310458_Compliance Evaluation Inspection_20200914

Division of Water Resources
°Facility Nawher - ©` R O Division of Soil and Water Conservation `
O Other Agency
of Visit: Colnpliance Inspection O Operation Review O Structure Evaluation O Technical Assistance
in for Visit: Routine O Complaint O Follow-up O Referral O Emergency O Other O Denied Access
Date of Visit: — Arrival Time: Departure Time: County: i
Farm Name: " y., c .K 0� 2 �flR�1 S Owner Email:
Owner Name: Won drmd K ST0.oL,17 Phone:
Mailing Address:
Physical Address:
Facility Contact:
Onsite Representative:
Certified Operator:
Back-up Operator:
Location of Farm:
-Design . Current°
Swine ' Capacity Pop.
Wean to Finish
Wean to Feeder
Feeder to Finish o
Farrow to Wean
Farrow to Feeder
Farrow to Finish
Gilts
Boars
Other
Other
Title:
Latitude:
Phone:
Integrator:
Certification Number:
Certification Number:
Longitude:
Design Current
Wet."Poultry Capacity Pop. ° .
4NLayer
on -Layer
Design Current.
nrt Pnultr°v : Canneity Pon. -
Layers
Non -Layers
Pullets
Turkeys
Turkey Poults
Other
Discharges and Stream Impacts
1. Is any discharge observed from any part of the operation?
Discharge originated at: ❑ Structure ❑ Application Field ❑ Other: _
a. Was the conveyance man-made?
b. Did the discharge reach waters of the State? (If yes, notify DWR)
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)
2. Is there evidence of a past discharge from any part of the operation?
3. Were there any observable adverse impacts or potential adverse impacts to the waters
of the State other than from a discharge?
Region: VN I R0
" Design 'Current."
Cattle. ' ` ' ;"Capacity Pog:
Dairy Cow
Dairy Calf
Dairy Heifer
Dry Cow
Non -Dairy
Beef Stocker
Beef Feeder
Beef Brood Cow
0 Yes D<o 0 NA ❑ NE
❑ Yes 0No ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Yes ;le0 NA ❑ NE
❑ Yes �No ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Yes �o ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Yes No ❑ NA ❑ NE
Page I of 3 21412015 Continued

Facility Number: 3 - 5 Date of Inspection: — a0� 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 �(No ❑ NA ❑ NE
Structure 1 Structure 2 Structure 3 Structure 4 Structure 5 Structure 6
Identifier: I —
Spillway?:
Designed Freeboard (in):—F-��--�
Observed Freeboard (in):
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 02"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?
8. Do any of the structures lack adequate markers as required by the permit?
(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
maintenance or improvement?
Waste Application
10. Are there any required buffers, setbacks, or compliance alternatives that need
maintenance or improvement?
I L Is there evidence of incorrect land application? If yes, check the appropriate box below. I ❑ Yes L.PNo
❑ Excessive Ponding ❑ Hydraulic Overload ❑ Frozen Ground ❑ Heavy Metals (Cu, Zn, etc.)
❑ Yes E;k*f4o ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Yes [�No ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Yes E;JeNlo ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Yes 2No ❑ NA ❑ NE
DNA ❑NE
❑ PAN ❑ PAN > 10% or 10 lbs. ❑ Total Phosphorus ❑ Failure to Incorporate Manure/Sludge into Bare Soil
❑ Outside of Acceptable Crop Window 11 ❑ Evidence of Wind Drift ❑ Application Outside of Approved Area
12. Crop Type(s): ( „ � n S L� �TI , S G-�-
13. Soil Type(s):.
14. Do the receiving crops differ from those designated in the CAWMP? ❑ Yes VN
❑ NA ❑ NE
15. Does the receiving crop and/or land application site need improvement? ❑Yes ❑ NA ❑ NE
16. Did the facility fail to secure and/or operate per the irrigation design or wettable ❑ Yes ❑ NA ❑ NE
acres determination?
17. Does the facility lack adequate acreage for land application?
❑ Yes
2r/No ❑ NA
❑ NE
18. Is there a lack of properly operating waste application equipment?
❑ Yes
EEKNo ❑ NA
❑ NE
Required Records & Documents
19. Did the facility fail to have the Certificate of Coverage & Permit readily available?
❑ Yes
[ No ❑ NA
❑ NE
20. Does the facility fail to have all components of the CAWMP readily available? If yes, check
ryes
—f�j+ ❑ NA
❑ NE
the appropriate box.
-3 q'IY.- �®
❑ WUP ❑ Checklists ❑ Design ❑ Maps ❑ Lease Agreements
❑ Other:
21. Does record keeping need i provement? If yes, check the appropriate box below.
[Weekly
❑ Yes
❑ No ❑ NA
❑ NE
[Xaste Application Freeboard ETW—aste Analysis ❑ Soil Analysis
❑ Waste Transfers
❑ Weather
Code
❑ Rainfall ❑ Stocking E Crop Yield ❑ 120 Minute Inspections E2<onthly and V Rainfall Inspections Judge Survey
22. Did the facility fail to install and maintain a rain gauge?
[:]Yes
❑ NA
❑ NE
23. If selected, did the facility fail to install and maintain rainbreakers on irrigation equipment?
❑ Yes
VNo ❑ NA
❑ NE
Page 2 of 3
21412015 Continued

