980001_Compliance Evaluation Inspection_20240221

fgW5 -UDivision of Water Resources
Facility Number ®- U 1 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: efRoutine 0 Complaint 0 Follow-up 0 Referral 0 Emergency 0 Other 0 Denied Access
Date of Visit: 2 i - z Arrival Time: Departure Time: ®County: lJ f ,• % Region: /Q A 6
•�jf
Farm Name: �' J-1 A (%�,�/� � p�5 lVf , u1k f r' /Z y Owner Email:
Owner Name: Phone:
Mailing Address: n /
Physical Address: - �� -5 /eft I �,J %'t7,c% /ri , 1�s !�� rt?ft �r r C /`ism
FacilityContact: �/J�
�1 /19 j i E 1 l Title: Phone: 9 / g - -7 3 8` 3.5 S q
Onsite Representative: Integrator:
Certified Operator: /�1f AV' yK '� 4ff Certification Number: e'p
Back-up Operator: Certification Number:
Location of Farm: Latitude: Longitude:
Design Current Design Current Design Current
Swine Capacity Pop. Wet Poultry Capacity Pop. Cattle Capacity Pop.
Wean to Finish
Wean to Feeder z ao o SU
Feeder to Finish
Farrow to Wean
Farrow to Feeder
Farrow to Finish
Gilts
Boars
Other
I—ILLayer
Non_La er
Pullets
Poults
Design Current
Dairy Cow
Dairy Calf
Dairy Heifer
Dry Cow
Non -Dairy
Beef Stocker
Beef Feeder
Beef Brood Cow
Dischar es and Stream Im acts
1. Is any discharge observed from any part of the operation? ❑ Yes T-:� ❑ 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
E 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
a"No
❑ NA
❑ NE
3. Were there any observable adverse impacts or potential adverse impacts to the waters
❑ Yes
allo
❑ NA
❑ NE
of the State other than from a discharge?
Page I of 3 511212020 Continued

Facility Number: g - Q / Date of Inspection: 14, 4
Waste Collection & Treatment
4. Is storage capacity (structural plus storm storage plus heavy rainfall) less than adequate? ❑ Yes CJ'No ❑ NA ❑ NE
a. If yes, is waste level into the structural freeboard? [] Yes [ZNo ❑ NA ❑ NE
Structure I Structure 2 Structure 3 Structure 4 Structure 5 Structure 6
Identifier: R2 SiC-V ,4ARr
Spillway?:
Designed Freeboard (in):
Observed Freeboard (in):
5. Are there any immediate threats to the integrity of any of the structures observed?
❑ Yes eNo
❑ 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
7. Do any of the structures need maintenance or improvement?
or environment I threat, notify DWR
Yes
❑
❑ NA ❑ NE
8. Do any of the structures lack adequate markers as required by the permit?
[:]Yes rdNo
❑ 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 6/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 bNo
❑ 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
❑ NA
❑ NE
15. Does the receiving crop and/or land application site need improvement?
❑Yes
'y
o �'J
❑ 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
No
[] NA
❑ NE
18. Is there a lack of properly operating waste application equipment?
❑ Yes
B No
❑ NA
❑ NE
Required Records & Documents
19. Did the facility fail to have the Certificate of Coverage & Permit readily available?
❑ Yes
_
ETNo
❑ NA
❑ NE
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
ErNo
❑ NA
❑ NE
23. If selected, did the facility fail to install and maintain rainbreakers on irrigation equipment?
[:]Yes
❑- 1�❑
NA
❑ NE
Page 2 of 3 511212020 Continued

Facility Number: 18 - 0j I I Date of Inspection: -2, - Z I
24. Did the facility fail to calibrate waste application equipment as required by the permit? ❑ Yes / No ❑ NA [:]NE
25. Is the facility out of compliance with permit conditions related to sludge? If yes, check ❑ Yes 01No ❑ 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 No ❑ NA ❑ NE
27. Did the facility fail to secure a phosphorus loss assessments (PLAT) certification? ❑ Yes No ❑ NA ❑ NE
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 Zj No
❑ Yes ffNo
❑NA []NE
❑NA ❑NE
❑ Yes .El"No ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Yes No ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Yes EJINo
❑ Yes EjN`o
❑ Yes ,fNo
[] NA ❑ NE
❑NA ❑NE
[]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).
so; 1z i [2-07.3,) 1 - 24 Arr%s IZAW 2,'a�/�� Mc.J2s
��ubG� su��iry 5���z� p� y.2- ;l� �°
cYASrc AdAfy 5`�5 2.,4-2�f
j,4s��ci
L /42'47
Reviewer/inspector Name: Lrt R 'i / S -lkrC
Reviewer/inspector Signature:
Page 3 of 3
N
Phone: 9l 4 - 7 2 3'/
Date: z x y
511212020