820407_Compliance Inspection_20210623

Facility Number
'107
£ Division of Water Resources
0 Division of Soil and Water Conservation
0 Other Agency
Kf elm5 co a6
Certified Operator: NcUt1LN ( 4e;
Back-up Operator:
Location of Farm:
Type of Visit: (b Compliance Inspection 0 Operation Review 0 Structure Evaluation 0 Technical Assistance
Reason for Visit: 11D Routine 0 Complaint 0 Follow-up 0 Referral 0 Emergency 0 Other 0 Denied Access
Date of Visit:
(PO GI
Farm Name: f-0,1
Arrival Time:
e.ao
Departure Time:
Owner Name: premge R!UTX INC
D' O
Owner Email:
Phone:
County:/ PI,ON Region: ft0
Mailing Address:
Physical Address:
Facility Contact: J ct I /-`v at Title: Phone:
Onsite Representative: L ` J Integrator: Freglge
Certification Number: fCfl:;pf2fJU
Certification Number:
Latitude: Longitude:
iiv 1-112eYb
Swine
Design Current
Capacity Pop.
Wean to Finish
Wean to Feeder
Feeder to Finish
Farrow to Wean
Farrow to Feeder
I50(p
11-0,0
Farrow to Finish
Gilts
Boars
Other
Wet Poultr
Design Current
Capacity Pop.
Layer
Non -Layer
Dry Poultry
Design Current
Capacity , Pop.
Layers
Non -Layers
Pullets
Turkeys
Turkey Poults
Other
Cattle
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 El NE
❑ Yes 'ENo ❑ NA El NE
❑ Yes allo ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Yes No ❑ NA ❑ NE
El Yes LNo 0 NA ❑ NE
❑ Yes [31\,No ❑ NA 0 NE
Page 1 of 3
5/12/2020 Continued

Facility Number: - 107
Waste Collection & Treatment
Date of Inspection: in.
❑ Rainfall ❑ Stocking ❑ Crop Yield ❑ 120 Minute Inspections
22. Did the facility fail to install and maintain a rain gauge?
23. If selected, did the facility fail to install and maintain rainbreakers on irrigation equipment?
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):
Structure 1
V-. al
NI)
)I
❑ Yes
❑ Yes
Structure 2 Structure 3 Structure 4 Structure 5
No ❑ NA ❑ NE
No ❑NA ❑NE
Structure 6
5. Are there any immediate threats to the integrity of any of the structures observed? ❑ Yes LVI No ❑ NA ❑ NE
(i.e., large trees, severe erosion, seepage, etc.)
6. Are there structures on -site which are not properly addressed and/or managed through a ❑ Yes No ❑ NA ❑ NE
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
7. Do any of the structures need maintenance or improvement? ❑ Yes n No ❑ NA ❑ NE
8. Do any of the structures lack adequate markers as required by the permit? ❑ Yes ki 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 Application
10. Are there any required buffers, setbacks, or compliance alternatives that need ❑ Yes IV No ❑ NA ❑ NE
maintenance or improvement?
11. Is there evidence of incorrect land application? If yes, check the appropriate box below. ❑ Yes 111 No 0 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
CAO12. Crop Type(s): coqc7tij Ono/a)
13. Soil Type(s):10h�� a1 I\ NO! f o(I `e , wk,frio
14. Do the receiving crops differ from those designated in the CAWMP? ❑ Yes No ❑ NA ❑ NE
15. Does the receiving crop and/or land application site need improvement? ❑ Yes No ❑ NA ❑ NE
16. Did the facility fail to secure and/or operate per the irrigation design or wettable ❑ Yes y No ❑ NA ❑ NE
acres determination?
17. Does the facility lack adequate acreage for land application? ❑ Yes n No ❑ 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 No ❑ NA ❑ NE
the appropriate box.
❑ WUP ❑ Checklists ❑ Design ❑ Maps ❑ Lease Agreements ❑ Other:
21. Does record keeping need improvement? If yes, check the a pro riate box below. ❑ Yes N:1 No ❑ NA ❑ NE
Fj.
❑ Waste Application ❑ Weekly Freeboard ❑ Was e Analysis ❑ Soil Analysis ❑ Waste Transfers ❑ Weather Code
❑ Monthly and 1" Rainfall Inspections ❑ Sludge Survey
❑ Yes No ❑ NA El NE
❑ Yes No ❑ NA ❑ NE
Page 2 of 3 2/4/2015 Continued
rair+brzWco�-

Facility Number: 9,2 -
i-101
Date of Inspection: t 9,2j' O i
24. Did the facility fail to calibrate waste application equipment as required by the permit?
25. Is the facility out of compliance with permit conditions related to sludge? If yes, check
the appropriate box(es) below.
'6a'
0 Failure to complete annual sludge survey 0 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:
❑ Yes No ❑ NA ❑ NE
0 Yes No ❑ NA 0 NE
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 0 Yes Ej No 0 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 E:] No ❑ NA 0 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 L] 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 0 NE
❑ Application Field ❑ Lagoon/Storage Pond ❑ Other:
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 n 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).
�4tm uGe Get
-sample i Ng) Keep CV eqe ON .miS
-l�Sfi rvm4 I'/9! iA,aA,
-OOHS hwe1-eq
Reviewer/Inspector Name:1(1 e. foftenOt
Reviewer/Inspector -.AO-)
Signature:G,)
Page 3 of 3
�-t
Phon=: q 19 `b9(v 7715
Date:
2/4/2015