310403_Compliance Evaluation Inspection_20230228

® Division of Water Resources
Eadlity Number ®- I `F6s .J O Division of Soil and Wafer Conservation
O Other Agency
Type of Visit: ® Compliance Inspection O Operation Review O Structure Evaluation O Technical Assistance
Reason for Visit: Cei Routine O Complaint O Follow-up O Referral O Emergency O Other O Denied Access
Date of Visit: Arrival Timer Departure Time: County:
Farm Name: 'T-!��y�`-�v�✓�C--� �-+ v�-- Owner Email:
Owner Name:
Mailing Address:
Physical Address:
Phone:
Facility Contact: i Title:
Onsite Representative:
Certified Operator:
Back-up Operator:
Location of Farm:
Design Current
Swine Capacity Pop.
Wean to Finish
Wean to Feeder
Feeder to Finish
0o
1-7 U
Farrow to Wean
Farrow to Feeder
Farrow to Finish
Gilts
Boars
Other
Latitude:
Integrator:
Region:
Phone: �1%n ZAO 3 G S 2
Certification Number:
Certification Number:
Design Current
Wet Poultry Capacity Pop.
Layer
Non -Layer
Design Current
Dry Pmfltry Cfinacity Pon_
Layers
Non -Layers
Pullets
Turkeys
Turkey Poults
Other
Discharlzes 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?
Longitude:
Design Current
Cattle Capacity Pop:
Dairy Cow
Dairy Calf
Dairy Heifer
Dry Cow
Non -Dairy
Beef Stocker
Beef Feeder
Beef Brood Cow
❑ Yes No 0 NA ❑ NE
❑ Yes ❑ No5?
A ❑ NE
b. Did the discharge reach waters of the State? (If yes, notify DWR)
❑ Yes
0 No
NA
❑ NE
c. What is the estimated volume that reached water-5-oftheState (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
yNo
❑ NA
❑ NE
3. Were there any observable adverse impacts or potential adverse impacts to the waters
❑ Yes
❑ NA
❑ NE
of the State other than from a discharge?
Page 1 of 3 511212020 Continued

Facility Number: 3 1 - *3Date of Inspection: 2
Waste Collection & Treatment
4. Is storage capacity (structural plus storm storage plus heavy rainfall) less than adequate?
❑ Yes
No ❑ NA
❑ NE
a. If yes, is waste level into the structural freeboard?
❑ Yes
❑ No [�I-A
❑ NE
Structure 1 Structure 2 Structure 3 Structure 4
Structure 5
Structure 6
Identifier:
Spillway?:
Designed Freeboard (in):
Observed Freeboard (in):_
5. Are there any immediate threats to the 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
No ❑ 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 to ❑ NA ❑ NE
8. Do any of the structures lack adequate markers as required by the permit? ❑ Yes Cj-RI'o ❑ 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 ErNo ❑ NA ❑ NE
maintenance or improvement?
Waste Application
10. Are there any required buffers, setbacks, or compliance alternatives that need ❑ Yes dNo ❑ NA ❑ NE
maintenance or improvement?
11. Is there evidence of incorrect land application? If yes, check the appropriate box below. ❑ Yes �o ❑ 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?
15. Does the receiving crop and/or land application site need improvement?
16. Did the facility fail to secure and/or operate per the irrigation design or wettable
acres determination?
17. Does the facility lack adequate acreage for land application?
18. Is there a lack of properly operating waste application equipment?
❑ Yes
❑i'�lo
❑ Yes
vo
❑ Yes
No
❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ NA 0 NE
❑NA ❑NE
❑ Yes LJ� q ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Yes ETNo ❑ NA ❑ NE
Required Records & Documents
19. Did the facility fail to have the Certificate of Coverage & Permit readily available? ❑ Yes Eg-Ko ❑ NA ❑ NE
20. Does the facility fail to have all components of the CAWMP readily available? If yes, check ❑ Yes [D_�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 ©-tqo
❑ Waste Application ❑ Weekly Freeboard ❑ Waste Analysis ❑ Soil Analysis ❑ Waste Transfers
❑ Rainfall ❑ Stocking ❑ Crop Yield ❑ 120 Minute Inspections ❑ Monthly and V Rainfall Inspections
22. Did the facility fail to install and maintain a rain gauge? ❑ Yes dNo
23. If selected, did the facility fail to install and maintain rainbreakers on irrigation equipment?
Page 2 of 3
❑ Yes [/] No
❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Weather Code
❑ Sludge Survey
❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ NA ❑ NE
511212020 Continued

Facility Number: -k.4 0, 1 Date of Inspection: c-).
24. Did the facility fail to calibrate waste application equipment as required by the permit? ❑ Yes �7No
� ❑ NA ❑ NE
25. Is the facility out of compliance with permit conditions related to sludge? If yes, check ❑ Yes ❑ 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 ETNo ❑ NA ❑ NE
27. Did the facility fail to secure a phosphorus loss assessments (PLAT) certification? ❑ Yes ❑ No ZINA ❑ 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
Ko
❑ NA ❑ NE
permit? (i.e., discharge, freeboard problems, over -application)
31. Do subsurface the 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
❑ NA ❑ NE
34. Does the facility require a follow-up visit by the same agency?
❑ Yes
[No
❑ NA ❑ NE
Comments (referto qu$answersad/oradexpanyInyahonamn onsaanyorcmens etion#}i n tp
a
,.
e draryvn :pages>as nesbetexse add t onalUsc
�e
Reviewer/Inspector Name: 11-1-1 V-r \_j Q A
Reviewer/Inspector Signature:
Page 3 of 3
\ I � -,, �-CVJ,
Phone: (O
Date: 01)- U
511212020