510035_Compliance Evaluation Inspection_20210913

JEM!vislon of Water Resources
Facility Number S� - 0 Division of Soil and Water Conservation
0 Other Agency
Type of Visit: Compli ce 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: • Ari`ival Time: t + eparture Time: Elpou j_,4b" Region:
Farm Name: �t� �+a�+ W1 TK 'Y^e_*-S&mot Owner Email:
Owner Name: Z- Phone:
Z
Mailing Address: fg p
Physical Address:
Facility Contact: 47 1 Title: Phone: Clio ie g 66
Onsite Representative: Integrator:
/ 11��1 1
Certified Operator: '" Z Z " (0 - .5 `4 ( Certification Number:
Back-up Operator: Certification Number:
Location of Farm: Latitude: S 24 3 5-46 Longitude: w'} V. 57-1 O 1 S_
Design Current Design Current
Swine Capacity Pop. Wet Poultry Capacity Pop. Cattle
Wean to Finish
Wean to Feeder
Feeder to Finish me4to 2
Farrow to Wean
Farrow to Feeder
Farrow to Finish
Gilts
Boars
Other
Layer
Non -Layer
Pullets
Poults
Design Current
Design Current
Capacity Pop.
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
ETNo
❑ NA
❑ NE
Discharge originated at: ❑ Structure ❑ Application Field ❑ Other:
a. Was the conveyance man-made?
[]Yes
[:]No
❑ NA
❑ NE
b. Did the discharge reach waters of the State? (If yes, notify DWR)
❑ Yes
[]No
❑ NA
❑ 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
2!rNo
❑ NA
❑ NE
3. Were there any observable adverse impacts or potential adverse impacts to the waters
❑ Yes
ZNo
❑ NA
0 NE
of the State other than from a discharge?
Page I of 3 511212020 Continued

Facility Number: jDate of inspection: I Z�
Waste Collection &Treatment
4. Is storage capacity (structural plus storm storage plus heavy rainfall) less than adequate? ❑ Yes Jam-' " - ❑ NA ❑ NE
a. If yes, is waste level into the structural freeboard? ❑ Yes 0 No ❑ NA ❑ NE
Structure 1 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 .210'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 ❑ YesZNo ❑ 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 ❑ NA ❑ NE
8. Do any of the structures lack adequate markers as required by the permit? ❑ Yes 2r'go ❑ 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 ;DN ❑ NA ❑ NE
maintenance or improvement?
Waste Application
10. Are there any required buffers, setbacks, or compliance alternatives that need
❑ Yes [2'No
❑ NA
❑ NE
maintenance or improvement?
11. Is there evidence of incorrect land application? If yes, check the appropriate box below. ❑ Yes P�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 ,0'No
❑ NA
❑ NE
15. Does the receiving crop and/or land application site need improvement?
❑ Yes L],No
❑ NA
❑ NE
16. Did the facility fail to secure and/or operate per the irrigation design or wettable ❑ Yes [:] do
❑ NA
❑ NE
acres determination?
17. Does the facility lack adequate acreage for land application?
❑ Yes,Q'No
❑ NA
❑ NE
18. Is there a lack of properly operating waste application equipment?
❑ Yes 2-No
❑ NA
❑ NE
Reauired Records & Documents
19. Did the facility fail to have the Certificate of Coverage & Permit readily available? ❑ Yes E?JlNo ❑ NA ❑ NE
20. Does the facility fail to have all components of the CAWMP readily available? If yes, check ❑ Yes 12ONo ❑ 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. &9511cs .6 "0 ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Waste Application ❑ Weekly Freeboard ❑ Waste Analysis ❑ Soil Analysis ❑ Waste Transfers ❑ Weather Code
❑ RainfallAStocking ❑ Crop Yield ❑ I20 Minute Inspections ❑ Monthly and I" Rainfall Inspections ❑ Sludge Survey
22. Did the facility fail to install and maintain a rain gauge? ❑ Yes O o 0 NA ❑ NE
23. If selected, did the facility fail to install and maintain rainbreakers on irrigation equipment? ❑ Yes PK0
❑ NA ❑ NE
Page 2 of 3 21412015 Continued

Facili Number: -15 jDate of Inspection:
24. Did the facility fail to calibrate waste application equipment as required by the permit? ❑ Yes ;21 No
25. Is the facility out of compliance with permit conditions related to sludge? If yes, check ❑ Yes No
the appropriate box(es) below. 7
❑ 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: �vN
26. Did the facility fail to provide documentation of an actively certified operator in charge? ❑ Yes o
27. Did the facility fail to secure a phosphorus loss assessments (PLAT) certification? ❑ Yes L2'1o
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)
3 I. Do subsurface the 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? ❑ Yes oNo ❑ 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? ElYes No ❑ NA ❑ NE
Comments (refer to question #): 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).
❑NA ❑NE
❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Yes �2Ro ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Yes PONo ❑ NA ❑ NE
[:]Yes 4-No [DNA ❑ NE
❑ Yes ?�No ❑ NA ❑ NE
3, Z 0 2,p C Z 0 2 3
b r� �, 1�-• 1 8, 1 Z, Z 1 �vE Z o23
510�e 5Ly"cy I �if°1• 2-nz)
0
r �
Z, 7r6
L
'�-ece , 5 #,a r- tV1
Reviewerlinspector Name: �I !w'bnr l S S" 1� �►'►�t
Revieweriinspector Signature:
Page 3 of 3
t'l 89 Mc o, lsa"�.
Z9 Zl✓ 'D 0 E Z o Z, Z,
,,j e- S av1,4k j S t S
rkj 6
(/
� oo
G TA4,j *� 5-72(o`�6'
Phone: + ( -- M r ^ Z 7
Date: 211 7' t
F 511212020
�.�-, �e+� Cz�tN�,�L 2�3� - �20 L
7