310680_Compliance Evaluation Inspection_20221027

Division of Water Resources
Facility Number O Division of Soil and Water Conservation
O Other Agency
Type of Visit: Hance Inspection 0 Operation Review O Structure Evaluation O Technical Assistance
Reason for Visit: Routine O Complaint O Follow-up O Referral O Emergency O Other O Denied Access
Date of Visit: Arrival Time: Departure Time: County:
Farm Name: bi ,,i /I/({G//� 7L1 Ci t� f � Owner Email:
Owner Name: & , f j/(�A 75J ��(eCt,p -J Phone:
Mailing Address:
Physical Address:
Facility Contact:
OnsiteRepresentative: ji—tIC L-1 lxjle'
Certified Operator: 61-il / (01ACL
Back-up Operator:
Location of Farm:
Swine
Wean to Finish
;ffl%an to Feeder
Feeder to Finish
Farrow to Wean
Farrow to Feede
Farrow to Finist
Other
Title:
Latitude:
Phone:
Region: 1..t'� iAd
Integrator:
Certification Number: l c %1 70
Certification Number:
Design Current Design Current
Capacity Pop. Wet Poultry Capacity Pop.
cLln.tlSLl—S1—J Layer
Non -Layer
Design Current
nry Poultry Canacity Poo.
Layers
Non -Layers
Pullets
Turkeys
Turkey Pouets
Other
Discharges and Stream Impacts
1. Is any discharge observed from any part of the operation?
Discharge originated at: ❑ Structtne ❑ Application Field ❑ Other:
a. Was the conveyance man-made?
b. Did the discharge reach waters of 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
of the State other than from a discharge?
Longitude:
Design Current
Cattle Capacity Pop.
Dairy Cow
Dairy Calf
Dairy Heifer
Dry Cow
Non -Dairy
Beef Stocker
Beef Feeder
Beef Brood Cow
❑ Yes b_tlro_�EI NA ❑ NE
❑ Yes
[:]No
❑ NA
❑ NE
❑ Yes
❑ No
❑ NA
❑ NE
❑ Yes ❑ No NA ❑ NE
❑ Yes 'NA ❑ NE
❑ Yes o ❑ NA ❑ NE
Page I of 3 511212020 Continued

Facility Number: U Date of Inspection:
Waste Collection & Treatment
4, Is storage capacity (structural plus storm storage plus heavy rainfall) less than adequate? ❑ Yes 0<o ❑ NA ❑ NE
a. If yes, is waste level into the structural freeboard? ❑ Yes ❑ No ❑ NA ❑ NE
Structure 1 Structure 2 Structure 3 Structure 4 Structure 5 Structure 6
Identifier: I —
Spillway?:
Designed Freeboard (in):
Observed Freeboard (in): J I
5. Are there any immediate threats toile 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
R<0 NA
❑ NE
waste management or closure plan?
If any of questions 4-6 were answered yes, and the situation poses an immediate public health at, environmental
threat, notify DWR
7. Do any of the structures need maintenance or improvement?
❑ Yes
f7 No ❑ NA
❑ NE
8. Do any of the structures lack adequate markers as required by the permit?
❑ Yes
e-i'dtf ❑ 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
ro
❑ NA
❑ NE
maintenance or improvement?
Waste Application
10. Are there any required buffers, setbacks, or compliance alternatives that need
❑ Yes
�❑
NA
❑ NE
maintenance or improvement?
11. Is there evidence of incorrect land application? If yes, check the appropriate box below.
❑ Yes
Q'IVo
❑ NA
❑ NE
❑ Excessive Pending ❑ 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 mops differ from those designated in the CAWMP?
❑ Yes
QNo'
❑ NA
❑ NE
15. Does the receiving crop and/or land application site need improvement?
❑ Yes
❑ No
❑ NA
❑ NE
16. Did the facility fail to secure and/or operate per the irrigation design or wettable
❑ Yes
[D-No
❑ NA
❑ NE
acres determination?
17. Does the facility lack adequate acreage for land application?
❑ Yes
Q—i
❑ NA
❑ NE
18. Is there a lack of properly operating waste application equipment?
❑ Yes
6-N-o
❑ NA
❑ NE
Rea aired Records & Documents
19. Did the facility fail to have the Certificate of Coverage & Permit readily available?
❑ Yes
[]>o
❑ NA ❑ NE
20. Does the facility fail to have all components of the CAWMP readily available? If yes, check
❑ Yes
Et o
❑ 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
U-No
❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Waste Application ❑ Weekly Freeboard ❑ Waste Analysis ❑ Soil Analysis
❑ Waste Transfers
❑ Weather Code
❑ Rainfall ❑ Stocking ❑ Crop Yield ❑ 120 Minute Inspections ❑ Monthly and l" Rainfall
Inspections
❑ Sludge Survey
22. Did the facility fail to install and maintain a rain gauge?
❑ Yes
�o
❑ NA ❑ NE
23. If selected, did the facility fail to install and maintain rainbreakers on irrigation equipment?
❑ Yes
b No
❑ NA ❑ NE
Page 2 of 3
511212020 Continued

Facilit Number: - Date of Inspection:
24. Did the facility fail to calibrate waste application equipment as required by the permit? ❑ Yes E3-iVo ❑ NA ❑ NE
25. Is the facility out of compliance with permit conditions related to sludge? If yes, check ❑ Yes ` o ❑ 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 to provide documentation of an actively certified operator in charge? ❑ Yes NA ❑ NE
27. Did the facility fail to secure a phosphorus loss assessments (PLAT) certification? ❑ Yes ❑ No `❑.NX ❑ NE
Other Issues
28. Did the facility fail to properly dispose of dead animals with 24 hours and/or document ❑ Yes E`N'o ❑ 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 n 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
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 ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Application Field ❑ Lagoon/Storage Pond ❑ Other:
32. Were any additional problems noted which cause non-compliance of the permit or CAWMP? ❑ Yes �o ❑ NA ❑ NE
33. Did the Reviewer/Inspector fail to discuss review/inspection with an on -site representative? ❑ Yes N/o ❑ NA ❑ NE
34. Does the facility require a follow-up visit by the same agency? ❑ Yes 4.�7'v0 ❑ NA ❑ NE
(Comments (refer to question #): Explain any YES answers and/or any additional recommendations or any other comments. I
Use drawings of facility to better explain situations (use additional pages as necessary).
Reviewer/Inspector Name:
Reviewer/Inspector Signature:
Phone: C(a tio�Ytl
Date:
Page 3 of 3 511212020