330020_Compliance Evaluation Inspection_20240506

ADivision of Water Resources
Facility Number 0 Division of Soli and Water Conservation
0 Other Agency
Type of Visit: Compliance Inspection Operation Review 0 Structure Evaluation 0 Technical Assistance
Reason for Visit: O Routine 0 Complaint 0 Follow-up 0 Referral 0 Emergency 0 Other 0 Denied Access
Date of Visit: G 2 Arrival Time: Departure Time: County:L66C 601a-15L Region: 69-0
Farm Name: b 1C- l �J / Ap-c, Owner Email:
Owner Name:
Mailing Address:
Physical Address:
! 33
LP
Facility Contact:
Title:
Onsite Representative:
Certified Operator:
Back-up Operator:
Location of Farm:
Swine
Latitude:
Phone:
61
Integrator:
Phone: 1719 -,3 2 ,j % AO e
Certification Number:
Certification Number:
Design Current Design Current
Capacity Pop. Wet Poultry Capacity Pop.
Layer
Non -Layer
Wean to Finish
Wean to Feeder
Feeder to Finish
Farrow to Wean
2 s'b
87 3..
Farrow to Feeder
Farrow to Finish
Gilts
Boars
Other
Design Current
Dry Poultry Canacity Pon.
Layers
Non -Layers
Pullets
Turkeys
Turkey Poults
Other
Longitude:
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 rNo ❑ NA ❑ NE
Discharge originated at: ❑ Structure ❑ Application Field ❑ Other:
a. Was the conveyance man-made? ❑ Yes E7No ❑ NA ONE
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 N
❑ NA
❑ NE
2. Is there evidence of a past discharge from any part of the operation?
❑ Yes i's
❑ NA
❑ NE
3. Were there any observable adverse impacts or potential adverse impacts to the waters
El Yes No
❑ NA
❑ NE
of the State other than from a discharge?
Page 1 of 3 511212020 Continued

Facili Number: - 2 Z jDate of Inspection: f
Waste Collection & Treatment
4. Is storage capacity (structural plus storm storage plus heavy rainfall) less than adequate? ❑ Yes
a. If yes, is waste level into the structural freeboard? ❑ Yes
Structure 1 Structure 2 Structure 3 Structure 4 Structure 5
Identifier: .l fn Sptj
Spillway?:
Designed Freeboard (in):_ L2_
Observed Freeboard (in): 10 1
5. Are there any immediate threats to the integrity of any of the structures observed?
(i.e., large trees, severe erosion, seepage, etc.)
6. Are there structures on -site which are not properly addressed and/or managed through a
waste management or closure plan?
L5-No ❑ NA ❑ NE
No ❑ NA ❑ NE
Structure 6
❑ Yes No ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Yes El"No ❑ NA ❑ NE
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 N ❑ NA [] NE
8. Do any of the structures lack adequate markers as required by the permit? [:]Yes YNo' ❑ 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 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
ManureiSludge 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 Z1No
❑ NA
❑ NE
15. Does the receiving crop and/or land application site need improvement?
❑ Yes VNo
❑ 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 Zvo
❑ NA
❑ NE
18. Is there a lack of properly operating waste application equipment?
❑ Yes �No
❑ NA
❑ NE
Required Records & Documents
19. Did the facility tail 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 ENo
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 1" Rainfall Inspections ❑ Sludge Survey
22. Did the facility fail to install and maintain a rain gauge? ❑ Yes 6 No ❑ NA ❑ NE
23. If selected, did the facility fail to install and maintain rainbreakers on irrigation equipment? ❑ Yes VrNo ❑ NA ❑ NE
Page 2 of 3 511212020 Continued

Facility Number: 33 - Z Date of Inspection: X-/, --I-
24. Did the facility fail to calibrate waste application equipment as required by the permit? ❑ Yes Efllslo ❑ 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 ZNo ❑ NA ❑ NE
27. Did the facility fail to secure a phosphorus loss assessments (PLAT) certification? 0 Yes eNo ❑ 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?
24. 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?
Comments (refer to question #): Explain any YES answers and/or any additional recommel
Use drawings of facility to better explain situations (use additional pages as necessary).
sa 1 / rr5 G— _
C4l��RA-T�A, f.
SrcRtlG71z-19-Z3�-
8°
.O
PoA-z�-z.4 P-t AT
�A a'A iy s 1 ,s -z. Z� IM .03
x.1•t� i��3 .09
�►jc5 AVr
e,
*- 8193 61v
ReviewerrInspector Name:
Reviewerr'Inspector Signature:
Page 3 of 3
[]Yes No ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Yes E 'No ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Yes ONo ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Yes tj'No ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Yes eNo ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Yes No ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Yes ZNo ❑ NA ❑ NE
ons or any other comments.
Phone: 91.1 1 l - 12 3"1
Date: Sib - -LIAO
511212020