640065_Compliance Evaluation Inspection_20230913

A 0 S C Division of Water Resources
Facility Number ®- S 0 Division of Soil and Water Conservation
0 Other Agency
Type of Visit: 0 Compliance Inspection O Operation Review 0 Structure Evaluation 0 Technical Assistance
Reason for Visit: 01-0-utine 0 Complaint 0 Follow-up 0 Referral 0 Emergency 0 Other 0 Denied Access
Date of Visit: - I ' Lj Arrival Time: f p: Departure Time: J : J County: �A Region: f
Farm Name:_ r � C �� X 'fo u) �fy/�„,( Owner Email:
Owner Name: b C1JN 1 ,$ KIT IYi SL N Phone:
Mailing Address:
Physical Address: Lc, Z
Facility Contact: �jQ �¢ pl k i r �] /QA 1't1 S t Title: Phone:
'T
Onsite Representative:
Certified Operator:
Back-up Operator:
Integrator:
Certification Number:
Certification Number:
Location of Farm: Latitude: Longitude:
Design Current Design Current
Swine Capacity Pop. Wet Poultry Capacity Pop. Cattle
Wean to Finish
Wean to Feeder
Feeder to Finish
Farrow to Wean Z
Farrow to Feeder
Farrow to Finish
Gilts
Boars
Other
La er
Non -La er
Pon
Pouits
Design Current
Design Current
Capacity Pop. 4
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 ❑ NA
❑ NE
b. Did the discharge reach waters of the State? (If yes, notify DWR)
❑ Yes
r2rNo ❑ 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
❑ NA
❑ NE
3. Were there any observable adverse impacts or potential adverse impacts to the waters
❑ Yes
No ❑ NA
0 NE
of the State other than from a discharge?
Page 1 of 3 511212020 Continued

Facility Number: & t4 - 4,5 Date of Inspection: 77 --
Waste Collection & Treatment
4. Is storage capacity (structural plus storm storage plus heavy rainfall) less than adequate? ❑ Yes Noo D NA ❑ NE
a. If yes, is waste level into the structural freeboard? ❑ Yes 2'I90❑ NA ❑ NE
Structure I Structure 2 Structure 3 Structure 4 Structure 5 Structure 6
Identifier: ' Z
Spillway?:
Designed Freeboard (in): ,r
Observed Freeboard (in): 7-7
5. Are there any immediate threats to the integrity of any of the structures observed? ❑ Yes ErNo ❑ 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 environmenta hreat, notify DWR
7. Do any of the structures need maintenance or improvement? [:]Yes rNo
❑NA ❑ NE
8. Do any of the structures lack adequate markers as required by the permit? []Yes ❑ 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 U "0 ❑ 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
&No ❑ NA
❑ NE
15. Does the receiving crop and/or land application site need improvement?
❑ Yes
d ❑ NA
❑ NE
16. Did the facility fail to secure and/or operate per the irrigation design or wettable
❑ Yes
C Noo ❑ NA
❑ NE
acres determination?
17. Does the facility lack adequate acreage for land application?
❑ Yes
;/X(o ❑ NA
❑ NE
18. Is there a lack of properly operating waste application equipment?
❑ Yes
No ❑ NA
❑ NE
Required 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
to ❑ NA
❑ NE
the appropriate box.
❑WUP ❑Checklists ❑ Design ❑ Maps ❑ Lease Agreements ❑Other: 11
21. Does record keeping need improvement? if yes, check the appropriate box below. [:]Yes No ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Waste Application ❑ Weekly Freeboard ❑ Waste Analysis ❑ Soil Analysis ❑ Waste Transfers ❑ Weather Code
❑ Rainfall ❑Stocking ❑ Crop Yield ❑ 120 Minute Inspections ❑Monthly and l" Rainfall InspectioFNo
❑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❑ NA ❑ NE
Page 2 of 3 511212020 Continued

Facility Number: 6.q - 65 1 Date of Inspection:
24. Did the facility fail to calibrate waste application equipment as required by the permit? ❑ Yes ED No
25. Is the facility out of compliance with permit conditions related to sludge? If yes, check ❑ Yes ❑ No
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 �o
27. Did the facility fail to secure a phosphorus loss assessments (PLAT) certification? ❑ Yes [2'No
❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ NA ❑ NE
❑NA ❑NE
Other Issues
28. Did the facility fail to properly dispose of dead animals with 24 hours and/or document
❑ Yes
C3-N-o ❑ 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
[ N ❑ 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
E),No ❑ NA ❑ NE
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:
7
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
EfNo ❑ NA ❑ NE
34. Does the facility require a follow-up visit by the same agency?
❑ Yes
J-Ds o ❑ 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 palles as necessary).
-S v r{ 5 j J 00 7--Z, X
L,4%/B"I/0)'� �2-DZ-2) /'0 Sf<•(l 4� r%L
A "jAl
ext
Reviewer/inspector Name:
Reviewer/Inspector Signature:
Page 3 of 3
Phone: 1/1- 7 / / - � z
Date: 9 — 13 - Z 3
511212020