820301_Routine Inspection_20210909

Facility Number
eto-
30l
Division of Water Resources
O Division of Soil and Water Conservation
0 Other Agency
81,1
Type of Visit: Q'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:
Owner Name:
Mailing Address:
Physical Address:
Facility Contact:
Arrival Time:
Departure Time:
.c..)&41r)
/ounty.
Owner Email:
Phone:
Region: F--,e6
Onsite Representative:
Certified Operator:
Back-up Operator:
Location of Farm:
Title:
Latitude:
Phone:
Integrator:
Certification Number: 02c246 2
Certification Number:
Longitude:
Swine
Design Current
Capacity Pop.
Wean to Finish
Wean to Feeder
eeder to Finish
Farrow to Wean
(ij/
Farrow to Feeder
Farrow to Finish
Gilts
Boars
Other
Design Current
Wet Poultry 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?
❑ Yes'No ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Yes ❑ No 0 NA ❑ NE
b. Did the discharge reach waters of the State? (If yes, notify DWR) ❑ 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 jallo ❑ NA ❑ NE
3. Were there any observable adverse impacts or potential adverse impacts to the waters ❑ Yes _❑-No ❑ NA ❑ NE
of the State other than from a discharge?
Page 1 of 3
5/12/2020 Continued

Facility Number:
Date of Inspection:
Waste Collection & Treatment
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 <❑ No ❑ NA 0 NE
❑ Yes ❑ No ❑ NA ❑ NE
Structure 1 Structure 2 Structure 3 Structure 4 Structure 5 Structure 6
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 ❑ 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
❑ Yes `❑ No ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Yes ❑rNo ❑ NA ❑ NE
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 ❑ Yes --ETNo ❑ NA ❑ NE
maintenance or improvement?
Waste Application
10. Are there any required buffers, setbacks, or compliance alternatives that need ❑ Yes ❑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
[1 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): le'°;e:/. /t r
,� e
13. Soil Type(s): t't.- '1" y . ) _,' /
' %�:• .s'ra t
14. Do the receiving crops differ from those designated in theICAWMP?
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? ❑ Yes
20. Does the facility fail to have all components of the CAWMP readily available? If yes, check ❑ Yes
the appropriate box.
❑WUP ❑Checklists ❑ Design ❑ Maps ❑ Lease Agreements ❑Other:
Yes
❑ Yes ._,❑ No ❑ NA ❑ NE
21. Does record keeping need improvement? If yes, check the appropriate box below.
❑ Yes El No ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Yes No ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Yes ❑ No ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Yes 473 -No ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Yes ,No ❑ NA ❑ NE
-No ❑ NA
❑ NA
No
❑ NE
❑ NE
❑No ❑NA ❑NE
❑ Waste Application ❑ Weekly Freeboard ❑ Waste Analysis ❑ Soil Analysis ❑ Waste Transfers f 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 ram gauge'? ❑ Yes_"❑ No ❑ NA ❑ NE
23. If selected, did the facility fail to install and maintain rainbreakers on irrigation equipment? ❑ Yes,,.-❑ No ❑ NA ❑ NE
Page 2 of 3 5/12/2020 Continued

Facility Number:''
30l
24. Did the facility fail to calibrate waste application equipment as required by the permit?
❑ Yes ❑ NA ❑ NE
25. Is the facility out of compliance with permit conditions related to sludge? If yes, check ❑ Yes jNo ❑ NA ❑ NE
the appropriate box(es) below.
❑ Failure to complete annual sludge survey n 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 .12"No ❑ NA ❑ NE
27. Did the facility fail to secure a phosphorus loss assessments (PLAT) certification? ❑ Yes .,2•No ❑ NA 0 NE
Other Issues
28. Did the facility fail to properly dispose of dead animals with 24 hours and/or document ❑ Yes ,,e'\10 ❑ 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 Jf 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 .2•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. 0 Yes No 0 NA ❑ 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 ,2iClo ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Yes Er 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).
- Ma' ,Aele VZe 6707,1-bay61() .44
FEK ol e,ceo
iter/2.- - &el e2e( /0:4-re-
a(//ie need e 0-7 ee214,66-71,ec2
GUeepet-€4 edeeid, ire-A-t
—erg, -)t
1
e4.4 .eleyee"77
/Y? 46 9-624 a,e,e_
Reviewer/Inspector Name:
Reviewer/Inspector Signature:
Page 3 of 3
6,4e /-4-a,(6:44.)
Phone:
Date:
Gig s3s-175.--
q/qI'1
5/12/2020