310760_Compliance Evaluation Inspection_20201026

. ®'Division of Water Resources •.°
Facflity Number 3 (,p O Division of Soil and Water Conservation
O Otlieir Agency
Type of Visit: 7Routine
Hance Inspection O Operation Review O Structure Evaluation O Technical Assistance
Reason for Visit: O Complaint O Follow-up O Referral O Emergency O Other O Denied Access
Date of Visit: d- -. Arrival Time: °O aw. Departure Time: am County: 01; n_ Region: I,llf o
Farm Name: la2atj< --qmi LY :]F°2�1 mS Owner Email:
Owner Name: RoN A &g-^ , Phone:
Mailing Address:
Physical Address:
Facility Contact:
Onsite Representative:
Certified Operator: R o h A R r mk
Back-up Operator:
Location of Farm:
Design, Current
Swine ' .. Capacity Pop.
Wean to Finish
Wean to Feeder
Feeder to Finish
Farrow to Wean
Farrow to Feeder
Farrow to Finish
Gilts
Other
Other
Title:
Latitude:
Phone:
Integrator:
Certification Number: I % 17 3-
Certification Number:
Design Current
Wet Poultry-
Capacity Pop. ,
Rayer
�
Non -Layer
. °
Design Current
Dry Panitry •
Cnnacity - Pon. °
Layers
Non -Layers
Pullets
Turkeys
F.Turkey
Poults
Other
Longitude:
Deslip, :Current
Cattle .G;apacity'op> r
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 E+ 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 ENo ❑ 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)
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?
❑ Yes E2"No ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Yes Ea�No ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Yes [ No ❑ NA ❑ NE
Page 1 of 3 21412015 Continued

Facility Number: jDate of Inspection:
Waste Collection & Treatment
4. Is storage capacity (structural plus storm storage plus heavy rainfall) less than adequate? ❑ Yes
a. If yes, is waste level into the structural freeboard? ❑ Yes
Structure 1 Structure 2 Structure 3 Structure 4 Structure 5
Identifier: 1
Spillway?: _
Designed Freeboard (in): �9, _
Observed Freeboard (in): -31 _
5. Are there any immediate threats to the integrity of any of the structures observed?
(i.e., large trees, severe erosion, seepage, etc.)
6. Are there structures on -site which are not properly addressed and/or managed through a
waste management or closure plan?
�o ❑ NA ❑ NE
[ No ❑ NA ❑ NE
Structure 6
❑ Yes ZNo ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Yes NKo ❑ NA ❑ NE
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 []No
❑ NA
❑ NE
8. Do any of the structures lack adequate markers as required by the permit?
❑ Yes [7V,lo
❑ 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 [ o
❑ NA
❑ NE
maintenance or improvement?
Waste Application
10. Are there any required buffers, setbacks, or compliance alternatives that need
❑ Yes [2/No
❑ NA
❑ NE
maintenance or improvement?
No
11. Is there evidence of incorrect land application? If yes, check the appropriate box below. ❑ Yes []
❑ 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):
13. Soil Type(s):
14. Do the receiving crops differ from those designated in the CAWMP? ❑ Yes [Z No ❑ NA ❑ NE
15. Does the receiving crop and/or land application site need improvement? ❑ Yes EJ�qo ❑ NA ❑ NE
16. Did the facility fail to secure and/or operate per the irrigation design or wettable ❑ Yes E�/No ❑ NA ❑ NE
acres determination?
17. Does the facility lack adequate acreage for land application?
❑ Yes
2No
❑ NA
❑ NE
18. Is there a lack of properly operating waste application equipment?
❑ Yes
[]No
❑ NA
❑ NE
Required Records & Documents
19. Did the facility fail to have the Certificate of Coverage & Permit readily available?
❑ Yes
0/140
❑ NA
❑ NE
20. Does the facility fail to have all components of the CAWMP readily available? If yes, check
❑ Yes
dNo
❑ 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 5;3'No
❑ Waste Application ❑ Weekly Freeboard ❑ Waste Analysis ❑ Soil Analysis ❑ Waste Transfers
❑ Rainfall ❑ Stocking ❑ Crop Yield ❑ 120 Minute Inspections ❑ Monthly and 1" Rainfall Inspections
22. Did the facility fail to install and maintain a rain gauge? i_ Zo 8 E3"No
23. If selected, did the facility fail to install and maintain rainbreakers on irrigation equipment? Yes ❑ No
❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Weather Code
❑ Sludge Survey
❑ NA ❑ NE
❑NA ❑NE
Page 2 of 3 21412015 Continued

Facility Number: 1 - Date of Inspection:
24. Did the facility fail to calibrate waste application equipment as required by the permit? ❑ ,Yes Ea"No
25. Is the facility out of compliance with permit conditions related to sludge? If yes, check ❑ Yes No
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 ER"No
27. Did the facility fail to secure a phosphorus loss assessments (PLAT) certification? ❑ Yes ❑ No
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?
❑NA ❑NE
❑ NA ❑ NE
❑NA ❑NE
EZNA ❑ NE
❑ Yes E3"'No ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Yes DNo ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Yes �No ❑ NA ❑ NE
5' io=ac-ao
❑ Yes ❑ No--fff7TA �NE
❑ Yes
[RNo
❑ NA
❑ NE
❑ Yes
[�No
❑ NA
❑ NE
❑ Yes
❑ No
❑ 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). '
ors+Au (' b��,k 'car spyh w�.�1VP
— wztAs LAre SPA] e�cz
$ec-�,jd v-, C0.r be SPA jet unit) 10/31,
—1ajcr'- O %3.3 P- 3.t
Reviewer/Inspector Name: -S0 41 r l -E V-h-4 Phone: C9 l9 0 -3—2LU
Reviewer/Inspector Signature: Date: 10 -;&— AORG
Page 3 of 3 21412015