670057_Compliance Evaluation Inspection_20210727

a
Division of Water Resources
Facility Numbers Division of Soil and Water Conservation
Q°Other Agency -
type of Visit: 90 Compliance Inspection 0 Operation Review 0 Structure Evaluation 0 Technical Assistance
leason for Visit: 0 Routine 0 Complaint 0 Follow-up 0 Referral 0 Emergency 0 Other 0 Denied Access
Date of Visit: 1 71 Arrival Time: Departure Time: .County:
Farm Name: t 1 Owner Email:
Owner Name:
Mailing Address:
Physical Address:
Facility Contact:
Title:
Phone:
Onsite Representative: Al �4>1, Tom - Integrator:
Certified Operator:
Back-up Operator:
Location of Farm:
Design -:Current
Swine_ Caliacity Pop.°y
Wean to Finish
Wean to Feeder
Feeder to Finish
Farrow to Wean
Farrow to Feeder
Farrow to Finish
Gilts
Boars
�. other
Phone:
Certification Number:
Certification Number:
Latitude: Longitude:
Region:
Design° Current . A i3esrgn Current R
Wet Poultry", Capacity °, Pop. Cable • " ; Capacity "Pop, ;
Layer
Non -Layer
Design ° Current
nry Pnultr`v- C anacihi' ° Pon. °
Layers
Non -Layers
Pullets
Turkeys
Turkey Poults
Other
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?
❑ Yes
C2xXxo
❑ NA
❑ NE
Discharge originated at: ❑ Structure ❑ Application Field ❑ Other:
a. Was the conveyance man-made?
❑ Yes
❑ No
OZA
❑ NE
b. Did the discharge reach waters of the State? (If yes, notify DWR)
❑ Yes
❑ No
PA
❑ 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
NA
❑ NE
2. Is there evidence of a past discharge from any part of the operation?
❑ Yes
V_]
NA
❑ NE
3. Were there any observable adverse impacts or potential adverse impacts to the waters
❑ YesNA
❑ NE
of theState other than from a discharge?
Page 1 of 3 511212020 Continued

Facility Number: Date of Inspection:
Waste Collection & Treatment
4. Is storage capacity (structural plus storm storage plus heavy rainfall) less than adequate?
❑ Yes
o
❑ NA
NA
❑ NE
a. If yes, is waste level into the structural freeboard?
❑ Yes
❑ No
[
❑ NE
Structure 1 Structure 2 Structure 3 Structure 4
Structure 5
Structure 6
Identifier:
Spillway?:
Designed Freeboard (in):
Observed Freeboard (in): 2�
5. Are there any immediate threats to the integrity of any of the structures observed?
❑ Yes
JeNo
❑ 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 enviromn a threat, notify DWR
7. Do any of the structures need maintenance or improvement? . ❑ Yes ❑ NA ❑ NE
8. Do any of the structures lack adequate markers ,as required by the permit? ❑ Yes �7No ❑ 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 M/No ❑ NA ❑ NE
maintenance or improvement?
Waste Application
10. Are there any required buffers, setbacks, or compliance alternatives that need ❑ Yes o ❑ 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 ❑ 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 0 No ❑ NA ❑ NE
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
the appropriate box.
❑ WUP ❑ Checklists ❑ Design ❑ Maps ❑ Lease Agreements
2oes record keeping need improvement? If yes, check the appropriate box below
❑ Yes [�No
❑ Yes 640
❑ Yes ❑Ao
❑ Yes [3No
❑ Yes
❑ Yes No
❑NA ❑NE
❑ NA ❑ NE
❑NA ❑NE
❑NA ❑NE
❑ NA ❑ NE
❑NA ❑NE
F]yOthe❑ Othe
es ❑ 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 ZrNo ❑ A ❑ NE
23. If selected, did the facility fail to install and maintain rainbreakers on irrigation equipment? ❑ Yes ❑ No 21 NA ❑ NE
Page 2 of 3 511212020 Continued

Facility Number: - Date of Inspection: /
24. Did the facility fail to calibrate waste application equipment as required by the permit? ❑ Yes ❑API ❑ NA ❑ NE
25. Is the facility out of compliance with permit conditions related to sludge? If yes, check []Yes DIN-01 ❑ 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 EKo ❑ZA
❑ NE
27. Did the facility fail to secure a phosphorus loss assessments (PLAT) certification? ❑ Yes ❑ No ❑ 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:
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 E3 No ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Yes U40.1 ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Yes No ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Yes
❑ Yes
❑ Yes
❑ Yes
❑ No ❑ NA
No ❑ NA
64 E] NA
No ❑ NA
❑ NE
❑ NE
❑ NE
(Comments (refer to question #): Explain any YES answers and/or any additional recommendations or any other comments. I
Use drawings of facilitv to better exulain situations (use additional aaees as necessarv).
Fi4 ue,��
r
oA-t1frirA', Vle,+
1� � Go.
Reviewer/Inspector Name:
Reviewer/Inspector Signature:
Page 3 of 3
3 S,-D
Li 0V uj�, CL
Phone: �i1�2�3�''
Date: L47/7 Z�
511212020