190039_Compliance Evaluation Inspection_20221229

Facility Number
_Pt\
IZTDivision of Water Resources
0 Division of Soil and Water Conservation
O Other Agency
ci
Type of Visit: Compliance Inspection 0 Operation Review 0 Structure Evaluation Technical Assistance
Reason for Visit: Routine 0 Complaint 0 Follow-up 0 Referral O Emergency 0 Other 0 Denied Access
Date of Visit: 1?, .2`i •'J•.. Arrival Time: 10ICIstim Departure Time:L yS arli County: ) o Region: trileilir,
Farm Name:. .o rpi ; _ _ %.1pAS
Owner Name: „ ,4 _Cd•-iblzb•Ir_
Mailing Address:
Physical Address:
Owner Email:
Phone: °PI" `Vie. —6G
Facility Contact: Title: Phone:
Onsite Representative: M,1; CrAb Integrator:
Certified Operator:
Back-up Operator:
Location of Farm:
Latitude:
Certification Number:
Certification Number:
Longitude:
a60 5A-OC.X0i0f4 7.4 r e� ,NC 2'135
Swine
Design Current
Capacity Pop.
Wean to Finish
Wean to Feeder
Feeder to Finish
Farrow to Wean
Farrow to Feeder
Farrow to Finish
Gilts
Boars
Design Current
Wet Poultry Capacity Pop.
Layer
Non -Layer
Design Current
Cattle
Design Current
Capacity Pop.
Dairy Cow
Dairy Calf
Dairy Heifer
Dry Cow
Non -Dairy
Beef Stocker
151Ao
Beef Feeder
XBeef Brood Cow
Ci to
Discharges and Stream Impacts
1. Is any discharge observed from any part of the operation?
Discharge originated at: ❑ Structure D 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) ❑ Yes Ili No ❑ NA ❑ NE
2. Is there evidence of a past discharge from any part of the operation? ❑ Yes [ No ❑ 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?
❑ Yes [ No ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Yes Er No ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Yes [,No ❑ NA ❑ NE
Page 1 of 3
5/12/2020 Continued

rikkrz
Facility Number: nk - 3 I
Waste Collection & Treatment
IDate of Inspection: 1k/a,41 J as
4. Is storage capacity (structural plus storm storage plus heavy rainfall) Tess than adequate?
a. If yes, is waste level into the structural freeboard?
Structure 1 Structure 2 Structure 3 Structure 4
Identifier:
Spillway?:
Designed Freeboard (in):
Observed Freeboard (in):
1'Crry Ste.
31.?
-- - — -
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 e ironmental threat, notify DWR
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? ifYes ❑ 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
maintenance or improvement?
I I . Is there evidence of incorrect land application? [f yes, check the appropriate box below.
'es ❑ No 0 NA ❑ NE
Yes ❑ No ❑ NA ❑ NE
Structure 5 Structure 6
Yes ❑ No ❑ NA ❑ NE
ZYes ❑ No ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Yes [ No ❑ NA ❑ NE
12f Yes ❑ 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 ei Isp Cu4,,4-
12. Crop Type(s):
13. Soil Type(s):
14. Do the receiving crops differ from those designated in the CAWMP? ❑ Yes [ No ❑ NA ❑ NE
15. Does the receiving crop and/or land application site need improvement? [Yes 0 No ❑ NA ❑ NE
16. Did the facility fail to secure and/or operate per the irrigation design or wettable I ❑ Yes No ❑ NA ❑ NE
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 ox.
WUP ❑Checklists [1rDesign liMaps 0 Lease Agreements
21oes record keeping need jmprovement? If yes, check the appropriate box below.
,� �t4A•tL
Waste Application lJ'Weekly Freeboard
Waste Analysis
❑ Rainfall Stocking ❑ Crop Yield ❑ 120 Minute 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
CZ No ❑NA ❑NE
O Yes No ❑ NA ❑ NE
Yes--14Tio ❑ NA ❑ NE
Yes ❑ No ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑Other:
IA Yes ❑ No ❑ NA ❑ NE
Soil Analysis ❑ Waste Transfers
❑ Monthly and 1" Rainfall Inspections ❑ Sludge Survey
12. No ❑ NA ❑
ITA No ❑ NA ❑ NE
5/12/2020 Continued
❑ Yes
❑ Yes
❑ Weather Code
NE

Facility Number: \ CI - 3dt 7
Date of Inspection: ja,./m / aa.
24. Did the facility fail to calibrate waste application equipment as required by the permit?
❑ Yes No ❑ NA 0 NE
25. Is the facility out of compliance with permit conditions related to sludge? If yes, check ❑ Yes IA No ❑ NA ENE
the appropriate box(es) below. tit
�Z,zq•
❑ 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: i
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 Toss 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 Ei 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 14 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? ❑ Yes No ❑ NA ❑ NE
33. Did the Reviewer/Inspector fail to discuss review/inspection with an on -site representative? ❑ Yes No El NA ❑ NE
34. Does the facility require a follow-up visit by the same agency? 'Yes ❑ 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).
Reviewer:Inspector Name:
Reviewer.'Inspector Signature:
Page 3 of 3
Phone:
Date:
aaiga�
5/12/2020