310594_Compliance Evaluation Inspection_20200916

Q Divisiodof Water Resources'
Facility Number 31 - Cam° r 0 Division of'Soil and Water °Conservation
0 Other Agency,
pe of Visit: 7Routine
pliance Inspection 0 Operation Review 0 Structure Evaluation 0 Technical Assistance
ason for Visit: 0 Complaint 0 Follow-up 0 Referral 0 Emergency 0 Other 0 Denied Access
Date of Visit: - 0'�0 Arrival Time: Departure Time: j I ok-..,- County:
Farm Name: SVrn rner'1ir\ '�0-M Owner Email:
Owner Name: Looanne Suri,Mef1 �r Phone:
Mailing Address:
Physical Address:
Facility Contact:
Onsite Representative:
Title:
Integrator:
Phone:
Region: W I i� 0
Certified Operator: MA-f f 4 EyJ Lex/A I Certification Number: Rqy a� 3
Back-up Operator:
Location of Farm:
Design Current
Swine " Capacity ° ° Pop.
Wean to Finish
Wean to Feeder
Feeder to Finish /0
Farrow to Wean
Farrow to Feeder
Farrow to Finish
Gilts
Boars
Other
Other
Certification Number:
Latitude:
Design Current
Wet Poultry" Capacity . Pop.
Layer
Non -Layer
Design ' Current a "
Dry Poultry Canacity , - Pon:
Layers
Non -Layers
Pullets
Turkeys
Turkey Poults
Other
Longitude:
° Design° ° Current
Cattle Capacity . Pop. °
Dairy Cow
Dairy Calf
Dairy Heifer
Dry Cow
Non -Dairy
Beef Stocker
Beef Feeder
Beef Brood Cow
Discharges and Stream Impacts
1. Is any discharge observed from any part of the operation?
❑ Yes
No
❑ NA
❑ NE
Discharge originated at: ❑ Structure ❑ Application Field ❑ Other:
a. Was the conveyance man-made?
❑ Yes
No
❑ NA
❑ NE
b. Did the discharge reach waters of the State? (If yes, notify DWR)
❑ Yes
2-*No
❑ NA
❑ NE
c. What is the estimated volume that reached waters of the State (gallons)?
d. Does the discharge bypass the waste management system? (If yes, notify DWR)
❑ Yes
No
❑ NA
❑ NE
2. Is there evidence of a past discharge from any part of the operation?
❑ Yes
YNo
0 NA
❑ NE
3. Were there any observable adverse impacts or potential adverse impacts to the waters
❑ Yes
WNo
❑ NA
❑ NE
of the State other than from a discharge?
Page I of 3 21412015 Continued

Facility Number: 3 I - 594 jDate of inspection: - (v -241-0
Waste Collection & Treatment
4. Is storage capacity (structural plus storm storage plus heavy rainfall) less than adequate? ❑ Yes �No ❑ NA ❑ NE
a. If yes, is waste level into the structural freeboard? ❑ Yes El"No ❑ NA ❑ NE
Structure 1 Structure 2 Structure 3 Structure 4 Structure 5 Structure 6
Identifier:
Spillway?:
Designed Freeboard (in):
Observed Freeboard (in): 3
5. Are there any immediate threats to the integrity of any of the structures observed? ❑ Yes No ❑ NA ❑ NE
(i.e., large trees, severe erosion, seepage, etc.)
6. Are there structures on -site which are not properly addressed and/or managed through a ❑ Yes E0 No ❑ NA ❑ NE
waste management or closure plan?
If any of questions 4-6 were answered yes, and the situation poses an immediate public health or environmental threat, notify DWR
7. Do any of the structures need maintenance or improvement? ❑ Yes RNo ❑ NA ❑ NE
8. Do any of the structures lack adequate markers as required by the permit? ❑ Yes EeNo ❑ NA ❑ NE
(not applicable to roofed pits, dry stacks, and/or wet stacks)
9. Does any part of the waste management system other than the waste structures require ❑ Yes iNo ❑ NA ❑ NE
maintenance or improvement?
Waste Application
10. Are there any required buffers, setbacks, or compliance alternatives that need ❑ Yes ErNo ❑ NA ❑ NE
maintenance or improvement?
11. Is there evidence of incorrect land application? If yes, check the appropriate box below. ❑ Yes EO?/No ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Excessive Ponding ❑ Hydraulic Overload ❑ Frozen Ground ❑ Heavy, Metals (Cu, Zn, etc.)
❑ PAN ❑ PAN > 10% or 10 lbs. ❑ Total Phosphorus ❑ Failure to Incorporate Manure/Sludge into Bare Soil
❑ Outside of Acceptable Crop Window ❑ Evidence of Wind Drift ❑ Application Outside of Approved Area
12. Crop Type(s): j3 U GGO 15'ESWE
13. Soil Type(s):
14. Do the receiving crops differ from those designated in the CAWMP?
❑ Yes
Vj No
❑ NA
❑ NE
15. Does the receiving crop and/or land application site need improvement?
❑ Yes
Q No
❑ NA
❑ NE
16. Did the facility fail to secure and/or operate per the irrigation design or wettable
❑ Yes
F3/No
❑ NA
❑ NE _
acres determination?
17. Does the facility lack adequate acreage for land application?
❑ Yes
T�o❑
NA
❑ NE
18. Is there a lack of properly operating waste application equipment?
❑ Yesd/No
❑ NA
❑ NE
Required Records & Documents
19. Did the facility fail to have the Certificate of Coverage & Permit readily available?
❑ Yes
❑ NA
❑ NE
20. Does the facility fail to have all components of the CAWMP readily available? If yes, check
❑ Yes
VNo
❑ NA
❑ NE
the appropriate box.
❑ WUP ❑ Checklists ❑ Design ❑ Maps ❑ Lease Agreements
❑ Other:
21. Does record keeping need improvement? If yes, check the appropriate box below.
[—]Yes
No
❑ NA
❑ NE
❑ Waste Application ❑ Weekly Freeboard ❑ Waste Analysis ❑ Soil Analysis ❑ Waste Transfers ❑ Weather Code
❑ Rainfall ❑ Stocking ❑ Crop Yield ❑ 120 Minute Inspections ❑ Monthly and 1" Rainfall Inspections ❑ Sludge Survey
22. Did the facility fail to install and maintain a rain gauge? ❑ Yes WNo ❑ NA ❑ NE
23. If selected, did the facility fail to install and maintain rainbreakers on irrigation equipment? ❑ Yes E2 No ❑ NA ❑ NE
Page 2 of 3 21412015 Continued

