310624_Compliance Evaluation Inspection_20230822

�-r
0 Division of Water Resoarces
Facility Number l _ (� 2 0 Division of Soil and Water Conservation=
Zx
0 Other Agency tl
Type of Visit: 0 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: r6r2qu Arrival Time: Departure Time: U t_yU County:
Farm Name: ��! q to ��� Owner Email:
Owner Name: Phone:
Mailing Address:
Region:
Physical Address:
Facility Contact: Title: Phone: C1 ro 3 f-iv 0 ,?`3 3
Onsite Representative: ��rC�tn W Integrator:
Certified Operator: Certification Number:
Back-up Operator: Certification Number:
Location of Farm: Latitude: Longitude:
Swine°- - t
Wean to Finish
Wean to Feeder L
Feeder to Finish
Farrow to Wean
Farrow to Feeder
Farrow to Finish
I 1Boars
Other ,-.. _ .
Curren tx Design Cui reu# Design Current
Pop Wet Poultry Capacity Top CattleCapacity - Pop:
- = - =
i `Resign Current.,' :
Drv'`Poultry � )Cabacity .Pon
Layers
Non -Layers
Pullets
Turkeys
Turkey Poults
Other
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
0 No
❑ NA
❑ NE
Discharge originated at: ❑ Structure ❑ Application Field ❑ Other:
a. Was the conveyance man-made?
❑ Yes
❑ No
EffNA
❑ NE
b. Did the discharge reach waters of the State? (If yes, notify DWR)
❑ Yes
❑ No
[7fNA
❑ 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
o
fNo
❑ NA
0 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 1 of 3
511212020 Continued

Facility Number: - (o Date of Inspection:
Waste Collection & Treatment
4. Is storage capacity (structural plus storm storage plus heavy rainfall) less than adequate? ❑ Yes n No ❑ NA
D NE
a. If yes, is waste level into the structural freeboard? ❑Yes ❑ No '— A ❑ NE
Structure 1 Structure 2 Structure 3 Structure 4 Structure 5 Structure 6
Identifier: Al� t
Spillway?:
Designed Freeboard (in):
Observed Freeboard (in):
5. Are there any immediate threats to the integrity of any of the structures observed? ❑ Yes YNo ❑ 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 environment reat, notify DWR
7. Do any of the structures need maintenance or improvement? ❑ Yes o ❑ NA ❑ NE
8. Do any of the structures lack adequate markers as required by the permit? ❑ Yes N ❑ 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
py<o ❑ NA
❑ NE
maintenance or improvement?
11. Is there evidence of incorrect land application? If yes, check the appropriate box below.
❑ Yes
�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
U<O ❑ 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
o ❑ NA
❑ NE
acres determination?
17. Does the facility lack adequate acreage for land application?
❑ Yes
No ❑ NA
❑ NE
18. Is there a lack of properly operating waste application equipment?
❑ Yes
o ❑ NA
❑ NE
Required Records & Documents
19. Did the facility fail to have the Certificate of Coverage & Permit readily available?
❑ Yes
o ❑ NA
❑ NE
20. Does the facility fail to have all components of the CAWMP readily available? If yes, check
❑ Yes
No ❑ 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 VNo ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Waste Application ❑ Weekly Freeboard ❑ Waste Analysis ❑ Soil Analysis ❑ Waste Transfers ❑ Weather Code
❑ Rainfall ❑ Stocking ❑ Crop Yield ❑ 120 Minute Inspections ❑ Monthly and I" 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 ❑ NA ❑ NE
Page 2 of 3 511212020 Continued

Facility Number: 7j 1 - 6 '1-%1 1 1 Date of Inspection:
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 61No ❑ 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 ❑ >xl ❑ NE
27. Did the facility fail to secure a phosphorus loss assessments (PLAT) certification? ❑ Yes ❑ No EfNA ❑ NE
Other Issues
28. Did the facility fail to properly dispose of dead animals with 24 hours and/or document
❑ Yes E J4 ❑ NA ❑ NE
and report mortality rates that were higher than normal?
ZNo
29. At the time of the inspection did the facility pose an odor or air quality concern?
❑ Yes ❑ 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 M No ❑ NA ❑ NE
permit? (i.e., discharge, freeboard problems, over -application)
d
31. Do subsurface tile drains exist at the facility? If yes, check the appropriate box below.
❑ Yes ❑ No ❑ NA 2
❑ Application Field ❑ Lagoon/Storage Pond ❑ Other:
32. Were any additional problems noted which cause non-compliance of the permit or CAWMP?
❑ Yes L� 1V ❑ NA ❑ NE
33. Did the Reviewer/Inspector fail to discuss review/inspection with an on -site representative?
❑ Yes LEI ° ❑ NA ❑ NE
34. Does the facility require a follow-up visit by the same agency?
❑ Yes LNo ❑ NA ❑ NE
Comments (refer to.questton #): Explain aay�F ES-answers'aud/or any,additional recommend -bons of other comments:;
Use drawin s of-facjli fo_better,ex lain situations° use>addit h' l'pages"as`necessjry).
g tJ'� - A i�_
S,,� s 6--f, I -e- _�-
Reviewer/Inspector Name:
Reviewer/Inspector Signature:
Page 3 of 3
ok_�� �ZY?
Phone: ' S 2-63s-J D .
Date: / l 2 21 ?-,3
511212020