310683_Compliance Evaluation Inspection_20230516

Division of Water Resources
Facility Number ?y O Division of Soil and Water Conservation
Q Other Agency
Type of Visit: Co lance Inspection Operation Review Q Structure Evaluation 0 Technical Assistance
Reason for Visit: Routine 0 Complaint 0 Follow-up 0 Referral 0 Emergency 0 Other 0 Denied Access
Date of Visit: Arrival Time: Departure Time: County: ) j n Region: � }
r
Farm Name: VC cv.,( 6
Owner Name: J l(tl Lt dL 1 . a-L
Mailing Address:
Physical Address:
Facility Contact:
Owner Email:
Phone:
Title:
((1
Onsite Representative: Cl )(� (//l (oAin �;, �J uotA
Certified Operator: _ SkK lfo' v�
Back-up Operator:
Location of Farm:
Design Current
Swine Capacity Pop.
Wean to Finish
Wean to Feeder
eeder to Finish
? S
Farrow to Wean
Farrow to Feeder
Farrow to Finish
Gilts
Boars
Other
Discharses and Stream Imnacts
Latitude:
Phone:
Integrator•
Certification Number:
Certification Number:
Longitude:
Design Current
Wet Poultry Capacity Pop.
Layer
Non -La er
Other
Design Current
lt.orb
Design Current
Cattle Capacity Pop.
Dairy Cow
Dairy Calf
Dairy Heifer
Dry Cow
Non -Dairy
Beef Stocker
Beef Feeder
Beef Brood Cow
1. Is any discharge observed from any part of the operation?
❑ Yes
02,)Or� NA
❑ NE
Discharge originated at: ❑ Structure ❑ Application Field ❑ Other:
a. Was the conveyance man-made?
❑ Yes
❑ No
❑ NA
❑ NE
b. Did the discharge reach waters of the State? (If yes, notify DWR)
❑ Yes
❑ No
❑ NA
❑ NE
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
❑ No
❑ NA
❑ NE
2. Is there evidence of a past discharge from any part of the operation?
❑ Yes
gQ-M
❑ NA
❑ NE
3. Were there any observable adverse impacts or potential adverse impacts to the waters
❑ Yes
PD'5o
❑ NA
❑ NE
of the State other than from a discharge?
Page I of 3 511212020 Continued

(�'
Facilit Number: Date of inspection:
Waste Collection & Treatme u C z
4. Is storage capacity (structural plus storm storage plus heavy rainfall) less than adequate?
❑ Yes
EQ-No
❑ NA
❑ NE
a. If yes, is waste level into the structural freeboard?
❑ Yes
❑ No
❑ NA
❑ NE
tructtuure I Structure 2 Structure 3 Structure 4
LC� j_ (0
Structure 5
Structure
6
Identifi (� (. 1\ -7 74c
Spillway?:
Designed Freeboard (in):
Observed Freeboard (in):
5. Are there any immediate threats to the integrity of any of the structures observed?
❑ Yes
i
❑ 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
EDNo
❑ NA
❑ NE
waste management or closure plan?
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
K2/No
❑ NA
❑ NE
8. Do any of the structures lack adequate markers as required by the permit?
❑ Yes
❑ 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
L>o
❑ NA
❑ NE
maintenance or improvement?
Waste Application
10. Are there any required buffers, setbacks, or compliance alternatives that need
❑ Yes
[`EJNo
❑ NA
❑ NE
maintenance or improvement?
11. Is there evidence of incorrect land application? If yes, check the appropriate box below.
❑ Yes
❑Ao
❑ 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
LrNo
❑ NA
❑ NE
15. Does the receiving crop and/or land application site need improvement?
❑ Yes
�o
❑ NA
❑ NE
16. Did the facility fail to secure and/or operate per the irrigation design or wettable
❑ Yes
E]-No
❑ NA
❑ NE
acres determination?
17. Does the facility lack adequate acreage for land application?
❑ Yes
PrNo
❑ NA
❑ NE
18. Is there a lack of properly operating waste application equipment?
❑ Yes
®No
❑ NA
❑ NE
Reauired Records & Documents
19. Did the facility fail to have the Certificate of Coverage & Permit readily available?
❑ Yes
E]�No
❑ NA ❑ NE
20. Does the facility fail to have all components of the CAWMP readily available? If yes, check
❑ Yes
rn­No
❑ NA ❑ NE
the appropriate box.
❑WUP []Checklists ❑Design ❑Maps ❑LeaseAgreements
❑Other:
21. Does record keeping need improvement? If yes, check the appropriate box below.
❑ Yes
JZI-Ko
❑ 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
[D No
No
❑ NA ❑ NE
23. If selected, did the facility fail to install and maintain rainbreakers on irrigation equipment?
❑ Yes
❑
❑ NA ❑ NE
Page 2 of 3
511212020 Continued

60
Facilit Number: Date of Inspection: 15_
24. Did the facility fail to calibrate waste application equipment as required by the permit? ❑ Yes �o ❑ NA ❑ NE
25. Is the facility out of compliance with permit conditions related to sludge? If yes, check ❑ Yes [a-llro ❑ 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?
27. Did the facility fail to secure a phosphorus loss assessments (PLAT) certification?
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?
33. Did the Reviewer/Inspector fail to discuss review/inspection with an on -site representative?
34. Does the facility require a follow-up visit by the same agency?
❑ Yes CD.No ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Yes P!KNo � ❑ NE
Cf _
❑ Yes R�Ko ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Yes ❑'No ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Yes o ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Yes
EEf,1VO
❑ NA
❑ NE
❑ Yes
hIo
❑ NA
❑ NE
❑Yes
�Nf
❑NA
❑NE
❑ Yes
L'J No
❑ NA
❑ NE
(Comments (reter to question 9): Explain any YES answers and/or any additional recommendations or any other comments. I
Use drawings of facility to better explain situations (use additional mazes as necessarv).
sign SIorl(6-
Reviewer/Inspector Name:
Reviewer/Inspector Signature:
Phone: wo szy (�&
Date: /��o AS
Page 3 of 3 511212020