310241_Compliance Evaluation Inspection_20210329

& Division of Water Resources 131 M 5
Facility Number 'J1 - O Division of Soll and Water Conservation
O Other Agency
J
Type of Visit: ZRputine
liance Inspection O Operation Review O Structure Evaluation O Technical Assistance
Reason for Visit: o0 Complaint 0 Follow-up 0 Referral 0 Emergency 0 Other 0 Denied Access
Date of Visit: 3. a9-d 1 Arrival Time: " Pr^ Departure Time: County: otl pl'ltJ Region: W 1 A0
Farm Name: M&r e n L 10" Rca- 4 �'� , 60-M Owner Email:
Owner Name: 26n i�co•,w Phone:
Mailing Address:
Physical Address:
Facility Contact:
Onsite Representative: CDCOTT Q•192:-2 r✓
Certified Operator: riArUo*-d isN t3GcwtJ
Back-up Operator:
Location of Farm:
Swine
Wean to Finish
Wean to Feeder
Feeder to Finish
Farrow to Wean
Farrow to Feeder
Farrow to Finish
Gilts
Boars
Other
Other
Title:
Integrator:
Phone:
Certification Number: % ZZ ` -
Certification Number:
Latitude:
Design Current Design Current
Capacity Pop. Wet Poultry Capacity Pop.
Layer I I ::::]
Non -Layer
Design Current
Dry Poultry 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?
b. Did the discharge reach waters of the State? (If yes, notify DWR)
c What is the estimated volume that reached waters of the State (gallons)?
Longitude:
Design Current
Cattle Capacity Pop.
Dairy Cow
Dairy Calf
Dairy Heifer
Dry Cow
Non -Dairy
Beef Stocker
Beef Feeder
Beef Brood Cow
[:]Yes [/] No ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Yes
ErNo
❑ NA
❑ NE
[:]Yes
C1 1"o
❑ NA
❑ NE
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? ❑ YesFj`No ❑ NA ❑ NE
3. Were there any observable adverse impacts or potential adverse impacts to the waters ❑ Yes 10 ❑ NA ❑ NE
of the State other than from a discharge?
Page I of 3 21412015 Continued

Facility Number: 31_ - 241 :J Date of Inspection: _ —
Waste Collection ,& Treatment
4. Is storage capacity (structural plus storm storage plus heavy rainfall) less than adequate? ❑ Yes
a. If yes, is waste level into the structural freeboard? ❑ Yes
Structure 1 Structure 2 Structure 3 Structure 4 Structure 5
Identifier: 1 a
Spillway?: _
Designed Freeboard (in):
Observed Freeboard (in):_ _
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?
Yo ❑ NA ❑ NE
o ❑ NA ❑ NE
Structure 6
❑ Yes [ No
❑ Yes VNo
❑ NA ❑ NE
❑NA ❑NE
If any of questions 4-6 were answered yes, and the situation poses an immediate public health or environmental hreat, notify DWR
7. Do any of the structures need maintenance or improvement? ❑ Yes No ❑ NA ❑ NE
8. Do any of the structures lack adequate markers as required by the permit? ❑ Yes F2< ❑ 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 EZrN o ❑ 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 EKo ❑ 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): ('� (TO
13. Soil Type(s):
14. Do the receiving crops differ from those designated in the CAWMP? ❑ Yes 0 No ❑ 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 ['No ❑ NA ❑ NE
acres determination?
17. Does the facility lack adequate acreage for land application?
18. Is there a lack of properly operating waste application equipment?
[:]Yes E]/No ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Yes [Er/No ❑ NA ❑ NE
Required Records & Documents
19. Did the facility fail to have the Certificate of Coverage & Permit readily available?
❑ Yes
dNo
❑ NA ❑ NE
20. Does the facility fail to have all components of the CAWMP readily available? If yes, check
❑ Yes
21"No
❑ 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
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
g3'<o
❑ NA ❑ NE
23. If selected, did the facility fail to install and maintain rainbreakers on irrigation equipment? ❑ Yes EJ-Ko ❑ NA ❑ NE
Page 2 of 3 21412015 Continued

Facility Number: `31 - 914 1 jDate of Inspection:
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 ❑ 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
ff NA ❑ NE
❑Yes ❑No ❑NA ❑NE
❑ Yes ❑ No ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Yes ❑ No ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Yes ❑ No ❑ NA ❑ NE
[:]Yes
[:]No
❑ NA
❑ NE
❑ Yes
❑ No
❑ NA
❑ NE
❑ Yes
❑ No
❑ NA
❑ NE
Comments (refer to question ft 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 necessarv).
GX11,6'r�J'ov, aid so"I du. aoai.
LI 0:3,3
Lp 0 = 3,`t P= �t 3
Reviewer/Inspector Name:
a 14 Phone: Lq t o� �p 1.7' 9 T'4
Reviewer/Inspector Signature: Date: 3
Page 3 of 3 511212020