960102_Inpsection 2021_20211110

Facility Number Fr)(-7
Division of 'Water Resources
Q Division of Soil and Water Conservation
Q Other Agency
Type of Visit: ! Compliance inspection Operation Review Q Structure Evaluation
Reason for Visit: • Routine 0 Complaint 0 Follow-up 0 Referral Q Emergency 0Other 0 Uenred Access
Date of Visit:
Q Technical Assistance
Arrive[ Time:�� r--1 Departure Time:ti �+',' County:L D Me
Farm Name: t c ri )rn f Q/J. \oc}, eIrA^- Owner Email:
.br4-k- L Phone:
Owner Name:
Mailing Address: _191C fry "ter, 1"►;1C Z`un , is ),75 19
Physical Address: ` r
Facility Contact: D�1 OOl[' L-Q.0 Title: Phone:
On site Representative:
Certified Operator
Backup Operator:
Location of Farm:
Latitude:
Region:
Integrator: clI'Y1Tk-1
-pk_
Certification Number:
Certification Number:
Longitude:
Swine
Design Current Design Current
Capacity Pop. Wet Poultry. Capacity Pop.
Wean to Finish
Wean to Feeder
Feeder to Finish
ICA 4-1
Farrow to Wean
Farrow to Feeder
Farrow to Finish
(hits
Briars
Other
Laver
Non -Layer
D Poult
Design Current
Ca acity Po
Lavers
Non-l-ayers
Pullets
Turkeys
Turkey Poulis
Other
Cattle
Design Current
Capacity Pop.
Dairy Cnw
Dairy Calf
Dairy Heifer
Dry Cow
Von -Dairy
Beef Stocker
Beef Feeder
Beef Brood (ow
J
1
Discharges and Stream impacts
l_ Is any discharge observed from any pan of the operation?
Discharge originated at: ❑ Structure ❑ Application Field ❑ Olhej:
a. Was the conveyance man-made?
b. Did the discharge reach waters ol'the State? (If yes, notify DWR)
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)
2. Is there evidence of a past discharge from any part of the operation?
3. Were there any observable adverse impacts or potential adverse impacts to the waters
cif the State other than from a discharge?
Pogo 1 of
0 Yes El/No [] NA ❑ NE
❑ Yes
❑ Yrs
❑No El NA QNE
❑No ❑NA ❑NE
❑ Yes
Yes
❑ Yes
❑}v[u ❑ NA Q NE
❑NA ❑NE
NA NE
S11212020 Continued

