310378_Compliance Evaluation Inspection_20231010

V)
® Division of Water Resources
Facility Ndnnber 0 Division of Soil and Water Couservation� .
0 Other Agency
type of Visit: ® Compliance Inspection 0 Operation Review 0 Structure Evaluation 0 Technical Assistance
2eason for Visit: ® Routine 0 Complaint 0 Follow-up 0 Referral 0 Emergency 0 Other 0 Denied Access
Date of Visit: 110 jig 2 Arrival Time: Departure Time: 1 v U County:
Farm Name: Owner Email:
Owner Name:
Mailing Address:
Physical Address:
Phone:
Facility Contact: Title:
Onsite Representative:
Certified Operator:
Back-up Operator:
Location of Farm:
Design , Current,,
Swine -Capacity Pop.
Wean to Finish SO
Wean to Feeder
Feeder to Finish
Farrow to Wean
Farrow to Feeder
Farrow to Finish
Gilts
Other
Latitude:
Integrator:
Region:
Phone: Q 00 7—es a,Sk,�r
Certification Number:
Certification Number:
Design Current
Wet Poultry
Capacity Pop.
Layer
Non -Layer
Design Current
Dry Poultrv-
Capacity Pon'.
Layers
Non -Layers
Pullets
Turkeys
Turkey Poults
Other
Longitude:
Design,, Current
"Cattle Capacity Pop. o `,
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
Z No
❑ NA
❑ NE
Discharge originated at: ❑ Structure ❑ Application Field ❑ Other:
a. Was the conveyance man-made?
❑ Yes
❑ No
❑lA
❑ NE
b. Did the discharge reach waters of the State? (If yes, notify DWR)
❑ Yes
❑ No
E�<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
❑ No
0 NA
0 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
2ZEj
NA
❑ NE
of the State other than from a discharge?
Page 1 of 3 511212020 Continued

Facility Number: 3 A - :S-1f( jDate of Inspection:
Waste Collection & Treatment
4. Is storage capacity (structural plus storm storage plus heavy rainfall) less than adequate?
❑ Yes
,--,,�
[4o
❑ NA
❑ NE
a. If yes, is waste level into the structural freeboard?
❑ Yes
❑ No
❑r1gA
❑ NE
Structure 1 Structure 2 Structure 3 Structure 4
Structure 5
Structure 6
Identifier:
Spillway?:
Designed Freeboard (in):
Observed Freeboard (in): 14
5. Are there any immediate threats to the integrity of any of the structures observed?
❑ Yes
Ea<o
❑ 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 environmental threat, 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?
❑ Yes
VNo
❑ 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
EONo
❑ 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
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
❑ 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
No
❑ NA
❑ NE
acres determination?
17. Does the facility lack adequate acreage for land application?
❑ Yes
Ea/No
❑ 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?
❑
,--,,�
Ea 5�o.DYes
NA
❑ NE
20. Does the facility fail to have all components of the CAWMP readily available? If yes, check
❑ Yes
L215o
❑ 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. es ❑ No ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Waste Applic ton ❑ eekly Freeboard ❑ Waste Analysis ❑ Soil Analysis ❑ Waste Transfers ❑ Weather Code
❑ Rainfall Stocking E 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 [� No ❑ NA ❑ NE
23. If selected, did the facility fail to install and maintain rainbreakers on irrigation equipment? ❑ Yes 2/No ❑ NA ❑ NE
Page 2 of 3 511212020 Continued

Facility Number: 31 - 37 Date of Inspection: 1 10
24. Did the facility fail to calibrate waste application equipment as required by the permit? ❑ Yes`; No ❑ NA ❑ NE
25. Is the facility out of compliance with permit conditions related to sludge? If yes, check ❑ Yes 64o ❑ 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 ❑ No �j(NA ❑ NE
Other Issues
28. Did the facility fail to properly dispose of dead animals with 24 hours and/or document ❑ Yes [To ❑ 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 CfNo ❑ 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 EE f E
❑ Application Field ❑ Lagoon/Storage Pond ❑ Other:
32. Were any additional problems noted which cause non-compliance of the permit or CAW TP?
33. Did the Reviewer/Inspector fail to discuss review/inspection with an on -site representative?
34. Does the facility require a follow-up visit by the same agency?
��OF j�i�
S�o C'F wJ a��z z
Reviewer/Inspector Name:
Reviewer/Inspector Signature:
Page 3 of 3
additiomalE°pages a ec sMY):
C(� re v-,,, `7 4VI
❑ Yes
❑ Yes
❑ Yes
0 No ❑ NA ❑ NE
B ' ❑ NA ❑ NE
Z❑ NA ❑ NE
oe&kA
Phone: 9y a S zolj 10
Date: ) 0/ 1 0 % �3
511212020