760003_Compliance Evaluation Inspection_20231229

Facility Number
Division of Water Resources
0 Division of Soil and Water Conservation
0 Other Agency
Type of Visit: T Compliance Inspection
Reason for Visit: (%,Routine 0 Compt
Operation Review 0 Structure Evaluation 0 Technical Assistance
0 Follow-up 0 Referral 0 Emergency 0 Other 0 Denied Access
Date of Visit: Arrival Time: Departure Time: Mi'E County: Region:
Farm Name: Owner L e d� (� Owner Email: \
Owner Name: ��Y 1 t t 1(� �J ��-� Phone:
Mailing Address: �� �� ` Y I t ►-\�\ \ r--=—1 ����5 EA)y_y1m1+ N G 2LII�144
Physical Address: L4 "1 QAy C_ -S�J
Facility Contact: C N( i—k 01 WAS
Title:
Onsite Representative:
Certified Operator:t� �--n U C-C-4-c'
Back-up Operator:
Location of Farm:
Ow,'y42'S
Ash CVDo r-d
Design Current
Swine Capacity Pop.
Wean to Finish
Wean to Feeder
Feeder to Finish
Farrow to Wean
Farrow to Feeder
Farrow to Finish
Gilts
Boars
Other
i2 am 2ur C a�t3 (
Phone:
Integrator:
Certification Number:
Certification Number:
Latitude: Longitude:
Design Current
Wet Poultry Capacity Pop.
Layer
Non -Layer
ury Poultry
Layers
Non -Layers
Pullets
Turkeys
Turkey Poults
Other
Design Current
Design Current
Cattle Capacity Pop.
Dairy Cow
Dairy Calf
Dairy Heifer
Dry Cow
Non -Dairy
Beef Stocker
Beef Feeder
Beef Brood Cow
Discharizes and Stream Impacts
1. Is any discharge observed from any part of the operation?
❑ Yes
0 No
❑ 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
No
❑ NA
❑ NE
3. Were there any observable adverse impacts or potential adverse impacts to the waters
El Yes
O(No
❑ NA
❑ NE
of the State other than from a discharge?
Page I of 3
5/12/2020 Continued

Facility Number: - 03 jDate of inspection:
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?
Ye ❑ No
❑ NA ❑ NE
Structure 1 Structure 2 Structure 3 Structure 4
Structure 5 Structure
6
Identifier: LQUJ-C Y
Spillway?:
Designed Freeboard (in): kw l Q�
Observed Freeboard (in): ' L
�of—the
5. Are there any immediate threats to the integrityofany 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 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?
fi� Yes [:]No
❑ NA ❑ NE
8. Do any of the structures lack adequate markers as required by the permit?
❑ Yes V No
❑ NA ❑ NE
(not applicable to roofed pits, dry stacks, and/or wet stacks)
YX
9. Does any part of the waste management system other than the waste structures require
❑ Yes YNo
❑ 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 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): C V\ C\ , �,SC L)C.
r
13. Soil Type(s):
14. Do the receiving crops differ from those designated in the CAWMP?
❑ Yes
No
❑ NA
❑ NE
15. Does the receiving crop and/or land application site need improvement?
❑ Yes
No
I
❑ 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
A No
❑ 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
No
❑ NA ❑ NE
20. Does the facility fail to have all components of the CAWMP readily available? If yes, check
❑ Yes
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
❑
[P Weather Code
ARainfall Stocking ❑Crop Yield �] 120 Minute Inspections 9�onthly Mand V Rainfall Inspections
ElSludge Survey
22. Did the facility fail to install and maintain a rain gauge?
❑ Yes
[:]No
❑ AN ❑ NE
23. If selected, did the facility fail to install and maintain rainbreakers on irrigation equipment?
[:]Yes
[:]No
NA ❑ T
Page 2 of 3
5/12/2 20 Conti,

Facility Number: - Date of Ins ection:
24. Did the facility fail to calibrate waste application equipment as required by the permit? ❑ Yes No
25. Is the facility out of compliance with permit conditions related to sludge? If yes, check ❑ Yes ❑ No
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 KNo
27. Did the facility fail to secure a phosphorus loss assessments (PLAT) certification? ❑ Yes � No
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?
❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ NA ❑ NE
❑NA ❑NE
❑ Yes ❑ No NA ❑ NE
❑Yes
( No
❑NA
❑NE
PY es
❑ No
❑ NA
❑ NE
❑ Yes
❑ No
❑ NA
❑ NE
❑ Yes
❑ No
❑ NA
❑ NE
❑ Yes
❑ No
❑ NA
❑ NE
❑ Yes
❑ 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).
fib. �Cks sk u�c�� Sieve
(c;t<<hrc�-��
n D
U� co,
k-b R -MGk_ i r eC (5 d5 Fbf
5� ►n CC �p�l
Reviewer/Inspector Name: b'wra_ cfkGi YAA (e y— Phone: 9)1 l Ib qt 06
Reviewer/Inspector Signature: Date:
Page 3 of 3
511212020