820499_Inspection_20190322

I I" pil- l"lu.. '_� k k
ivision of Water Resources
Facility Number FF —2— 1 - RWI O Division of Soil and Water Conservation
O Other Agency
Type of Visit: Comm Hance Inspection Operation Review O Structure Evaluation O Technical Assistance
Reason for Visit: Qr Routine O Complaint O Follow-up O Referral O Emergency O Other O Denied Access
Date of Visit: /1(u /OlArrival Time: I Lt(fir% Departure Time: l f�c>_ County:
Farm Name:�� �cltli�,� �J �'tr Owner Email:
Owner Name: /�� ���r� l� i �' Phone:
Mailing Address:
Physical Address:
Facility Contact:
Onsite Representative:
Certified Operator:
Back-up Operator:
Location of Farm:
Ce [c e, L5- Title:
t(
t(
Design Current
Swine `Capacity Pop.'
Wean to Finish
Wean to Feeder
Feeder to Finish
Farrow to Wean
Farrow to Feeder
Farrow to Finish
Gilts
Boars
Other
Other
Latitude:
Region:F*—
Phone:
Integrator: ,EU 5w cti
Certification Number: / g5
Certification Number:
Design Current
Wet, Poultry
Capacity Pop.
Layer
Non -Layer
Design Current
Dry Poultry
Capacity POD.
Layers
Non -Layers
Pullets
Turkeys
Turke Poults
Other
Discharees and Stream Impacts
1. Is any discharge observed from any part of the operation?
Discharge originated at: ❑ Structure ❑ Application Field ❑ Other:
Longitude:
Design Current
Cattle _ Capacity Pop.
Dairy Cow
Dairy Calf
Dairy Heifer
Dry Cow
.Non -Dairy
Beef Stocker
Beef Feeder
Beef Brood Cow
+_
❑ Yes 0-aMo— ❑ NA ❑ NE
a. Was the conveyance man-made? ❑ Yes ❑ No E3 A ❑ NE
b. Did the discharge reach waters of the State? (If yes, notify DWR) ❑ Yes ❑ No Q'�iA ❑ 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 �A ❑ NE
2. Is there evidence of a past discharge from any part of the operation? []Yes Q�lo ❑ NA ❑ NE
3. Were there any observable adverse impacts or potential adverse impacts to the waters ❑ Yes [r]'No ❑ NA ❑ NE
of the State other than from a discharge?
Page l of 3 21412015 Continued

Facility Number: „'L - allDate of Inspection: 'V 714"l
;,Waste Collection & Treatment
4. Is storage capacity (structural plus storm storage plus heavy rainfall) less than adequate?
❑ Yes
ON —DNA
❑ NE
a. If yes, is waste level into the structural freeboard?
[—]Yes
❑ No
E]-'NA
❑ NE
Structure 1• Structure 2 Structure 3 Structure 4
Structure 5
Structure 6
Identifier:
Spillway?:
Designed Freeboard (in):
!� d
Observed Freeboard (in):
5. Are there any immediate threats to the integrity of any of the structures observed?
❑ Yes
f g 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
EE o
❑ 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
E3No
❑ NA
❑ NE
8. Do any of the structures lack adequate markers as required by the permit?
❑ Yes
®�10
❑ 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
Z],No
❑ NA
❑ NE
maintenance or improvement?
Waste Application
10. Are there any required buffers, setbacks, or compliance alternatives that need
❑ Yes
[Y No
❑ NA
❑ NE
maintenance or improvement?
11. Is there evidence of incorrect land application? If yes, check the appropriate box below. ❑ Yes �o ❑ 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 W. d Drift ❑ Application Outside of Approved Area
12. Crop Type(s)
13. Soil Type(s): 1-0 cL �lL
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? ❑ Yes 71.No ❑ NA ❑ NE
16. Did the facility fail to secure and/or operate per the irrigation design or wettable ❑ Yes [Z],RTo ❑ NA ❑ NE
acres determination?
17. Does the facility lack adequate acreage for land application?
18. Is there a lack of properly operating waste application equipment?
❑ Yes ❑'10 ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Yes E] No ❑ NA ❑ NE
Required Records & Documents
19. Did the facility fail to have the Certificate of Coverage & Permit readily available? ❑ Yes �o ❑ 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 [DNo
❑ 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?
23. If selected, did the facility fail to install and maintain rainbreakers on irrigation equipment?
❑ Yes []�4o
❑ Yes ENo
❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Weather Code
❑ Sludge Survey
❑ NA ❑ NE
❑NA ❑NE
Page 2 of 3 21412015 Continued

FaciAty Number: - Date of inspection:
24. Did the facility fail to calibrate waste application equipment as required by the permit? ❑ Yes
25. Is the facility out of compliance with permit conditions related to sludge? If yes, check ❑ Yes
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:
32. Were any additional problems noted which cause non-compliance of the permit or CAWMP?
33. Did the Reviewer/Inspector fail to discuss review/inspection with an on -site representative?
34. Does the facility require a follow-up visit by the same agency?
©-No- ❑ NA ❑ NE
L_I 1" o ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Yes ,It ­
Yes NE
❑ NA ❑
❑ Yes o ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Yes Q-141o­ ❑ NA ❑ NE
[:]Yes ©-ilo- ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Yes ['INo ❑ NA ❑ NE
[—]Yes E:fNo ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Yes [ 1,90
❑ Yes -
❑ Yes ETNo
❑NA ❑NE
❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ NA ❑ NE
Comments (refer to question ft Explain any YES answers and/or any additionalrecommendations or any other comments.
Use drawings of facility to better explain situations (use additional pages as necessary).
C{ Tc-- 30s- R 5(
Reviewer/Inspector Name:
Reviewer/Inspector Signatm
Page 3 of 3
Phone:70'
Date: &A l
21412015