090031_Inspection_20200331

‘ x-; 2' r3...t C 1 :: . ,= `` fili DiVisit)n of:Watet _ ,}.. ,,*Wit. . $ -
iltur` iy N ' � d Division of Soil and Water Conservation` r
� „,
pe of Visit: *Compliance Inspection 0 Operation Review 0 Structure Evaluation 0 Technical Assistance
ason for Visit: fill Routine 0 Complaint 0 Follow-up 0 Referral 0 Emergency 0 Other 0 Denied Access
to of Visit: 3 al,,,,„), ,W Arrival Time:( }a4 I(.S Departure Time: //k/p g County: 6 ia)eA Region:F4 y
rm Name: Ld f r—t-,""1 `7 N tIS— I Owner Email: a I w15 ,..Aj)t (_oaO ij1
1
i
vner Name: rn uv- ii r ig `��, L. ,'t L 1—.c
Phone: i
ailing Address: i
i
ysical Address: 1
i
tcility Contact: n'(1 Ke- ,6-1)1 in C 11 5 Title: Phone: JJ1 (� I
site Representative:
Integrator: _cm i 11-1-1�`t-t c,
;rtified Operator: �� Certification Number: 4:1•P?
ick-up Operator: Certification Number:
)cation of Farm: Latitude: Longitude:
Design Current Design Current Design Current
4 Swine Capacity Pop. Wet Poultry Capacity Pop. Cattle Capacity Pop.
wean to Finish -- Layer Dairy Cov,
�Wean to Feeder -- Y
Non La era Dairy Calf
Feeder to Finish � I Dairy Heifer
Farrow to Wean 111.111111—- . Design Current Dry Cow
Farrow to Feeder -- I. Poultry Ca iaci. Po I. Non-Dairy
'�Farrow to Finish —_ IMMENIMINI-- Beef Stocker
'MI Gilts -- R Non-La ers -- Beef Feeder
Beef Brood Cow
��Boars -- �Pullets
, ,
,Dther`\ ' sa I Turke Poults
-__ �t)ther Other
)ischarees and Stream Impacts
.Is any discharge observed from any part of the operation? n Yes ❑-i D NA ❑ NE
Discharge originated at: ❑ Structure ❑ Application Field ❑ Other:
a. Was the conveyance man-made? I I Yes ❑ No FTICIA I i NE
b. Did the discharge reach waters of the State?(If yes,notify DWR) n Yes ❑ No J NA n 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) I I Yes n No ' NA ❑ NE
Z.Is there evidence of a past discharge from any part of the operation? Yes E No ❑ NA n NE
3.Were there any observable adverse impacts or potential adverse impacts to the waters I f Yes [1 No (l NA (i NE
of the State other than from a discharge?
Page 1 of 3 2/4/2015 Continued

Facility Number: 9 - 3 / Date of Inspection: /
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 ®_iA ❑ NE
Structure 1 Structure 2 Structure 3 Structure 4 Structure 5 Structure 6
Identifier: /.7c&
Spillway?:
Designed Freeboard(in):
Observed Freeboard(in): 7 -t 2-
5.Are there any immediate threats to the integrity of any of the structures observed? ❑ Yes ©�Io ❑ 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 ❑- ❑ 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? n Yes ❑ NA (—] NE
8.Do any of the structures lack adequate markers as required by the permit? n Yes lErNo ❑ NA n 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 Et N ❑ NA ❑ NE
maintenance or improvement?
Waste Application
10.Are there any required buffers,setbacks, or compliance alternatives that need n Yes No ❑ NA ❑ NE
maintenance or improvement?
11.Is there evidence of incorrect land application?If yes,check the appropriate box below. ❑ Yes 127No ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Excessive Ponding ❑ Hydraulic Overload ❑ Frozen Ground D 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): C P
13.Soil Type(s): /.E e.+s'6 t C 0 Q// 4
14.Do the receiving crops differ from those designated in the CAWMP? ❑ Yes (No n NA ❑ NE
15.Does the receiving crop and/or land application site need improvement? ❑ Yes ❑ 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 allo ❑ NA ❑ NE
18.Is there a lack of properly operating waste application equipment? ❑ Yes Do ❑ NA ❑ NE
Required Records&Documents
19.Did the facility fail to have the Certificate of Coverage&Permit readily available? ❑ Yes I:1 No ❑ NA ❑ NE
20.Does the facility fail to have all components of the CAWMP readily available?If yes,check n Yes No NA n 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
(1 Waste Application n Weekly Freeboard ❑Waste Analysis ❑Soil Analysis ❑Waste Transfers ❑Weather Code
(1 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 I ❑ NA El NE
23.If selected,did the facility fail to install and maintain rainbreakers on irrigation equipment? El Yes DO No ❑ NA ❑ NE
Page 2 of 3 2/4/2015 Continued

Facility Number: CI - 3 j 'Date of Inspection: Si 1417 a O
24.Did the facility fail to calibrate waste application equipment as required by the permit? ❑ Yes ❑ NA ❑ NE
25.Is the facility out of compliance with permit conditions related to sludge? If yes,check ❑ Yes 121/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 Erlo ❑ NA ❑ NE
27.Did the facility fail to secure a phosphorus loss assessments(PLAT)certification? ❑ Yes El/No ❑ NA ❑ NE
Other Issues
28.Did the facility fail to properly dispose of dead animals with 24 hours and/or document (i Yes El No ❑ NA n 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 [ o ❑ 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 E10 n 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 124 ❑ NA fl NE
❑ Application Field ❑ Lagoon/Storage Pond ❑ Other:
32.Were any additional problems noted which cause non-compliance of the permit or CAWMP? ❑ Yes aPQo ❑ NA ❑ NE
33.Did the Reviewer/Inspector fail to discuss review/inspection with an on-site representative? ❑ Yes Er< ❑ NA ❑ NE
34. Does the facility require a follow-up visit by the same agency? n Yeso ❑ 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):
r `i S( ye S4crtyey S ` — t
fL
C -64c-
Hu a a
twtbi- A
(tecody,e, u cew q c µl r d,,L t 4(p ti t t Z Z
Reviewer/Inspector Name: 1.( U UF? Phone:
Reviewer/Inspector Signature: Li) .60tPir Date: '3 6`
Pare 3 of 3
2/4/2015