510050_Compliance Evaluation Inspection_20230626

IVAK
Facility Number ber - 5n Q Division of Soil and Water Conservation
Q Other Agency
(Type of Visit: 0 Compliance Inspection O Operation Review O Structure Evaluation O Technical Assistance
Reason for Visit: Q�Routine O Complaint 0 Follow-up O Referral 0 Emergency 0 Other Q Denied Access
Date of Visit: Z 4 L3 Arrival Time: p g,Q Departure Time: !tJ o. County: S S,! Region: /9 2U
Farm Name: �p id I tl Owner Email:
Owner Name: /rf A t /< N p W I J Phone: q/&- 319 -$ -1 1 O
Mailing Address:
�I
Physical Address: 1 ,7 7 ! I[ 1 Z J t'�
y ]1 b b 6 Ry SIG
Facility Contact:
Onsite Representative:
Certified Operator:
Title: Phone:
Integrator: eA,$ ,
Certification Number:
Back-up Operator: Certification Number:
Location of Farm: Latitude: Longitude:
Swine
Design Current Design Current
Capacity Pop. Wet Poultry Capacity Pop.
Layer
Non -La er
Wean to Finish
Wean to Feeder
Feeder to Finish
G
52 4b
Farrow to Wean
Farrow to Feeder
Farrow to Finish
Gilts
Boars
Other
Non-L
Pullets
Other
Poults
Design Current
Design Current
Cattle Capacity Pop.
Dairy Cow
Dairy Calf
Dairy Heifer
Dry Cow
Non -Dairy
Beef Stocker
Beef Feeder
Beef Brood Cow
Discharges and Stream Impacts
1. Is any discharge observed from any part of the operation?
❑ Yes
No
❑ NA
❑ NE
Discharge originated at: ❑ Structure ❑ Application Field ❑ Other:
a. Was the conveyance man-made?
❑ Yes
❑ No
L31NAA
❑ 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
N
❑ NA
❑ NE
3. Were there any observable adverse impacts or potential adverse impacts to the waters
❑ Yes
�FNo
NA
❑ NE
of the State other than from a discharge?
Page 1 of 3 511212020 Continued

Facilit Number: 51 - 5 b jDate of Ins ection: -
3
Waste Collection & Treatment
No
4. Is storage capacity (structural plus storm storage plus heavy rainfall) less than adequate?
❑ Yes
E
❑ NA
❑ NE
a. If yes, is waste level into the structural freeboard?
[:]Yes
No
❑ NA
❑ NE
Structure I Structure 2 Structure 3 Structure 4
Structure 5
Structure 6
Identifier: G S'MA/r
Spillway?:
Designed Freeboard (in): 0.-^
Observed Freeboard (in): 3 `1 ,
5. Are there any immediate threats to the integrity of any of the structures observed?
❑ Yes
E No
❑ 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
tNo
❑ 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 hreat, 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? ❑ YesEl-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 iJ 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 dNo
❑ 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 Fj_N o
❑ NA
❑ NE
acres determination?
N
17. Does the facility lack adequate acreage for land application?
❑ Yes U
❑ NA
❑ NE
18. Is there a lack of properly operating waste application equipment?
❑ Yes
❑ 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 [2/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 eNo
❑ NA
❑ NE
❑ Waste Application ❑ Weekly Freeboard ❑ Waste Analysis ❑ Soil Analysis
❑ Waste Transfers
❑ Weather Code
❑ Rainfall ❑ Stocking ❑ Crop Yield ❑ 120 Minute Inspections ❑ Monthly and V Rainfall Inspections ❑ Sludge Survey
22. Did the facility fail to install and maintain a rain gauge?
[:]Yes �
❑ NA
❑ NE
23. If selected, did the facility fail to install and maintain rainbreakers on irrigation equipment?
❑ Yes r ' o
0 NA
❑ NE
Page 2 of 3
511212020 Continued

Facili Number: 3' I. - 56 Date of Inspection: & • 2- 4 ' ;L 3-1
24. Did the facility fail to calibrate waste application equipment as required by the permit? ❑ Yes ffNo ❑ NA ❑ NE
25. Is the facility out of compliance with permit conditions related to sludge? If yes, check ❑ Yes E-N--o ❑ 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 No ❑ NA ❑ NE
27. Did the facility fail to secure a phosphorus loss assessments (PLAT) certification? ❑ Yes �j<o ❑ NA ❑ 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)
[:]Yes No ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Yes [/'No ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Yes <o ❑ NA [] NE
31. Do subsurface tile drains exist at the facility? If yes, check the appropriate box below. ❑ Yes
❑ Application Field ❑ Lagoon/Storage Pond ❑ Other:
32. Were any additional problems noted which cause non-compliance of the permit or CAWMP? ❑ Yes
33. Did the Reviewer/Inspector fail to discuss review/inspection with an on -site representative? ❑ Yes
34. Does the facility require a follow-up visit by the same agency? ❑ Yes
ErNNo ❑ NA ❑ NE
No ❑ NA ❑ NE
rNo ❑ NA ❑ NE
Ej__No ❑ NA ❑ NE
Comments (refer to question 9): N:xplam any YEN answers and/or any additionai recommendations or any Omer comments.
Use drawings of facility to better explain situations (use additional pages as necessary).
eAI 5!thTr`0,J f r -Loz3) 33 /19�)rX
iJAS i c ArlA��s�S - q� l7-7-3 - L.(3 Cei") 1-1Z-�23
i�►nz «+L?� 1�Ls r�/4Vcj - I"okRs
ldjfE4- . I.p kIZ5
ig- I . 5 140�3.
k PJ C7 • G f'
So,rs'it '1i Q aF_ 2-02-Ll
fAI S'-010340gS
Reviewer/Inspector Name: Zi fz' /S "//ZC
Reviewer/inspector Signature:
Page 3 of 3
[e-mail]
work cell: 919-810-2691
Phone: 9! 1 - 711 4I2-
f
Date: -- 14, - Z 3
511212020