780084_Routine_20230321

Division of Water Resources
Facility Number 1Bq Division of Soil and Water Conservation,
0 Other Agency �. .
Type of Visit: ( Compliance Inspection 0 Operation Review 0 Structure Evaluation 0 Technical Assistance
Reason for Visit: Routine O.Complaint 0 Follow-up 0 Referral 0 Emergency 0 Other 0 Denied Access
Date of Visit: Arrival Time: III) -. D (p Departure Time: County: _ } Region:
Farm NameQ� Owner Email:
Owner Name: nnCjeap
Phone:
Mailing Address:
Physical Address:
Facility Contact: lad RA"
Onsite Representative: (
Certified Operator:
Back-up Operator:
Location of Farm:
Title: Phone:
Integrator: W it
Certification Number: I N I I
Latitude:
Certification Number:
Design Current
Design
Current
Swine
Capacity Pop.
Wet Poultry
Capacity
Pop.
Wean to Finish
i ILayer
Wean to Feeder
Non -Layer
1(, Feeder to Finish
o S
Farrow to Wean
Design
Current
Farrow to Feeder
Dry Poultry,
Capacity
Pop.
Farrow to Finish
Layers
Gilts
Non -Layers
Boars
Pullets
Turkeys
Other
Turkey Poults
Other
Discharees 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)?
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 I
❑ Yes 0 No ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Yes
1p No
❑ NA
❑ NE
❑ Yes
IV No
❑ NA
❑ NE
❑ Yes �] No ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Yes No ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Yes KNo ❑ NA ❑ NE
Page I of 3 5/I212020 Continued

Facility Number: 7�) - FI)y [ jDate of Inspection:
Waste Collection & Treatment
4. Is storage capacity (structural plus storm storage plus heavy rainfall) less than adequate?
a. If yes, is waste level into the structural freeboard?
Structure 1 Structure 2 Structure 3 Structure 4
Identifier: I
Spillway?: Iq
Designed Freeboard (in): N10
Observed Freeboard (in): !0
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?
❑ Yes 00 No
❑ Yes No
❑NA ❑NE
❑NA ❑NE
Structure 5 Structure 6
❑ Yes No ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑Yes yNo ❑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? �: . QNs CN)
❑NA ❑ NE
8. Do any of the structures lack adequate markers as required by the permit? _ZI❑��' Y`v'es 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
❑ Yes
No
❑ NA
❑ NE
maintenance or improvement?
11. Is there evidence of incorrect land application? If yes, check the appropriate box below.
❑ Yes
0 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): c, uj: P( ) . l , Du^,(���
13. Soil Type(s): NOHr—T'—)V K) I UU �_ r0 M
14. Do the receiving crops differ from those designated in the CAWMP?
❑ Yes
t] No
❑ 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
No
❑ NA
❑ NE
acres determination?
17. Does the facility lack adequate acreage for land application?
❑ Yes
No
❑ NA
❑ NE
18. Is there a lack of properly operating waste application equipment?
❑ Yes
No
LIV
❑ NA
❑ NE
Reauired Records & Documents
19. Did the facility fail to have the Certificate of Coverage & Permit readily available?
❑ Yes
No
❑ NA
❑ NE
20. Does the facility fail to have all components of the CAWMP readily available? If yes, check
❑ Yes
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 W 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 ❑ Sludge Survey
22. Did the facility fail to install and maintain a rain gauge? ❑ Yes [Z No ❑ NA ❑ NE
23. If selected, did the facility fail to install and maintain rainbreakers on irrigation equipment? ❑ Yes [�'No ❑ NA ❑ NE
Page 2 of 3 511212020 Continued

Facility Number: - I jDate of Inspection:
1
24. Did the facility fail to calibrate waste application equipment as required by the permit?
❑ Yes
No ❑ NA ❑ NE
25. Is the facility out of compliance with permit conditions related to sludge? If yes, check
❑ Yes
No ❑ NA ❑ NE
LIV
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
No ❑ NA ❑ NE
27. Did the facility fail to secure a phosphorus loss 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
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 ❑ NA ❑ NE
0
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 V,No ❑ 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).
-farm %emDved Slvd�2 in 2022 ih d-eC-eqer 3 had ci
G1vd9e
+Lagoon bahKS `oC)K good �
r�. worK on .'Nud-1 Gfuq m4� con�ld-� SP►ay�n�
nor weedy.
Reviewer/Inspector Name: _Ka*t�tMT-W04-
Reviewer/Inspector Signature:
Page 3 of 3 " /?Y, (
9
Phone: 1 / 1 i
Date:�j
511212020