310290_Compliance Evaluation Inspection_20211027

Division of Water Resources
Facility Number - ® 0 Division of Soil and Water Conservation
0 Other, Agency
Type of Visit: ® Compliance Inspection 0 Operation Review 0 Structure Evaluation 0 Technical Assistance
[teason for Visit: ® Routine 0 Complaint 0 Follow-up 0 Referral 0 Emergency 0 Other 0 Denied Access
Date of Visit: @ �'7,1� Arrival Time: ® Departure Time: County:
Farm Name: C � —k—Us r' T f V f&L �j Owner Email:
—r
Owner Name:
Mailing Address:
Physical Address:
Phone:
Facility Contact: (Y\ (CJk Coe—( IV� , 1 t'-i✓ Title:
Onsite Representative:
Certified Operator:
Back-up Operator:
Location of Farm:
Swine
can to Finish
can to Feeder
seder to Finish
grow to Wean
xrow to Feeder
grow to Finish
oars
Other
Latitude:
Integrator:
Region:
Phone: 9 fo 70 ,3 t8_
Certification Number:
Certification Number:
'Design Current Design Current
Capacity Pop. Wet Poultry Capacity Pop.
Layer
(1,1 INon-Layer
Design Current
Dry Poultry 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 [2'*No ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Yes ❑ No N/A ❑ NE
b. Did the discharge reach waters of the State? (If yes, notify DWR)
❑ Yes
❑ No [-+-N A
❑ 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 CfNA
❑ NE
2. Is there evidence, of a past discharge from any part of the operation?
❑YesE
Rio ❑ 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 I of 3 `= 511212020 Continued

Facility Number: jDate of Inspection: 10'Z� 2
Waste Collection & Treatment
4. Is storage capacity (structural plus storm storage plus heavy rainfall) less than adequate? ❑Yes aNO ❑ NA ❑ NE
a. If yes, is waste level into the structural freeboard? ❑ Yes 0 No .i NA ❑ NE
Structure 1 Structure 2 Structure 3 Structure 4
Structure 5
Structure 6
Identifier:
Spillway?:
Designed Freeboard (in): l_
Observed Freeboard (in):
5. Are there any immediate threats to the integrity of any of the structures observed?
❑ Yes
- o ❑ 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 environmental
threat, notify DWR
7. Do any of the structures need maintenance or improvement?
❑ Yes
all/To ❑ NA
❑ NE
8. Do any of the structures lack adequate markers as required by the permit?
❑ Yes
6e ❑ 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
2/No ❑ 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
2/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
o ❑ NA
❑ NE
15. Does the receiving crop and/or land application site need improvement?
❑ Yes
RNo ❑ NA
❑ NE
16. Did the facility fail to secure and/or operate per the irrigation design or wettable
❑ Yes
E]/No ❑ 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
No ❑ NA
❑ NE
Required Records & Documents
19. Did the facility fail to have the Certificate of Coverage & Permit readily available?
❑ Yes
Ng ❑ NA
❑ NE
20. Does the facility fail to have all components of the CAWMP readily available? If yes, check
❑ Yes
Q No ❑ NA
❑ NE
the appropriate box.
❑WUP ❑Checklists ❑Design ❑Maps ❑ Lease Agreements ❑Other: i
21. Does record keeping need improvement? If yes, check the appropriate box below. �es Vr o ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Waste Ap=StockingF—l
❑ Weekly Freeboard ❑ Waste Analysis ❑ Soil Analysis ❑ Waste Transfers ❑ Weather Code
❑ Rainfall 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 ❑ NA ❑ NE
23. If selected, did the facility fail to install and maintain rainbreakers on irrigation equipment? ❑ Yes LA ❑ NA ❑ NE
Page 2 of 3 511212020 Continued

Facility Number: 3 jDate of Inspection: I() Z-T 1 -:5
24. Did the facility fail to calibrate waste application equipment as required by the permit? ❑ Yes EiNo . ❑ NA ❑ NE
25. Is the facility out of compliance with permit conditions related to sludge? If yes, check ❑ Yes CZ ❑ 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: j
26. Did the facility fail to provide documentation of an actively certified operator in charge? ❑ Yes No VNA
" ❑ 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:
❑ Yes No ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Yes No ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Yes E No ❑ NA ❑ NE/
❑ Yes ❑ No ❑ NA /NE
32. Were any additional problems noted which cause non-compliance of the permit or CAWMP? ❑ Yes
33. Did the Reviewer/Inspector fail to discuss review/inspection with an on -site representative? ❑ Yes
34. Does the facility require a follow-up visit by the same agency? ❑ Yes
21'/No ❑ NA ❑ NE
�>d ❑ NA ❑ NE
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).
5
Reviewer/Inspector Name:
Reviewer/Inspector- Signature:
Page 3 of 3
V. we 'o—
Phone: 9 ( us '70
Date: fo JZ7 Z
511212020