960056_Compliance Evaluation Inspection_20241001

Division of Water Resources
Facility Number 0 Division of Soil and Water Conservation
0 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: Arrival Time: a�1'�� Departure Time: County: 'iL Region: K/4 ((' z�t
Farm Name: `�
`i t f'',� q oC r V✓_)
Owner Name: �(t.�_�_ P'i: 6 - I
Mailing Address:
Physical Address:
Facility Contact:
Onsite Representative:
Title:
Owner Email:
Phone:
Phone:
Integrator: V.v_w Fee vv�-S i. C,
Certified Operator: (Y1 � G'kc? '(1, 1 Y. 1,c v t_i'q Certification Number: ) ` j (I , �2
Back-up Operator:
Location of Farm:
Swine
Wean to I
Wean to I
Feederto
Farrow to
Farrow to
Farrow to
Other
Certification Number:
Latitude: Longitude:
Design Current Design Current
Capacity Pop. Wet Poultry Capacity Pop.
Layer
I INon-Layer
Design Current
Dry Poultry Capacity Poo.
Layers
Non -Layers
Pullers
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 Slate? (If yes, notify DWR)
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)
2. Is there evidence of a past discharge from any part of the operation?
3. Were there any observable adverse impacts or potential adverse impacts to the waters
ofthe State other than from a discharge?
Design Current
Cattle Capacity Pop.
Dairy Cow
Dairy Calf
Dairy Heifer
Dry Cow
Non -Dairy
Beef Stocker
Beef Feeder
Beef Brood Cow
❑ Yes
'A No
❑ NA
❑ NE
❑ Yes
❑ No
❑ NA
❑ NE
❑ Yes
❑ No
❑ NA
❑ NE
❑ Yes
❑ No
❑ NA
❑ NE
❑ Yes
�,No
❑ NA
❑ NE
❑ Yes
� No
❑ NA
❑ NE
Page 1 of 3 511212020 Continued

Facility Number: Date of Inspection: 0 / 2 p
Waste Collection & Treatment �q
4. Is storage capacity (structural plus storm storage plus heavy rainfall) less than adequate? ❑ Yes VNI No ❑ NA ❑ NE
a. If yes, is waste level into the structural freeboard? ❑ Yes ❑ No ❑ NA ❑ NE
Structure I 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 JA 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 1;!j 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 10 No ❑ 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 [4 No ❑ NA
❑ NE
maintenance or improvement?
Waste Application
10. Are there any required buffers, setbacks, or compliance alternatives that need
❑ Yes [A No ❑ NA
❑ NE
maintenance or improvement?
11. Is there evidence of incorrect land application? If yes, check the appropriate box below.
❑ Yes (D 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?
15. Does the receiving crop and/or land application site need improvement?
16. Did the facility fail to secure and/or operate per the irrigation design or wettable
acres determination?
17. Does the facility lack adequate acreage for land application?
18. Is there a lack of properly operating waste application equipment?
Required Records & Documents
19. Did the facility fail to have the Certificate of Coverage & Permit readily available?
20. Does the facility fail to have all components of the CAWMP readily available? If yes, check
the appropriate box.
❑ WUP ❑Checklists ❑ Design ❑ Maps ❑ Lease Agreements
❑ Yes L No
❑ Yes ONo
❑ Yes ®No
❑ Yes W No
❑ Yes 0 No
❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Yes
NfNo
❑ NA
❑ NE
❑ Yes
&rNo
❑ NA
❑ NE
[—]Other:
21. Does record keeping need improvement? If yes, check the appropriate box below. [—]Yes K N
❑ Waste Application ❑ Weekly Freeboard ❑ Waste Analysis ❑ Soil Analysis ❑ Waste Transfers
❑ Rainfall ❑ Stocking ❑ Crop Yield ❑ 120 Minute Inspections ❑ Monthly and I" Rainfall Inspections
22. Did the facility fail to install and maintain a rain gauge?
23. If selected, did the facility fail to install and maintain rainbreakers on irrigation equipment?
❑ Yes 0No
❑ Yes � No
o ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Weather Code
❑ Sludge Survey
❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ NA ❑ NE
Page 2 of 3 511212020 Continued

Facili Number: Date of Inspection: p
d�
24. Did the facility fail to calibrate waste application equipment as required by the permit?
❑ Yes
[J .No
❑ NA ❑ NE
25. Is the facility out of compliance with permit conditions related to sludge? If yes, check
❑ Yes
E,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?
❑ Yes
0 No
❑ NA ❑ NE
27. Did the facility fail to secure a phosphorus loss assessments (PLAT) certification?
❑ Yes
$D No
❑ NA ❑ NE
Other Issues
�f
28. Did the facility fail to properly dispose of dead animals with 24 hours and/or document
❑ Yes
I d No
❑ 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
IM 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
PjNo
❑ 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
fA No
❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Application Field ❑ Lagoon/Storage Pond ❑ Other:
32. Were any additional problems noted which cause non-compliance of the permit or CAWNIP?
❑ Yes
[M No
❑ NA ❑ NE
33. Did the Reviewer/Inspector fail to discuss review/inspection with an on -site representative?
❑ Yes
No
❑ NA ❑ NE
34. Does the facility require a follow-up visit by the same agency?
❑ Yes
No
❑ NA ❑ NE
Comments (refer to question tt): Explain any YES answers and/or any additional recommendations or any other comments.
Use drawings
''of facility to better explain situations (use additional pages as necessary)..
/
lvaS-1-� a�LJS(S ��//3/a���N nf= &5_ I �FsU6VSkkjS
OQ-1,: a2Y If:- 1•P7
3)-2-9404aV Ar 3%
1/k/ 2oayO�I=lra�
00•.G11 o-+t nl i 12 /.2a-/aa2-3
,Slv'(r Sur Ax /a- 3
-T%,;a,=2,1
Reviewer/Inspector Name: (Q'ld. o
Reviewer/InspectorSignoture: mr
Page 3 of 3
Phone: /b) V_? -�
Date: oC
5112/2020