310655_Compliance Evaluation Inspection_20230925

e — i b
_ Division:bf WaterResources
k+ acality �Tuuaber - � G Dr�visio of Soiland' W C�.'at Consern vatio
Q 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: i 2, Arrival Time: Departure Time: County: y;ltegion:
Farm Name: � Owner Email: }
q 7
Owner Name: Phone:
Mailing Address:
Physical Address:
Facility Contact: 7;­6 y J p o, Title:
Onsite Representative:
Certified Operator:
Back-up Operator:
Location of Farm:
Design
Swine "Caeit;
Wean to Finish
Wean to Feeder
Feeder to Finish
Farrow to Wean
Farrow to Feeder
Farrow to Finish
Gilts
Boars
Latitude:
Phone: `:1103 8-543 9-
Integrator:
Certification Number:
Certification Number:
Longitude:
Current Design Current Design Current
Po „ Wet Poclltry = `Capacity Pop Cattle Capacity leap
p
Layer
Non -Layer
D
Desagn Current
Dry Poultry Ca pacit , I'.o
t?ther
Layers
Non -Layers
Pullets
Turkeys
Turkey Poults
Other
Discharges and Stream Impacts
1. Is any discharge observed from any part of the operation?
Discharge originated at: ❑ Structure ❑ Application Field ❑ Other:
a. Was the conveyance man-made?
b. Did the discharge reach waters of the State? (If yes, notify DWR)
Dairy Cow
ETE�
Dairy Calf
Dairy Heifer
Dry Cow
Non -Dairy
Beef Stocker
Beef Feeder
Beef Brood Cow
0 Yes E NA ❑ NE
0 Yes ❑ No r!jWA ❑ NE
❑ Yes ❑ No ❑� ❑ 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 NE
22. Is there evidence of a past discharge from any part of the operation? ❑Yeso NA ❑ NE
3. Were there any observable adverse impacts or potential adverse impacts to the waters ❑ Yes o�❑ NA ❑ NE
of the State other than from a discharge?
Page 1 of 3 , 511212020 Continued

Facility Number: \ - io J Date of Inspection: a
Waste Collection & Treatment
4. Is storage capacity (structural plus storm storage plus heavy rainfall) less than adequate?
❑ Yes
Er<o ❑ NA
❑ NE
a. If yes, is waste level into the structural freeboard?
❑ Yes
[—]No 6--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
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
To ❑ 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 enviromental
threat, notify DWR
7. Do any of the structures need maintenance or improvement?
Yesn
M/<oo❑ NA
❑ NE
8. Do any of the structures lack adequate markers as required by the permit?
❑ Yes
❑ X6 ❑ 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
Q No ❑ NA
❑ NE
maintenance or improvement?
Waste Application
10. Are there any required buffers, setbacks, or compliance alternatives that need
❑ Yes
To ❑ NA
❑ NE
maintenance or improvement?
11. Is there evidence of incorrect land application? If yes, check the appropriate box below.
[:]Yes
E 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 [a -Rio ❑ 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 ❑ No 0 NA ❑ NE
acres determination?
17. Does the facility lack adequate acreage for land application?
18. Is there a lack of properly operating waste application equipment?
❑ Yes [] No ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Yes [l"No ❑ NA ❑ NE
Required Records & Documents
19. Did the facility fail to have the Certificate of Coverage & Permit readily available? ❑ Yes ❑ No ❑ NA I �J 1VE
20. Does the facility fail to have all components of the CAWMP readily available? If yes, check [—]Yes [-]No ❑ NA
the appropriate box.
❑WUP ❑Checklists ❑Design ❑Maps ❑ Lease Agreements ❑Other:
21. Does record keeping need improvement? If yes, check the appropriate box below. ❑ Yes ❑ No
❑ Waste Application ❑ Weekly Freeboard ❑ Waste Analysis ❑ Soil Analysis ❑ Waste Transfers
❑ Rainfall ❑ Stocking ❑ Crop Yield ❑ 120 Minute Inspections ❑ Monthly and 1" Rainfall Inspections
22. Did the facility fail to install and maintain a rain gauge? ❑ Yes ❑ No
23. If selected, did the facility fail to install and maintain rainbreakers on irrigation equipment? [—]Yes ❑ No
❑ NA Q 1 `
❑ Weather Code
❑ Sludge Survey
❑ NA �NE -
❑ NA LJ NE
Page 2 of 3 511212020 Continued

Facility Number: Ni - G S ,S' I Date of inspection: q 7 - Z�3
24. Did the facility fail to calibrate waste application equipment as required by the permit? ❑ Yes ❑ No ❑ NA Ej'<E
25. Is the facility out of compliance with permit conditions related to sludge? If yes, check ❑ Yes ❑ No ❑ NA ElXlf
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 ❑ NAB
❑ NE
27. Did the facility fail to secure a phosphorus loss assessments (PLAT) certification?
❑ Yes
❑ No EXA
❑ NE
Other Issues
28. Did the facility fail to properly dispose of dead animals with 24 hours and/or document
❑ Yes
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
❑40_ ❑ 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
permit? (i.e., discharge, freeboard problems, over -application)
31. Do subsurface tile drains exist at the facility? If yes, check the appropriate box below.
❑ Application Field ❑ Lagoon/Storage Pond ❑ Other:
32. Were any additional problems noted which cause non-compliance of the permit or CAWMP?
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?
❑ Yes No ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Yes ❑ No ❑ NA u 1V
❑ Yes _ No ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Yes Ea<o ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Yes Z�U ❑ NA ❑ NE
3
Reviewer/Inspector Signature: Date: ZS`
Page 3 of 3 511212020