620006_Inspection_20200206

(Type of Visit: ('C—ommpHance Inspection O Operation Review O Structure Evaluation O Technical Assistance I
Reason for Visit: O Routine O Complaint O Follow-up O Referral O Emergency O Other O Denied Access
Date of Visit: Arrival Time: Departure Time: a p County: 610lt Region4c�z
Farm Name: �`—
Owner Name:
Mailing Address:
Physical Address:
Facility Contact: ��IAI el? Qt ✓ Title:
Onsite Representative:
Certified Operator: r I(
Back-up Operator:
Location of Farm:
Latitude:
Owner Email:
Phone:
Phone:
Integrator: rrqc
Certification Number:
Certification Number:
Longitude:
Design
Current �� Design `CurrentesigCurrent€
wuune Gapaety
>?op�et,P ry apa o
oult C city P
= fop
Cattle nyt
Wean to Finish
I ILayer
Dairy Cow
E
Wean to Feeder gJ00
76 &,RS ° °le Non -Layer I
Dairy Calf
Feeder to Finish
Dairy Heifer
..<
Farrow to Weana
`Design
Cu rirent
Dry Cow
Farrow to Feeder
_ Dxoultr C,a iaci'
PINon-Dairy
Farrow to Finish
Layers
lBeef Stocker
I Beef Feeder
z Gilts Non -Layers
Boars
<< Pullets
113eef Brood Cow
Turkeys
(latter -_
Turkey Poults
Other
Discharees and Stream Impacts
1. Is any discharge observed from any part of the operation?
❑ Yes
E34+o--❑ NA
❑ NE
Discharge originated at: ❑ Structure ❑ Application Field ❑ Other:
a. Was the conveyance man-made?
❑ Yes
❑ No
ETNVA
❑ NE
b. Did the discharge reach waters of the State? (If yes, notify DWR)
❑ Yes
❑ No
E NA
❑ 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
NA
❑ NE
2. Is there evidence of a past discharge from any part of the operation?
❑ Yes
EJNo
❑ NA
❑ NE
3. Were there any observable adverse impacts or potential adverse impacts to the waters
❑ Yes
Fj'No
❑ NA
❑ NE
of the State other than from a discharge?
Page I of 3 21412015 Continued

Facility Number: - Date of Inspection:
m
'
Waste Collection & Treatment
4. Is storage capacity (structural plus storm storage plus heavy rainfall) less than adequate?
❑ Yes
-_ NA
❑ 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):
Observed Freeboard (in):
5. Are there any immediate threats to the integrity of any of the structures observed?
❑ Yes
E �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]'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
No ❑ 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
/
❑moo ❑ NA
❑ NE
maintenance or improvement?
Waste Application
10. Are there any required buffers, setbacks, or compliance alternatives that need
❑ Yes
No ❑ NA
❑ NE
t t0
am enance or improvemen .
11. Is there evidence of incorrect land application? If yes, check the appropriate box below. ❑ Yes rj 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): J'-e-'-SGL,/-C
I n -
13. Soil Type(s): as'Pr� to (// S I,-
14. Do the receiving crops differ from those designated in the CAWMP?
❑ Yes
❑ NA
❑ NE
15. Does the receiving crop and/or land application site need improvement?
❑ Yes
❑ o
❑ NA
❑ NE
16. Did the facility fail to secure and/or operate per the irrigation design or wettable
❑ Yes
EJ-No
❑ NA
❑ NE
acres determination?
17. Does the facility lack adequate acreage for land application?
❑ Yes
E3-N`6­
❑ NA
❑ NE
18. Is there a lack of properly operating waste application equipment?
❑ Yes
[a-N`6­
❑ NA
❑ NE
Required Records & Documents
19. Did facility fail have
the to 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
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 [214O
❑ 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? ❑ YesWXO
o
23. If selected, did the facility fail to install and maintain rainbreakers on irrigation equipment? ❑ Yes
❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Weather Code
❑ Sludge Survey
❑NA ❑NE
❑ NA ❑ NE
Page 2 of 3 21412015 Continued

Facility Number: jDate of Inspection:
24. Did the facility fail to calibrate waste application equipment as required by the permit?
❑ Yes
�o ❑ NA
❑ NE
25. Is the facility out of compliance with permit conditions related to sludge? If yes, check
❑ Yes
E]- o— ❑ 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
Ejvo ❑ 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?
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?
C-d� qlolu� VS(.
Reviewer/Inspector Name: 'h r
❑ Yes ,❑-Vo ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Yes No ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Yes ®'No ❑ NA ❑ NE
0 Yes 0 "o ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Yes / No
❑ Yes / No
❑ Yes <0
❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ NA ❑ NE
Phone:
Reviewer/Inspector Signature:
Page 3 of 3
Date:
21412015