310124_Compliance Evaluation Inspection_20210217

Division of Water Resources
Facility Number - O Division of Soil and Water Conservation
0 Other Agency
Type of Visit: O Compliance Inspection 0 Operation 12ecieti * Structure Ecalualiun O Technical Assistance
Reason for Visit: O Routine O Complaint O Follow-up O Referral ® Emergency OOther O Denied Access
Date of Visit: Arrival Time: ® Departure Time: County: In Region: VJ LIU-J
Farm Name: aV L zt C'] -r r.rf R1L lag Owner Email:
Owner Name: olq.ezrv1 Cam,, 47 n Phone:
Mailing Address:
Physical Address
Facility Contact: Title: Phone: ((��
Onsite Representative: Integrator: '.5W) }i'S'L id
Certified Operator: Certification Number:
Back-up Operator: 2C/eertification Number: pu r.
Location of Farm: Latitude: JI.'7�")LJ Longitude: n O I! )-22)
Cap ^ hT i Dirtad_y Ix "40A. 4" %t)� loo�"b I i Vdi
Swine
Design Current Design Current
Capacity Pop. Wet Poultry Capacity Pop.
Laver
Von -Laver
Farrow to Wean Design Current
Farrow to Feeder Dry Poultry Capacity Pop.
Farrow to Finish Layers
Gilts Non -Layers
Roars Pullets
Turkeys
Other Turkey Faults
Othcr Other
Discharges and Stream Impacts
1. Is any discharge observed from any part ofthe operation?
Discharge originated at: ❑ Structure ❑ Application Field ❑ Other: _
a. Was the conveyance man-made?
b. Did the discharge reach waters ofthe State? (If yes, notify DWR)
c. What is the estimated volume that reached waters ofthe 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 ofthe operation?
3. Were there any observable adverse impacts or potential adverse impacts to the waters
ofthe State other than from a discharge?
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
ZNo
❑ NA
❑ NE
❑ Yes
r
IL] No
❑ NA
❑ NE
❑ Yes
g No
❑ NA
❑ NE
❑ Yes
4� No
❑ NA
❑ NE
❑ Yes
Id No
❑ NA
❑ NE
Page I of 3 21412015 Continued

Facili Number: Date of Ins ectioru
Waste Collection & Treatment
4. Is storage capacity (structural plus storm storage plus heavy rainfall) less than adequate? �y( Yes ❑ No ❑ NA ❑ NE
a. If yes, is waste level into the structural freeboard? 1 Yes ❑ No ❑ NA ❑ NE
Structure I Structure Structure 3 Structure 4 Structure 5 Structure 6
Identifier: --:� 4
Spillway?:
Designed Freeboard(in):
Observed Freeboard (in): �� Z-3
5. Are there any immediate threats to the integrity of any of the strucmres 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 FC] 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 K No ❑ NA ❑ NE
8. Do any of the structures lack adequate markers as required by the permit? Yes ❑ 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 ® No ❑ NA ❑ NE
maintenance or improvement?
Waste Aoplication
10. Are there any required buffers, setbacks, or compliance alternatives that need ❑ Yes ❑ No '4 NA ❑ NE
maintenance or improvement?
11. Is there evidence of incorrect land application? If yes, check the appropriate box below. ❑ Yes ❑ No g NA ❑ NE
❑ Excessive Pending ❑ 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 Arco
12. Crop Type(s)
13, Soil Type(s):
14. Do the receiving crops differ from those designated in the CAWMP? [:]Yes ❑ No 4 NA ❑ NE
15. Does the receiving crop and/or land application site need improvement? ❑ Yes ❑ No ® NA ❑ NE
to. 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
❑ No
W NA
❑ NE
I S. Is there a lack of properly operating waste application equipment?
❑ Yes
❑ No
® NA
❑ NE
Required Records & Documents
19. Did the facility fail to have the Certificate of Coverage & Permit readily available?
❑ Yea
❑ No
® NA
❑ NE
20. Does the facility fail to have all components of the CAWMP readily available? If yes, check
❑ Yes
❑ No
1511 NA
❑ NE
the appropriate box.
❑ W UP ❑Checklists ❑ Design ❑ Maps ❑ Lease Agreements
❑Other.
21. Does record keeping need improvement? If yes, check the appropriate box below.
❑ Yes
C� 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
0 No
❑ NA
❑ NE
23. If selected, did the facility fail to install and maintain rainbreakers on irrigation equipment?
❑ Yes
ZNo
❑ NA
❑ NE
Page 2 of
2142015 Continued

Facili Number: Date of Inspection:
24. Did the facility fail to calibrate waste application equipment as required by the pennit? ❑ 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 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
15�NA ❑ NE
10 NA ❑ NE
❑ Yes
❑ No
0 NA
❑ NE
❑ Yes
❑ No
® NA
�r❑—
❑ NE
❑ Yes
% No
NA
❑ NE
❑ Yes
❑ No
NA
❑ NE
❑ Yes
® No
❑ NA
❑ NE
❑ Yes
g No
❑ NA
❑ NE
❑ Yes
M No
❑ NA
❑ NE
Comments (refer to question ft Explain any^ recommendations or any other comments.
Use drawings of facility to better explain si
Nasc�slccd 5'n'4'W +0 ft ool �'d "\ maruit, " +
9csln fio ; ,{{,� IS► look `' I i lu 2 3t:
bec lc, corrw,,' ) Won 2 has 2 m, No hc 2 -3n C<' Dec
12�o©n 1 h°J' �� °e>i' -}pd�y 211�• Loolceei a�-�reeboafa� a
(gin Qa ll �Q'e IL }o �• Ne bee1� urdef s (b�1 s I oce-
t3' vo� J�nuarl�. C?(ic lded POD 214. COI)eJ tD
Ife9b(+ W 2�119. He Has �d�itd ll ik }o 41-t lower
Co McrS �o� }o oze i+ � M 6rEaC� 1� n� • , noJ Yvbre off, ��
Ae C4 '0 ` I t ld d o �o Qur �p
d la TO"15
bP r ai 5 �lood� u-am
Reviewer/Inspector Name: L(]pOCOPhone: gIO'(0ZO-� /Cl
Reviewer/Inspector Signature: Date:
Page 3 of 21412015