Facility Number: 3 - 4 5$ jDate of Inspection: —1kt-ao'ao
24. Did the facility fail to calibrate waste application equipment as required by the permit? ❑ Yes No ❑ NA ❑ NE
25. Is the facility out of compliance with permit conditions related to sludge? If yes, check RrYes ❑ 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 VNo ❑ NA ❑ NE
27. Did the facility fail to secure a phosphorus loss assessments (PLAT) certification? ❑ Yes ❑ No [�NA ❑ NE
Other Issues
28. Did the facility fail to properly dispose of dead animals with 24 hours and/or document
❑ Yes
VNo
❑ NA
❑ NE
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?
❑ Yes
&3"No
❑ NA
❑ NE
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
❑ Yes
[I�No
❑ NA
❑ NE
permit? (i.e., discharge, freeboard problems, over -application)
31. Do subsurface tile drains exist at the facility? If yes, check the appropriate box below.
❑ Yes
❑ No
❑ NA
gNE
❑ Application Field ❑ Lagoon/Storage Pond ❑ Other:
32. Were any additional problems noted which cause non-compliance of the permit or CAWMP?
❑ Yes
ZNo
❑ NA
❑ NE
33. Did the Reviewer/Inspector fail to discuss review/inspection with an on -site representative?
❑ Yes
["No
❑ NA
❑ NE
34. Does the facility require a follow-up visit by the same agency?
❑ Yes
[INo
❑ NA
❑ NE
Comments (refer to question,#): Explain any YES answers and/or any additional recommendations or any other comments.
Use drawinss of facility to better explain situations (use additional pages as necessary).
NItS 9�r* J a uip_ 4T - �inCgrm. �ol,.: �
�,
pis �`�� nec' s �verJ �«^�. .0. c��S�.se c�tle.d Cor-h'c� .�AS�I d�5�re�a-hc�vL .
MS %.s CRVSe v�� Iq eS ',� _(neir-no avi=al =C«5n;i-e �uri ';(iv 5, Nl'rs. S�'('VA
•i5 v �w �jc d , 'c CS-5 f lJORAI l .. cos*S /o l ° d- aoa.o� for +keSe R C S a•^ s
asp Se Il� 2 ` ar+v�. to_ ( vk' j' Cjvse .wt, o - S - +-,ken ova a o ►< SponS;L1(;%
�;M1 She will Car pl Nd jurm aoad, .
�a�8�1h.
RMA . 7h,
S��YI • EfrnVi;.I ° '''� QJmP �q C� e o c c� S 6 joke ( n(,d2i`r: l0�% ..
dAVAM64 as
�vfV't (jr
1
ie. oioa.O: Cab'.6te-ti�n_ 51Uq ¢, S"Tv
sv Uai•�`�= 'CA�.2 i ,_ AImo_I Oepe °�'vc- e o d '�crSLrP4
Reviewer/Inspector Name:-.TO14-K) &t q Phone: Lqto)
Reviewer/Inspector Signature: 9Date:
Page 3 of 3 21412015