510107_Compliance Evaluation Inspection_20190530

En
k) V3 Uto« dt)ty
Division of Water Resources
Facility Number 5 - Ql O Division of Soil and Water Conservation
O Other Agency
Type of Visit: 12FCompliance Inspection 0 Operation Review O Structure Evaluation O Technical Assistance
Reason for Visit: Routine O Complaint O Follow-up O Referral O Emergency O Other O Denied Access
Date of Visit: 1,51301 � Arrival Time: ! U Departure Time: County: �_ Region:
Farm Name: Ci[p 1 Let
:calm
Owner Name: CAro a-, LPA
Mailing Address:
Owner Email:
Phone:
Physical Address: 2064 81ckdn a Pater oak s
Facility Contact: Ut,I ly _ Title: C01SAfftAfi Phone:
Onsite Representative: J o %"d Nell, Integrator:
Certified Operator:ri''rl I Il Certification Number:
Back-up Operator: Certification Number:
Location of Farm:
Design Current
Swine Capacity Pop.
Wean to Finish
Wean to Feeder +-t
Feeder to Finish
Farrow to Wean
Farrow to Feeder
Farrow to Finish
Boars
Other
Other
Latitude:
Design Current
Wet Poultry Capacity Pop.
Layer
Non -La er
tis
Design Current
Pullets
Other
Poults
Discharges and Stream Imuacts
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)?
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?
Longitude:
Design Current
Cattle Capacity Pop.
Dairy Cow
Dairy Calf
Daky Heifer
DryTow
Non -Dai
Beef Stocker
Beef Feeder
Beef Brood Cow
❑ Yes ] No ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Yes ❑ No ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Yes ❑ No ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Yes [:]No
❑ Yes U No
0 Yes Eff No
❑ NA ❑ NE
❑NA ❑NE
❑ NA ❑ NE
Page 1 off 2/4/2015 Continued

JlFacWty Number: 51- Date of Inspection: I
Waste Collection & Treatment
4. Is storage capacity (structural plus storm storage plus heavy rainfall) less than adequate?
❑ Yes
E�[ No
❑ NA
❑ NE
n. If yes, is waste level into the structural freeboard?
❑ Yes
❑ No
❑ NA
❑ NE
Structure 1 Structure 2 Structure 3 Structure 4
Structure 5
Structure 6
Identifier:
Spillway?:
Designed Freeboard (in): 19 lbejigrlchvt•il!
Observed Freeboard (in):
5. Are there any immediate threats to the integrity of any of the structures observed?
❑ Yes
k] No
❑ NA
❑ NE
(i.e., large trees, severe erosion, seepage, etc.)
6. Are there structures on-site which are not properly addressed an&or managed through a
❑ Yes
21 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
®'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 Application
I0. Are there any required buffers, setbacks, or compliance alternatives that need
❑ Yes
No
❑ NA
❑ NE
maintenance or improvement?
11. Is there evidence of incorrect land application? If yes, check the appropriate box below. ❑ Yes 0 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 ❑1 Evidence of Wind Drift ❑ Application Outside of Approved Area
12. Crop Type(s):
13. Soil Type(s): rjr `i AlofVU
1.11
14. Do the receiving crops differ from those designated in the CAWMP? ❑ Yes ® No ❑ NA ❑ NE
15. Does the receiving crop andior land application site need improvement? ❑ Yes ® No ❑ NA ❑ NE
16. Did the facility fail to secure and/or operate per the irrigation design or wettable ❑ Yes N No ❑ NA ❑ NE
acres determination?
I7. Does the facility lack adequate acreage for land application?
18. Is there a lack of properly operating waste application equipment?
❑ Yes ® No ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Yes W No ❑ NA ❑ NE
Required Records & Documents
19. Did the facility fail to have the Certificate of Coverage & Permit readily available? ❑ Yes No ❑ NA ❑ NE
20. Does the facility fail to have all components of the CAWMP readily available? Ifyes, check ❑ Yes No ❑ NA ❑ NE
the appropriate box.
❑ WUP ❑Checklists ❑ Design [—I Maps ❑ Lease Agreements ❑Other:
21. Does record keeping need improvement? If yes, check the appropriate box below. ❑ Yes R No
ElWaste Application ❑ Weekly Freeboard E]Waste Analysis ❑ Soil Analysis ❑ Waste Transfers
❑ Rainfall ❑ Stocking ❑ Crop Yield ❑ 120 Minute Inspections ElMonthly and V Rainfall Inspections
22. Did the facility fail to install and maintain a rain gauge? [:]Yes E& No
23. If selected, did the facility fail to install and maintain rainbreakers on irrigation equipment? ❑ Yes ® No
❑NA ❑NE
❑ Weather Code
❑ Sludge Survey
❑NA ONE
❑ NA ❑ NE
Page 2 of 3 21412015 Continued

Facili Number: -
Date of Inspection: D
24. Did the facility fail to calibrate waste application equipment as required by the permit? ❑ Yes C' No ❑ NA ❑ NE
25. is the facility out of compliance with permit conditions related to sludge? If yes, check ❑ Yes allo ❑ NA ❑ NE
the appropriate box(es) below.
❑ Failure to complete annual sludge survey ❑ Failure to develop a AOA 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 ❑ 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 151 No
❑ NA ❑ NE
permit? (i.e., discharge, freeboard problems, over -application)
31. Do subsurface the drains exist at the facility? If yes, 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 (2 No
❑ NA ❑ NE
33. Did the Reviewer/Inspector fail to discuss review/inspection with an on-site representative?
❑ Yes [a No
❑ NA ❑ NE
34. Does the facility require a follow-up visit by the same agency?
❑ 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).
a&-o+fl riII1 I neck 6 hri cm*AI//Af
'a _ b
-A�� pi8d` /oy
f a�o' a4ltt,
Syy!�D5-S1vJ esv!vf 4.G�4 14
3pU4�
o
d�er r
o -Ca 'bluo./y
ytyVnIn,e � �a► -1561 Tf)f SGq) 4 �. No �
YVik 74 1
po�ss
�I R hyo q I
rvDoL3 y�P
OV
yvVt743
Bpl j y b u ffoda+,
Reviewer/Inspector Name: V ogn SC=411eiPi
Reviewer/lnspector Signature:
Page 3 of 3
Phone: fiffite q'Iq 7Q1 -4o)3 V
Date: 10aq } r101 G
214/1015