830014_Inspection_20191007

I ypc ut visit; %tyK.utupa nce inspection U operation tcevtew U norructure r:vamat on U I eennical Assistance I
Reason for Visit: outine 0 Complaint 0 Follow-up 0 Referral 0 Emergency 0 Other 0 Denied Access
Date of Visit: a Arrival Time: Departure Time: 1 County: �gcD f1 tj Region:
G .�
Farm Name: � 5 � - •r�'�. Owner Email:
Owner Name: Phone:
Mailing Address:
Physical Address:
Facility Contact: __/_G lJr 105DTitle:
Onsite Representative: 7-6
Certified Operator: �G'G:i •SO.�
Back-up Operator:
Location of Farm:
Latitude:
,- Design E Current4,s,, Design
seine Capacity: , Pop Wet'1'oultry ; Capacity
Wean to Finish
Wean to Feeder
Feeder to Finish
Farrow to Wean
Farrow to Feeder
Farrow to Finish
Gilts
Boars
Uther
Other
Phone: /%
Integrator: S� g1 t'(�C�
Certification Number: f -76 KS -
Certification
Number:
Longitude:
r-rent
op Cattle
-_
Design: Current
Dry Poultrv'l C'anai�ity Pnri
Layers
Non -Layers
Pullets
Turkeys
Turke 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?
Design Current
f apacPop t
Dairy Cow
Dairy Calf
Dairy Heifer
Dry Cow
Non -Dairy
Beef Stocker
Beef Feeder
Beef Brood Cow
Yes ❑e -Nu-"❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Yes ❑ No Ej-ttX ❑ NE
b. Did the discharge reach waters of the State? (If yes, notify DWR) ❑ Yes [-]No [q-10A ❑ 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?
[:]Yes [:]No
❑ Yes to
[-]Yes [E[<o
ff'NA ❑ NE
❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ NA ❑ NE
Page 1 of 3 21412015 Continued

Facili y Number: jDate of Inspection: - QCi
Waste Collection & Treatment
4. Is storage capacity (structural plus storm storage plus heavy rainfall) less than adequate? ❑ Yes [Zj_Pd'o ❑ NA ❑ NE
a. If yes, is waste level into the structural freeboard? ❑ Yes ❑ No ❑ NE
Structure 1 Structure 2 Structure 3 Structure 4 Structure 5 Structure 6
Identifier:
Spillway?:
Designed Freeboard (in):
Observed Freeboard (in):
5. Are there any immediate threats to the integrity of any of the structures observed? ❑ Yes Q-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 E 91 4❑ 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 Ems] o ❑ NA ❑ NE
8. Do any of the structures lack adequate markers as required by the permit? ❑ Yes 2'go- ❑ 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 J No ❑ NA ❑ NE
maintenance or improvement?
Waste Application
10. Are there any required buffers, setbacks, or compliance alternatives that need [:]Yes No ❑ NA ❑ NE
maintenance or improvement?
11. Is 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): L 5-60
13. Soil Type(s): IG 1(t"d I K4 q(" (, m'
14. Do the receiving crops differ from those designated in the CAWMP? ❑ Yes E4-No ❑ NA ❑ NE
15. Does the receiving crop and/or land application site need improvement? E/Yes �o ❑ NA ❑ NE
16. Did the facility fail to secure and/or operate per the irrigation design or wettable ❑ Yes [9jc<o ❑ NA ❑ NE
acres determination?
17. Does the facility lack adequate acreage for land application? ❑ Yes [ ❑ NA ❑ NE
18. Is there a lack of properly operating waste application equipment? ❑ Yes Ef o ❑ NA ❑ NE
Required Records & Documents,
19. Did the facility fail to have the Certificate of Coverage & Permit readily available? ❑ Yes �lo ❑ NA ❑ NE
20. Does the facility fail to have all components of the CAWMP readily available? If yes, check ❑ Yes 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 EalTo
❑ 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 [d�qo
23. If selected, did the facility fail to install and maintain rainbreakers on irrigation equipment? [—]Yes 1 No
❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Weather Code
❑ Sludge Survey
❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ NA ❑ NE
Page 2 of 3 2141201E Continued

_
Facility �� Number: jDate of Inspection: G
24t Did the facility fail to calibrate waste application equipment as required by the permit? ❑ Yes ®-P'K ❑ NA ❑ NE
25. Is the facility out of compliance with permit conditions related to sludge? If yes, check ❑ Yes I:glqo ❑ NA ONE
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? ❑ Yes R-Vro' ❑ NA ❑ NE
27. Did the facility fail to secure a phosphorus loss assessments (PLAT) certification? ❑ Yes 10 ❑ 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? ❑ Yes 2 No ❑ NA ❑ NE
33. Did the Reviewer/Inspector fail to discuss review/inspection with an on -site representative? ❑ Yes EJ'No ❑ NA ❑ NE
34. Does the facility require a follow-up visit by the same agency? ❑ Yes eNo ❑ NA ❑ NE
Comments (refer"to question #): Explain any YES answers and/or any additional recommendations oI any othe_a= commeuts.''
Use drawings of facility=to better explain situations (use additional pages as necessary).
rz
_e SUAVe_y
Chi T0-3D8-6'35(
❑ Yes —F-JAM5-❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Yes E2- o ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Yes g o ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Yes D o ❑ NA ❑ NE
Reviewer/Inspector Name: l v(y /� Phone: - I , d 3 333
!� C
Reviewer/Inspector Signature: CjA Date: 9 [ `
Page 3 of 3 2/4/ 15