820586_Inspection_20201012

Facility Number
ivision of Water Resources
0 Division of Soil and Water Conservation
Other Agency
QIN;Kf itIlU
,Type of Visit: G.COmpliance Inspection 0 Operation Review 0 Structure Evaluation 0 Technical Assistance
Reason for Visit: a Koutine 0 Complaint 0 Follow-up 0 Referral 0 Emergency 0 Other 0 Denied Access
Date of Visit: J /Q—M Arrival Time:
/:ov
Departure Time:
3tpo
Farm Name: Ion�� w� 1 ! A)" 6-29 Owner Email:
Owner Name: TIC 7 3 J-rn'Y0/lJ -ri 3 L,
Mailing Address:
Physical Address:
Facility Contact:
Onsite Representative:
County:
Region:
L('J Phone:
Title:
Phone:
Certified Operator:
Back-up Operator:
Location of Farm:
Latitude:
Integrator:
Certification Number: /Dj') q �77j
Certification Number:
Longitude:
Swine, ,,
Design Current
:Capacity Pop. °.
Wean to Finish
Wean to Feeder
',Feeder to Finish
Farrow to Wean
1330
Farrow to Feeder
Farrow to Finish
Gilts
Boars
Other
Other
Wet Poultry
Design Current
Capacity - , °Pop. "..
Layer
Non -Layer
Design Current
Dry Poultry Capacity Pop.
Layers
Non -Layers
Pullets
Turkeys
Turkey Poults
Other
Cattle
-Design entreat
„Capacity Pop;
Dairy Cow
Dairy Calf
Dairy Heifer
Dry Cow
Non -Dairy
Beef Stocker
Beef Feeder
Beef Brood Cow
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?
❑ Yes LTo ❑ NA ❑ NE
El Yes ❑No ❑NA ❑NE
❑ Yes ❑No ❑NA ❑NE
❑ Yes ❑ No ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Yes [r]NNo ❑NA El NE
❑ Yes Er<o ❑ NA ❑ NE
Page 1 of 3
2/4/2015 Continued

Facility Number: p- - 57540
Waste Collection & Treatment
Date of Inspection: /.Q
12. Crop Type(s):
13. Soil Type(s):
4. Is storage capacity (structural plus storm storage plus heavy rainfall) less than adequate?
a. If yes, is waste level into the structural freeboard?
Structure 1 Structure 2
Identifier: UUJU $ u' 'tY
Spillway?:
Designed Freeboard (in):
Observed Freeboard (in):
❑ Yes QNo ❑NA ❑NE
❑ Yes Er&o ❑ NA ❑ NE
Structure 3 Structure 4 Structure 5 Structure 6
sue: +1,r-
607eelQ
36' 33
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?
❑ Yes [/]-No ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Yes fNo ❑ NA ❑ NE
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?
8. Do any of the structures lack adequate markers as required by the permit?
(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
maintenance or improvement?
Waste Application
10. Are there any required buffers, setbacks, or compliance alternatives that need
maintenance or improvement?
11. Is there evidence of incorrect land application? If yes, check the appropriate box below.
❑ Yes
❑ Yes
❑ Yes
E]No ❑NA ❑NE
jNo ❑ NA ❑ NE
dNo ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Yes ErNo ❑ NA
❑ Yes [] N ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Excessive Ponding ❑ Hydraulic Overload ❑ Frozen Ground ❑ Heavy Metals (Cu, Zn, etc.)
❑ PAN ❑ PAN > 10% or 101bs. ❑ Total Phosphorus ❑ Failure to Incorporate Manure/Sludge into Bare Soil
❑ Outside of Acceptable Crop Window ❑ Evidence of Wind Drift ❑ Application Outside of Approved Area
"'lath( /Dv 4-P;5'�i
X1©rf1( /rar k /I r/f iJJ
14. Do the receiving crops differ from those designated in the CAWMP?
15. Does the receiving crop and/or land application site need improvement?
16. Did the facility fail to secure and/or operate per the irrigation design or wettable
acres determination?
17. Does the facility lack adequate acreage for land application?
❑ NE
❑ Yes 1_1'No ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Yes ENo ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Yes ['No ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Yes Eo ❑ NA ❑ NE
18. Is there a lack of properly operating waste application equipment? ❑ Yes iNo ❑ NA ❑ NE
Required Records & Documents
19. Did the facility fail to have the Certificate of Coverage & Permit readily available? No ❑ NA ❑ NE.
20. Does the facility fail to have all components of the CAWMP readily available? If yes, check [No ❑ NA ❑ NE
the appropriate box.
❑WUP
❑ Checklists ❑ Design ❑ Maps ❑ Lease Agreements
21. Does record keeping need improvement? If yes, check the appropriate box below.
❑ Yes
❑ Yes
❑ Other:
❑ Yes [] No ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Waste Application El Weekly Freeboard El Waste Analysis ❑ Soil Analysis ❑ Waste Transfers ❑ Weather Code
El Rainfall ❑ Stocking ❑ Crop Yield ❑ 120 Minute Inspections ❑ Monthly and 1" Rainfall Inspections El Sludge Survey
22. Did the facility fail to install and maintain a rain gauge? n Yes 13/No ❑ NA ❑ NE
23. If selected, did the facility fail to install and maintain rainbreakers on irrigation equipment? ❑ Yes dNo ❑ NA ❑ NE
Page 2 of 3 2/4/2015 Continued

Facility Number: -
24. Did the facility fail to calibrate waste application equipment as required by the permit?
Date of Inspection: /0 -- f — .2t
❑ Yes INo ❑ NA ❑ NE
25. Is the facility out of compliance with permit conditions related to sludge? If yes, check lEr/es ❑ 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: f2 l0 8
26. Did the facility fail provide documentation of an actively certified operator in charge? ❑ Yes L`J No ❑ NA
27. Did the facility fail to secure a phosphorus loss assessments (PLAT) certification? ❑ Yes D'No ❑ NA
Other Issues
28. Did the facility fail to properly dispose of dead animals with 24 hours and/or document ❑ Yes [21/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 dNo ❑ 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 dNo ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Application Field ❑ Lagoon/Storage Pond ❑ Other:
❑ NE
❑ NE
32. Were any additional problems noted which cause non-compliance of the permit or CAWMP? ❑ Yes /[rNo ❑ NA ❑ NE
33. Did the Reviewer/Inspector fail to discuss review/inspection with an on -site representative? ❑ Yes [ co ❑ NA ❑ NE
34. Does the facility require a follow-up visit by the same agency? ❑ Yes �o ❑ NA ❑ NE
Co"mment's (refer to question #) Explant any YES answers `and/or airy additional recommtto endans ortany othe;c©mmeu
Use drawings,offacihty`:;fa better expIain;situatiens"°Oise additional'-pagess as necessary):;
afkl &d D/` c 7PD ( c, I- 7
ve, eao,
Reviewer/Inspector Name:
Reviewer/Inspector Signature:
Page 3 of 3
Phone: 2-140` 1 3'(6 i
Date: 6 7
2/4/2015