290013_Compliance Evaluation Inspection_20201218

Type of Visit: , Compliance 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: �'� 1571xj Arrival Time:I iyAby
Departure Time:I7 1 County:
\n
Farm Name: I Jj flU % V I2q d Q i'k {Yv\ Owner Email:
\n disbn Region: V is l2cD
Owner Name: a \I d e S/A Phone: � ' (X-15-13
Mailing Address: V \% I \ S� ( c & . 1 U y vV d N/ lJ /1 N
l v\I i I Sn i ke I2dl.) lei n vc 1 Vi'i (712 I
36 2-L10 1cl 15(c )
Physical Address:
Facility Contact: Sv)ane, Sy)id ex -
Title: Phone:
Onsite Representative:4(y)be v A I ( so vn
Certified Operator:
Back-up Operator:
Location of Farm:
Shane vc1&-
Integrator:
Certification Number:
Certification Number:
O t 11 1
Latitude: 3o5 Longitude: 00 �5
Iry y 6 ) +-D TO SD gvenc. i +- 3--u bi
6o.A1 (2A . --� u3' SY) I de -A per .
Wean to Finish
Wean to Feeder
Feeder to Finish
Farrow to Wean
Farrow to Feeder
Farrow to Finish
Gilts
Boars
Layer
Non -Layer
Non -La ers
Pullets
Turke Poults
Other
Discharges and Stream Impacts
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?
Dai Calf
Dai Heifer
Non-Dai
Beef Stocker
Beef Feeder
Beef Brood Cow
1 I
❑ Yes ZLNo ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Yes ❑ No ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Yes ❑ No ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Yes ❑ No ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Yes nNo ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Yes Is No ❑ NA ❑ NE
Page 1 of 3
5/12/2020 Continued

'Facility Number: 21 - ( 3
Waste Collection & Treatment
Date of Inspection:
4. Is storage capacity (structural plus storm storage plus heavy rainfall) less than adequate?
a. If yes, is waste level into the structural freeboard?
Identifier:
Spillway?:
Designed Freeboard (in):
Observed Freeboard (in):
❑ Yes KNo ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Yes ❑ No ❑ NA ❑ NE
Structure 1 Structure 2 Structure 3 Structure 4 Structure 5 Structure 6
l/.P
5. Are there any immediate threats to the integrity of any o e 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?
❑ Yes KNo ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Yes [] No ❑ NA ❑ NE
If any of questions 4-6 were answered yes, and the situation poses an immediate public health or environmental threat, notify DWR
Yes ❑ No 0 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 IANo ❑ NA ❑ NE
maintenance or improvement? `
Waste Application
10. Are there any required buffers, setbacks, or compliance alternatives that need ❑ Yes [X No ❑ NA ❑ NE
maintenance or improvement?
11. Is there evidence of incorrect land application? If yes, check the appropriate box below. ❑ Yes 0 No [X] 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
7. Do any of the structures need maintenance or improvement?
12. Crop Type(s):
13. Soil Type(s):
14. Do the receiving crops differ from those designated in the CAWMP? ❑ Yes ❑ No N NA ❑ NE
15. Does the receiving crop and/or land application site need improvement? ❑ Yes A
No ❑ NA ❑ NE
16. Did the facility fail to secure and/or operate per the irrigation design or wettable ❑ Yes ❑ No Eil NA ❑ NE
acres determination?
17. Does the facility lack adequate acreage for land application?
18. Is there a lack of properly operating waste application equipment?
Required Records & Documents
19. Did the facility fail to have the Certificate of Coverage & Permit readily available? Jw Yes ❑ No ❑ NA ❑ NE
20. Does the facility fail to have all components of the CAWMP readily available? If yes, check ❑ Yes Xl No ❑ NA ❑ NE
the appropriate box.
❑ WUP ❑Checklists ❑ Design ❑ Maps ❑ Lease Agreements ❑Other:
21. Does record keeping need improvement?
EI_V- pillar tig Weekly Freeboard aitEitsteliamilyaigSoil Ana , s
1p Rainfall D9teekitag to 41Monthly and 1" Rainfall Inspections
22. Did the facility fail to install and maintain a rain gauge? ❑ Yes
23. If selected, did the facility fail to install and maintain rainbreakers on irrigation equipment? ❑ Yes
Page 2 of 3
❑ Yes X] No ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Yes No ❑ NA ❑ NE
Yes
❑No El NA ❑NE
]No ❑NA ❑NE
❑ No Ix NA ❑ NE
5/12/2020 Continued

'Facility Number:
3
Date of Inspection:
24. Did the facility fail to calibrate waste application equipment as required by the permit?
❑ Yes ❑ No j] NA ❑ NE
25. Is the facility out of compliance with permit conditions related to sludge? If yes, check ❑ Yes ❑ No IANA ❑ 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 to provide documentation of an actively certified operator in charge?
27. Did the facility fail to secure a phosphorus loss assessments (PLAT) certification?
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:
❑ Yes No ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Yes No ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Yes ❑ No NA ❑ NE
❑ Yes [N No ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Yes y No ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Yes No ❑ NA ❑ NE
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?
❑ Yes No ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Yes No ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Yes No ❑ NA ❑ NE
efer to question #): Explain any YES answers and/or any additional r
dramas of facility' to better explain situations (use additional pages as necess7). ary}
(Y)o -rS )? V\D CAA-CLIk C2ctS
SDI is Slz{ - i 415t), A o ktc
Asiovp
ern ba N4tY\k Ct5Y'c , i ? iv\o-ai bush hO I nW\3&''
Son—' tvai of t (t tAA:ss i n
Po <1- A 30 tl - W 5 P os ► n smg iS a.41. 4,i s poi
f)sb bts, ca le Gc- (am tu(1►n wOP 1)0111 Nd ix. vemaved QY
o.(+
ipro a Y Ma' 1 &-Vo ✓ +
ftei
(\J 6 r) I asp Ni a. r so; is (Yia_rltbr-
Reviewer/Inspector Name:
Reviewer/Inspector Signature
Page 3 of 3
a VIA L
5/12/2020