310238_Compliance Evaluation Inspection_20201204

C71)ivision of Water Resources I3+M5 '-
Facility Number 3 - 3® O Division of Soil and Water Conservation
0 Other Agency
Type of Visit: 0 Com iance Inspection O Operation Review O Structure Evaluation O Technical Assistance
Reason for Visit: routine O Complaint O Follow-up O Referral O Emergency O Other O Denied Access
Date of Visit: Arrival Time: 0'�ow^l Departure Time: County: jjPLI rj
Farm Name: et fi� �S'� �rw. Owner Email:
Owner Name: kp.'+� R+L Phone:
Mailing Address:
Physical Address:
Facility Contact:
Onsite Representative:
Certified Operator: K tl, c`k
Back-up Operator:
Location of Farm:
Swine
Title:
Integrator:
Phone:
Region: WIA6
Certification Number: Q 9 8 3 7y
Certification Number:
Latitude:
Design Current Design Current
Capacity Pop. Wet Poultry Capacity Pop.
Layer
Non -Layer
Wean to Finish
Wean to Feeder
Feeder to Finish
9940
c--
Farrow to Wean
Farrow to Feeder
Farrow to Finish
Gilts
Boars
Other
Other
Design Current
Dry Poultry Cauacitv 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)
Longitude:
Design Current
Cattle, Capacity Pop.
Dairy Cow
Dairy Calf
Dairy Heifer
Dry Cow
Non -Dairy
Beef Stocker
Beef Feeder
Beef Brood Cow
❑ Yes allo ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Yes VNo
❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Yes ❑ 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 VNo
❑ NA ❑ NE
2. Is there evidence of a past discharge from any part of the operation? ❑ Yes 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: 11 jDate of Inspection:
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
EP4
❑ NA
❑ NE
Structure 1 Structure 2 Structure 3 Structure 4
Structure 5
Structure 6
Identifier:
Spillway?:
Designed Freeboard (in): q�s
Observed Freeboard (in): ;Z9-
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
QeKo
❑ 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 t reat, notify DWR
7. Do any of the structures need maintenance or improvement? ❑ Yes Eg4o ❑ NA ❑ NE
8. Do any of the structures lack adequate markers as required by the permit? [:]Yes EIA10 ❑ 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 [9No ❑ NA ❑ NE
maintenance or improvement?
Waste Application �--��'
10. Are there any required buffers, setbacks, or compliance alternatives that need ❑ Yes [lo ❑ NA ❑ NE
maintenance or improvement?
11. Is there evidence of incorrect land application? If yes, check the appropriate box below. ❑ Yes Egll�o ❑ 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 2 ❑C Evidence of Wind Drift ❑ Application Outside of Approved Area
12. Crop Type(s): W Cl3 J ( -0
13. Soil Type(s):
14. Do the receiving crops differ from those designated in the CAWMP?
15. Does the receiving crop and/or land application site need improvement?
16. Did the facility fail to secure and/or operate per the irrigation design or wettable
acres determination?
17. Does the facility lack adequate acreage for land application?
18.-Is there a lack of properly operating waste application equipment?
Required Records & Documents
19. Did the facility fail to have the Certificate of Coverage & Permit readily available?
20. Does the facility fail to have all components of the CAWMP readily available? If yes, check
the appropriate box.
❑ Yes [TNo
❑ Yes [<o
❑ Yes ED-Ko
❑ NA ❑ NE
❑NA ❑NE
❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Yes - No
❑ NA
❑ NE
❑ Yes V to
❑ NA
❑ NE
❑ Yes Zo
❑ NA
❑ NE
❑ Yes
❑ NA
❑ NE
❑ WUP ❑ Checklists ❑ Design ❑ Maps ❑ Lease Agreements
❑ Other:
21. Does record keeping need improvement? If yes, check the appropriate box below.
❑ Yes
[,g,1q_o_
❑ 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?
❑ Yes
[B,to
❑ NA ❑ NE
23. If selected, did the facility fail to install and maintain rainbreakers on irrigation equipment?
❑ Yes
[�o
❑ NA ❑ NE
Page 2 of 3
21412015 Continued

Facility Number: 3 @ - 3"$ 1 jDate of Inspection:
24. Did the facility fail to calibrate waste application equipment as required by the permit? ❑ Yes Eg4o ❑ NA ❑ NE
25. Is the facility out of compliance with permit conditions related to sludge? If yes, check ❑ Yes [Q4 ❑ 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 F91NIA ❑ 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 [�Vo ❑ NA ❑ NE
[—]Yes 05Xo ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Yes u'"v ❑ NA ❑ NE
[:]Yes
❑ No ❑ NA
[g/NE
❑ Yes
[B/No ❑ NA
❑ NE
❑ Yes
No ❑ NA
❑ NE
❑ Yes
�Zo ❑ NA
❑ NE
Comments (refer to question #): Explain any YES answers and/or any additional recommendations or any other comments. I
Use drawings of facility to better explain situations (use additional pages as necessary).
t'10011-1- 0k�j' busk Acl b.
`, W-K- — b:'� S f ot5.
Reviewer/Inspector Name: �� �� s2 ►4-Phone: 'l 1
Reviewer/Inspector Signature:
Page 3 of 3
Date: I �--`f
21412015