820655_Inspection_20190507 (2)

. ivision of Water Resources
I cili Number 0 Division of Soil and Water Conservation
- �s
o
.Other Agency
Type of Visit: om Hance Inspection 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: filay Arrival Time: ► 4 S Departure Time: I 87,.W County:
Farm Name: 2 r--j Owner Email:
Owner Name: 11 L a✓ �S Phone:
Mailing Address:
S' l Region: 51�17
Physical Address:
Facility Contact: �0 US 1V c C Title: Phone:
Onsite Representatives (• Integrator: g' .4" `�
Certified Operator:
Back-up Operator:
Location of Farm:
Latitude:
Certification Number: 1 7Y Z'Z
Certification Number:
Longitude:
Design ' Catrrent. Design, .Current.` .? a ` ` Design . Ct
Swine Capacity ' Pop. ' Wet Poultryy Capacity 1'op: Cattle° Capacity
Wean to Finish I ILayer
Wean to Feeder Non -Layer
Feeder to Finish
Farrow to Wean DesignPCurrent
Farrow to Feeder Dr' Poultry Capacity Pop.
Farrow to Finish
Gilts
Boars
Other
F—TO—ther
Layers
Non -Layers
Pullets
Turkeys
DI
Turkey Poults
Other
i
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)?
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
Trent
op.
Dairy Cow
Dairy Calf
Dairy Heifer
Dry Cow
Non -Dairy
Beef Stocker
Beef Feeder
Beef Brood Cow
❑ Yes I9"1V O ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Yes
❑ No
[r]-'RA
❑ NE
❑ Yes
❑ No
dNA
❑ NE
❑ Yes [:]No [3NA ❑ NE
❑ Yes ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Yes No ❑ NA ❑ NE
21412015 Continued

Facilit• Number: - t! JDate of Inspection: n
Waste Collection & Treatment
4. Is storage capacity (structural plus storm storage plus heavy rainfall) less than adequate? ❑ Yes E3-No---[n NA ❑ NE
a. If yes, is waste level into the structural freeboard? ❑ Yes ❑ No E3-N'X�❑ 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
❑-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
[-1(r-
❑ 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
B o
❑ NA
❑ NE
8. Do any of the structures lack adequate markers as required by the permit?
❑ Yes
E-156--
❑ 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
[3-M
❑ NA
❑ NE
maintenance or improvement?
11. Is there evidence of incorrect land application? If yes, check the appropriate box below.
❑ Yes
[51-N-o
DNA
❑ 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 ❑ Application Outside of Approved Area
/Drift
12. Crop Type(s):
13. Soil Type(s):
14. Do the receiving crops differ from those designated in the CAWMP?
❑ Yes
�o
❑ NA
❑ NE
15. Does the receiving crop and/or land application site need improvement?
❑ YesFj--No
❑ NA
❑ NE
16. Did the facility fail to secure and/or operate per the irrigation design or wettable
❑ Yes
❑-lo
❑ NA
❑ NE
acres determination?
17. Does the facility lack adequate acreage for land application?
❑ Yes
[4'lgo
❑ NA
❑ NE
18. Is there a lack of properly operating waste application equipment?
❑ Yes
Q N�o
❑ 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 E2 o D. 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. M4es � ❑ 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 1F21Vo ❑ NA ❑ NE
23. If selected, did the facility fail to install and maintain rainbreakers on irrigation equipment? ❑ Yes [2,110 D NA ❑ NE
Page 2 of 3 214120I5 Continued

FacilityrNumber: - r Bate of Inspection: %
24., Did the facility fail to calibrate waste application equipment as required by the permit? ❑ Yes - io ^ [:]NA ❑ NE
A
25. Is the facility out of compliance with permit conditions related to sludge? If yes, check [:]Yes E3 N10 ❑ 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
[A -No ❑ NA
❑ NE
27. Did the facility fail to secure a phosphorus loss assessments (PLAT) certification? .
❑ Yes
❑_Ni5-_❑ NA
❑ NE
Other Issues
28. Did the facility fail to properly dispose of dead animals with 24 hours and/or document
❑ Yes
Vj-Nv--❑ 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
E4.Rb-__❑ 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 the 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 []'Kqo ❑ NA ❑ NE
34. Does the facility require a follow-up visit by the same agency? ❑ Yes No ❑ NA ❑ NE
C041nients (refer to qu0tibn #); Explain any 1'ES answers and/or any additional reA ts.
iTen�riaixri erne riF`nnlif`ii �fn',1�n1#nr nwanl.ro-n ci4vti�6�ne�.a;lnicri nritii'i tan.rnl atn�rnc`+ n+ nnnnoc+n r.r1_-� :; r -:"��'� � . � �_r
0`I !
CA 9(0 -3C)
Reviewer/Inspector Name:
c
Reviewer/Inspector Signature:
Page 3 of 3
Phone:�.3`?�3
Date: v "
21412015