Faeility Number: al - Date of Inspection: —16 _9 d as
24. Did the facility fail to calibrate waste application equipment as required by the permit? El Yes No ❑ NA ❑ NE
25. Is the facility out of compliance with permit conditions related to sludge? If yes, check ❑ Yesj/No ❑ NA ❑ NE
the appropriate box(es) below.
❑ Failure to complete annual sludge survey ❑ Failure to develop a POA for sludge levels
❑ Non -compliant sludge levels in any lagoon
List structure(s) and date of first survey indicating non-compliance:
26. Did the facility fail provide documentation of an actively certified operator in charge? ❑ Yes 06No ❑ NA ❑ NE
27. Did the facility fail to secure a phosphorus loss assessments (PLAT) certification? ❑ Yes ❑ No ERrNA ❑ NE
Other Issues
28. Did the facility fail to properly dispose of dead animals with 24 hours and/or document
and report mortality rates that were higher than normal?
29. At the time of the inspection did the facility pose an odor or air quality concern?
If yes, contact a regional Air Quality representative immediately.
30. Did the facility fail to notify the Regional Office of emergency situations as required by the
permit? (i.e., discharge, freeboard problems, over -application)
31. Do subsurface tile drains exist at the facility? If yes, check the appropriate box below.
❑ Application Field ❑ Lagoon/Storage Pond ❑ Other:
32. Were any additional problems noted which cause non-compliance of the permit or CAWMP?
33. Did the Reviewer/Inspector fail to discuss review/inspection with an on -site representative?
34. Does the facility require a follow-up visit by the same agency?
❑ Yes ['No ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Yes ["No ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Yes [`No ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Yes ❑ No ❑ NA T NE
❑ Yes No
❑ Yes EI�No
❑ Yes 2"N' o
❑ NA ❑ NE
DNA ❑NE
❑ NA ❑ NE
Comments ('refer to question ft Explain any YES answers and/or any additional recommendations or any other comments. -
Use. drawings of facility to better explain situations (use additional pages as necessary).
Sr c,l v Ae w ce -11 !9+6c .'y) 1enor+cJ,+j e 5 4,.+, 0L -%c 10 - I -19
-� Eveft_4 15s uir Ta2..aw\_ LA Tr i kAa5 NOV Has 8Een/ Ac>orzES'tCt:> ANo (2z soLV&O,
c PLIT R-Ot PumPIN Cr F2a� COASTAL . CoasnvL 2Ts ,,IV1hmRc-N,
i- kpo> (26PI OF 2A/N WAI EK It""'
Reviewer/Inspector Name: _Aati►n _rFn.n.'
Reviewer/Inspector Signature:
Page 3 of 3
Phone: (310)
Date: q — /6—a®�L-G
21412015