630006_Inspection_20190225

T
1S I rvl ) cl 0 f wb C Iy
Cf Division of Water Resources
Facility -Huber - I� O Division of Soil and Water Conservation
O Other Agency
Type of Visit: Compliance Inspection O 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: S" Arrival Time: I Ce ` Departure Time: County:
Farm Name: "Ar �� �� Owner Email:
Owner Name: Phone:
Mailing Address:
Neco�-_ Regiol-
Physical Address:
Facility Contact: 1VV- lcb ✓-,f Title: Phone:
Onsite Representative: Integrator: V' Z" Gi S
Certified Operator: C�i'Y` rJ� f I S�� I Certification Number:
Back-up Operator:
Location of Farm:
Swine
Wean to Finish
Wean to Feeder
Feeder to Finish
Farrow to Wean
Farrow to Feeder
Farrow to Finish
Gilts
Boars
Other
Other
Certification Number:
Latitude:
Design Current Design Current
Capacity Pop. Wet Poultry Capacity Pop.
Layer
Non -Layer
Design Current
Dry Poultry Capacity 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?
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)?
Longitude:
Design Current
Cattle Capacity Pop.
Dairy Cow
Dairy Calf
Dairy Heifer
Dry Cow
Non -Dairy
Beef Stocker
Beef Feeder
Beef Brood Cow
I
❑ Yes No ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Yes ❑ No ❑-NA ❑ NE
❑ Yes ❑ No Ej,<A ❑ NE
d. Does the discharge bypass the waste management system? (If yes, notify DWR) ❑ Yes ❑ No O NA ❑ NE
2. Is there evidence of a past discharge from any part of the operation? ❑ Yes �o ❑ NA ❑ NE
3. Were there any observable adverse impacts or potential adverse impacts to the waters ❑ Yes EKNo ❑ NA ❑ NE
of the State other than from a discharge?
Page I of 3 21412015 Continued

Facility Number: - Date of Inspection: ,
Waste 061lection &'Treatment
4. Is storage capacity (structural plus storm storage plus heavy rainfall) less than adequate? ❑ Yes [ Ib o ❑ NA ❑ NE
a. If yes, is waste level into the structural freeboard? ❑ Yes ❑ No -® NA ❑ NE
Structure 1 Structure 2 Structure 3 Structure 4
Structure 5
Structure 6
Identifier:
Spillway?:
Designed Freeboard (in):
Observed Freeboard (in): �l
5. Are there any immediate threats to the integrity of any of the structures observed?
❑ Yes
®'N 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
No
❑ 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
©'Iqo
❑ NA
❑ NE
8. Do any of the structures lack adequate markers as required by the permit?
❑ Yes
[, No
❑ 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
[j- o
❑ NA
❑ NE
maintenance or improvement?
Waste Application
10. Are there any required buffers, setbacks, or compliance alternatives that need
[:]Yes
No
❑ NA
❑ NE
lntenance Or im rovement9
ma p
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):
13. Soil Type(s): rtS U t^4 /
14. Do the receiving crops differ from those designated in the CAWMP? ❑ Yes J�po ❑ NA ❑ NE
I
15. Does the receiving crop and/or land application site need improvement? El Yes ` No ❑ NA ❑ NE
16. Did the facility fail to secure and/or operate per the irrigation design or wettable ❑ Yes No ❑ NA ❑ NE
acres determination?
/
17. Does the facility lack adequate acreage for land application?
❑ Yes
❑ No
❑ NA
❑ NE
18. Is there a lack of properly operating waste application equipment?
❑ Yes
" No
❑ NA
❑ NE
Required Records & Documents
19. Did the facility fail to have the Certificate of Coverage & Permit readily available?
❑ Yes
ET<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 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? ❑ gNo
Yes ❑ NA ❑ NE
Page 2 of 3 21412015 Continued

Facility Number: jDate of Inspection:
24. Did tree facility fail to calibrate waste application equipment as required by the permit?
❑ Yes No ❑ NA ❑ NE
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 OTIo ❑ NA ❑ NE
27. Did the facility fail to secure a phosphorus loss assessments (PLAT) certification?
❑ Yes o ❑ NA ❑ NE
Other Issues
28. Did the facility fail to properly dispose of dead animals with 24 hours and/or document
❑ Yes EjNo ❑ 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 EJ'No ❑ 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 El -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?
❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Yes �No
33. Did the Reviewer/Inspector fail to discuss review/inspection with an on -site representative?
❑ Yes ❑ NA ❑ NE
34. Does the facility require a follow-up visit by the same agency?
❑ Yes [ 'No ❑ 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).
-3, -L, � s �
Reviewer/Inspector Name:
Reviewer/Inspector Signature: �
Page 3 of 3
Phone:l
Date:•
2141201 S