300010_Inspection_20191210

Division of Water Resources S v 1—(1
Facility Number % Q - ‘0 Division of Soil and Water Conservation
0 Other Agency
Type of Visit: Compliance Inspection 0 Operation Review 0 Structure Evaluation 0 Technical Assistance
Reason for Visit: p Routine 0 Complaint 0 Follow-up 0 Referral 0 Emergency 0 Other 0 Denied Access
Date of Visit: "I Arrival Time:Rigmo , Departure Time: County: AV`t% Region:Wj�(�
1 .,..P i°
Farm Name: �I j V/9,u3 'Ftrrr\.,J Owner Email:
Owner Name: 10 ne., l,l}l- Phone: '. 6— gOci - 1311
Mailing Address: 0(:) j 'i (yak/V.t/I `/tf cDC-SV1 I I G N`j D 2-Ng
Physical Address:
Facility Contact: V.)a-i -e- V"i. 2- Title: Phone:
Onsite Representative: \/ Integrator:
Certified Operator: V Certification Number:
Back-up Operator: Certification Number:
Location of Farm: Latitude: 146" Longitude: NO -1 0 pH
T40 .D i i\‘01 c 7 coy)°, Rck-2 OD w*Z (,n .
Design Current Design Current Design Current
Swine Capacity Pop. Wet Poultry Capacity Pop. Cattle Capacity Pop.
Wean to Finish Layer ' Dairy Cow 0
Wean to Feeder Non-Layer Dairy Calf
Feeder to Finish Dairy Heifer (t
Farrow to Wean Design Current Dry Cow
Farrow to Feeder D Poult Ca'ad Po I. Non-Dairy
Farrow to Finish MEST -- Beef Stocker
Gilts •Non-La ers -- Beef Feeder
Boars El Pullets -- Beef Brood Cow
IMEMEMIIIII
Other •Turke Poults
Other •Other
Discharges and Stream Impacts
1. Is any discharge observed from any part of the operation? ❑ Yes ( No ❑ NA ❑ NE
Discharge originated at: ❑ Structure ❑ Application Field ❑ Other: T�
a. Was the conveyance man-made? ❑ Yes ❑ No ❑ NA ❑ NE
b. Did the discharge reach waters of the State?(If yes, notify DWR) ❑ Yes ❑ No ❑ 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 (A No ❑ NA ❑ NE
3. Were there any observable adverse impacts or potential adverse impacts to the waters ❑ Yes ttkNo ❑ NA ❑ NE
of the State other than from a discharge?
Page 1 of 3 2/4/2015 Continued

Facility Number: 'd - C. Date of Inspection: Li ( - j9
Waste Collection&Treatment
4.Is storage capacity(structural plus storm storage plus heavy rainfall) less than adequate? ❑ Yes [ No ❑ 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: OC p
Spillway?:
Designed Freeboard(in):
Observed Freeboard(in): 1)'
'1
5.Are there any immediate threats to the integrity of any of the structures observed? ❑ Yes Wo ❑ 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 Itl No ❑ NA ❑ NE
8.Do any of the structures lack adequate markers as required by the permit? ❑ Yes Dtl.No 0 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 IL41,No ❑ NA ❑ NE
maintenance or improvement?
Waste Application
10.Are there any required buffers, setbacks,or compliance alternatives that need ❑ Yes IN No ❑ NA ❑ NE
maintenance or improvement? '
11.Is there evidence of incorrect land application? If yes,check the appropriate box below. ❑ Yes to No ❑ NA ❑ NE
El 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): .&SMUQ Facchft..
13. Soil Type(s):
14. Do the receiving crops differ from those designated in the CAWMP? ❑ Yes IA No ❑ NA n NE
15. Does the receiving crop and/or land application site need improvement? ❑ Yes IX No ❑ NA ❑ NE
16.Did the facility fail to secure and/or operate per the irrigation design or wetta le ❑ Yes 7 No ❑ NA ❑ NE
acres determination?Wfikatott, QC• \Js• So\iASQYPad at* r
17. Does the facility lack adequate acreage for land application?' ❑ Yes NI No ❑ NA ❑ NE
18. Is there a lack of properly operating waste application equipment? ❑ Yes ryl No 0 NA ❑ NE
Required Records&Documents
19.Did the facility fail to have the Certificate of Coverage& Permit readily available? ❑ Yes Irk1 No ❑ NA ❑ NE
20.Does the facility fail to have all components of the CAWMP readily available? If yes,check ❑ Yes 7(No ❑ NA ❑ NE
the appropriate box. T
DWUP ❑Checklists ❑Design ❑Maps ❑ Lease Agreements El Other:
21. Does record keeping need improvement? If yes,check the appropriate box below. ❑ Yes No ❑ NA ❑ NE
Waste Application Weekly Freeboard Waste Analysis q1 Soil Analysis Bather Code
Rainfall 0 3lvkli.fg ElCrop Yiold, 0420„tin eetia ^ AMonthly and 1" Rainfall Inspections
22. Did the facility fail to install and maintain a rain gauge? ❑ YesI%No ❑ NA ❑ NE
23. If selected,did the facility fail to install and maintain rainbreakers on irrigation equipment? ❑ Yes ❑ No 41 NA ❑ NE
Page 2 of 3 2/4/2015 Continued

Facility Number: 7jO - \Q Date of Inspection: q i,--q 19
24.Did the 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. I
❑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 Wo ❑ NA ❑ NE
27. Did the facility fail to secure a phosphorus loss assessments(PLAT)certification? ❑ Yes 14 No ❑ NA ❑ NE
Other Issues
28. Did the facility fail to properly dispose of dead animals with 24 hours and/or document ❑ Yes 11 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 NI'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 K1 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
D 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 qNo ❑ NA ❑ NE
Comments(refer to(*mks#):Explain any YES answers apd/od any additional K 4 or any otIer tL `
Use drawings of latilityinbetbreel OdditioffiR.s as -
q. Diu s-0 (f -rrrS
5f=z t n o v, 0
fylv i e +A--i- 12CJ2Ar+ U of a'^d CGt(i rzCf-r 7
USQd Vk -'S Ov
l�� 9 1uvx5 Ir�sc w d Slvrri( V1aUl �� n b Lei
MpQ
, o bay +n i Y 1`� rke_ ds �.�Aek.J .
\46 C 1,a--e a 3( D n - )c e r Lo4o
Cap+ 6 A v I V'&c L4-e. .
14101 G I let
0.6
Reviewer/Inspector Name: IiaLlY24 Q acti& ,QX Phone: ,1b--01 1Q9
Reviewer/Inspector Sign Date: 121 ti b'I \
Page 3 of 3 2/4/2015