310136_Compliance Evaluation Inspection_20231102

U Division of Water Resources
Facility Number - �_3 !c 0 Division of Soil and Water Conservation
0 Other Agency
Inspection
for Visit: '0 Routine
Referral 0 Emer2encv 0 Other 0 Denied Access
Date of Visit: Arrival Time: L,
�� Departure Time: County: ^ Region: L
Farm Name: ►" l � �Oy. / C-� , 6L C
Owner Name: UIA D({ ( l
Mailing Address:
Physical Address:
Facility Contact:
Title:
Owner Email:
Phone:
,/
Onsite Representative: jQ()CZ,/7�1//L( r// u- Integrator:
Certified Operator: './d km /D 6a'Lv —
Back-up Operator:
Location of Farm:
Design Current
Swine Capacity Pop.
W an to Feeder
feeder to Finish
Farrow to Wean
Farrow to Feeder
Farrow to Finish
Gilts
Boars
Other
Phone:
Certification Number:
Certification Number:
Latitude: Longitude:
Design Current
Wet Poultry Capacity Pop.
Layer
Non -La er
Design Current
Dry Poultry Canacitv Pon.
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)
c. What is the estimated volume that reached waters of the State (gallons)?
17cAo 3
Design Current
Cattle Capacity Pop.
Dairy Cow
Dairy Calf
Dairy Heifer
Dry Cow
Non -Dairy
Beef Stocker
Beef Feeder
Beef Brood Cow
[—]Yes Y] No ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Yes ❑ No ❑ NA ❑ NE
[]Yes [:]No ❑ NA ❑ NE
d. Does the discharge bypass the waste management system? (If yes, notify DWR) ❑ Yes VNo
o ❑ 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 ❑ Yeso ❑ NA ❑ NE
of the State other than from a discharge?
Page I of 3 511212020 Continued

Facilit Number: -_j Date of Inspection: �(
Waste Collection & Treatment
4. Is storage capacity (structural plus storm storage plus heavy rainfall) less than adequate? ❑ Yes
a. If yes, is waste level into the structural freeboard? ❑ Yes
Structure 1 Structure 2 Structure 3
Identifier:
Spillway?:
Designed Freeboard (in):
Observed Freeboard (in):
U� 1o❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ No ❑ NA ❑ NE
Structure 4 Structure 5 Structure 6
5. Are there any immediate threats to the integrity of any of the structures observed?
(i.e., large trees, severe erosion, seepage, etc.)
6. Are there structures on -site which are not properly addressed and/or managed through a
waste management or closure plan?
❑ Yes No ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Yes No ❑ NA ❑ NE
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 P 9-0
❑ NA
❑ NE
8. Do any of the structures lack adequate markers as required by the permit?
❑ Yes �o
❑ 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 No
❑ NA
❑ NE
maintenance or improvement?
11. Is there evidence of incorrect land application? If yes, check the appropriate box below. ❑ Yes [3/No
❑ NA
❑ NE
❑ Excessive Pending ❑ 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
2N0
❑ 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?
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
VO
❑ NA
❑ NE
Required
19.
Records & Documents
Did the facility fail to have the Certificate of Coverage & Permit readily available?
❑ Yes
,--,��
❑ NA
NE
lJ%'PO
❑
20.
Does the facility fail to have all components of the CAWMP readily available? If yes, check
❑ Yes
]o
❑ 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
/
[ � o
❑ 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
ID'"o
❑ NA
❑ NE
23.
If selected, did the facility fail to install and maintain rainbreakers on irrigation equipment?
❑ Yes
[�]' uo
❑ NA
❑ NE
Page 2 of 3
511212020 Continued

Facility Number: q t 3 (o Date of Inspection:
24. Did the facility fail to calibrate waste application equipment as required by the permit? ❑ Yes L>16-" ❑ NA ❑ NE
25. Is the facility out of compliance with permit conditions related to sludge? If yes, check ❑ Yes No ❑ 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?
27. Did the facility fail to secure a phosphorus loss assessments (PLAT) certification?
Other Issues
28. Did the facility fail to properly dispose of dead animals with 24 hours and/or document
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?
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 l?_-_ o ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Yes ❑ No A ❑ NE
❑ Yes
o
❑ NA
❑ NE
❑ Yes
2<0
❑ NA
❑ NE
❑ Yes
No
❑ NA
❑ NE
❑ Yes 0 No ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Yes
❑ Yes
❑ Yes
IooVNo
❑ NA ❑ NE
NA ❑ NE
❑ NA ❑ NE
(Comments (refer to question #): Explain any YES answers and/or any additional recommendations or any other comments.
Use drawines of facility to better explain situations (use additional naves as necessarv).
Reviewer/Inspector Name:
Reviewer/Inspector Signature:
Phone: 9/� Sony N'A
Date: //443
Page 3 of 3 511212020