310132_Compliance Evaluation Inspection_20231026

® Division of Water Resources
Facility Number, - 13 0 Division of Soil and Water Conservation
0 Other Agency
)e of Visit: ® Compliance Inspection 0 Operation Review 0 Structure Evaluation 0 Technical Assistance
ison for Visit: ® Routine 0 Complaint 0 Follow-up 0 Referral 0 Emergency 0 Other 0 Denied Access
Date of Visit: ° V ZG Arrival Time: Gj (� �1 Departure Time: CC, County:
Farm Name:F'11*'w- Owner Email:
Owner Name:
Mailing Address:
Physical Address:
Facility Contact: Le.., ; ✓ 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
®lam
Farrow to Wean
Farrow to Feeder
Farrow to Finish
Gilts
Boars
`Other
Phone:
Phone:
Integrator:
Certification Number:
Certification Number:
Region:
Latitude: 3" 4 C Z-9 Longitude: 77. S/o 3 4
Design Current
Wet Poultry_ Capacity Pop.
Layer
Non -Layer
Design Current
Dry Poultry La acit ro .
Layers
Non -Layers
Pullets
Turkeys
Turkey Poults
Other
Design - Current .
' -Cattlea ° : <Capacityi, 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 0 NA
❑ NE
Discharge originated at: ❑ Structure ❑ Application Field ❑ Other:
a. Was the conveyance man-made?
❑ Yes
❑ No E3<A
❑ NE
b. Did the discharge reach waters of the State? (If yes, notify DWR)
❑ Yes
❑ No [�A
❑ 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
NA
❑�Vo
❑ NE
2. Is there evidence of a past discharge from any part of the operation?
❑ Yes
❑ NA
❑ NE
an observable adverse im acts or otential adverse impacts to the waters
3. Were there y p P
❑ Yes
[ o 0 NA
❑ NE
of the State other than from a discharge?
Page I of 3 511212020 Continued

Facility Number: - 1 Date of Inspection: id 2
a
Waste Collection & Treatment
4. Is storage capacity (structural plus storm storage plus heavy rainfall) less than adequate?
❑ Yes
0 No ❑ NA
❑ NE
a. If yes, is waste level into the structural freeboard?
❑ Yes
❑ No Ej NA
❑ 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
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
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 environmenhreat, notify DWR
7. Do any of the structures need maintenance or improvement?
❑ Yes
/Ilt
❑ NA
❑ NE
8. Do any of the structures lack adequate markers as required by the permit?
❑ Yes
No ❑ NA
P
❑ 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
6JZo ❑ 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):
13. Soil Type(s):
14. Do the receiving crops differ from those designated in the CAWMP?
❑ Yes
E] Noo ❑ NA
❑ NE
15. Does the receiving crop and/or land application site need improvement?
❑ Yes
o ❑ NA
❑ NE
16. Did the facility fail to secure and/or operate per the irrigation design or wettable
❑ Yes
[ No ❑ NA
❑ NE
acres determination?
N
17. Does the facility lack adequate acreage for land application?
❑ Yes
❑ NA
❑ NE
18. Is there a lack of properly operating waste application equipment?
❑ Yes
VNo ❑ NA
❑ NE
Required Records & Documents
19. Did the facility fail to have the Certificate of Coverage & Permit readily available?
❑ Yes
2(No ❑ NA
❑ NE
20. Does the facility fail to have all components of the CAWMP readily available? If yes, check
❑ Yes
TNo ❑ 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
E!fNo ❑ 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
Ko ❑ NA
❑ NE
23. If selected, did the facility fail to install and maintain rainbreakers on irrigation equipment?
❑ Yes
�o ❑ NA
❑ NE
Page 2 of 3 511212020 Continued
.`

Facility Number: - Date of Inspection: 10 2
24. Did the facility fail to calibrate waste application equipment as required by the permit? [:]Yes No ❑�NA
❑ NE
25. Is the facilityout of compliance with permit conditions related to sludge? If yes, check ❑ Yes ❑ No ❑ NE
P
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?
❑ NE
❑ Yes No ❑�NA
27. Did the facilityfail to secure a phosphorus loss assessments (PLAT) certification?
P p
❑ Yes ❑ No Q ❑ NE
Other Issues
/No
28. Did the facility fail to properly dispose of dead animals with 24 hours and/or document
❑ Yes 0 ❑ 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 Zf No ❑ NA ❑ NE
If yes, contact a regional Air Quality representative immediately.
/No
30. Did the facility fail to notify the Regional Office of emergency situations as required by the
❑ Yes ❑ 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 ONo ❑ NA ❑ NE
33. Did the Reviewer/Inspector fail to discuss review/inspection with an on -site representative?
❑ Yes W ❑ NA ❑ NE
34. Does the facility require a follow-up visit by the same agency?
❑ Yes Vf No ❑ NA ❑ NE
Comments .(refer to question #): Explain any YES answers and/or any additional recommendations or any other comments.
6e'drawings of facility to better explain situations (use additional pages as necessary).
�ev�ewe� I��Sf�23 -a!C
Reviewer/Inspector Name: Phone:
Reviewer/Inspector Signature: Date: / b/
Page 3 of 3 5/ /2020