260002_Compliance Inspection Routine_20210623

Facility Number
0
pDivision of Water Resources SIMS0 Division of Soil and Water Conservation
0 Other Agency ( a8
Type of Visit: 9 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:
Farm Name: P P I
(6
Arrival Time:
Owner Name: Ftedirgge fQiiijc, /i
Mailing Address:
Departure Time:
1-}'8b
Owner Email:
Phone:
County: CV l n Ql tl
Region: -pro
Physical Address:
3:.
Facility Contact: °LIU f
Onsite Representative: (I
Title:
Certified Operator: CU-J 1 Neoilti
Back-up Operator:
Location of Farm:
Latitude:
Integrator:
Certification Number:
Certification Number:
Longitude:
Phone:
MO-09e
160 gip?'
Swine
Design Current
Capacity Pop.
Wean to Finish
Wean to Feeder
Feeder to Finish
.iC
Farrow to Wean
Min
Farrow to Feeder
Farrow to Finish
Gilts
Boars
Other
Design Current
Wet Poultry Capacity Pop. Cattle
Layer
Non -Layer
Dry Poultry
Design Current
Capacity Pop.
Layers
Non -Layers
Pullets
Turkeys
Turkey Poults
Other
Design Current
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 / No ❑ NA ❑ NE
El Yes No ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑Yes No ❑NA ❑NE
❑ Yes No ❑ NA 0 NE
❑ Yes No ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Yes /6 No 0 NA ❑ NE
Page 1 of 3
5/12/2020 Continued

Facility Number: - 00,
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
❑ Yes
Structure 1 Structure 2 Structure 3 Structure 4 Structure 5
F.— IF)
�9
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?
If any of questions 4-6 were answered yes, and the situation poses an immediate public health or environmental threat, notify DWR
No ❑ NA ❑ NE
No ❑ NA ❑ NE
Structure 6
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 No ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Yes d No ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Yes No ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Yes No ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Yes No ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Yes )6 No ❑ NA ❑ NE
El Yes No ❑NA El NE
❑ Excessive Ponding ❑ Hydraulic Overload ❑ Frozen Ground El 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 El Application Outside of Approved Area
12. Crop Type(s): CDC1#1-61 1 S€tmLd1(1 �JGO
13 Soil r,p=(,)cqrtcot) J01 jJOU) NOtcIt() wagtcun
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?
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?
20. Does the facility fail to have all components of the CAWMP readily available? If yes, check ❑ Yes FA No ❑ NA ❑ NE
the appropriate box.
❑ WUP ['Checklists El Design ❑ Maps ❑ Lease Agreements ❑ Other:
21. Does record keeping need improvement? If yes, check the a ro riate box below. ❑ Yes ® No ❑ NA ❑ NE
5.
El Waste Application El Weekly Freeboard ❑ Waste Ana ysis ❑ Soil Analysis ❑ Waste Transfers El Weather Code
❑ Rainfall ❑ Stocking ❑ Crop Yield El 120 Minute Inspections ❑ Monthly and 1" Rainfall Inspections El Sludge Survey
22. Did the facility fail to install and maintain a rain gauge? ❑ Yes No ❑ NA ❑ NE
23. If selected, did the facility fail to install and maintain rainbreakers on irrigation equipment? ❑ Yes LE No ❑ NA ❑ NE
Page 2 of 3 Kcl IN bf'.t 2/4/2015 Continued
❑ Yes .V No ❑ NA ❑ NE
Al Yes ❑ No ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Yes No ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Yes 7 No ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Yes VI No ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Yes ® No ❑ NA ❑ NE

Facility Number: 'fps( p
Date of Inspection:
24. Did the facility fail to calibrate waste application equipment as required by the permit?'j' 19'1 I ❑ Yes Y`t' No ❑ NA ❑ NE
25. Is the facility out of compliance with permit conditions related to sludge? If yes, check ❑ Yes iiii No 0 NA ❑ NE
the appropriate box(es) below.
6' gq• gi
❑ 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 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 jA No 0 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 0 NE
❑ Application Field ❑ Lagoon/Storage Pond ❑ Other:
32. Were any additional problems noted which cause non-compliance of the permit or CAWMP? ❑ Yes IZI No ❑ NA ❑ NE
33. Did the Reviewer/Inspector fail to discuss review/inspection with an on -site representative? ❑ Yes .t No ❑ NA ❑ NE
34. Does the facility require a follow-up visit by the same agency? ❑ Yes A 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).
Note' recor-dS rev(ewed off Site (r.al-al
NDteS-- LQgt yifia) aP�, 2C)
NOteS: 04t5 IjgrV25te4
�5 qpralFleidr nek4 to be fMe4 for (-IF fpe gross,
monitor klovr bqqfOdflmay wet fo
coPh99e4.
— r�o \0g tecLflNg bc {VWtJ
Reviewer/Inspector Name: KoJ1'e ft)
Reviewer/Inspector Signature:
Page 3 of 3
vicN
Pho„e919 M./76
a�o-1�Ce�r�t Date:(MO�
2/4/2015