310328_Compliance Evaluation Inspection_20200925

Division of Water Resburces
Facility Number. °- 302 g O Division of -Soil and Water Conservation
..0 Other Agency.
of Visit: W Co
Hance Inspection Operation Review 0 Structure Evaluation 0 Technical Assistance
in for Visit: 0 Complaint 0 Follow-up 0 Referral 0 Emergency 0 Other 0 Denied Access
Date of Visit: -o��- Arrival Time: Departure Time: 0. County: Ott
Farm Name: \� Mx(' L\/4S ` {�(Lm� -Wa Owner Email:
Owner Name: 0AkjJJ4.9VJ5 fno-m5 ING Phone:
Mailing Address:
Physical Address:
Facility Contact:
Onsite Representative: W KM$Ni N &4 064(>
Certified Operator: P � u ay i S � Totj
Back-up Operator:
Location of Farm:
Sw,me °
Title:
Latitude:
Phone:
Integrator:
Region: (Rd
Certification Number: 91 I t 2
Certification Number:
Longitude:
Design • Current Design Current. `. Design Current
Capacity ° Pop.° ' . ' Wet Poultry Capacity` Pop. Cattle Capacity yP.o.
Wean to Finish
Wean to Feeder
5a o®
Feeder to Finish
q b
$ b
Farrow to Wean
Farrow to Feeder
Farrow to Finish
Gilts
Boars
Other
Other
Layer
Non -Layer
Design Current
Dry Poultry` Capacity � Pop.
.
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 No ❑ NA ❑ NE
Discharge originated at: ❑ Structure ❑ Application Field ❑ Other:
a. Was the conveyance man-made? ❑ Yes 53�0 ❑ NA ❑ NE
b. Did the discharge reach waters of the State? (If yes, notify DWR)
❑ Yes
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
�❑ NA
❑ NE
3. Were there an observable adverse impacts or potential adverse impacts to the waters
Y p
[:]Yes
❑ NA
VNo
❑ NE
.of the State other than from a discharge?
Page 1 of 3 21412015 Continued

Facility Number: '3 - 37X$ l Date of Inspection: -aq—
Waste Collection & Treatment
4. Is storage capacity (structural plus storm storage plus heavy rainfall) less than adequate? ❑ Yes [2/No ❑ NA ❑ NE
a. If yes, is waste level into the structural freeboard? ❑ Yes [ to ❑ NA ❑ NE
Structure 1 Structure 2 Structure 3 Structure 4 Structure 5 Structure 6
Identifier: nip L S
Spillway?:
Designed Freeboard (in):
Observed Freeboard (in): '� S `� 3 0_
5. Are there any immediate threats to the integrity of any of the structures observed? ❑ Yes Ev(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 Ef/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 [g,"No ❑ NA ❑ NE
8. Do any of the structures lack adequate markers as required by the permit? ❑ Yes [D/No ❑ 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 2/No ❑ NA ❑ NE
maintenance or improvement?
Waste Application
10. Are there any required buffers, setbacks, or compliance alternatives that need ❑ Yes O No ❑ NA ❑ NE
maintenance or improvement?
11. Is there evidence of incorrect land application? If yes, check the appropriate box below. ❑ Yes E/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): S (r C, W
13. Soil Type(s):
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
❑ NA
❑ NE
16. Did the facility fail to secure and/or operate per the irrigation design or wettable
❑ Yes
rN
❑ NA
❑ NE
acres determination?
17. Does the facility lack adequate acreage for land application?
❑ Yes
®No
❑ NA
❑ NE
18. Is there a lack of properly operating waste application equipment?
❑ Yes
[Plo
❑ NA
❑ NE
Required Records & Documents
19. Did the facility fail to have the Certificate of Coverage & Permit readily available?
❑ Yes
Eg' o
❑ NA
❑ NE
20. Does the facility fail to have all components of the CAWMP readily available? If yes, check
❑ Yes
To
❑ 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 V Rainfall Inspections ❑ Sludge 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
VN
❑ NA
❑ NE
Page 2 of 3
21412015 Continued

Facility Number: - 2•$ I Date of Inspection: q - a S -- 36
24. Did the facility fail to calibrate waste application equipment as required by the permit? ❑ Yes LJ 1V ❑ NA ❑ NE
25. Is the facility out of compliance with permit conditions related to sludge? If yes, check ❑ Yes ❑ 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 []"NA ❑ 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
❑ Yes 2/No
❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ NA ❑ NE
[:]Yes No ❑ NA 0 NE
❑ Yes ❑ No ❑ NA 2 N
❑ Yes 2No
❑ Yes
;�
❑ Yes VNo
❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ 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).
K� S �o ck; I I
Reviewer/Inspector Name: :So1w Rowl
Reviewer/Inspector Signature:
Page 3 of 3
Phone: 011916 Q - 9 S ��
Date: "l -
21412015