330020_Compliance Evaluation Inspection_20230320

1/-
A 4/—r Division of Water Resources
Facility Number 33 - 2 0 0 Division of Soil and Water Conservation
0 Other Agency
Type of Visit: Cam ce Inspection Operation Review 0 Structure Evaluation 0 Technical Assistance
Reason for Visit: Routine ()Complaint 0 Follow-up 0 Referral 0 Emergency 0 Other 0 Denied Access
Date of Visit: - zn. y3 Arrival Time: / L3'.9 Departure Time: ; ZS N1 County: Ch4kC4PAl6ZRegion: RAO
Farm Name: /[D 5. YOwner Email:
Owner Name: TLA4 o ` i fl 1 1 L G Phone:
Mailing Address:
Physical Address: S 3 a 30 iS � ti D R LAI. U.;r del /uG
Facility Contact: ` uA i -5 AAA.J /G,e Title: Phone: 1/0 - 3$.5— /mc •
Onsite Representative: Integrator:
Certified Operator: Certification Number:
Back-up Operator: tt Certification Number:
Location of Farm: Latitude: 3 5' $44.12 S Longitude: 77 37 / 93' i
Design Current
Swine Capacity Pop.
Wean to Finish
Wean to Feeder
Feeder to Finish
Farrow to Wean 7-
Farrow to Feeder
Farrow to Finish
Gilts
Boars
Other
Design Current
Wet Poultry Capacity Pop.
WL'
er
Non -Layer
Pullets
Other
Poults
Design Current
Design Current
Cattle 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
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
F5 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
NA
[] NE
2. Is there evidence of a past discharge from any part of the operation?
❑ Yes
N
❑ NA
❑ NE
3. Were there any observable adverse impacts or potential adverse impacts to the waters
❑ Yes
No
❑ NA
❑ NE
of the State other than from a discharge?
Page 1 of 3 511212020 Continued

Facilit Number: 33 - z, D Date of Inspection: — zp z 3
Waste Collection & Treatment
4. Is storage capacity (structural plus storm storage plus heavy rainfall) less than adequate?
❑ Yes
No
NE
a. If yes, is waste level into the structural freeboard?
❑ Yes
❑ No VN❑
❑ NE
Structure I Structure 2 Structure 3 Structure 4 Structure 5
Structure 6
Identifier: .i iO Sp u1
Spillway?:
Designed Freeboard (in):
Observed Freeboard (in): �rS' `� z
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
ffNo ❑ 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 environment hreat, notify DWR
7. Do any of the structures need maintenance or improvement? ❑ Yes F3-<O
No ❑ NA ❑ NE
8. Do any of the structures lack adequate markers as required by the permit? ❑ Yes ❑ 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 �fNo ❑ NA ❑ NE
maintenance or improvement?
Waste Application
10. Are there any required buffers, setbacks, or compliance alternatives that need
[] Yes 0 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 ManurelSludge 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 Vj N
❑ NA
❑ NE
15. Does the receiving crop and/or land application site need improvement?
❑ Yes
❑ 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 o
❑ NA
❑ NE
18. Is there a lack of properly operating waste application equipment?
❑ Yes �o
❑ NA
❑ NE
Required Records & Documents
19. Did the facility fail to have the Certificate of Coverage & Permit readily available?
❑ Yes o
❑ NA
❑ NE
20. Does the facility fail to have all components of the CAWMP readily available? if yes, check
❑ Yes WNo
❑ 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 6No ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Waste Application ❑ Weekly Freeboard ❑ Waste Analysis ❑ Soil Analysis ❑ Waste Transfers ❑ Weather Code
❑ Rainfall ❑ Stocking ❑ Crop Yield ❑ 120 Minute Inspections ❑ Monthly and I" Rainfall Inspections ❑ Sludge Survey
22. Did the facility fail to install and maintain a rain gauge? ❑ Yes o ❑ NA ❑ NE
23. If selected, did the facility fail to install and maintain rainbreakers on irrigation equipment? ❑ Yes [ No ❑ NA ❑ NE
Page 2 of 3 511212020 Continued

I<acili Number: 3 3 - Z Date of Inspection: 7- U-23
24. Did the facility fail to calibrate waste application equipment as required by the permit? ❑ Yes E c ❑ 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 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
elNo ❑ NA
❑ NE
27. Did the facility fail to secure a phosphorus loss assessments (PLAT) certification?
❑ Yes
E�N o ❑ NA
❑ NE
Other Issues
28. Did the facility fail to properly dispose of dead animals with 24 hours and/or document
❑ Yes
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
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
permit? (i.e., discharge, freeboard problems, over -application)
❑ Yes E�(No ❑ NA ❑ NE
31. Do subsurface the drains exist at the facility? If yes, check the appropriate box below. ❑ Yes
❑ Application Field ❑ Lagoon/Storage Pond ❑ Other:
32. Were any additional problems noted which cause non-compliance of the permit or CAWMP? ❑ Yes
33. Did the Reviewer/Inspector fail to discuss review/inspection with an on -site representative? ❑ Yes
34. Does the facility require a follow-up visit by the same agency? ❑ Yes
❑ NA
❑ NE
0--N--o
ff'No
❑ NA
❑ NE
❑ NA
❑ NE
;Z
❑ NA
❑ NE
Comments (refer to question ft 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).
fV 4 -ZA4v11 � `�
o
/
LJ zZ"z-Z
L%i�iB�f�l10/l/ slzazZ, (�.�-2 Z 4 2 3 jr4l
8- I Z L -
lA,4L � %. v � S
��C/a.At-S
11
CNr�f�s.T �e�Yt�e�e-nr.9oti✓
�1Q�X ��/l - 9'19- SIo-ZG9!
Reviewer/Inspector Name: A 2CCr,
Phone: t/1 - 7W - y 7, 3
Reviewer/Inspector Signature:
Date: 3 ' 7­0 — 2_ 3
Page 3 of 3
511212020