510043_Compliance Evaluation Inspection_20191007

1,I)WI 11'71q 11 �
Divislon of Water Resources
Facility Number - t{3 O Division of Soil and Water Conservation
O Other Agency
Type of Visit: &'Compliance Inspection 0 Operation Review O Structure Evaluation O Technical Assistance
Reason for Visit: a'Routine O Complaint O Follow-up O Referral O Emeraencv O Other O Denied Access
Date of Visit: Arrival Time: Departure Time: a County:vj Region:
Farm Name: P fckie— NY(b r
Owner Name: Ri'e�i` Nr
Mailing Address:
Owner Email:
Phone:
Physical Address: .710 /icID Sf�1OL
l �0_t//oQ�
Facility Contact: R1ic� it A1o(fix- Title: Cwn Phone:
Onsite Representative: RI�E. Nrf. Integrator:�—
Certified Operator: RiCWQ_ Nam ` Certification Number:
Back-up Operator: Certification Number:
Location of Farm: Latitude: Longitude:
Swine
Wean to Finish
Wean to Feeder
Feeder to Finish
Farrow to Wean
Farrow to Feeder
Farrow to Finish
Gilts
Boars
Other
Other
Design Current Design Current
Capacity Pop. Wet Poultry Capacity Pop.
Layer
35 , on -Layer I I El
Pullets
Poults
Design Current
Discharges and Stream Impacts
1. Is any discharge observed from any part of the operation?
Discharge originated at: ❑ Structure ❑ Application Field ❑ Other:
a. Was the conveyance man-made?
b. Did the discharge reach waters of the State? (If yes, notify DWR)
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)
2. Is there evidence of past discharge from any part of the operation?
3. Were there any observable adverse impacts or potential adverse impacts to the waters
of the State other than from a discharge?
Design Current
Cattle Capacity Pop.
Dairy Cow
Dairy Calf
Dairy Heifer
Dry Cow
.Non -Dairy
Beef Stocker
Beef Feeder
Beef Brood Cow
[:]Yes [S No ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Yes ❑ No ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Yes ❑ No ❑ NA ❑ NE
[—]Yes ❑ No
❑ Yes 25 No
Yes []No
E] NA ❑NE
❑NA ❑NE
❑ NA ❑ NE
Page I of 3 214/2015 CondBnaed

Facility Number: Tj Date of Ins ection:
Waste Collection & Treatment
4. Is storage capacity (structural plus storm storage plus heavy rainfall) less than adequate?
❑ Yes
E@ 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: MQjf se[ad�
Spillway?:
Designed Freeboard (in): 19
935Observed Freeboard (in): '93
5.
. Are there any immediate threats to the integrity of any of the structures observed?
❑ Yes
2] 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
X] No
❑ NA
❑ NE
8. Do any of the structures lack adequate markers as required by the permit?
❑ Yes
N No
❑ 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
tio" No
❑ NA
❑ NE
maintenance or improvement?
Waste Application
I0. Are there any required buffers, setbacks, or compliance alternatives that need
❑ YesNo
❑ NA
❑ NE
maintenance or improvement?
11. Is there evidence of incorrect land application? If yes, check the appropriate box below.
❑ Yes
IS No
❑ NA
❑ NE
❑ Excessive Ponding ❑ Hydraulic Overload ❑ Frozen Ground ❑ Heavy Metals
(Cu, Zn, etc.)
❑ PAN ❑ PAN:;- 10°x" or 10 lbs. ❑ Total Phosphorus ❑ Failure to Incorporate Manure/Sludge
into
Bare Soil
❑ Outside of AccLob] e Crop Window E]Evidence of Wind Drift E:]Application Outside of Approved Area
12. Crop Type(s): pa ! V - — �CYe_ -rai-twe—
J r
13. Soil Type(s):
14. Do the receiving crops differ from those designated in the CAWMP?
❑ Yes
t4 No
❑ NA
❑ NE
15. Does the receiving crop and/or land application site need improvement?
❑ Yes
Z] No
❑ NA
❑ NE
16. Did the facility fail to secure and/or operate per the irrigation design or wettable
❑ Yes
5E No
❑ NA
❑ NE
acres determination?
17. Does the facility lack adequate acreage for land application?
❑ Yes
JE No
❑ NA
❑ NE
18. Is there a lack of properly operating waste application equipment?
❑ Yes
INA No
❑ NA
❑ NE
Required Records & Documents
19. Did the facility fail to have the Certificate of Coverage & Permit readily available?
[] Yes
2 No
❑ NA
❑ NE
20. Does the facility fail to have all components of the CAWMP readily available? If yes, check
❑ Yes
K 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. Z] Yes ❑ No ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Waste Application ❑ Weekly Freeboard tK 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 No ❑ NA ❑ NE
23. If selected, did the facility fail to install and maintain rainbreakers on irrigation equipment? ❑ Yes ❑ No NA ❑ NE
Page 2 of 3 214/1015 Continued

]Facility Number: F1 -
Date of Inspection: ?
24. Did the facility fail to calibrate waste application equipment as required by the permit? ❑ Yes 0 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:
❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ NA ❑ NE
26. Did the facility fail provide documentation of an actively certified operator in charge?
❑ Yes
(6 No
❑ NA
❑ NE
27. Did the facility fail to secure a phosphorus loss assessments (PLAT) certification?
❑ Yes
❑ No
[Z NA
❑ NE
Other Issues
❑ Yes
No
❑ NA
❑ NE
28. Did the facility fail to properly dispose of dead animals with 24 hours andlor document
❑ Yes
jg No
❑ NA
❑ NE
and report mortality rates that were higher than normal?
❑ Yes
No
❑ NA
❑ NE
29. At the time of the inspection did the facility pose an odor or air quality concern?
❑ Yes
� No
❑ NA
❑ NE
lfyes, contact a regional Air Quality representative immediately.
❑ Yes
No
❑ NA
❑ NE
30. Did the facility fail to notify the Regional Office of emergency situations as required by the
❑ Yes
No
❑ NA
❑ NE
permit? (i.e., discharge, freeboard problems, over -application)
3 I. Do subsurface the drains exist at the facility? If yes, check the appropriate box below.
❑ Yes
No
❑ NA
❑ NE
❑ Application Field ❑ Lagoon/Storage Pond ❑ Other:
32. Were any additional problems noted which cause non-compliance of the permit or CAWMP?
❑ Yes
No
❑ NA
❑ NE
33. Did the Reviewer/Inspector fail to discuss reviewrinspection with an on-site representative?❑
Yes
LO No
❑ NA
❑ NE
34. Does the facility require a follow-up visit by the same agency?
❑ 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 paces as necessary).
a6- IQi��re.
has- sufHtf-thtC_& ifmt ed hoe's X11 tyh Rola.
as-sjVdje�sUrve� 1a1-711 PCIA-, +idjes, S1ud�ye- 0,7j,3,y - L��Tt 4,6 5, ,, �a�� lea.
Callbldfi D 7a, de�?er IMe- 3015 Maw Vrjo#q P1r�9�
a� n
v0
liga
I*) kyfMf Anal 'eaI , Cu%7n rvOT01°- 300
':�7n 1-0b Y I -r/ac, II(ne? 1voi s ftead. Serf, ao1q, p-er D1~nff -
5-11)1q WOO -73 SFO
SjgjjS hVooaLrq
s uen�s ��I� is e-�9a t f a -at j bs PJA)16 oo nyih�B" cro
OW). Cro r'e jk��i W 04 �r r he dvll ifn� 0 r* ese e
S r -C>Veshe wi1I, hi r� �naj 0�1' rte;
s1 dl .��hPn'e3�1 d�`�� �; lnm ��t o�v,#u� �u��
3 -Cows haveCtCcess� Sinall � a�1
of c+ fbr s �a f o a rr > eta
Ise ~iso 0ahlral, No xs
�j oto r��!' �
�14r11
d eac.
'"4 °�a�-er `.UP�1,'SP-VI �I�ois aboo N1a01 h1_011i-rt iLM'.
Rev iewerllnspectorName: Phone: Ch —r—Yt
Reviewer/Inspector Signature: Date: &3 -7tAQ i C1r
Page 3 of 3 1/4/2015