310813_Compliance Evaluation Inspection_20210204

UDivision of Water Resources
Facility Number `�j ( - (� 0 Division of Soil and Water Conservation �ms
0 Other Agency
of Visit: & C�o�liance Inspection 0 Operation Review 0 Structure Evaluation 0 Technical Assistance
4 in for Visit: Routine 0 Complaint 0 Follow-up 0 Referral 0 Emergency 0 Other 0 Denied Access
Date of Visit: Arrival Time: I Departure Time: gyvt County: 1In Region: W 1 Rd —
Farm
Name: ­S'G F d' -T A `� e N C - " iyrc,,.3F 2 0% Owner Email:
Owner Name: '-Tv D'1 1' t' s ('t: ®o aW G- Phone:
Mailing Address:
Physical Address:
Facility Contact:
Onsite Representative. 5a
Certified Operator: -sef+ 5& nx
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: 1116 � -? 1
Certification Number:
Latitude:
Design Current Design Current
Capacity Pop. Wet Poultry Capacity Pop.
Layer I I :::]
Non -Layer
Design Current
Dry Poultry Capacity Pon.
Layers
Non -Layers
Pullets
Turkeys
Turkey Poults
Other
Longitude:
Design Current
Cattle Capacity Pop.
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
No
❑ NA
❑ NE
Discharge originated at: ❑ Structure ❑ Application Field ❑ Other:
a. Was the conveyance man-made?
❑ Yes
No
❑ NA
❑ NE
b. Did the discharge reach waters of the State? (If yes, notify DWR)
❑ Yes
C240
❑ 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
No
❑ NA
❑ NE
2. Is there evidence of a past discharge from any part of the operation?
❑ Yes
To
❑ NA
❑ NE
3. Were there any observable adverse impacts or potential adverse impacts to the waters
❑ Yes
E�'No
❑ NA
❑ NE
of the State other than from a discharge?
Page 1 of 3 21412015 Continued

Facility Number: 72, jDate of inspection:
Waste Collection & Treatment
4. Is storage capacity (structural plus storm storage plus heavy rainfall) less than adequate? ❑ Yes ®�o ❑ NA ❑ NE
a. If yes, is waste level into the structural freeboard? ❑ Yes E2No ❑ NA ❑ NE
Structure 1 Structure 2 Structure 3 Structure 4 Structure 5 Structure 6
Identifier: -� sow
Spillway?:
Designed Freeboard (in):
Observed Freeboard (in): 30 a- t
5. Are there any immediate threats to the integrity of any of the structures observed?
❑ Yes
o No
❑ NA
❑ NE
(i.e., large trees, severe erosion, seepage, etc.)
No
6. Are there structures on -site which are not properly addressed and/or managed through a
❑ Yes
Z
❑ 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,
No
notify DWR
7. Do any of the structures need maintenance or improvement?
[—]Yes
El
❑ NA
❑ NE
8. Do any of the structures lack adequate markers as required by the permit?
❑ Yes
FZ<o
❑ 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 [�"No ❑ NA ❑ NE
maintenance or improvement?
Waste Application
10. Are there any required buffers, setbacks, or compliance alternatives that need ❑ Yes EKO ❑ 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): C,, LJ , S G
13. Soil Type(s):
14. Do the receiving crops differ from those designated in the CAWMP?
❑ Yes
® No
❑ NA
❑ NE
15. Does the receiving crop and/or land application site need improvement?
❑ Yes
D<O
❑ NA
❑ NE
16. Did the facility fail to secure and/or operate per the irrigation design or wettable
❑ Yes
[2"No
❑ NA
❑ NE
acres determination?
17. Does the facility lack adequate acreage for land application?
❑ Yes
eNo
❑ NA
❑ NE
18. Is there a lack of properly operating waste application equipment?
❑ Yes
FZ/No
❑ NA
❑ NE
Required Records & Documents
19. Did the facility fail to have the Certificate of Coverage & Permit readily available?
❑ Yes
[3/No
❑ NA
❑ NE
20. Does the facility fail to have all components of the CAWMP readily available? If yes, check
❑ Yes
F5<o
❑ 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? ❑ Yes �o ❑ NA ❑ NE
23. If selected, did the facility fail to install and maintain rainbreakers on irrigation equipment? ❑ Yes dNo ❑ NA ❑ NE
Page 2 of 3 21412015 Continued

Facility Number: 31 - 211 1 Date of inspection: a - 4 - �Lool
24. Did the facility fail to calibrate waste application equipment as required by the permit? ❑ Yes 4No ❑ NA ❑ NE
25. Is the facility out of compliance with permit conditions related to sludge? If yes, check ❑ Yes 2/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 YNA ❑ NE
Other Issues
28. Did the facility fail to properly dispose of dead animals with 24 hours and/or document ❑ Yes E04 ❑ NA ❑ NE
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 [YNo ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Yes ®No ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Yes ❑ No ❑ NA
❑ Yes ENo
❑ Yes W
❑ Yes�zo
DNA ❑NE
❑NA ❑NE
❑ 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).
90l�-, 5�a.� PP► A'S1A�,
E XFc*- m S x�
—AN NON) rq'*4 �,,U_c Jew1 U Cad..Svl }- b.,e Fly Su$ eft Sep
Was cec__Ject
` i5r A5oc� - b.� �� ►)r 902� Af, S�°mow. �Q�¢ iS s o �9
Reviewer/Inspector Name: Phone: 0lo)n l-4- .s-?q
a
Reviewer/Inspector Signature: Date: 01 —
Page 3 of 3 21412015