310012_Compliance Evaluation Inspection_20211201

vv cUL —r`—v 6—
° Division of Water` Resources °
Facility Number .°- °� 0 Division of Soil and°Water Conservation ;
0. Other Agency
Type of visit: q;compliance Inspection 0 Operation Review 0 Structure Evaluation 0 Technical Assistance
Reason for Visit: (B Routine O Complaint O Follow-up O Referral O Emergency O Other O Denied Access
Date of Visit: jI LiT7�l Arrival Time: Departure Time: 1 County:
Farm Name: 1 A G � e y 0A., j- !j n�% Owner Email:
Owner Name:
Mailing Address:
Physical Address:
Facility Contact: ►-e ,,� 0>-.—y Title:
Onsite Representative:
Certified Operator:
Back-up Operator:
Location of Farm:
Latitude:
Phone:
Integrator:
Region:
Phone: `Z ( 0 ZG 6 -3S7
Certification Number:
Certification Number:
' `. `Desiga Cant _ %D'esigii Current y
wiue - Capacity , Pop. Wet; Poultry ° Capacity ;Pop.
Wean to Finish 1 ILayer
Wean to Feeder I INon-Layer
Feeder to Finish 40 &
Farrow to Wean Design' Current .
Farrow to Feeder Dry Poultry Capacity . Pon.
Farrow to Finish
Gilts
Boars
Other
77
Layers
Non -Layers
Pullets
Turkeys
Turkey Poults
Other
Longitude:
Design 'Current
Cattle' ° :Capacity ,'Pop -.,-
Dairy Cow
Dairy Calf
Dairy Heifer
Dry Cow
Non -Dairy
Beef Stocker
Beef Feeder
Beef Brood Cow
,4
,'
Discharges and Stream Impacts
1. Is any discharge observed from any part of the operation? ❑� 1V V . Yes ❑ NA ❑ NE
Discharge originated at: ❑ Structure ❑ Application Field ❑ Other:
a. Was the conveyance man-made? ❑ Yes ❑ No A ❑ 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)?
is d. Does the discharge bypass the waste management system? (If yes, notify DWR)
❑ Yes
❑ No DINA
❑ NE
2. Is there evidence of a past discharge from any part of the operation?
❑ Yes
NA
r'.N-
❑ NE
3. Were there any observable adverse impacts or potential adverse impacts to the waters
❑ Yes
❑ NA
❑ NE
i of the State other than from a discharge?
s
o
Page I of 3
511212020 Continued
,s

Facility Number: 31 jDate of Inspection:
Waste Collection & Treatment
4. Is storage capacity (structural plus storm storage plus heavy rainfall) less than adequate? ❑ Yes
a. If yes, is waste level into the structural freeboard? ❑ Yes
Structure 1 Structure 2 Structure 3 Structure 4
Identifier: 1 Z
Spillway?: _
Designed Freeboard (in): _
Observed Freeboard (in): _
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?
Structure 5
No ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑No Lam<A ❑NE
Structure 6
❑ Yes No ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Yes No ❑ NA ❑ NE
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 [ 1V ' ❑ NA ❑ NE
8. Do any of the structures lack adequate markers as required by the permit? ❑Yes 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 No ❑ NA ❑ NE
maintenance or improvement?
Waste Application
10. Are there any required buffers, setbacks, or compliance alternatives that need
❑ Yes
I lilao
7'
❑ NA
❑ NE
maintenance or improvement?
11. Is there evidence of incorrect land application? If yes, check the appropriate box below.
Yes
' o
❑ NA
❑ NE
❑ Excessive Pond' g ❑ Hydraulic Overload ❑ Frozen Ground ❑ Heavy Metals (Cu, Zn, etc.)
,AN
❑ 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
Q o
❑ NA
❑ NE
15. Does the receiving crop and/or land application site need improvement?
✓ Yes
❑ N
❑ NA
❑ NE
16. Did the facility fail to secure and/or operate per the irrigation design or wettable
❑ Yes
❑ NA
❑ NE
acres determination?
17. Does the facility lack adequate acreage for land application?
❑ Yes
Yes
No-
No
❑ NA
NA
❑ NE
❑ NE
18. Is there a lack of properly operating waste application equipment?
❑
F'i
❑
Required Records & Documents
19. Did the facility fail to have the Certificate of Coverage & Permit readily available?
❑ Yes
® N�
NA
❑ NE
20. Does the facility fail to have all components of the CAWMP readily available? If yes, check
❑ Yes
0 No
❑ NA
❑ NE
the appropriate box.
❑ WUP ❑ Checklists ❑ Design ❑ Maps ❑ Lease Agreements ❑ Other:
21. Does record keeping need improvement? If yes, check the appropriate box below. ❑ Yes 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 ZO
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 [—]No YNA ❑ NE
Page 2 of 3 511212020 Continued

Facility Number: - V Date of Inspection: I
by the
Y
No
NA
NE
24. Did the facility fail to calibrate waste application equipment as required permit?
❑
❑
❑
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
a
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
❑'No
❑ NA
❑ NE
27. Did the facility fail to secure a phosphorus loss assessments (PLAT) certification?
❑ Yes
[:]No
[2-KA
❑ NE
Other Issues
28. Did the facility fail to properly dispose of dead animals with 24 hours and/or document
❑ Yes
E 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
E],Ko
❑ 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 o
❑ 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
E]-I A ❑ NE
❑ Application Field ❑ Lagoon/Storage Pond ❑ Other:
32. Were any additional problems noted which cause non-compliance of the permit or CAWMP?
❑ Yes
LJ <
❑ NA ❑ NE
33. Did the Reviewer/Inspector fail to discuss review/inspection with an on -site representative?
❑ Yes
[3No
❑ NA ❑ NE
34. Does the facility require a follow -tip visit by the same agency?
❑ Yes
EgNo
❑ NA ❑ NE
Comments (refer to question ft 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).
Ocr I1I(-Q
3 ' %"\ G. , V\ i I
R;�viewer/Inspector Name:
Reviewer/Inspector Signature:
�'Page 3 of 3
i�
s
►"
O Nn
C
Phone: �1 S ?_ 0_3 �) 0
Date: 0 I t
511212020