510102_Compliance Evaluation Inspection_20230714

li '0 IV
tJ SU Division of Water Resources
Facility Number 0 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 0 Complaint 0 Follow-up 0 Referral 0 Emergency 0 Other 0 Denied Access
Date of Visit: Arrival Time: 1 q ; !`hdA Departure Time: J� . t County:
Farm Name: AC,J10 5 R.+u NOA-
,C4 Owner Email:
Owner Name: 1��.��lS � �4/L Phone: _q/U� yg0 - z 1
Mailing Address:
Physical Address: 315' WG 5 i f A Oy K Lou) j�/ty K.JS A iO u X
Facility Contact: Title:
Onsite Representative:
Integrator:
Phone:
Certified Operator: Certification Number:
Back-up Operator:
Location of Farm:
Swine
Wean to Finish
Wean to Feeder
Feeder to Finish
Farrow to Wean
Farrow to Feeder
Farrow to Finish
Gilts
Boars
Other
Certification Number:
Latitude:
Design Current Design Current
Capacity Pop. Wet Poultry Capacity Pop.
La erI I —d
Non -La er
Design Current
Dry Poultry Canaclty Pon.
Layers
Non -Layers
Pullets
Turkeys
Turkey Poults
Other
Discharges and Stream Impacts
I. Is any discharge observed from any part of the operation?
Discharge originated at: ❑ Structure ❑ Application Field ❑ Other:
a. Was the conveyance man-made?
Longitude:
Region: 12 it D
Design Current
Cattle Capacity Pop.
Dairy Cow
Dairy Calf
Dairy Heifer
Dry Cow
.Non -Dairy
Beef Stocker
Beef Feeder
Beef Brood Cow
❑ Yes ONo ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Yes ❑ No ED"NA [] NE
b. Did the discharge reach waters of the State? (If yes, notify DWR)
[:]Yes
❑ No Ej 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
To❑ NA
❑ NE
3. Were there any observable adverse impacts or potential adverse impacts to the waters
❑ Yes
❑ NE
of the State other than from a discharge?
Page 1 of 3 511212020 Continued

Facility Number: 51 - 2— Date of Inspection: ' _ 1 _ x.
Waste Collection & Treatment
4. Is storage capacity (structural plus storm storage plus heavy rainfall) less than adequate? ❑ Yes Z<o ❑ NA ❑ NE
a. If yes, is waste level into the structural freeboard? ❑ Yes ErNo ❑ NA ❑ NE
Structure I Structure 2 Structure 3 Structure 4 Structure 5 Structure 6
Identifier
Spillway?:
Designed Freeboard (in):
Observed Freeboard (in):
Z 3—(,
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 �No[_] ❑ NE
❑ Yes �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 5� ❑ NA ❑ NE
8. Do any of the structures lack adequate markers as required by the permit? ❑ Yes P 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 P N ❑ 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 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'u/h %4l Ax'y
13. Soil Type(s):
14.
Do the receiving crops differ from those designated in the CAWMP?
❑ Yes
❑ No
❑ NA
❑ NE
15.
Does the receiving crop and/or land application site need improvement?
❑ Yes
NA
❑ NE
16.
Did the facility fail to secure and/or operate per the irrigation design or wettable
❑ Yes
VNo
❑ NA
r] 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
�rN
❑ NA
❑ NE
Required Records & Documents
19.
Did the facility fail to have the Certificate of Coverage & Permit readily available?
❑ Yes
ffNo
❑ NA
0 NE
20.
Does the facility fail to have all components of the CAWMP readily available? If yes, check
❑ Yes
�No
❑ NA
D 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 ffNo ❑ NA 0 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 o ❑ NA ❑ NE
23. If selected, did the facility fail to install and maintain rainbreakers on irrigation equipment? El Yes No ❑ NA ❑ NE
Page 2 of 3 511212020 Continued

Facility Number: S 1 - v Date of Inspection: 7- f q- z 3
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 VNo ❑ 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 QNo ❑ 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 No ❑ 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
/No
NA
NE
[
❑
❑
Ej'No
❑ NA
❑ NE
No
❑ NA
❑ NE
EKO
❑ 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).
o Z z./ 7�rJ Z 3 7 - - L 3 T s ` L9
�1?A
So�t/s �ST[za�3)'I�d� l�i�>f1k!_KL� !
�itt r QF /s fPL G r/ON
C,4i��/Z.4iio�s (zazz)-Iz-s zz ztd�f 6 e'Ps,
9S �s
4,4­0r I 31P
Is 4�'I0s'z8
Reviewer/Inspector Name: Lu A 5 % V A Z 4
Reviewer/Inspector Signature:
Page 3 of 3
®det. n e-
.gfl ✓
curtis.tyre
work cell: 919-810-2691
Phone: III- 7 i/ - `l 1- S
Date: 7-IY- z.3
511212020