440036_Inspection_20201209

Division of Water Resources
Facility Number ®- 1 136 O Division of Soil and Water Conservation
O Other Agency
Type of Visit: ®Compliance Inspection 0 Operation Review O Structure Evaluation 0 Technical Assistance
Reason for Visit: O Routine O Complaint O Follow-up O Referral O Emergency O Other O Denied Access
Date of Visit ( Arrival Time: Znn1.�^D, Depparture Time: !JXj A County: Region:
ply
Farm Name: i� r �uW l !e°-� Owner Email:
Owner Name: '" {..�pQ,((// �/ 0,1y'/�L/+SrJ! n ' Phone: / UZ� �' i7VZ�? g'�— (� � �'0W
Mailing Address: &Y c�`y / �i(n-Ilse-l- " � t� �r'qq�� rl%C—.
Physical Address: - �F4 /U L
Facility Contact-. K�[�S Title: Cysp-{/,L Phone:
Onsite Representative: �� LI yea Integrator: �u //��
Certified Operator: Certification Number: /Q' LA3 -;y&&0
Back-up Operator:
Certification Number:
Location of Farm: Latitude: Longitude:
Its 5ti&s uk- 0clf-/ -(Uaj I A'("(es
2t%&MT t^- 0.5 1UA le--9 J-0 mat C I9ibU7_ 3-,P IZn!
Design Current
Design
Current
Swine Capacity Pop.
Wet Poultry
Capacity
Pop.
Wean to Finish
Layer
Wean to Feeder
on -Layer
Feeder to Finish
Farrow to Wean
Design
Current
Other
Other
Discharges and Stream Impacts
1. is any discharge obseived 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)? _
d. Does the discharge bypass the waste management system? (If yes, notify DWR)
2. Is there evidence of a past discharge from any part of the operation?
3. Were there any observable adverse impacts or potential adverse impacts to the waters
of the State other than from a discharge?
Design Current
Cattle Capacity Pop.
Dairy Cow
Dairy Calf
Dan Heifer
DryCow
Non -Dairy
Beef Stocker
Beef Feeder
Beef Brood Cow
❑ Yes [il-No ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Yes ❑ No ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Yes ❑ No ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Yes
❑ No
❑ NA
❑ NE
❑ Yes
5KNo
❑ NA
❑ NE
❑ Yes
P!�No
❑ NA
❑ NE
Page I of 3 21412015 Continued

Facili Number: Date of Ins ection:
Waste Collection & Treatment
4. Is storage capacity (structural plus storm storage plus heavy rainfall) less than adequate?
❑ Yes
❑ NA
❑ NE
a. Ifyes, is waste level into the structural freeboard?
❑ Yes
�.&No
O6 No
❑ NA
❑ NE
Structurg�L Structure 2 Structure 3 Structure 4
Structure 5
Structure 6
Identifier:1��-'
Spillway?:E��
Designed Freeboard (in):
Observed Freeboard (in): �b(,
5. Are there any immediate threats to the integrity of any ofthe structures observed?
❑ Yes
No ,,,,,,--------,,,,,,((((((
❑ 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
tgg.: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
15dNo
❑ NA
❑ NE
maintenance or improvement?
Waste Application
10. Are there any required buffers, setbacks, or compliance alternatives that need ❑ Yes EA1go ❑ NA ❑ NE
maintenance or improvement? ---,,,trr
11. is there evidence of incorrect land application? If yes, check the appropriate box below. ❑ Yes Fyf No ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Excessive Pending ❑ Hydraulic Overload ❑ Frozen Ground ❑ Heavy Metals (Co, Zn, etc.)I
❑ 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. Cmp Type(s): 60" �n�/'i'�.C— .�'iGG-Q� /
13. Soil Type(s): /Uh'�' 6014— 1stGl.1. l4 Li" L. Le df 0 eJ A-&— �>11110612-0
14. Do the receiving crops differ from those designated in the CAWMP? ❑ Yes Eq
No ❑ NA ❑ NE
l5. Does the receiving crop and/or land application site need improvements ❑Yes MNo ❑ NA ❑ NE
16. Did the facility fail to secure and/or operate per the irrigation design or wettable ❑ Yes [s,No ❑ NA ❑ NE
acres determination?
17. Does the Facility lack adequate acreage for land application?
❑ Yes
qNo
❑ NA
❑ NE
18. Is them a lack of properly operating waste application equipment?
❑ Yes
gNo
❑ NA
❑ NE
Required Records & Documents
19. Did the facility fail to have the Certificate of Coverage & Permit readily available?
❑ Yes
[84qo
❑ NA
❑ NE
20. Does the facility fail to have all components of the CAWMP readily available? If yes, check
❑ Yes
r5d No
❑ NA
❑ HE
the appropriate box.
❑WUP ❑Checklists ❑Design ❑Maps ❑ Lease Agreements
❑Other:
21. Does record keeping need improvement? If yes, check the appropriate box below.
❑ Yes
,ter
of No
❑ NA
❑ NE
❑ Waste Application ❑ Weekly Freeboard ❑ Waste Analysis ❑ Soil Analysis
❑ Waste Ti
ansfer's
❑ Weather
Code
❑ Rainfall ❑ Stocking ❑ Crop Yield ❑ 120 Minute Inspections ❑ Monthly and I" Rainfall Inspections
❑ Sludge Survey
22. Did the facility fail to install and maintain a rain gauge?
❑ Yes
6No
❑ NA
❑ NE
23. If selected, did the facility fail to install and maintain rambreakers on irrigation equipment?
❑ Yes
KN.
❑ NA
❑ NE
Page 2 of 3 .
21412015 Continued

Facili Number: Date of Inspection: Z'C9
24. Did the facility £ail 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
E.No ❑ NA ❑ NE
the appropriate box(es) below.
❑ Failure to complete annual sludge survey ❑Failure to develop a PDA 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
E. No ❑ NA ❑ NE
27. Did the facility fail to secure a phosphorus loss assessments (PLAT) certification?
❑ Yes
[XNo ❑ NA ❑ NE
Other Issues
28, Did the facility fail to properly dispose of dead animals with 24 hours and/or document
❑ Yes
[4No ❑ 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
�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
%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
1
K No ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ 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
,, ,(
y� No ❑ NA ❑ NE
34. Does the facility require a follow-up visit by the same agency?
❑ Yes
7 C No ❑ NA ❑ NE
a i, %Yzv'h DnJ W i I( /p- cLo- t o
mod; ��i �e7 c'u'S' sre�r �49� E�� r /4 z �M;fi�
acre_ iie-r Ve jV Auw�C,
Reviewer/Inspector Name: Phone: p
Reviewer/Inspector Signature: Date:
Page 3 of 3 2/4/2015