310467_Compliance Evaluation Inspection_20241031

Facility Number © -
QYDivision of Water Resources
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: @r1koutine 0 Complaint 0 Follow-up 0 Referral 0 Emergency 0 Other 0 Denied Access
Date of Visit: D ?q Arrival Time::/ •DO Departure Time: I County: IIO
Farm Name: � �� �AY mS Ifs— l.� V, K— S Owner Email:
Owner Name:
Mailing Address:
Physical Address:
Facility Contact:
Title:
Phone:
Onsite Representative: (�& h!g
Certified Operator:
Back-up Operator:
Location of Farm:
Swine
Latitude:
Phone:
Integrator:
Region:
Certification Number: g q 6 6 j L(
Certification Number:
Design Current
Design Current
Capacity Pop.
Wet Poultry Capacity Pop.
2
22I
11-ayer
Non -Layer
Wean to Finish
Wean to Feeder
Feeder to Finish
ITBO
IgLkG
Farrow to Wean
Farrow to Feeder
Farrow to Finish
Gilts
Boars
Other
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)?
Longitude:
Design Current
Cattle Capacity Pop.
Dairy Cow
Dairy Calf
Dairy Heifer
Dry Cow
Non -Dairy
Beef Stocker
Beef Feeder
Beef Brood Cow
❑ Yes try{ No ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Yes ❑ No
❑ Yes ❑ No
❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ NA ❑ NE
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? El Yes 117� No ❑ NA ❑ NE
3. Were there any observable adverse impacts or potential adverse impacts to the waters ❑ Yes g No ❑ NA ❑ NE
of the State other than from a discharge?
Page I of 3 511212020 Continued

Facili Number: Date of Inspection:
Waste Collection & Treatment
4. Is storage capacity (structural plus storm storage plus heavy rainfall) less than adequate?
❑ Yes
9No
❑ 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: �_ 2
Spillway?:
Designed Freeboard (in): Ict. 5 a • 5
Observed Freeboard (in): :3 �— 3
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
WNo
❑ 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?
Ui Yes
❑ No
❑ NA
❑ NE
8. Do any of the structures lack adequate markers as required by the permit?
❑ Yes
L'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
No
❑ NA
❑ NE
maintenance or improvement?
Waste Application
10. Are there any required buffers, setbacks, or compliance alternatives that need
❑ Yes
O No
❑ NA
❑ NE
maintenance or improvement?
11. Is there evidence of incorrect land application? If yes, check the appropriate box below.
❑ Yes
d�W 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
g No
❑ 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
[4 No
❑ NA
❑ NE
acres determination?
17. Does the facility lack adequate acreage for land application?
❑ Yes
5j No
`E�
❑ NA
❑ NE
18. Is there a lack of properly operating waste application equipment?
❑ Yes
No
❑ NA
❑ NE
Required Records & Documents
19. Did the facility fail to have the Certificate of Coverage & Permit readily available?
❑ Yes
Ef No
❑ NA
❑ NE
20. Does the facility fail to have all components of the CAWMP readily available? If yes, check
❑ Yes
R 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
❑ No
❑ NA
❑ NE
❑ Waste Application ❑ Weekly Freeboard ❑ Waste Analysis ❑ Soil Analysis
❑ Waste Transfers
❑ Weather Code
❑ Rainfall ❑Stocking ❑ 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
0 No
❑ NA
❑ NE
23. If selected, did the facility fail to install and maintain rainbreakers on irrigation equipment?
❑ Yes
ENo
❑ NA
❑ NE
Page 2 of 3
511212020 Continued

Facility Number: Date of Inspection: tJ Q
24. Did the facility fail to calibrate waste application equipment as required by the permit? ❑ Yes allo ❑ 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 PDA 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 JXNo ❑ NA ❑ NE
27. Did the facility fail to secure a phosphorus loss assessments (PLAT) certification? ❑ Yes ❑ No U'NA ❑ NE
Other Issues
28. Did the facility fail to properly dispose of dead animals with 24 hours and/or document ❑ Yes V] 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?
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?
ter to question #): Explain any YES answers and/or any addii
of facility to better explain situations (use additional pages as
S ud� of ZP) 7j-
�iyh Z1Z1zz's
boa 5j ofis
Reviewer/Inspector Name:
❑ Yes M No ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Yes 19 No ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Yes a No ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Yes �) No
❑ Yes No
❑ Yes No
or any
4 I nKw kloov) Wa Ns
Reviewer/Inspector Signature:�
Page 3 of 3
❑NA ❑NE
❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ NA ❑ NE
comments.
Phone: 1 6 W
Date: b Z
511212020