330004_Compliance Evaluation Inspection_20240830

A v) erDivision of Water Resources
Facility Number - p© 0 Division of Soil and Water Conservation
O Other Agency
Type of Visit: C�ompliance Inspection 0 Operation Review O Structure Evaluation Q Technical Assistance
Reason for Visit: 30/Routine 0 Complaint l) Follow-up 0 Referral 0 Emergency 0 Other 0 Denied Access
Date of Visit: Arrival Time: Departure Time: r9 a County: id ttt449 1 Region:
Farm Name: M i L L C Owner Email:
Owner Name: A.'t_kAPb rdrAiLb Phone:
Mailing Address:
Physical Address:
J
Facility Contact: Title:
Onsite Representative:
Certified Operator: A L AAX2 fu !FOIL ._
Back-up Operator:
Location of Farm:
Latitude:
zSz-13V,.• �-I�25
Phone: 2
Integrator:
Certification Number: Agl t q 1)f'7 V y
Certification Number:
Longitude:
Design Current Design Current
Swine Capacity Pop. Wet Poultry Capacity Pop. Cattle
Wean to Finish
Wean to Feeder 5 S CC,, 1 G x-a
Feeder to Finish
Farrow to Wean
Farrow to Feeder
Farrow to Finish
Gilts
Boars
Other
La er
Non -La er
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
I . Is any discharge observed from any part of the operation? [—]Yes 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
/Z o ❑ 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
o ❑ 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

Facility Number: -oq Date of Inspection: p
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? ❑ Yes �No❑ NA ❑ NE
Structure I Structure 2 Structure 3 Structure 4 Structure 5 Structure 6
Identifier: Z Ll G t- / 1W
Spillway?:
Designed Freeboard (in):
Observed Freeboard (in): 2. j 2 ( y 1� 2, 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 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? ❑ Yes �No ❑ NA ❑ NE
8. Do any of the structures lack adequate markers as required by the permit? ❑ Yes P4o ❑ 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 E No ❑ NA ❑ NE
maintenance or improvement?
Waste Application
10. Are there any required buffers, setbacks, or compliance alternatives that need ❑ Yes [3 No ❑ NA ❑ NE
maintenance or improvement?
11, 1s 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): SX4 Aot,4,,'pJ p ✓EA 5i, G "
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
❑ NA
❑ NE
16. Did the facility fail to secure and/or operate per the irrigation design or wettable
❑ Yes
[3N
❑ NA
❑ NE
acres determination?
17. Does the facility lack adequate acreage for land application?
❑ Yes
ONo
❑ NA
❑ NE
18. Is there a lack of properly operating waste application equipment?
❑ Yes
[r oo
❑ 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
[2-90
❑ 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
11<0
❑ NA
❑ NE
❑ Waste Application ❑ Weekly Freeboard ❑ Waste Analysis ❑ Soil Analysis
❑ Waste Transfers
❑ Weather Code
[] Rainfall ❑ Stocking ❑ Crop Yield ❑ 120 Minute Inspections ❑ Monthly and l" Rainfall Inspections
❑ Sludge Survey
22. Did the facility fail to install and maintain a rain gauge?
❑ Yes
❑No
❑ NA
❑ NE
23. If selected, did the facility fail to install and maintain rainbreakers on irrigation equipment?
❑ Yes
[]Ko
❑ NA
❑ NE
Page 2 of 3 511212020 Continued

Facili Number: - aq I Date of Inspection: 8 -- 3
24. Did the facility fail to calibrate waste application equipment as required by the permit? ❑ Yes Q'No
25. Is the facility out of compliance with permit conditions related to sludge? If yes, check ❑ Yes Io
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 Rio
27. Did the facility fail to secure a phosphorus loss assessments (PLAT) certification? ❑ Yes [2 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)
3 I. 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
O/No
❑ NA
❑ NE
[:]Yes
❑ No
❑ NA
❑ NE
❑Yes
E]No
DNA
❑NE
❑ Yes
B No
❑ NA
❑ NE
[:]Yes No ❑ NA
[:]Yes No ❑ NA
[3 Yes [7] No ❑ NA
❑ NE
❑ NE
❑ NE
Comments (refer to question #): Explain any YES answers and/or any additional recommendations or any other comments.
Usep drawings of facility to better explain situations (use additional. pages as necessary).
y
�
O
73
�-
v �
i
aR
t-j
by
N
� a
t
"S
z
n
,A A
Oil�-X
Reviewerinspector Name: za
Phone: 9 / 9 - 711 - V 2- 5'
Reviewedlnspector Signature:
Page 3 of 3
Date: $— 3o — L
511212020