260023_Routine Inspection_20211025

Type of Visit:
Reason for Visit:
cq3
.vision of Water Resources
0 Division of Soil and Water Co servdtion
Q Other Agency
/im,S /O/?5/2`j
Compliance Inspection 0 Operation Review 0 Structure Evaluation 0 Technical Assistance
Routine 0 Complaint 0 Follow-up 0 Referral 0 Emergency 0 Other 0 Denied Access
Date of Visit: VO sla a Arrival Time:
Farm Name:
Owner Name:
Departure Time: MEMCounty:
Mailing Address:
Physical Address:
Facility Contact:
,C171-4
Owner Email:
Phone:
Onsite Representative:
Certified Operator:
Back-up Operator:
Location of Farm:
Title:
Latitude:
Integrator:
Phone:
Certification Number:
Certification Number:
Longitude:
Swine
Design Current
Capacity . Pop.
Wean to Finish
Wean to Feeder
Feeder to Finish
Farrow to Wean
Farrow to Feeder
5z
Farrow to Finish
Gilts
Boars
O
Other
Design Current
Wet Poultry Capacity Pop.
Layer
Non -Layer
D.
Pau
Design Current
Ca aci Po
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 o'❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Yes ❑ No ❑ 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 „e'lgo ❑ NA ❑ NE
3. Were there any observable adverse impacts or potential adverse impacts to the waters ❑ Yes,_e1lo ❑ NA ❑ NE
of the State other than from a discharge?
Page 1 of 3
2/4/2015 Continued

'74 /
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):
Structure 1
❑ Yes ,❑rNo ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Yes El No ❑NA ❑NE
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
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 ,_0-. 10 ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Yes __ErNo ❑ NA ❑ NE
7. Do any of the structures need maintenance or improvement? ❑ Yes _.❑ %No ❑ NA ❑ NE
8. Do any of the structures lack adequate markers as required by the permit? ❑ Yes ,❑ 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 n Yes°No ❑ NA ❑ NE
maintenance or improvement?
11. Is there evidence of incorrect land application? If yes, check the appropriate box below. ❑ Yes-f No ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Excessive Ponding n Hydraulic Overload ❑ Frozen Ground ❑ Heavy Metals (Cu, Zn, etc.)
❑ PAN ❑ PAN > 10% or 10 lbs. ❑ Total Phosphorus n 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?
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 n Lease Agreements
21. Does record keeping need improvement? If yes, check the appropriate box below.
❑ Waste Application ❑ Weekly Freeboard ❑ Waste Analysis n Soil Analysis
❑ Rainfall ❑ Stocking ❑ Crop Yield ❑ 120 Minute Inspections n Monthly and 1" Rainfall 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?
Page 2 of 3
❑ Yes -ID-No
❑ Yes ❑--NO
❑ Yes ja-No
❑ Yes jaiCio
❑ Yes No
❑ YesNo
❑ Yes .:I -No
❑ Other:
❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ NA ❑NE
❑ NA ❑NE
❑NA ❑NE
❑ Yes ❑""N'o ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Waste Transfers ❑ Weather Code
❑ Sludge Survey
❑ Yes ❑'No ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Yes J-No ❑ NA ❑ NE
2/4/2015 Continued

Facility Number: (7'
Date of Inspection: /0101
24. Did the facility fail to calibrate waste application equipment as required by the permit?
❑ Yes ❑ No ❑ NA ❑ NE
25. Is the facility out of compliance with permit conditions related to sludge? If yes, check ❑ Yes ❑ No ❑ 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 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 ❑ Yes ❑ No ❑ 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 ❑ 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 ❑ 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 ❑ 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 ❑ No ❑ NA ❑ NE
Comments (refer to question #):
Use drawings of facility to better
plain any YES answers andtor any additional recommendation
lain situations (use additional pages as necessary).
114,74- )‘_(. 114,4 sm'te.i4 q >L4'
citar,6 &ye_a2t.‘a yv Ced-a-ec(
/72�rti M�& u)-(A &Al 66-,,,leo
Q,Pec rwiut � �n�+ hcaiee -eeey,U„
W25 $ich
Reviewer/Inspector Name:
n
SOO
67,
Reviewer/Inspector Signature.
A
Vip one: qiCs 73 S ----
Date: / O/ 6 (
2/4/2015
Page 3 of 3