330058_Compliance Evaluation Inspection_20190624

6 2 7-
UDivision of Water Resources
Facility Number ®-] 0 Division of Soil and Water Conservation
/ 0 Other Agency
Type of Visit: [4 Com cc Inspection U Operation Review O 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:, Arrival Time t/ Departure Time: L_S�7_-1_L1J County:
Farm Name: "f7 Ne i� l7 fY 1-i9 Zvi— Owner Email:
Owner Name:
Mailing Address:
Physical Address:
Facility Contact:
Phone:
Title: Phone:
Onsite Representative: n8a¢ t �OLC) �/f/ -� Integrator:
Certified Operator:
Hack -up Operator:
Location of Farm:
Swine
Certification Number:
Certification Number:
Latitude: Longitude:
Design Current Design Current
Capacity Pop. Wet Poultry Capacity Pop.
La er
% ! J Non—Layer
W n to Finish
❑ Yes
can to Feeder
❑ NE
Feeder to Finish
9
Farrow to Wean
Od S/Cd
Farrow to Feeder
❑YesrNoED]
Farrow to Finish
❑ NE
Gilts
❑ Yes
Boars
w^
Other
Other
Pullets
Other
Poults
Design Current
Discharges and Stream Impacts
I. Is any discharge observed from any part of the operation?
Discharge originated at: ❑ Structure ❑ Application Field ❑ Other:
a. Was the conveyance man-made?
Region:
Design Current
Cattle Capacity Pop.
Dairy Cow
Dairy Calf
Dairy Heifer
_Dry Cow
Non -Dai
Beef Stocker
Beef Feeder
Beef Brood Cow
❑ Yes No ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ YesN +❑ NA ❑ NE
b. Did the discharge reach waters of the State? (If yes, notify DWR)
❑ Yes
PNo ❑ 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)
❑YesrNoED]
NA
❑ NE
2. Is there evidence of a past discharge from any part of the operation?
❑ Yes
NA
E] NE
3. Were there any observable adverse impacts or potential adverse impacts to the waters
❑ Yes
NA
❑ NE
of the State other than from a discharge?
Page I of 3 2/4/2015 Continued

Facility Number: a - Date of Inspection: 6 • Lt -/
Waste Collection & Treatment
4. Is storage capacity (structural plus storm storage plus heavy rainfall) less than adequate? ❑ Yes"No ❑ NE
a. if yes, is waste level into the structural freeboard? ❑ Yes No ❑ NA ❑ NE
Structure I Structure 2 Structure 3 Structure 4 Structure 5 Structure 6
Identifier: &j 4y- Aur4e�•, �h • P Fth" S • SQW P Svw- 5
Spillway?:
Designed Freeboard (in):
Observed Freeboard (in): 3~ -7,9 YL/ 7 R
5. Are there any immediate threats to the integrity of any of the structures observed? E] Yes ❑ NA Yes ❑ 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 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 environmenta rent, 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 No ❑ NA ❑ NE
maintenance or improvement?
Waste Application
10. 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. [D Yes No ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Excessive Ponding ❑ Hydraulic Overload ❑ Frozen Ground p Heavy Metals (Cu, Zn, etc.)
❑ PAN ❑ PAN > I0% 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): f , t C
13. Soil Type(s):
14. Do the receiving crops differ from those designated in the CAWMP?
❑ Yes
LL'J'N ❑ NA
E]NE
15.
Does the receiving crop and/or land application site need improvement?
❑ YesPNo
❑ 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
❑ NA
❑ NE
18.
Is there a lack of properly operating waste application equipment?
❑ Yes
No ❑ NA
❑ NE
Reauired_Records
& Documents
19.
Did the facility fail to have the Certificate of Coverage & Permit readily available?
❑ YesN
❑ NA
❑ NE
20.
Does the facility fail to have all components of the CAWMP readily available? if yes, check
❑ Yes
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 No ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Waste Application ❑ Weekly Freeboard ❑ Waste Analysis ❑ Soil Analysis ❑ Waste Transfers ❑ Weather Code
❑ Rainfall []Stocking ❑ Crop Yield ❑ 120 Minute Inspections ❑ Monthly and I" Rainfall InspectiPNo
Sludge Survey
22. Did the facility fail to install and maintain a rain gauge? ❑ Yes❑ NA ❑ NE
23. Ifselected, did the facility fail to install and maintain rainbreakers on irrigation equipment? ❑ Yes❑ NA ❑ NE
Page 2 of 3 21412015 Continued

Facility Number: 3,5 - S Datc of Inspection: G - Z
24. Did the facility fail to calibrate waste application equipment as required by the permit? ❑ YesNo NA ❑ NE
25. Is the facility out of compliance with permit conditions related to sludge? If yes, check ❑ Yes 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 o NA ❑ NE
Other Issues
28. Did the facility fail to properly dispose of dead animals with 24 hours andior 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)
31. Do subsurface tile 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
❑ No
❑ NA
❑ NE
33. Did the ReviewerlInspector fail to discuss reviewimspection 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 pages as necessary),
A It�, ��� �, dke 'C)1 R eLe �v�r
L'Is- ches Jam( 7- zV-l7
Reviewer: Inspector Name:
ReviewerllnspectorSignature: 134 S yli' -fir-
Page 3 of 3
Phone: 1 ( t/ ZOG
Date: ' LLI' 15,
2/412015