310012_Compliance Evaluation Inspection_20231130

0 Division of Water Resources
Facility Numbers - 1 O Division of Soil and Water Conservation
Q Other Agency
Type of Visit: -e Compliance Inspection O Operation Review O Structure Evaluation O Technical Assistance
Reason for Visit: ® Routine O Complaint O Follow-up O Referral O Emergency O Other O Denied Access
Date of Visit:
Arrival Time: 0 �
Departure Time: County:
Farm Name:
c,1
i
�c1 ry�Owner Email:
Owner Name:
Mailing Address:
Physical Address:
Facility, Contact: ( ''ro z„ 7 v'. Title:
Onsite Representative:
Certified Operator:
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
Phone:
Integrator:
Region:
Phone: '� i U Z4 (0 3 J 1
Certification Number:
Certification Number:
Latitude: `? 4 . YS t'
Design Current Design Current
Capacity Pop. Wet Poultry Capacity Pop.
Layer
Non -Layer
Design Current
Drv.Poultry Canacitv Pon.
Layers
Non -Layers
Pullets
Turkeys
Turkey Pouets
Other
Longitude:
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 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
❑ N NA
❑ NE
2. Is there evidence of a past discharge from. any part of the operation?
❑ Yes7No
❑ 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 I of 3 511212020 Continued

Facility Number: � 1- i Z I jDate of Inspection: 11 3 0
VZ3
Waste Collection & Treatment
/No
4. Is storage capacity (structural plus storm storage plus heavy rainfall) less than adequate?
❑ Yes
❑ NA
❑ NE
a. If yes, is waste level into the structural freeboard?
❑ Yes
❑ NoF2-4
❑ 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
❑ NA
❑ NE
(i.e., large trees, severe erosion, seepage, etc.)
YNo
6. Are there structures on -site which are not properly addressed and/or managed through a
❑ Yes
❑ NA
❑ NE
waste management or closure plan?
threat, notify DWR
If any of questions 4-6 were answered yes, and the situation poses an immediate public health or environm7/co
7. Do any of the structures need maintenance or improvement?
❑ Yes
❑ 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
No
❑ NA
❑ NE
maintenance or improvement?
Waste Application
10. Are there any required buffers, setbacks, or compliance alternatives that need
❑ Yes
E� o
❑ 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?
❑ Yes
ETNo
❑ 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
ElYes
BN-o
❑ NA
❑ NE
acres determination?
17. Does the facility lack adequate acreage for land application?
❑ Yes
6"No
❑ NA
❑ NE
18. Is there a lack of properly operating waste application equipment?
❑ Yes
❑ NA
❑ NE
Required Records & Documents
7;0
19. Did the facility fail to have the Certificate of Coverage & Permit readily available?
❑ Yes
gNo
❑ NA
❑ NE
20. Does the facility fail to have all components of the CAWMP readily available? If yes, check
❑ Yes
❑ 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
TNo
❑ 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
ff N�Zov
❑ NA
❑ NE
23. If selected, did the facility fail to install and maintain rainbreakers on irrigation equipment?
El Yes
❑ NA
❑ NE
Page 2 of 3
511212020 Continued

Facility Number: 3 - j Z Date of Inspection: 'it 30 21
24. Did the facility fail to calibrate waste application equipment as required by the permit? �`Ye
No ❑ NA ❑ NE
25. Is the facility out of compliance with permit conditions related to sludge? If yes, check❑ No ❑ 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
27. Did the facility fail to secure a phosphorus loss assessments (PLAT) certification? ❑ Yes ❑ No
❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ NA ❑ 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
❑ 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:
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
❑ No ❑ NA
❑ NE
34. Does the facility require a follow-up visit by the same agency?
❑ Yes
❑ No ❑ NA
❑ NE
Comments(refer foggestion;'#):'Explain any YES answers and/orany�additioual reeommendatibns or any other comments °' 'x , y
Use drawings of;facility to bettertetplain situatidns 61se-additional pages as necessa ,
ry)�
_
= s s
Q
Reviewer/Inspector Name:
Reviewer/Inspector Signature
Page 3 of 3
�') k' � 1-
11 5:-�` ` d-5 Z �RL �'3
Phone: ' i 3 )o
Date: t t 3 a 'Q
5111120201