310113_Compliance Evaluation Inspection_20200925

bivision of Water Resources
I acflity Number ° 31 '� O Division of Soil and Water Conservation
F
°. 0 Other.`Ageney
type of Visit: 0 Co
Hance Inspection O Op.eration Review O Structure Evaluation O Technical Assistance
?.eason for Visit: 0 Complaint 0 Follow-up- 0 Referral 0 Emergency 0 Other 0 Denied Access
Date of Visit: -a-S- b Arrival Time: 1( Departure Time: County: _ Region: V4 u-6
Farm Name: SW •(; M A TV E\l.s l igR1YlS Owner Email:
Owner Name: - .WS M A' 1 H 04 S cairns Iv r- Phone:
Mailing Address: N
Physical Address:
Facility Contact:
Onsite Representative: oYnjoj 8?_1-DCt5
Certified Operator: �r� L� LEA V 2S �ti ird
Back-up Operator:
Location of Farm:
Title: Phone:
Latitude:
Integrator:
Certification Number: q 9V 141
Certification Number:
Longitude:
Design Current ° besxgn". Current " Design Current
Swine " Capacity Pop. Wet poultry , Capacity Pop., Cattle Capacity', Pop.
Wean to Finish
Wean to Feeder
Feeder to Finish tt$ 6
Farrow to Wean
Farrow to Feeder
Farrow to Finish
Gilts
Boars
' Other ."
Layer
Non -Layer
Design Current -
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
ENo
❑ NA
❑ NE
Discharge originated at: ❑ Structure ❑ Application Field ❑ Other:
a. Was the conveyance man-made?
❑ Yes
E21<o
❑ NA
❑ NE
b. Did the discharge reach waters of the State? (If yes, notify DWR)
❑ Yes
F94
❑ 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
EkNo
❑ NA
❑ NE
2. Is there evidence of a past discharge from"any part of the operation?
❑ Yes
[oNo .
❑ NA
❑ NE
3. Were there any observable adverse impacts or potential adverse impacts to the waters
❑ Yes
[ to
❑ NA
❑ NE
of the State other than from a discharge?
Page I of 3 21412015 Continued

Facility Number: 24 - Date of Inspection:
O
Waste Collection & Treatment
4. Is storage capacity (structural plus storm storage plus heavy rainfall) less than adequate?
❑ Yes
TN
N
❑ NA
❑ NE
a. If yes, is waste level into the structural freeboard?
❑ Yes
❑ NA
❑ NE
Structure 1 Structure 2 Structure 3 Structure 4
Structure 5
Structure 6
Identifier:_
Spillway?:
Designed Freeboard (in):
Observed Freeboard (in): a- 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
Et"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 2No ❑ NA ❑ NE
8. Do any of the structures lack adequate markers as required by the permit? ❑ Yes [;3No ❑ 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 M/No ❑ NA ❑ NE
maintenance or improvement?
Waste Application
10. Are there any required buffers, setbacks, or compliance alternatives that need ❑ Yes No ❑ NA ❑ NE
maintenance or improvement?
11. Is there evidence of incorrect land application? If yes, check the appropriate box below. ❑ Yes E2/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 W, inldow ❑ Evidence of Wind Drift ❑ Application Outside of Approved Area
12. Crop Type(s): S1 , C, W
13. Soil Type(s):
14. Do the receiving crops differ from those designated in the CAWMP? ❑ Yes o ❑ NA ❑ NE
15. Does the receiving crop and/or land application site need improvement? ❑ Yes :'No ❑ NA ❑ NE
16. Did the facility fail to secure and/or operate per the irrigation design or wettable ❑ Yes [jlo ❑ NA ❑ NE
acres determination?
17. Does the facility lack adequate acreage for land application?
❑ Yes d- o
❑ NA
❑ NE
18. Is there a lack of properly operating waste application equipment?
❑ Yes VNo
❑ 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 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?ty El WN ❑ NA ❑ NE
23. If selected, did the facility fail to install and maintain rainbreakers on irrigation equipment? ❑ Yes No ❑ NA ❑ NE
Page 2 of 3 21412015 Continued

Facility Number: 1, 1 - 11 '3 Date of Inspection: 'aS—ate
24. Did the facility fail to calibrate waste application equipment as required by the permit? ❑ Yes F f No ❑ NA ❑ NE
25. Is the facility out of compliance with permit conditions related to sludge? If yes, check ❑ Yes �'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 No ❑ NA ❑ NE
27. Did the facility fail to secure a phosphorus loss assessments (PLAT) certification? ❑ Yes ❑ No Eo"N-A ❑ 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
dNo
❑ NA
❑ NE
❑ Yes
[!fNo
❑ NA
❑ NE
❑ Yes
[2'1�o
❑ NA
❑ NE
❑ Yes
❑ No
❑ NA
�NE
❑ Yes ENo ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Yes o ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Yes ]Nlo ❑ 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).
P �re.ly e�2 S=�ork-'��/j►�ot--���,� ry-u,(�l.s ��.�'e�i �o �0 -�—(q,
WA 'PRE Gpl'b> WA 1 Up-2,
Reviewer/Inspector Name: ­96wo W��
Reviewer/Inspector Signature:
Page 3 of 3
Phone: L� � 6 l 7—Q 2}
Date: q' oLs— ;t_d_ L0
21412015