310516_Compliance Evaluation Inspection_20230726

0 Division of Water Resources 1 LL
Facility N tuber t � I (, U Di, vision of Soil`and water Couservation
O Other Agency
Type of Visit: ® 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:
Departure Time: © County:
Farm Name:
�,.,�
;.� �, G�'M Owner Email:
Owner Name:
Phone:
Mailing Address:
Physical Address:
Facility Contact: �r i c�� �j,r�s a, j Title:
Onsite Representative:
Certified Operator:
Back-up Operator:
Location of Farm:
Latitude:
Phone:
Integrator:
Certification Number:
Certification Number:
Longitude:
Region:
`Design ;Current .
Design
Cumreut.
D_ esign Current
Swine
;Capacity',Pop
Wet Poultry '
Capacity
Pop: ,
Cattle
E Capacity
b
Wean to Finish
23A
Layer
Wean to Feeder
Non -Layer
Feeder to Finish
-
Farrow to Wean
Design-'
Current_
Farrow to Feeder
Dry,Poultry';' 4
Capacity
Pop. '
Farrow to Finish
Gilts
Boars
=_
OtherAAM
Layers
Non -Layers
Pullets
Turkeys
Turkey Points
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
No
❑ NA
❑ NE
Discharge originated at: ❑ Structure ❑ Application Field ❑ Other:
a. Was the conveyance man-made?
❑ Yes
❑ NorA
❑ NE
b. Did the discharge reach waters of the State? (If yes, notify DWR)
❑ 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
❑ NA
❑ NE
2. Is there evidence of a past discharge from any part of the operation?
❑ Yes
❑ NA
❑ NE
3. Were there any observable adverse impacts or potential adverse impacts to the waters
❑ Yes
No
❑ NA
❑ NE
of the State other than from a discharge?
Page I of 3 5/12/2020 Continued

Facility Number: jDate of Inspection: 'j 2.
Waste Collection & Treatment
4. Is storage capacity (structural plus storm storage plus heavy rainfall) less than adequate?
❑ Yes
No
❑ NA
❑ NE
a. If yes, is waste level into the structural freeboard?
❑ Yes
❑ No
6-<A
❑ NE
Structure I Structure 2 Structure 3 Structure 4
Structure 5
Structure 6
Identifier:
Spillway?:
Designed Freeboard (in):
C
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
E]-<o
❑ 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?
El Yes
C"'o
0 NA
❑ NE
8. Do any of the structures lack adequate markers as required by the permit?
❑ Yes
[' To
❑ 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
To
❑ NA
❑ NE
maintenance or improvement?
Waste Application
10. Are there any required buffers, setbacks, or compliance alternatives that need
❑ Yes
C3 No
❑ NA
❑ NE
t t9
mam enance or tmprovemen .
11. Is there evidence of incorrect land application? If yes, check the appropriate box below. ❑ Yes To ❑ 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
D No
❑ NA
❑ NE
15. Does the receiving crop and/or land application site need improvement?
❑ Yes
N
❑ NA
❑ NE
16. Did the facility fail to secure and/or operate per the irrigation design or wettable
❑ Yes
YNo
❑ NA
❑ NE
acres determination?
17. Does the facility lack adequate acreage for land application?
❑ Yes
L� 1V
❑ NA
❑ NE
18. Is there a lack of properly operating waste application equipment?
❑ Yes
L � L�0
❑ NA
❑ NE
Required Records & Documents
19. Did the facility fail to have the Certificate of Coverage & Permit readily available?
❑ Yes
roo
❑ 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. Ell/Yes Rl o ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Waste Applicati ❑ Weekly Freeboard ❑ Waste Analysis ❑ Soil Analysis ❑ Waste Transfers ❑ Weather Code
❑ Rainfall tocking ❑ Crop Yield ❑ 120 Minute Inspections ❑ Monthly and V Rainfall Inspections ❑ Sludge Survey
22. Did the facility fail to install and maintain a rain gauge? ❑ Yes o ❑ NA ❑ NE
23. If selected, did the facility fail to install and maintain rainbreakers on irrigation equipment? ❑ Yes No ❑ NA ❑ NE
Page 2 of 3 511212020 Continued

Facility Number: 3 1 - Date of Inspection:
24. Did the facility fail to calibrate waste application equipment as required by the permit? ❑ Yes 2No ❑ NA ❑ NE
25. Is the facility out of compliance with permit conditions related to sludge? If yes, check 0 Yes �zo ❑ 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
E21<o ❑ 7XA
❑ NE
27. Did the facility fail to secure a phosphorus loss assessments (PLAT) certification?
❑ Yes
❑ No
❑ 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
i 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 E�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
ENE
❑ 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 o ❑ NA
❑ NE
34. Does the facility require a follow-up visit by the same agency?
❑ Yes ❑ NA
YNo
❑ NE
Comments (referto question #): Explain a`ny YES ansv++ers andfar any additional.recommendations or;any other°comments;'.
Use drawing =of facility'tobetter explain situations (use additional pages -as necessaiy). .
c,c
I'
Reviewer/Inspector Name: � � �
Phone:
Reviewer/Inspector Signature:
Date: 1�3
Page 3 of 3
S/ /2020