310285_Compliance Evaluation Inspection_20230123

- �Division-of Water Resources >F
��aet]i l�Ttttnber�1 Z b Dlvisaon of Soil and='t'ater.Conse> vatlon
-
Other Agency,
Type of Visit: ® Compliance Inspection 0 Operation Review 0 Structure Evaluation 0 Technical Assistance
Reason for Visit: (2) Routine 0 Complaint 0 Follow-up 0 Referral 0 Emergency 0 Other 0 Denied Access
Date of Visit: Arrival Time: Departure Time: FIT J lz County:
Farm Name: G,„ \ 4_. X Owner Email:
Owner Name:
Mailing Address:
Physical Address:
Facility Contact:
Title:
Phone:
Onsite Representative: ��(,� v.Ca < I��••�,,,J� C Integrator:
Certified Operator:
Back-up Operator:
Location of Farm:
Latitude:
Region:
Phone: ci Iy 7-9 6 3 ZycD
Certification Number:
Certification Number:
Longitude:
Dasign,_ Curirent
Design, v_Cuxent .
Design Current
Swine .
Capacity : _Pop... �.
Wet Poultry ; - ;
Capacity; i'op
Cattle, C pacaty Pop
Wean to Finish
Layer
Dairy Cow
Wean to Feeder
(� oo
Non -Layer
Dairy Calf
Feeder to Finish
Dairy Heifer
Farrow to Wean`
Design= Cusr'nt
Dry Cow
Farrow to Feeder
�Djry Poultry` ::
tappacit�y, , . o .'
Non -Dairy
Farrow to Finish
Layers
Beef Stocker
Gilts
Non -Layers
Beef Feeder
Boars
Pullets
Beef Brood Cow
Turkeys
:Other
Turkey Pou Its
-
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?
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)?
9
❑ Yes No ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Yes
❑ No
NNAA
❑ NE
❑ Yes
❑ No
❑
❑ NE
d. Does the discharge bypass the waste management system? (If yes, notify DWR) U Yes U No L_j NA U NE
2. Is there evidence of a past discharge from any part of the operation? ❑ Yes 2<o ❑ NA ❑ NE
3. Were there any observable adverse impacts or potential adverse impacts to the waters ❑ Yes Flo ❑ NA ❑ NE
,•�of the State other than from a discharge?
`'5K
a Puge4oif 3 511212020 Continued

Facility Number: 31 - Date 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
Identifier: I
Spillway?:
Designed Freeboard (in):
Observed Freeboard (in): 1/5
Structure 2 Structure 3 Structure 4 Structure 5
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?
[-N'o ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ No ❑'N/A ❑ NE
Structure 6
❑ Yes ETNo ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Yes [l"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
[�K-
❑ NA
❑ NE
8. Do any of the structures lack adequate markers as required by the permit?
❑ Yes
j v
❑ 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
❑,Pdo
❑ NA
❑ NE
maintenance or improvement?
Waste Application
10. Are there any required buffers, setbacks, or compliance alternatives that need
[:]Yes
Ko
❑ NA
❑ NE
maintenance or improvement?
11. Is there evidence of incorrect land application? If yes, check the appropriate box below.
❑ 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
12. Crop Type(s):
13. Soil Type(s):
14. Do the receiving crops differ from those designated in the CAWMP?
❑ Yes
[
❑ NA
❑ NE
15. Does the receiving crop and/or land application site need improvement?
❑ Yes
�;7No
❑ NA
❑ NE
16. Did the facility fail to secure and/or operate per the irrigation design or wettable
❑ Yes
QXo
❑ NA
❑ NE
acres determination?
17. Does the facility lack adequate acreage for land application?
❑ Yes
❑ NA
❑ NE
18. Is there a lack of properly operating waste application equipment?
❑ Yes
VNo
❑ NA
❑ NE
Required Records & Documents ,—�
19. Did the facility fail to have the Certificate of Coverage & Permit readily available? ❑ Yes L3 N' o ❑ NA ❑ NE
20. Does the facility fail to have all components of the CAWMP readily available? If yes, check ❑ Yes Ey<o ❑ NA ❑ NE
the appropriate box.
❑WUP ❑Checklists ❑Design ❑Maps ❑ Lease Agreements ❑Othe.
21. Does record keeping need improvement? If yes, check the appropriate box below. Yes ❑ No ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Waste Applic ❑ Weekly Freeboard ❑ Waste Analysis ❑ Soil Analysis ❑ Waste Transfers ❑ Weather Code
❑ Rainfall Stoc 'ng ❑Crop Yield ❑ 120 Minute Inspections ❑Monthly and 1" Rainfall Inspections ❑Sludge Survey
J
22. Did the fac' ' 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 WNo ❑ NA ❑ NE
Page 2 of 3 511212020 Continued

Facility Number: jDate of Inspection: 1 23
24. Did the facility fail to calibrate waste application equipment as required by the permit? ❑ Yes . Flo ❑ NA ❑ NE
25. Is the facility out of compliance with permit conditions related to sludge? If yes, check ❑ Yes to ❑ 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 ❑TQo ❑ NA ❑ NE
27. Did the facility fail to secure a phosphorus loss assessments (PLAT) certification? ❑ Yes ❑ No [✓]'TA ❑ 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:
32. Were any additional problems noted which cause non-compliance of the permit or CAWMP? ❑ Yes f 1V o ❑ NA ❑ NE
33. Did the Reviewer/Inspector fail to discuss review/inspection with an on -site representative? ❑ Yes [�4o ❑ NA ❑ NE
34. Does the facility require a follow-up visit by the same agency? ❑ Yes ri/o ❑ NA ❑ NE
Cbmmients (refer to questaon°#):°Explaigany YES answers, axtcllo`r°any_additionaT recopmpndat nns or.any other comments _e
tie"Kira vit► s_a faciTit .to lieft�r explaiti_situations,(pse addiiional pales necessary)
❑Yes ❑ o ❑NA ❑NE
❑ Yes ❑ado ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Yes dNo ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Yes ❑ No ❑ NA D4E
�s ?AN CE_� � OL77q r&NJ Alit® . 0 .�. k � �� Z�
u�72L. a.rj i-A , T i4N
--�, eIJ C3 e— "
,D(-- i r Ir- -'� cj--),Cp.— e- ve_"A )
Reviewer/Inspector Name:
Reviewer/Inspector Signature:
Page 3 of 3
Phone: ®'�_l 03r(0
Date: 7_3 (13
511212020