310574_Compliance Evaluation Inspection_20210408

& Division of Water Resources
Facility Number O Division of Soil and Water Conservation
O Other Agency
Visit: 0 Co P Hance Inspection O Operation Review O Structure Evaluation O Technical Assistance
for Visit: Routine O Complaint O Follow-up O Referral O Emergency O Other O Denied Access
Date of Visit: ®j Arrival Time: a Departure Time: County: uPL/®✓ Region: WlteO
Farm Name: UsUE W"H I?TC U-T� Owner Email:
Owner Name: U S LI G IZ w h 1 TTiE-P Phone:
Mailing Address:
Physical Address:
Facility Contact:
Onsite Representative:
Title:
Integrator:
Phone:
Certified Operator: Vsd)E P­ UH 'fj EP Certification Number: I (P LOL
Back-up Operator:
Location of Farm:
Latitude:
Certification Number:
Design Current Design Current
Swine Capacity Pop. Wet Poultry Capacity Pop.
Wean to Finish
Wean to Feeder
Feeder to Finish / 2 O S
Farrow to Wean
Farrow to Feeder
Farrow to Finish
Gilts
Boars
Other
Other
Layer
Non -Layer
Design Current
Dry Poultry Capacity Pon.
Layers
Non -Layers
Pullets
Turkeys
Turkey 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)?
Longitude:
Design Current
Cattle Capacity Pop.
Dairy Cow
Dairy Calf
Dairy Heifer
Dry Cow
Non -Dairy
Beef Stocker
Beef Feeder
Beef Brood Cow
❑ Yes 0"'No ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Yes No ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ YesNo ❑ NA ❑ NE
F3/
d. Does the discharge bypass the waste management system? (If yes, notify DWR) ❑ Yes . ❑ NA ❑ NE
2. Is there evidence of a past discharge from any part of the operation? ❑ Yes r ❑ 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 I of 3 121412015 Continued

Facility Number: 3 - 5 Date of Inspection: - a
Waste Collection & Treatment
4. Is storage capacity (structural plus storm storage plus heavy rainfall) less than adequate? ❑ Yes
a. If yes, is waste level into the structural freeboard? ❑ Yes
Structure 1
Identifier:
Spillway?:
Designed Freeboard (in):
Observed Freeboard (in):l�_
Structure 2 Structure 3 Structure 4
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?
Structure 5
�rNq❑ NA ❑ NE
No ❑ NA ❑ NE
Structure 6
❑ Yes yNo ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Yes �To ❑ 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?
❑ Yes LJ 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 [2No
❑ NA
❑ NE
maintenance or improvement?
Waste Application
10. Are there any required buffers, setbacks, or compliance alternatives that need
❑ Yes [:ZNo
❑ NA
❑ NE
maintenance or improvement?
11. Is there evidence of incorrect land application? If yes, check the appropriate box below.
❑ Yes ZNo
❑ 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):
14. Do the receiving crops differ from those designated in the CAWMP?
❑ Yes ZNo
❑ NA
❑ NE
15. Does the receiving crop and/or land application site need improvement?
❑ Yes [ o
❑ NA
❑ NE
16. Did the facility fail to secure and/or operate per the irrigation design or wettable
❑ YesE140
❑ NA
❑ NE
acres determination?
17. Does the facility lack adequate acreage for land application?
❑ Yes o
❑ NA
❑ NE
18. Is there a lack of properly operating waste application equipment?
❑ Yes ��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? If yes, check ❑ Yes 1;Ko ❑ 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 1" Rainfall Inspections Sludge Survey
22. Did the facility fail 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? El Yes ❑ NA ❑ NE
Page 2 of 3 21412015 Continued

Facility Number: S 1 - 57�q I jDate of Inspection: Lf —aj
24. Did the facility fail to calibrate waste application equipment as required by the permit? ❑ Yes VNo
❑ NA ❑ NE
25. Is the facility out of compliance with permit conditions related to sludge? If yes, check [:]Yes ❑ 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 to 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 2 NA ❑ NE
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 []/ N
❑ Yes DN"o
❑ Yes [2/No
❑ Yes [ /No
❑ NA ❑ NE
❑NA ❑NE
❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ NA ❑ NE
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 E2,<o ❑ NA ❑ NE
34. Does the facility require a follow-up visit by the same agency? ❑ Yes [Z/No ❑ NA ❑ NE
Comments (refer to question #): Explain any YES answers and/or any additional recommendations or any other comments.
Use drawines of facilitv to better explain situations (use additional Daizes as necessarv).
Ad, Aae.rwad fri L'JuP,
()P-*►
has Pa -A r i o.r a.3a0 ,
3i
�W WQl j� l@a��'-►�q ar
�l�e ka` (,v S2. on4 rvn S evL N"z 4 d5P.
of the Se --y Nr
PO
1s"ICS ,As
Reviewer/Inspector Name
Reviewer/Inspector Signature:
Page 3 of 3
H r� t'e 2X-y
Phone: 61/o -9 -77
Date: Lf' ?3—�
511212020