820415_Complinace Inspection_20210622

Facility Number
?,0
yi5
} Division of Water Resources
0 Division of Soil and Water Conservation
0 Other Agency
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:
Farm Name:
P-1
Arrival Time:
Departure Time:
Owner Name: Pe�.9e f ffl INC
Mailing Address:
Physical Address:
Owner Email:
Phone:
County: mp5oN Region: Fro
Facility Contact:cra441 L1744/Af Title:
Onsite Representative: Integrator: Pt.
Certified Operator: WI 1 1 TTi or
Back-up Operator:
Location of Farm:
Latitude:
Phone:
Certification Number:
Certification Number:
Longitude:
iD0dJS/
last NecTe Rokert
Swine
Design Current
Capacity Pop.
Wean to Finish
Wean to Feeder
Feeder to Finish
Farrow to Wean
Farrow to Feeder
Farrow to Finish
Gilts
Boars
Other
Design Current
Wet Poultry Capacity Pop.
Layer
Non -Layer
Dry Poultr
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?
❑ Yes ®'No ❑ NA ❑ NE
El Yes El No ❑NA El NE
b. Did the discharge reach waters of the State? (If yes, notify DWR) 0 Yes ❑ No ❑ NA ❑ NE
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) ❑ Yes ❑ No ❑ NA ❑ NE
2. Is there evidence of a past discharge from any part of the operation? ❑ Yes ® ❑ NA ❑ NE
3. Were there any observable adverse impacts or potential adverse impacts to the waters n Yes o ® NA ❑ NE
of the State other than from a discharge?
Page 1 of 3
5/12/2020 Continued

Facility Number: 6
Li
Date of Inspection: &
Waste Collection & Treatment
4. Is storage capacity (structural plus storm storage plus heavy rainfall) less than
a. If yes, is waste level into the structural freeboard?
Identifier:
Spillway?:
Designed Freeboard (in):
Observed Freeboard (in):
❑Yes e1No NA ❑NE
0 Yes ❑ No ❑ NA ❑ NE
Structure 1 Structure 2 Structure 3 Structure 4 Structure 5 Structure 6
Iry
or 17
adequate?
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 [] 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
7. Do any of the structures need maintenance or improvement? ❑ Yeslo ❑ NA ❑ NE
8. Do any of the structures lack adequate markers as required by the permit? ❑ Yes la�10 ❑ 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 El No ❑ NA ❑ NE
maintenance or improvement?
11. Is there evidence of incorrect land application? If yes, check the appropriate box below. ❑ Yes ' No ❑ 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 ❑ Evidenceo
fWind Drift ❑ Application Outside of Approved Area
12. Crop Type(s): C V �1 Vtirfl7J)c1V G raiN
13. Soil Type(s): GQ i Nh 0 ciavel
14. Do the receiving crops differ from those designated in the CAWMP? 0 Yes ❑No ❑ NA ❑ NE
15. Does the receiving crop and/or land application site need improvement? ❑ Yes ENo ❑ NA ❑ NE
16. Did the facility fail to secure and/or operate per the irrigation design or wettable ❑ Yes ['No ❑ NA ❑ NE
acres determination?
17. Does the facility lack adequate acreage for land application? ❑ Y• es [ No ❑ NA 0 NE
18. Is there a lack of properly operating waste application equipment? ❑ Y• es [E`�to ❑ NA ❑ NE
Required Records & Documents
19. Did the facility fail to have the Certificate of Coverage & Permit readily available? ❑ Yes L1 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 n Design ❑ Maps n Lease Agreements ❑ Other:
21. Does record keeping need improvement? If yes, check the appropriate box below. ❑ Y• es No ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Waste Application • ❑ Weekly Freeboard 4. ❑ Wast 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 [] No 0 NA ❑ NE
23. If selected, did the facility fail to install and maintain rainbreakers on irrigation equipment? 0 Yes rZ1 No ❑ NA ❑ NE
Page 2 of 3 2/4/2015 Continued

Facility Number: ga - 916
Date of Inspection:
24. Did the facility fail to calibrate waste application equipment as required by the permit? 9'a&QD0 Yes [y No ❑ NA
25. Is the facility out of compliance with permit conditions related to sludge? If yes, check
the appropriate box(es) below.
❑ Failure to complete annual sludge survey
❑ Non -compliant sludge levels in any lagoon
List structure(s) and date of first survey indicating non-compliance: p I A' GO 5=1
26. Did the facility fail 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
peiiiiit? (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 0 NA
❑ Failure to develop a POA for sludge levels
DN
❑ NE
❑ NE
❑ Yes ] No ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Yes E No ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Yes ❑ No ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Yes ❑ No ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Yes ❑ 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
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).
Node: ftrrn Ug2S Ceritet- PIV18i"
Npt"e Q5oi I ahgLyc61S civ2 12-1
Not--e Last- pumped -ffetq DN
Not"-e: gars halveSted
Note: recor4S 1-evr'ewed off cite co-al-0
for SOD M ►NS .
Reviewer/Inspector Name: �Q �� �� N �� ( /�y`-� 6—
Reviewer/Inspector Signature:
Page 3 of 3
Phone:
Date:
919 S9(e 9715
2/4/2015