470031_Inspection_20191127

_ C:l Division of _W ter7desource`_s
Facility Nnmber Q Division of Soft and Water Conservation. .
z 0 Other A euc
Type of Visit: Compli nce Inspection 0 Operation Review 0 Structure Evaluation 0 Technical Assistance
Reason for Visit: outine 0 Complaint 0 Follow-up 0 Referral 0 Emergency 0 Other 0 Denied Access
Date of Visit: Arrival Time: Departure Time: (;rJ County:
Farm Name: 1 �'l`�' Owner Email:
Owner Name: (Z�YI (lUOy4i Phone:
Mailing Address:
Physical Address:
I�ii�v
Facility Contact: dj �j (�j Title:
Onsite Representative:
i(
Certified Operator:
Back-up Operator:
Location of Farm:
Latitude:
Integrator:
Region:
Phone:
e_
Certification Number: 17 < 6C' 17
Certification Number:
Longitude:
Design
Current
Design--
Current
- Design- Current y-
Swine t Capacity
Pop.. ° ' _
= Wet Poultry Capacity
Pop
Cattle Capacity Pop.
Wean to Finish
Wean to Feeder
Feeder to Finish
Farrow to Wean
Farrow to Feeder
Farrow to Finish
Gilts
Boars
Layer
Non -Layer
- Designs Current
= Dry Poultry- Canacity Pon_ '
Layers
Non -Layers
Pullets
Turkeys
Turkey Poults
Other
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?
Dairy Cow
Dairy Calf
Dairy Heifer
Dry Cow
Non -Dairy
Beef Stocker
Beef Feeder
Beef Brood Cow
❑ Yes [ -No ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Yes ❑ No ONA ❑ NE
®I
b. Did the discharge reach waters of the State? (If yes, notify DWR)
❑ Yes
❑ No
DNA
❑ 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
[EfN
❑ NA
❑ NE
3. Were there any observable adverse impacts or potential adverse impacts to the waters
[:]Yes
L"'J No
❑ NA
❑ NE
of the State other than from a discharge?
Page I of 3 21412015 Continued
i

Facility Number: - Date of Inspection:
If
Waste Collection & Treatment
4. Is storage capacity (structural plus storm storage plus heavy rainfall) less than adequate? ❑ Yes 0-Ne—❑ NA ❑ NE
a. If yes, is waste level into the structural freeboard? ❑ Yes ❑ No ®-N-A- ❑ NE
Structure 1 Structure 2 Structure 3 Structure 4
Structure 5
Structure 6
Identifier:
Spillway?:
Designed Freeboard (in):
Observed Freeboard (in): 3 Z
5. Are there any immediate threats to the integrity of any of the structures observed?
❑ Yes
[]--i�o ❑ 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
❑'5o__ ❑ 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
notify DWR
threat,
7. Do any of the structures need maintenance or improvement?
❑ Yes
[ oo ❑ NA
❑ NE
8. Do any of the structures lack adequate markers as required by the permit?
❑ Yes
❑Tlo ❑ 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
to ❑ NA
❑ NE
maintenance or improvement?
Waste Application
10. Are there any required buffers, setbacks, or compliance alternatives that need
❑ Yes
NA
❑ NE
maintenance or improvement?
11. Is there evidence of incorrect land application? If yes, check the appropriate box below. ❑ Yes EJ'Ko" ❑ NA
❑ 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
�^ /r
12. Crop Type(s): 3�yt� t/7Cr el� 1�• �%' fJ`�GC2i
13. Soil Type(s): C_GI vLQJ�'�
❑ NE
14. Do the receiving crops differ from those designated in the CAWMP?
❑ Yes
2<90
❑ NA
❑ NE
15. Does the receiving crop and/or land application site need improvement?
❑ Yes
jj/No
❑ NA
❑ NE
16. Did the facility fail to secure and/or operate per the irrigation design or wettable
❑ Yes
[J"No
❑ NA
❑ NE
acres determination?
17. Does the facility lack adequate acreage for land application?
❑ Yes
[fNoo
❑ NA
❑ NE
18. Is there a lack of properly operating waste application equipment?
❑ Yes
[3'14o
❑ NA
❑ NE
Required Records & Documents
19. Did the facility fail to have the Certificate of Coverage & Permit readily available?
❑ Yes
to
❑ NA ❑ NE
20. Does the facility fail to have all components of the CAWMP readily available? If yes, check
❑ Yes
E Io
❑ 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
es
10
❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Waste Application ❑ Weekly Freeboard ❑ Waste Analysis Soil Analysis
❑Waste Transfers
Weather Code
❑ Rainfall ❑ Stocking ❑ Crop Yield ❑ 120 Minute Inspections ❑ Monthly and V Rainfall Inspections ❑ Sludge Survey
22. Did the facility fail to install and maintain a rain gauge?
❑ Yes
I E(,N�'❑
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
21412015 Continued

Facility Number: - Date of Inspection:. gcv
i
24. Did the facility fail to calibrate waste application equipment as required by the permit?
❑ Yes
Eg-116❑ NA
❑ NE
a5. Is the facility out of compliance with permit conditions related to sludge? If yes, check
❑ Yes
❑i >o— ❑ 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 provide documentation of an actively certified operator in charge?
0 Yes
0-11o­ ❑ NA
❑ NE
27. Did the facility fail to secure a phosphorus loss assessments (PLAT) certification?
❑ Yes
Io ❑ NA
❑ NE
Other Issues
28. Did the facility fail to properly dispose of dead animals with 24 hours and/or document
❑ Yes to ❑ NA ❑ NE
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?
❑ Yes 10 ❑ NA ❑ NE
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
❑ Yes Io ❑ NA ❑ NE
permit? (i.e., discharge, freeboard problems, over -application)
31. Do subsurface tile drains exist at the facility? If yes, check the appropriate box below.
❑ Yes E]-ilo ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Application Field ❑ Lagoon/Storage Pond ❑ Other:
32. Were any additional problems noted which cause non-compliance of the permit or CAWMP?
❑ Yes [] ❑ NA -❑ NE
33. Did the Reviewer/Inspector fail to discuss review/inspection with an on -site representative?
❑ Yes ❑-N-6- ❑ NA ❑ NE
34. Does the facility require a follow-up visit by the same agency?
❑ Yes Eo ❑ 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.,
_ a
C�0 q'+o ' ,OK-
Reviewer/Inspector Name:
Reviewer/Inspector Signature:
Page 3 of 3
,5r,
7
51 6111,1LrreaC
J
.S. �3/��31 d,-C(q
1
M
Phone: l 0-43V 3�W`
Date: `( W
21412015