310750_Compliance Evaluation Inspection_20201116

U Division. of Water Resources, .
Facility 'Nomber 0 Division of Soil and Water Conservation ° °
0 Other Agency
Type of Visit: ff Comliance Inspection 0 Operation Review 0 Structure Evaluation 0 Technical Assistance
Reason for Visit: G outine 0 Complaint 0 Follow-up 0 Referral 0 Emergency 0 Other 0 Denied Access,
Date of Visit: j(o-PzGjgss Arrival Time: Departure Time: LLB County: L-)Lj%,,- Region: W JILQ
Farm Name: N � �uS 11 Fr Owner Email:
Owner Name: %A rr��5 �, .13 R i c Phone:
Mailing Address: /
Physical Address:
Facility Contact:
Onsite Representative:
Title: Phone:
Integrator:
Certified Operator: F-, $r t C-e, Certification Number: ;Z- �601
Back-up Operator:
Location of Farm:
`Design Current
Swine.. Capacity , Pop.,
Wean to Finish
Wean to Feeder
Feeder to Finish -71'�
Farrow to Wean
Farrow to Feeder
Farrow to Finish
Gilts
Boars
.Other f
Other
Latitude:
Certification Number:
Longitude:
Design' Current. ° , Design Current. ;.
Wet Poultry 'Capacity Pop. Cattle ' ° 'Capacity,, .Pop:.
Layer
Non -Layer
° Desigri Current
Dry, Poultry Capacity = Pon. `
Layers
Non -Layers
Pullets
Turkeys
Turkey Pouets
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
ZNo
❑ NA
❑ NE
Discharge originated at: ❑ Structure ❑ Application Field ❑ Other:
a. Was the conveyance man-made?
❑ Yes
[ZNo
❑ NA
❑ NE
b. Did the discharge reach waters of the State? (If yes, notify DWR)
❑ Yes
[11"'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
o
❑ NA
❑ NE
2. Is there evidence of a past discharge from any part of the operation?
❑ Yes
g-l<o
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 1 of 3 21412015 Continued

Facility Number: 31 - -7 Ta Date of Inspection: 0 -i _aoolo
Waste Collection & Treatment
4. Is storage capacity (structural plus storm storage plus heavy rainfall) less than adequate?
❑ Yes
[eNo
❑ NA ❑ NE
a. If yes, is waste level into the structural freeboard?
❑ Yes
�Xo
❑ NA ❑ NE
Structure I Structure 2 Structure 3 Structure 4
Structure 5
Structure 6
Identifier:
Spillway?:
Designed Freeboard (in): i it
Observed Freeboard (in): oL o
5. Are there any immediate threats to the integrity of any of the structures observed?
❑ Yes
Wo
❑ 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
M-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 to ❑ NA ❑ NE
8. Do any of the structures lack adequate markers as required by the permit? ❑ Yes [Zfo ❑ 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 ❑ NA ❑ NE
maintenance or improvement?
Waste Application
10. Are there any required buffers, setbacks, or compliance alternatives that need ❑ Yes MNo ❑ NA ❑ NE
maintenance or improvement?
11. Is there evidence of incorrect land application? If yes, check the appropriate box below. ❑ Yes [S�rNo ❑ 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): g H- , S G-o
13. Soil Type(s):
14. Do the receiving crops differ from those designated in the CAWMP?
❑ Yes
[v]�No
❑ NA
❑ NE
15. Does the receiving crop and/or land application site need improvement?
❑ Yes
E;KNo
❑ NA
❑ NE
16. Did the facility fail to secure and/or operate per the irrigation design or wettable
❑ Yes
[�No
❑ NA
❑ NE
acres determination?
17. Does the facility lack adequate acreage for land application?
❑ Yes
[glo
❑ NA
❑ NE
18. Is there a lack of properly operating waste application equipment?
❑ Yes
DA_0____❑ NA
❑ NE
Required Records & Documents
19. Did the facility fail to have the Certificate of Coverage & Permit readily available?
❑ Yes
[]?T�o
❑ NA
❑ NE
20. Does the facility fail to have all components of the CAWMP readily available? If yes, check
❑ Yes
Eq o
❑ NA
❑ NE
the appropriate box.
❑ WUP ❑ Checklists ❑ Design ❑ Maps ❑ Lease Agreements
❑ Other:
21. Does record keeping need improvement? If yes, check t 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
Eg-<o
❑ NA
❑ NE
23. If selected, did the facility fail to install and maintain rainbreakers on irrigation equipment?
❑ Yes
Eg Ko
❑ NA
❑ NE
Page 2 of 3
21412015 Continued

Facility Number: S1 - c-,) I Date of Inspection.] - 6-a o
24. Did the facility fail to calibrate waste application equipment as required by the permit? ❑ Yes ER/N(o ❑ NA ❑ NE
25. Is the facility out of compliance with permit conditions related to sludge? If yes, check [:]Yes �To ❑ 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 En"No ❑ NA ❑ NE
27. Did the facility fail to secure a phosphorus loss assessments (PLAT) certification? ❑ Yes ❑ No E24A ❑ 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?
Comments (refer to question #): Explain any YES answers and/or any additional
Use drawinss of facility to better explain situations (use additional pages as neces
❑ Yes EJ�No ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Yes dNo ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Yes [2io ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Yes ❑ No ❑ NA [✓4
❑ Yes E2'N"o ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Yes [�1�To ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Yes [3"-No ❑ NA ❑ NE
ons or any other comments.
u s e Cs►�c� C+ uj A 0^_ I )z 2 w k. c k --rille /c/ f
�v� was �e r is no(e.rS �oiY�c% l d�J . .. .
f ivcte Lkme*-[7S p
— (A ST C Jee,k. o' t o� C� me n t S (g WrAZA �{" 1 z t�J 1, � / QA i cA u— lj�✓�
115• Labs d-caf5 „ j9'5-1' ;S -"he rn;Wn.Um (211et,
— ao(o PA-j
was Gpe ed
F0 ]Fa-
►�s�acf �� �c� .
C�U�r apt/'c��o,� = � ,
LP4)c5on Lk
neeJs +_
cpve r—
Reviewer/Inspector Name: CAg - . (40 h CJ14 Phone: a i o) %) �-�-
Reviewer/Inspector Signature: Date: U - I t; -;L 0410
Page 3 of 3 21412015