930034_Compliance Evaluation Inspection_20190819

W Division of Water Resources
Facility Number - 0 Division of Soil and Water Conservation
0 Other Agency
Type of Visit: �DCo fiance Inspection O Operation Review 0 Structure Evaluation O Technical Assistance
Reason for Visit: _ Routine 0 Complaint 0 Fallow -up 0 Referral 0 Emergency 0 Other 0 Denied Access
Date of Visit: — —"— —'r, Arrival Time: t Departure Timer County: Region:
Farm Name: Lia
Owner Name:
Mailing Address:
Physical Address:
Facility Contact:
Onsite Representative: J b g4l
Certified Operator:
Back-up Operator:
Location of Farm:
Swine
Owner Email:
Phone:
Title:
Latitude:
Phone:
Integrator: %/Gfr ✓ i-5
Certification Number:
Certification Number:
Longitude:
Design Current Design Current
Capacity Pop. Wet Poultry Capacity Pop.
Layer
Non -La er
can to Finish
Wean to Feeder
Feeder to Finish
I. Is any discharge observed from any part of the operation?
Farrow to Wean
ONo
Farrow to Feeder
❑ NE
Farrow to Finish
Gilts
Soars
a. Was the conveyance man-made?
Other
Other
Non -L.
Pullets
Other
Poults
Design Current
Design Current
Cattle Capacity Pop.
Dairy Cow
Dai Calf
Dairy Heifer
Dry Cow
,Non -Dairy
Beef Stocker
Beef Feeder
Beef Brood Cow
Discharges and Stream Impacts
I. Is any discharge observed from any part of the operation?
❑ Yes
ONo
❑ NA
❑ NE
Discharge originated at: ❑ Structure ❑ Application Field ❑ Other:
a. Was the conveyance man-made?
❑ YesN
F] NA
❑ NE
b. Did the discharge reach waters of the State? (If yes, notify DWR)
❑ Yes
No
❑ 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
❑ 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 1 of 3 2/4/2015 Cond hued

Facili Number: C1 jDate of Inspection: 9 - / —(
Waste Collection & Treatment
4. Is storage capacity (structural plus storm storage plus heavy rainfall) less than adequate? ❑ Yes ❑ NA ❑ NE
a. If yes, is waste level into the structural freeboard? ❑ Yes No ❑ NA ❑ NE
Structure 1 Structure 2 Structure 3
Identifier:
Spillway?:
Designed Freeboard (in):
Observed Freeboard (in): I
Structure 4 Structure 5 Structure 6
5. Are there any immediate threats to the integrity of any of the structures observed?
(i.e., large trees, severe erosion, seepage, etc.)
6. Are there structures on-site which are not properly addressed and/or managed through a
waste management or closure plan?
❑ YesZNo�7o­NA [:]NE
❑ Yes No ❑ NA ❑ NE
If any of questions 4-6 were answered yes, and the situation poses an immediate public health or environment th at, notify DWR
7. Do any of the structures need maintenance or improvement? ❑ Yes [:]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 AppliCatiOR
10. Are there any required buffers, setbacks, or compliance alternatives that need ❑ Yes VNo
❑ NA ❑ NE
maintenance or improvement?
11. Is there evidence of incorrect land application? If yes, check the appropriate box below. ❑ Yes❑ 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):
13. Soil Type(s):
❑ Yes❑
NA
❑ NE
14. Do the receiving crops differ from those designated in the CAWMP?
❑ YesrNplNA
❑ NA
I—]NE
15. Does the receiving crop and/or land application site need improvement?
❑ Yes
❑
❑ NE
16. Did the facility fail to secure and/or operate per the irrigation design or wettable
❑ Yes
NA
❑ NE
acres determination?
❑ Yes No
❑ NA
❑ NE
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
❑ NA
❑ NE
23. If selected, did the facility fail to install and maintain rainbreakers on irrigation equipment?
❑ Yes ❑ No
Required Records & Documents
❑ NE
Page 2 of 3
2/4/2015 Continued
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 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 V Rainfall Inspections
Sludge Survey
22. Did the facility Dail 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 ❑ No
❑ NA
❑ NE
Page 2 of 3
2/4/2015 Continued

Facility Number: - Date of Ins ection: Z3 -
24. Did the facility fail to calibrate waste application equipment as required by the permit? ❑ YesN ❑ NA [:]NE
25. Is the facility out of compliance with permit conditions related to sludge? If yes, check ❑ Yes gNo [:INA ❑ 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 NA ❑ NE
Other Issues
28. Did the facility fail to properly dispose of dead animals with 24 hours and/or document ❑ Yes o ❑ 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 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 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 necessary).
Reviewer, inspector Name:
Rev iewerinspector Signature: { zW _'/04/L/Z
Page 3 of 3
Phone: / 2 -7!L ` 2�
Date: - i 1 - t
1/412015