040014_Inspection_20191104

p xvv�__> 6 jUuv t 5L)
s� is
_ tvof Water Resources"I oil
Fit Number O Division of_Soil and WateL;Conservation
Other -Agency
_ `O _
Type of Visit: om ance Inspection 0 Operation Review 0 Structure Evaluation 0 Technical Assistance
Reason for Visit: 15 Routine 0 Complaint 0 Follow-up 0 Referral 0 Emergency 0 Other 0 Denied Access
Date of Visit: D Arrival Time: ' 0 Departure Time: County: Region:
Farm Name: :3 o4 e5 C`rc .e' r VL'l Owner Email:
Owner Name: �Qr'Okk �1CV4esOYI Phone:
Mailing Address:
Physical Address:
Facility Contact: Title:
Onsite Representative: �vL t j �GC o tr
Certified Operator:
Back-up Operator:
Location of Farm:
�s
De
Swine Cap
Wean to Finish
Wean to Feeder
Feeder to Finish
Farrow to Wean
Farrow to Feeder
Farrow to Finish
Gilts
Boars
10
Other
Other
Latitude:
Current Design
10
Pop Met Poultry Capacity
La er
Non -Layer
Design.- `i
U -v PoultryVanaeity ,
Phone:
Integrator: S"I, 14 4. c/
Certification Number: 1(50 Z p�'
Certification Number:
urrent T.
Layers
Non -Layers
Pullets
Turkeys
Turkey Poults
r—t05—ther
Longitude:
Cow
Design, ` Current-,,,j
Capacity:, Pop
Longitude:
Cow
Design, ` Current-,,,j
Capacity:, Pop
Dairy
Discharges and Stream Impacts
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 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 ❑ NA ❑ NE
[:]Yes [:]No TA �❑ NE
❑ Yes ❑ No E;kK� ❑ NE
[:]Yes [:]No lA ❑ NE
❑ Yes No ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Yes J� No ❑ NA ❑ NE
Page I of 3 21412015 Continued
Page I of 3 21412015 Continued

Facility Number: jDate of Inspection:
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 [:Er< ❑ NE
Structure 1 Structure 2 Structure 3 Structure 4 Structure 5 Structure 6
Identifier:
Spillway?:
Designed Freeboard (in):
Observed Freeboard (in): 'Z
5. Are there any immediate threats to the integrity of any of the structures observed?
(i.e., large trees, severe erosion, seepage, etc.)
6. Are there structures on -site which are not properly addressed and/or managed through a
waste management or closure plan?
117
❑ Yes No ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Yes OlNo ❑ NA ❑ NE
If any of questions 4-6 were answered yes, and the situation poses an immediate public health or environmental t at, 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 12Ko ❑ 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 No ❑ NA ❑ NE
maintenance or improvement?
Waste Application
10. Are there any required buffers, setbacks, or compliance alternatives that need ❑ Yes 2-lac ❑ 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): 0 W J8
13. Soil Type(s):
I1-"—
14. Do the receiving crops differ from those designated in the CAWMP?
15. Does the receiving crop and/or land application site need improvement?
16. Did the facility fail to secure and/or operate per the irrigation design or wettable
acres determination?
17. Does the facility lack adequate acreage for land application?
.18. Is there a lack of properly operating waste application equipment?
Required Records & Documents
19. Did the facility fail to have the Certificate of Coverage & Permit readily available?
20. Does the facility fail to have all components of the CAWMP readily available? If yes, check
the appropriate box.
❑ WUP ❑Checklists ❑ Design ❑ Maps ❑ Lease Agreements
❑ Yes [' l�o ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Yes No ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Yes No ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Yes Now ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Yes ®'No ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Yes No ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Yes [];Xo— ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Other:
21. Does record keeping need improvement? If yes, check the appropriate box below. ❑ Yes Ef No ❑ 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 o ❑ 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: 9 ITO
24. Did the facility fail to calibrate waste application equipment as required by the permit? ❑ Yes NNoo ❑ NA ❑ NE
0
25. Is the facility out of compliance with permit conditions related to sludge? If yes, check ❑ Yes 'No ❑ 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? ❑ Yes No ❑ NA ❑ NE
27. Did the facility fail to secure a phosphorus loss assessments (PLAT) certification? ❑ Yes �l�io ❑ NA ❑ NE
Other Issues
28. Did the facility fail to properly dispose of dead animals with 24 hours and/or document ❑ Yes No ❑ 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
® -
❑ 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
No
❑ 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
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 review/inspection with an on -site representative?
❑ Yes
[ No
❑ NA ❑ NE
34. Does the facility require a follow-up visit by the same agency?
❑ Yes
E�KNo
❑ NA ❑ NE
1Cornments'(refer to question #): Explain"any YES answers and/or_any=additional recommendations or any other comments.:
jJsedraw,in9S__ offacility-4o better_explain situations (use additional pages as, necessary): ,
CC'.L l ,
cr'l1 `{V - 30s -C g St
Reviewer/Inspector Name:
Reviewer/Inspector Signatur
Page 3 of 3
n ✓Cleak/
gI%�-c�Ly e a �rG '�YJ ©'
ell
7
�; U - 1*1 La-? nr_)etie% I s li
ou
Phone: l �(� `�(3 7 3 � 34
Date: q NDU I q
21412015