310267_Compliance Evaluation Inspection_20210811

V Division of Water Resources
Facility Number - '-� 0 Division of Soil and Water Conservation
0 Other Agency
Type of Visit: (Z Compliance Inspection 0 Operation Review 0 Structure Evaluation 0 Technical Assistance
Reason for Visit: 0 Routine 0 Complaint 0 Follow-up 0 Referral 0 Emergency 0 Other 0 Denied Access
Date of Visit: Arrival Time: Departure Time: (00. County:
Farm Name:; �,,,,� �� ��r� Owner Email:
�—
Owner Name:
Mailing Address:
Physical Address:
Phone:
Facility Contact: �1 ! C Y ✓ C it idl l l e % Title:
o
Onsite Representative:
Certified Operator:
Back-up Operator:
Location of Farm:
Design Current
Swine Capacity Pop.
Wean to Finish
Wean to Feeder
Feeder to Finish
Farrow to Wean
Farrow to Feeder
Farrow to Finish
Gilts
Boars
Other
Latitude:
Integrator:
Region:
Phone: C\ ( izo ?a C
Certification Number:
Certification Number:
Design Current
Wet Poultry
Capacity Pop.
Layer
Non -Layer
�Poult
Design Current
Di
Canacitv 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?
Longitude:
Design Current
Cattle , • Capacity Pop. .
Dairy Cow
Dairy Calf
Dairy Heifer
Dry Cow
Non -Dairy
Beef Stocker
Beef Feeder
Beef Brood Cow
❑ Yes ZNo ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Yes ❑ No [] NA ❑ NE
b. Did the discharge reach waters of the State? (If yes, notify DWR)
❑ Yes
❑ No
LA
❑ 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
[�rlqo
❑ NA
❑ NE
3. Were there any observable adverse impacts or potential adverse impacts to the waters
❑ Yes
DNo
❑ NA
❑ NE
of the State other than from a discharge? -
Page 1 of 3 511212020 Continued

Facility Number: 3 1 - Date of Inspection:
Waste Collection & Treatment
4. Is storage capacity (structural plus storm storage plus heavy rainfall) less than adequate?
❑ Yes [2-< ❑ NA
❑ NE
a. If yes, is waste level into the structural freeboard?
[:]Yes [:]No E2,<A
❑ NE
Strurcturei 1 Structure 2 Structure 3 Structure 4
Structure 5 Structure 6
Identifier:y L I WL
Spillway?:
Designed Freeboard (in): E4__
Observed Freeboard (in):_
5. Are there any immediate threats to the integrity of any of the structures observed?
❑ Yes 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 Io ❑ 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?
es [:]No ❑ NA
❑ NE
8. Do any of the structures lack adequate markers as required by the permit?
❑ Yes Q!N o ❑ 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 O,v V ❑ NA
❑ NE
maintenance or improvement?
Waste Application
10. Are there any required buffers, setbacks, or compliance alternatives that need
[:]Yes � ❑ NA
❑ NE
maintenance or improvement?
11. Is there evidence of incorrect land application? If yes, check the appropriate box below.
❑ Yes E�o ❑ 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 OXr ❑ NA ❑ NE
15. Does the receiving crop and/or land application site need improvement? ❑ Yes E2 I96 ❑ NA ❑ NE
16. Did the facility fail to secure and/or operate per the irrigation design or wettable ❑ Yes ❑,N'o ❑ NA ❑ NE
acres determination?
17. Does the facility lack adequate acreage for land application?
❑ Yes
[No
❑ NA
❑ NE
18. Is there a lack of properly operating waste application equipment?
❑ Yes
o
❑ NA
❑ NE
Required Records & Documents
19. Did the facility fail to have the Certificate of Coverage & Permit readily available?
❑ Yes
ZrNo
❑ NA
❑ NE
all co m onents of the CAWMP readily available? If yes, check
20. Does the facility fail to hav;Kecklists
0-yes
❑ No
❑ NA
❑ NE
the appropriate box.
❑ WUP ❑ Design ❑ Maps ❑ Lease Agreements
❑Other:
21. Does record keeping need improvement? If yes, check the appropriate box below. ❑ Yes D<O ❑ 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 No ❑7NA
❑ NE
23. If selected, did the facility fail to install and maintain rainbreakers on irrigation equipment? ❑ Yes ❑ No ❑ NE
Page 2 of 3 511212020 Continued

G•
Facility Number: 1 - jDate of Inspection: Z
24. Did the facility fail to calibrate waste application equipment as required by the permit? ❑ :;,;],Ko
❑ NA ❑ NE
25. Is the facility out of compliance with permit conditions related to sludge? If yes, check ❑
❑ No ❑ NA ❑ NE
thopriate box(es) below.
ilure to complete annual sludge survey ❑ Failure to develop a POA for sludge levels
❑ Non -compliant sludge levels in any lagoon
� o 20 2-f3
6'D%
List structure(s) and date of first survey indicating non-compliance:
S
26. Did the facility fail to provide documentation of an actively certified operator in charge? ❑ Yes
Q'No ❑ NA ❑ NE
27. Did the facility fail to secure a phosphorus loss assessments (PLAT) certification? ❑ Yes
❑ No EEr A ❑ NE
Other Issues
28. Did the facility fail to properly dispose of dead animals with 24 hours and/or document ❑ Yes
E3150 ❑ 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;X ❑ 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
❑ No DNA
❑ Application Field ❑ Lagoon/Storage Pond ❑ Other:
32. Were any additional problems noted which cause non-compliance of the permit or CAWMP? ❑ Yes F,;No ❑ NA ❑ NE
33. Did the Reviewer/Inspector fail to discuss review/inspection with an on -site representative? ❑ Yes ZT No ❑ NA ❑ NE
34. Does the facility require a follow-up visit by the same agency? ❑ Yes F._1,f4o ❑ NA ❑ NE
Comments (refer to question ft Explain any YES answers and/or any additional recommendations or any other comments.
Use drawinis of facilitv to better exalain situations (use additional na2es as necessarv).
51"'� -1
VV-
ly
0
s V'[vV' f
`C�Aorye
S
�e�s Ste,
�4
S,.,Q V%, U S \", �y S V\Nty ('Lo 'ZA I -6 e 5�e
Reviewer/Inspector Name
Reviewer/Inspector Signature:
Page 3 of 3
Phone: 01 to 2 ® 3 5' 10
Date: 0 V 1
511212020