660014_Compliance Evaluation Inspection_20190411

Facility Number ® - C�
Sd'Division of Water Resources
0 Division of Sail and Water Conservation
0 Other Agency
-L'I -
Type of Visit:Com nce Inspection 0 Operation Review 0 Structure Evaluation 0 Technical Assistance
Reason for Visit: Routine 0 Complaint 0 Follow-up 0 Referral 0 Emergency 0 Other 0 Denied Access
Date of Visit: rl % Arrival Time: D t Departure Time: County:
Farm Name: 1ki z Ro 5 e .3 Owner Email:
Owner Name:
Mailing Address:
Physical Address:
Facility Contact:
Onsite Representative: 14 /I--) h') &r.
Certified Operator:
Back-up Operator:
Title:
Location of Farm: Latitude:
Phone:
Phone:
Integrator:
Certification Number:
Certification Number:
Longitude:
Design Current Design Current
Swine Capacity Pop. Wet Poultry Capacity Pop. Cattle
Wean to Finish
Wean to Feeder
Feeder to Finish r '"r)
Farrow to Wean
Farrow to Feeder
Farrow to Finish
Gilts
Boars
Other
Other
Layer
Non -La er
Pullets
Poults
Design Current
Dairy Cow
Dairy Calf
Dairy Heifer
Dry Cow
,Non -Dairy
Beef Stocker
Beef Feeder
Beef Brood Cow
Region:
Design Current
Capacity Pop.
Discharges and Stream Impacts
1. Is any discharge observed from any part of the operation? ❑ Yes F �NoE3 NA ❑ NE
Discharge originated at: ❑ Structure ❑ Application Field ❑ Other:
a. Was the conveyance man-made? ❑ YesN ❑ NA ❑ NE
b. Did the discharge reach waters of the State? (If yes, notify DWR) ❑ YesgNo ❑ 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 ro L]NA F]NE
2. Is there evidence of a past discharge from any part of the operation? ❑ Yes ❑ NA ❑ NE
3. Were there any observable adverse impacts or potential adverse impacts to the waters ❑ Yes ❑ No ❑ NA ❑ NE
of the State other than from a discharge?
Page I of 3 2/4/2015 Continued

Facility Number: 1(4 Date of inspection: t / /
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
❑ NA
r ❑ NA
Structure 1 Structure 2 Structure 3 Structure 4 Structure 5 Structure 6
Identifier:
Spillway?:
Designed Freeboard (in):
Observed Freeboard (in):
5. Are there any immediate threats to the integrity of any of the structures observed? ❑ Yes eNo NA
(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 No ❑ NA
waste management or closure plan?
❑ NE
❑ NE
❑ NE
❑ NE
If any of questions 4-6 were answered yes, and the situation poses an immediate public health or environments hreat, notify DWR
7. Do any of the structures need maintenance or improvement?
❑Yes
n 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 KNO
❑ NA
❑ NE
maintenance or improvement?
Waste Application
10. Are there any required buffers, setbacks, or compliance alternatives that need
❑ Yes UNo
❑ NA
❑ NE
maintenance or improvement?
11. Is there evidence of incorrect land application? If yes, check the appropriate box below.
❑ Yes ONo
❑ 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): 10 t /3 dr+n s
13. Soil Type(s):
14. Do the receiving crops differ from those designated in the CAWMP?
— /
❑ Yes I ANO .
TKNo
❑ NA
❑ NE
15. Does the receiving crop and/or land application site need improvement?
❑ Yes
❑ NA
❑ NE
16. Did the facility fail to secure and/or operate per the irrigation design or wettable
❑ Yes
❑ NA
❑ NE
acres determination?
17. Does the facility lack adequate acreage for land application?
❑ Yes
�No
❑ NA
❑ NE
18. Is there a lack of properly operating waste application equipment?
❑ Yes
❑ NA
❑ NE
Re uired Records & Documents
N
19. Did the facility fail to have the Certificate of Coverage & Permit readily available?
❑ Yes ❑
❑ NA
❑ NE
20. Does the facility fail to have all components of the CAWMP readily available? If yes, check
❑ Yes
❑ NA
❑ NE
the appropriate box.
❑WUP []Checklists []Design E] Maps ❑ Lease Agreements ❑Other:
21. Does record keeping need improvement? 1 f yes, check the appropriate box below. ❑ Yes EfNo ❑ 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 No ❑ NA ❑ NE
23. If selected, did the facility fail to install and maintain rainbreakers on irrigation equipment? ❑ Yes [] No ❑ NA ❑ NE
Page 2 of 3 2/4/2015 Continued

Facili Number: .n - Date of Inspection: /r
/
and report mortality rates that were higher than normal?
24. Did the facility fail to calibrate waste application equipment as required by the permit?
❑ Yes
N ❑ NA
❑ NE
25. is the facility out of compliance with permit conditions related to sludge? If yes, check
❑ Yes
❑ NA
❑ NE
the ap opriate box(es) below.
❑ Yes ❑ No ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Application Field ❑ Lagoon/Storage Pond ❑ Other:
ailure to complete annual sludge survey ❑ Failure to develop a POA for sludge levels
❑ Yes ❑ No ❑ NA ❑ NE
33. Did the Reviewer/Inspector fail to discuss review/inspection with an on-site representative?
❑ Non-compliant sludge levels in any lagoon
34. Does the facility require a follow-up visit by the same agency?
❑ Yes ❑ No [] NA ❑ NE
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
❑ NA
❑ NE
27. Did the facility fail to secure a phosphorus loss assessments (PLAT) certification?
❑ Yes
No ❑ NA
❑ NE
Other Issues
28. Did the facility fail to properly dispose of dead animals with 24 hours and/or document
❑ Yes ❑ No ❑ 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?
❑ Yes ❑ No ❑ NA ❑ NE
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
❑ Yes ❑ No ❑ NA ❑ NE
permit? (i.e., discharge, freeboard problems, over -application)
3I. Do subsurface the drains exist at the facility? Ifyes, check the appropriate box below.
❑ Yes ❑ No ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Application Field ❑ Lagoon/Storage Pond ❑ Other:
32. Were any additional problems noted which cause non-compliance of the permit or CAWMP?
❑ Yes ❑ No ❑ NA ❑ NE
33. Did the Reviewer/Inspector fail to discuss review/inspection with an on-site representative?
❑ Yes ❑ No ❑ NA ❑ NE
34. Does the facility require a follow-up visit by the same agency?
❑ Yes ❑ No [] 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 panes as necessarv).
K1�e ( #/ G. 7-0- II
S IrtieJye Sc(rvo7 -7— Zy_/7
Reviewer/ I nspvctor
Reviewer/Inspector Name:
Reviewer/Inspector Signature: 'fit S Zj
Page 3 of 3
Phone: 7`J - Y Zy o
Date: Y /I I
2/4/2015