310221_Compliance Evaluation Inspection_20201027

W�Division of Water Resources.
Facitity Number 31. as 1 0 Division of �Soii and Water Cot►servation
-: 'Dal
0 °Other Agency
Type of Visit: C^^o//mpliance Inspection 0 Operation Review 0 Structure Evaluation 0 Technical Assistance
Reason for Visit: Q&outine 0 Complaint 0 Follow-up 0 Referral 0 Emergency 0 Other 0 Denied Access
Date of Visit: j0-,)- 0jd Arrival Time: y,, Departure Time: County: UIV Region:
Farm Name: MILL- 3 "Oco f rz-ms Owner Email:
Owner Name: �� �,,,y &R-A Phone:
Mailing Address:
Physical Address:
Facility Contact:
Onsite Representative:
Title:
Integrator:
Phone:
Certified Operator: ern, LTn`9 Certification Number:
Back-up Operator:
Location of Farm:
Latitude:
Certification Number:
Longitude:
Design ',Current Design Current° , Design Current
Swine Capacity Pop. Wet Poultry Capacity P* ° Cattle ° Capacity ` Pop:
Wean to Finish
Wean to Feeder (D400 6a
Feeder to Finish
Farrow to Wean
Farrow to Feeder
Farrow.to Finish
Gilts
Boars
Other
Other
Layer
Non -Layer
Design Current
Dry Poultry C'anaeity _ Pon:.
Layers
Non -Layers
Pullets
Turkeys
Turkey Poults
Other
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
02]"No
❑ NA
❑ NE
Discharge originated at: ❑ Structure ❑ Application Field ❑ Other:
a. Was the conveyance man-made?
❑ Yes
2<o
❑ NA
❑ NE
b. Did the discharge reach waters of the State? (If yes, notify DWR)
❑ Yes
Z"'O
❑ 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.
ETNo
❑ NA
❑ NE
2. Is there evidence of a past discharge from any part of the operation?
0 Yes
No
0 NA
❑ NE
3. Were there any observable adverse impacts or potential adverse impacts to the waters
❑ Yes
o
❑ NA
❑ NE
of the State other than from a discharge?
Page I of 3 21412015 Continued

Facility Number: jDate of Inspection: lo- k —a p
Waste Collection & Treatment
4. Is storage capacity (structural plus storm storage plus heavy rainfall) less than adequate? ❑ Yes E2�No ❑ NA ❑ NE
a. If yes, is waste level into the structural freeboard? ❑ Yes E�rNo ❑ NA ❑ NE
Structure 1 Structure 2 Structure 3 Structure 4 Structure 5 Structure 6
Identifier:
Spillway?:
Designed Freeboard (in):
_ o
Observed Freeboard (in): 3 a 5
5. Are there any immediate threats to the integrity of any of the structures observed? ❑ Yes [gNo ❑ 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 eNo ❑ 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 E!rNo ❑ NA ❑ NE
8. Do any of the structures lack adequate markers as required by the permit? ❑ Yes [24o ❑ 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
�To
❑ NA
❑ NE
maintenance or improvement?
Waste Application
10. Are there any required buffers, setbacks, or compliance alternatives that need
❑ Yes
�o
❑ NA
❑ NE
maintenance or improvement?
11. Is there evidence of incorrect land application? If yes, check the appropriate box below.
❑ Yes
I2"11O
❑ 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): G-
14. Do the receiving crops differ from those designated in the CAWMP?
❑ Yes
- "No
❑ NA
❑ NE
15. Does the receiving crop and/or land application site need improvement?
❑ Yes
E21 o
❑ NA
❑ NE
16. Did the facility fail to secure and/or operate per the irrigation design or wettable
❑ Yes
E j<
❑ NA
❑ NE
acres determination?
17. Does the facility lack adequate acreage for land application?
❑ Yes
Mo
❑ NA
❑ NE
18. Is there a lack of properly operating waste application equipment?
❑ Yes
2<6
❑ 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
❑ Yes
Ej4o
❑ 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. 1 (Yes ❑ No
❑ Waste Application ❑ Weekly Freeboard ❑ Waste Analysis Soil Analysis ❑ Waste Transfers
❑ Rainfall 0 Stocking[4Crop Yield ❑ 120 Minute Inspections ❑ Monthly and 1" Rainfall Inspections
22. Did the facility fail to install and maintain a rain gauge? ❑ Yes ff 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 ONE
❑ NA ❑ NE
Page 2 of 3 ' 21412015 Continued

Facility Number: - -a x I jDate of inspection: (b -a- -2 D
24. Did the facility fail to calibrate waste application equipment as required by the permit? ❑ Yes Ej'�No ❑ NA ❑ NE
25. Is the facility out of compliance with permit conditions related to sludge? If yes, check ❑ Yes �o ❑ 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 No ❑ NA ❑ NE
27. Did the facility fail to secure a phosphorus loss assessments (PLAT) certification? ❑ Yes ❑ No FZNA ❑ 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 L/No ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Yes Eff'No ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Yes Eq"�No ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Yes [ErNo ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Yes
❑ No
❑ NA
[tom NE
❑ Yes
E] o
❑ NA
❑ NE
❑ Yes
E?<
❑ NA
❑ NE
Comments (refer to question #): 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).
C-O As- t1 S em. w @ e X_
S'o l k Ay\_-A� ue sited
Reviewer/Inspector Name:
Phone:
Reviewer/Inspector Signature: Date: 1 p -ate— L='a- 0
Page 3 of 3 21412015