Waste collection & Treatment
4. 1s storage capacity (structural plus storm storage plus heavy rainfall) less than adequate?
a. If yes, is waste level into the structural freeboard?
112ate of Inspection: t" Jo
Identifier:
Spillway?:
Designed Freeboard (in):
Observed Freeboard (in);
Structure i Structure 2
Structure 3 Structure 4
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
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 die waste structures require
maintenance or improvement?
Waste Application
10. Are Were any required buffers. setbacks. or compliance alternatives that need
maintenance or improvement?
] 1. Is there evidence of incorrect Iand application? ]f yes, check the appropriate box below, ❑ Yes /Io D NA ❑ NE
❑ Excessive Ponding ❑ Hydraulic Overload ❑ Frozen Ground ❑ Heavy Metals (Cu, Zn, etc.)
❑ PAN El PAN > 10% or 10 lbs. ❑ Total Phosphorus ❑ Failure to Incorporate Manure/Sludge into Bare Soil
❑ Outside of Acceptable Crop Window ❑ Evidence of Wind Drift 0 Application Outside of Approved Area
❑ Yes
O Yes
Structure 5
riNo ❑NA ONE
❑ No ❑ NA ❑ NE
Structure 6
12. Crop Type(s):
13. Soil Type(s):
❑ Yes is ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Yes allNo ❑ NA
❑ NE
health or environmental threat, notify DWR
❑ Yes No 0 NA ❑ NE
❑ Yes L71 No ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Yes 1No ❑ NA ❑ NE
1
❑ Yes ❑ No ❑ NA ❑ NE
14. Do the receiving crops differ from those designated in the CAWMP?
15. Does the receiving crop and/or land application site aced 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?
I S. Is there a lack of properly operating waste application equipment?
wired 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? lfyes, cheek
the appropriate box.
❑WUP El Checklists ❑Design ❑ Maps ❑ Lease Agreements ❑Other;
❑ Yes
❑ Yes
❑ Yes
❑ Yes
0 Yes
❑ Yes
❑ Yes
No
No
'No
Eo
No
do
D No
❑ NA
❑ NA
❑ NA
❑ NA
D NA
❑ NA
❑ NA
❑ NE
❑ NE
❑ NE
❑ NE
❑ NE
0 NE
0 NE
21. Does record keeping need improvement? !ryes, check the appropriate box below. ❑ Yes
❑ Waste Application ❑ Weekly Freeboard ❑ Waste Analysis ❑ Soil Analysis ❑ Waste Trans
❑ Rainfall ❑ Stocking ❑ Crop Yield ❑ 120 Minute Inspections ❑ Monthly and 1" Rainfall Inspections
22. Did the facility tail to install and maintain a rain gauge?
❑ Yes
23, If selected, did the facility fail to install and maintain rainbreakers on irrigation equipment? ❑ Yes
Page 2 of 3
❑l10 ❑NA
fers
❑ NE
[] Weather Code
❑ Sludge Survey
❑ NA ❑ NE
No .0 NA ❑NE
5/12/2020 Continued

IfIlate of Inspectlont tiT 1c — .-'
24. Did the facility NI to ctdihrate waste application equlpmeni ttis required by the permit?
25. is the facility out of compliance with permit conditions related to sludge' If yes, check
the appropriate hux{es) below.
❑ Failure to cotnpletc annual sludge survey ❑ Failure to develop a POA for sludge levels
❑ Non -compliant sludge levels in any lagoon
List structure(s) and date oflirst survey indicating non-compliance.
Yes
Q Yes
❑NA 0NI'
❑ NA 0 NE
26, Did the facility tail to provide doeumentution of an actively certified operator in charge? ❑Yes jN
❑ NA Q NE
,u�{
27, Did the facility fail to secure a pht�sphnrus loss assessments (PLAT) certification? Yes No ❑ NA 0 NE
Other Issues ❑ Yes ^ [ ❑ NA ❑ NE
28. Did the facility fail to properly dispose of dead animals with 24 hours andior document °
and report mortality rates that were higher than normal?
t ❑ Yeti ri' o ❑ NA ❑ NE
29. At the time of the inspection did the facility pose an odor or sir 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. ❑ Yes
❑ Application Field ❑ Lagoon/Storage Pond [J Other:
32. Were any additional problems noted which cause non-compliance of the permit or CA W MP? ❑ Ves 2N ❑ NA 0 NE
33. Did the Reviewer.]nspector fail to discuss reviewlinspection with an on -site representative? ❑ Yes ❑ NA. 0 NE
;a_ Does the facility require a Wow -up s isit by the same .tgertc ? ❑ Yes ti.n Q MA ❑ NE
QYes
iJ S,
❑ NA ❑ NE
❑\A ❑NE
Comments (refer to question #): Explain any l ES answers and/or any additional recommendations or any other comments.
Use drawings of facility to better explain situations lusc additional pages as necessary).
5 3-2 -21 .25
i- -2-D wI sk- "4-
147 2n Q s r—
T.ee-hoc , t {; � 'I �`.� et.l CDri,L
SwcFt- S(2P-A-4
• ta-2,6-21p►►-�
—Om cic
k1
P.I.
Reviewerintipecwr Name:
Reviewer -inspector Signature:
Pone 3 of 3
ll-0)3t1(
Date: