440013_Inspection_20201215 (2)

Division of Water Resources
Facility Number ® - 1 l3 1 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: O Routine O Complaint O Fallow -up O Referral O Emergency O Other Denied Access
Date of Visit: Arrival rT,iime: p: �Departure Time: N:OD-NM County: 1//rs%t.JbSU4 Region:
Farm Name: �i(II� � cLJA(12-if
Owner Email:
Owner Name: ST W�eyI /tA Y�65S ,,11
Phone:
Mailing Address: .� � Gy!/3 �d � wQN U : (�c Ne- O>gT�^- 9 d--
Physical Address:
77 /
Facility Contact �ry. �lk`n ss Title: Phone:
Onsite Representative: Integrator: n
Certified Operator: if� A k Certification Number:�--
Back-up Operator: Certification Number:
Location of Farm: Latitude: Longitude:
Design Current Design Current
Swine Capacity Pop. Wet Poultry Capacity Pap.
Wean to Finish Layer
Wean to Feeder Non -Layer
Feeder to Finish
Farrow to Wean - Design Current
Other
Other
Design Current
Cattle Capacity Pop.
Dairy Cow
$g
Dairy Calf
Dairy Heifer
Dry Cow
Non -Dairy
Beef Stocker
Beef Feeder
Beef Brood Cow
Discharges and Stream Impacts
1. Is any discharge observed from any part of the operation? R Yees / ❑ No ❑ NA ❑ NE
Discharge originated at: ❑Structure ❑ Application Field ❑ /I Other: _ 10t)L �/$o OWLY)
a. Was the conveyance man-made? ❑ Yes ❑ No ❑ NA ❑ NE
b. Did the discharge reach waters of the State? (If yes, notify D W R) ❑ 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)
2. Is there evidence of a 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?
Page I of 3
❑ Yes
❑ No
❑ NA
❑ NE
Yes
❑ No
❑ NA
❑ NE
❑ Yes
allo
❑ NA
❑ NE
2142015 Continued

Factlity Number: Date of Inspection:
Waste Collection & Treatment
4. Is storage capacity (structural plus storm storage plus heavy rainfall) less than adequate?
❑ Yes
[�A_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: /�
Spillway?:
Designed Freeboard (in):
Observed Freeboard (in): Zia (,ay-�
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
galo
❑ 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
rUrNo
❑ NA
❑ NE
8. Do any of the structures lack adequate markers as required by the permit?
❑ Yes
I:Z .No
❑ NA
❑ NE
(not applicable to roofed pits, dry stacks, and/or wet stacks)
9. Does any pail of the waste management system other than the waste structures require
❑ Yes
[dNo
❑ NA
❑ NE
maintenance or improvement?
Waste Application
10, Are there any required buffers, setbacks, or compliance alternatives that need
❑ Yes
6?j_No
❑ NA
❑ NE
maintenance or improvement?
11. Is there evidence of incorrect land application? If yes, check the appropriate box below.
❑ Yes
[�LNo
❑ NA
❑ NE
❑ Excessive Pending ❑ Hydraulic Overload ❑ Frozen Ground ❑ Heavy Metals
(Cu, Zn, etc.)
❑ PAN ❑ PAN> 10%or 10 its. ❑ 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): F:eccL .� ax74V, WIhi 1; .
/+,,i%11LE+
(--
13. Soil TYpe(s): �I IES%U-2m IO*AA 1 vh—
rp it l (
�o�l%
ay}nn
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
M, No
❑ NA
❑ NE
16. Did the facility fail to secure and/or operate per the irrigation design or wettable
❑ Yes
g No
❑ NA
❑ NE
acres determination?
17. Does the facility lack adequate acreage for land application?
❑ Yes
MNo
❑ NA
❑ NE
18. Is there a lack ofpmperly operating waste application equipment?
❑ Yes
EjNo
❑ NA
❑ NE
Required Records & Documents
19. Did the facility fail to have the Certificate of Coverage & Permit readily available?
❑ Yes
EZ�No
❑ NA
❑ NE
20. Does the facility fail to have all components ofthe CAWMP readily available? If yes, check
❑ Yes
[RNo
❑ NA
❑ NE
the appropriate box.
❑WUP El Checklists ❑Design ❑Maps ❑ Lease Agreements
❑Other:
21. Does record keeping need improvement? If yes, check the appropriate box below.
❑ Yes
ONO
❑ 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
allo
❑ NA
❑ NE
23. If selected, did the facility fail to install and maintain rainbreakers on irrigation equipment?
❑ Yes
KNo
❑ NA
❑ NE
Page 2 of 3
21412015 Continued

Facili Number: - 1 Date of Inspection:
24. Did the facility fail to calibrate waste application equipment as required by the permit? ❑ Yes [ No
25. Is the facility out of compliance with permit conditions related to sludge? If yes, check ❑ Yes [}ZNo
the appropriate boxes) below.
❑ Failure to complete annual sludge survey ❑ Failure to develop a PDA for sludge levels
❑ Non -compliant sludge levels in any lagoon
List structure(s) and date of first survey indicating non-compliance:
❑NA ONE
El NA ❑NE
26. Did the facility fail provide documentation of an actively certified operator in charge? ❑ Yes 14,Nc ❑ NA ❑ NE
27. Did the facility fail to secure a phosphorus loss assessments (PLAT) certification? ❑ Yes allo ❑ 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 gNo ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Yes 4No ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Yes JZNo ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Yes [�LNo ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Yes
No
❑ NA
❑ NE
❑ Yes
Z No
❑ NA
❑ NE
❑ Yes
C,
No
❑ NA
❑ NE
LaGs,i7FLLi?or.. L'to >s
1nl ao1�P "ra£w"d
.Qu"
)- LIES)
C�,.
�LI
�oifS Clowe /N
a-61% (rezw,ved
.aver-j
3 ` IU
2oz�l
1�(ScuS£c� (ver�f l r es)ofiPAS�L -Fa bezej"'"' 3lsf 19-52H
�d �7oi$-?a�% veceV� to G Ci oF' Gver1'�
W'rS 4cryYe ��:fi�,,vv_� PLaVores.
A",-iuv.&(k�1 V�sLtuc" A-f( r..G.r.CNna,_+ Vi P¢ru;i r�uiveMQw+ Subti ffd
e�ttiiu"P,d U-a'Fr�- Mv'144cv Iw'h'�iGa 7) ci} j
Reviewer/Inspector Name:
Reviewer/Inspector Signature:
Page 3 of 3
Phone:
Date:
21412015