310271_Compliance Evaluation Inspection_20210315

z
0 Division of Water Resources 61 MS _
Facility Number 0 Division of Soil and Water Conservation
0 Other Agency
Type of Visit: 0 Compliance Inspection 0 Operation Review 0 Structure Evaluation 0 Technical Assistance
treason for Visit: 0 Routine 0 Complaint 0 Follow-up 0 Referral 0 Emergency 0 Other 0 Denied Access
Date of Visit: 3-15-- k Arrival Time: 10 o..,r• Departure Time: 1 � County: Djj0Lj" Region: w 1A_' o
Farm Name: :f� d oy c! �i.fJV1 Owner Email:
Owner Name: S- f oy el Phone:
Mailing Address:
Physical Address:
Facility Contact:
Onsite Representative:
Certified Operator: -11—rn-3
Back-up Operator:
Location of Farm:
Swine
Title:
Latitude:
Phone:
Integrator:
Certification Number:
Certification Number:
Longitude:
Design Current Design Current
Capacity Pop. Wet Poultry Capacity Pop.
Layer
Non -Layer
Wean to Finish
Wean to Feeder
Feeder to Finish
a&y0
0
Farrow to Wean
Farrow to Feeder
Farrow to Finish
Gilts
Boars
Other
Other
Design Current
Dry Pnultry Canacitv 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?
Design Current
Cattle Capacity Pop.
Dairy Cow
Dairy Calf
Dairy Heifer
Dry Cow
Non -Dairy
Beef Stocker
Beef Feeder
Beef Brood Cow
❑ Yes 2(No ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ YesL!rllqo ❑ NA ❑ NE
b. Did the discharge reach waters of the State? (If yes, notify DWR) ❑ Yes Q 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)
2. Is there evidence of a past discharge from any part of the operation?
3. Were there any observable adverse impacts or potential adverse impacts to the waters
of the State other than from a discharge?
❑ Yes [�To
[:]Yes LJ 1V
[:]Yes No
❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ NA ❑ NE
Page 1 of 3 21412015 Continued

Facility Number: -&I - ;C41A I jDate of Inspection: -15-
Waste Collection & Treatment
4. Is storage capacity (structural plus storm storage plus heavy rainfall) less than adequate? ❑ Yes g
❑ NA ❑ NE
a. If yes, is waste level into the structural freeboard? ❑ Yes ❑ NA ❑ NE
Structure 1
Identifier:
Spillway?:
Designed Freeboard (in):
Observed Freeboard (in): o�
Structure 2 Structure 3 Structure 4
5. Are there any immediate threats to the integrity of any of the structures observed?
(i.e., large trees, severe erosion, seepage, etc.)
6. Are there structures on -site which are not properly addressed and/or managed through a
waste management or closure plan?
Structure 5 Structure 6
❑ Yes dNo ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Yes [ofNo ❑ NA ❑ NE
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 ❑ NA ❑ NE
8. Do any of the structures lack adequate markers as required by the permit? ❑ Yes��o
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 dNo ❑ NA ❑ NE
maintenance or improvement?
Waste Application
10. Are there any required buffers, setbacks, or compliance alternatives that need ❑ Yes dNo ❑ NA ❑ NE
maintenance or improvement?
11. Is there evidence of incorrect land application? If yes, check the appropriate box below. ❑ Yes ❑ 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): W
13. Soil Type(s):
14. Do the receiving crops differ from those designated in the CAWMP?
❑ Yes
Q o
❑ NA
❑ NE
15. Does the receiving crop and/or land application site need improvement?
❑ Yes
o
❑ NA
❑ NE
16. Did the facility fail to secure and/or operate per the irrigation design or wettable
❑ Yes
WNNo
0 NA
❑ NE
acres determination?
17. Does the facility lack adequate acreage for land application?
❑ Yes
EZ, No
❑ NA
❑ NE
18. Is there a lack of properly operating waste application equipment?
❑ Yes
YNo
❑ NA
❑ NE
Required Records & Documents
19. Did the facility fail to have the Certificate of Coverage & Permit readily available?
❑ Yes
[2�No
❑ NA
❑ NE
20. Does the facility fail to have all components of the CAWMP readily available? If yes, check
❑ Yes
[YNo
❑ 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
EZ/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?
❑ Yes
[/N
❑ NA
❑ NE
23. If selected, did the facility fail to install and maintain rainbreakers on irrigation equipment?
❑ Yes
VNo
❑ NA
❑ NE
Page 2 of 3
21412015 Continued

Facility Number: - Date of Inspection: -S - K a 1
24. Did the facility fail to calibrate waste application equipment as required by the permit? ❑ Yes &No
25. Is the facility out of compliance with permit conditions related to sludge? If yes, check ❑ Yes �No
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 to provide documentation of an actively certified operator in charge? ❑ Yes ff No
27. Did the facility fail to secure a phosphorus loss assessments (PLAT) certification? ❑ Yes ❑ No
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?
❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ NA ❑ NE
[ /NA ❑ NE
❑ Yes R�No ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Yes ZNo ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Yes EA/No ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Yes E2/No ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Yes [No
❑ Yes N
❑ Yes 0
❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ NA ❑ NE
Comments (refer to question ft Explain any YES answers and/or any additional recommendations or any other comments.
Use drawinLys of facility to better explain situations (use additional pates as necessarv).
L, ® = y.35 Q - 3.-+ 0, L�8
— CLWreofI y sol 00",
Reviewer/Inspector Name:
Reviewer/Inspector Signature:
Page 3 of 3
+► 'K—;yt ab.„{- S145-e. CeV%_0v9'1 .
-o Phone:
&R, Date: 3 — I oZ 1
511212020