820011_Inspection_20191016

(Lw►
OP Division of Water Resources
Facility Number ®- � O Division of Soil and Water Conservation
O Other Agency
Type of Visit: 40 Compliance Inspection O Operation Review O Structure Evaluation O Technical Assistance
Reason for Visit: ® Routine O Complaint O Follow-up O Referral O Emergency O Other O Denied Access
Date of Visit: f ! Arrival Time: �Cr, Departure Time: b ; �(� r. County: e
Farm Name: S 1['_%/.E� Lrr;� y-�EZ-11y, Owner Email:
Owner Name: � � .�� R'46_f�j> I.,_ Phone:
Mailing Address:
Physical Address:
Facility Contact:
Onsite Representative:
Certified Operator:
Back-up Operator:
Location of Farm:
Swine
Title:
f^
Latitude:
Region: `` r
Phone:
' Integrator: 5'1,' `�� 7'�;_o I
Certification Number: L�
Certification Number:
Design Current Design Current
Capacity Pop. Wet Poultry Capacity Pop.
Layer
Non -Layer
Wean to Finish
Wean to Feeder
Feeder to Finish
��
C✓
Farrow to Wean
Farrow to Feeder
Farrow to Finish
Gilts
Boars
Other
Other
Design Current
Dry Poultry Canacitv Pon.
Layers
Non -Layers
Pullets
Turkeys
Turkey Poults
Other
Discharses 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)?
Longitude:
Design Current
Cattle Capacity Pop.
Dairy Cow
Dairy Calf
Dairy Heifer
Dry Cow
Non -Dairy
Beef Stocker
Beef Feeder
Beef Brood Cow
❑ Yes � No ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Yes ❑ No
❑ Yes ❑ No
NA ❑ NE
�NA ❑NE
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 � No ❑ NA ❑ NE
3. Were there any observable adverse impacts or potential adverse impacts to the waters ❑ Yes M No ❑ NA ❑ NE
of the State other than from a discharge?
Page 1 of 3 21412015 Continued

Facility Number: Date of Inspection: E> ,
Waste Collection & Treatment
4. Is storage capacity (structural plus storm storage plus heavy rainfall) less than adequate? ❑ Yes P No ❑ NA ❑ NE
a. If yes, is waste level into the structural freeboard? ❑ Yes ❑ No .1 NA ❑ NE
Structure 1 Structure 2 Structure 3 Structure 4 Structure 5 Structure 6
Identifier: j _ _
Spillway?:
I U Cl,
Designed Freeboard (in): � y
11
r!
Observed Freeboard (in):
5. Are there any immediate threats to the integrity of any of the structures observed? ❑ Yes M 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 rv-1 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 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 Qj No ❑ NA ❑ NE
maintenance or improvement? 7
Waste Application
10. Are there any required buffers, setbacks, or compliance alternatives that need ❑ Yes No ❑ NA ❑ NE
maintenance or improvement? `P
11. Is there evidence of incorrect land application? If yes, check the appropriate box below. ❑ Yes FYI
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): fi`3't G 'E C 3 i 5�jta , / �'S�'' C'^ % �XC,' I
13. Soil Type(s):
14. Do the receiving crops differ from those designated in the CAWMP? ❑ Yes M 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 N No ❑ NA ❑ NE
acres detennination?
17. Does the facility lack adequate acreage for land application?
❑ Yes
No
❑ NA
❑ NE
18. Is there a lack of properly operating waste application equipment?
❑ Yes
P No
7�
❑ NA
❑ NE
Required Records & Documents
19. Did the facility fail 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
[J] 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. ❑ Yes [P No
❑ Waste Application ❑ Weekly Freeboard ❑ Waste Analysis ❑ Soil Analysis ❑ Waste Transfers
❑ Rainfall ❑ Stocking ❑ Crop Yield ❑ 120 Minute Inspections ❑ Monthly and 1" Rainfall Inspections
22. Did the facility fail to install and maintain a rain gauge? ❑ Yes No
23. If selected, did the facility fail to install and maintain rainbreakers on irrigation equipment? ❑ Yes No
❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Weather Code
❑ Sludge Survey
❑NA ❑NE
❑ NA ❑ NE
Page 2 of 3 21412015 Continued

Facility Number:- ( 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 [` 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:
26. Did the facility fail provide documentation of an actively certified operator in charge?
27. Did the facility fail to secure a phosphorus loss assessments (PLAT) certification?
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:
❑ Yes `1'' No
❑ Yes ` P No
❑ Yes � No
❑ Yes 1PNo
❑ Yes T No
❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ NA ❑ NE
❑NA ❑NE
❑ NA ❑ NE
❑NA ❑NE
❑ Yes h No ❑ NA ❑ NE
32. Were any additional problems noted which cause non-compliance of the permit or CAWMP? ❑ Yes 4 No ❑ NA ❑ NE
33. Did the Reviewer/Inspector fail to discuss review/inspection with an on -site representative? ❑ Yes TMk No ❑ NA ❑ NE
34. Does the facility require a follow-up visit by the same agency? ❑ Yes l] 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 pages as necessary).
qfo-6;z'- vql
-LI CCO
k14a f-AI G "Vie; v;
Reviewer/Inspector Name:
Reviewer/Inspector Signature:
Page 3 of 3
Phone: 1 L01(1( 13 _JJ�
Date: 0 f(b
21412015