820465_Inspection_20200812

_ ,.._, - f� - r� f 13
r
1 LP
e. .-- - ..-,.v. .,t.,..,..,Ki,,,4.:44,4-7:74:-..,:stliii',.:-. ..ii_=,',:i4;1,4itv,r-4 il,:,1.jruel;'fi7.014 i ti''''.41i 1 4,1,4',,... tfit.'tt,-...S.ArAtleAKkiwfifit.:*4324.4.":13.1'.0 --."1`,1-*.,54'S
; 4 . 1 em 4. - - , <
pe of Visit: ( 6) Nance Inspection 0 Operation Review 0 Structure Evaluation 0 Technical Assistance 1
ason for Visit: O Routine 0 Complaint 0 Follow-up 0 Referral 0 Emergency 0 Other 0 Denied Access I
to of Visit: j;1 • T'' Arrival Time: 1 to /- Departure Time:Well' County: Cu-itRegion: 0
rm Name:
evei.k to 3 1 Owner Email: 8 z' (D.c
vner Name: l i lk,A#l- 017101k, `1--C" Phone:
ailing Address: - 1
I
I
ysical Address: i
I �[ tJ c 1
cility Contact: (till. '1 b s Title: Phone: +
isite Representative: tC Integrator: rr`
6— Sett;4-tett-ckig i
:rtified Operator: T014. l 8. 41,0t i' c. Certification Number: ( $ge g
ick-up Operator: Certification Number:
i
)cation of Farm: Latitude: Longitude:
i
l
.��,,,yyAfg,^�L$� e ' �0 vz�:;`- v ,�� s 2y��j f^ �+,��'�+R�," �,<..t' + 'Yer -pg¢ �=� ` fir �s-'i. +a ^��„ - ' _� i
S' *,,,. R- �.+�. Ye}1 ..1fY3��'s12 ,, ,-,5 gmt y K r`at.*�.:I - '+k T --,-` El* 'aL. 1.
'- '�'�a,„. ��a�v a,.'-." "�G �:+.,,��7 . � � Y-S a� sF�R�i�}a e� � �--'+A� x*">'�. -.. �r .2x�"r'`t��� �c_�`� D K� � I
k ._,' n"he Q.7r a, 1'Po . k'4 si s "i'v S a 'E' 4 =-k.-. ,,, `4 ` 'k"��
x� t-,3'A 4� t �` ;^?.A-tayk �` .'AAA-'',i _. �h" ne� , .,..,r� ...' , -'"~ .` R:r ;�1" -'"':�: 3-,:ice-s
I Wean to Finish ,� Layer le E Dai Cow k- j
Wean to Feeder Non La er 4--t �Dai Calf #
4.$— A u 14 I.Dai Heifer
Feeder to Finish /Otf 16 '7h �� � � ■ --
Farrow to Wean T AAA�P V t 'Curre7 , D Cow
Farrow to Feeder 1 t r . :'ae _-'4' , t; UNon-Da' ��
,
Farrow to Finish e
Beef Stocker --
Non-La ers � Beef Feeder --
Gilts �� �� �
' —°X.�Beef Brood Cow
Boars Pullets
ems. + r 'r r --It -1^-�
- - Turke Poults -- ' nb
Other �Other ap �. z€ � `� �.�
: ,a s�_f: .. n4..,v�- : 3 w_. -_. te ar-,.. ,..,��. .. . .. � _ Mx.,. k� _x
Discharges and Stream Impacts
.Is any discharge observed from any part of the operation? ❑ Yes No ❑ NA n NE
•
Discharge originated at: ❑ Structure ❑ Application Field ❑ Other: /
a. Was the conveyance man-made? ❑ Yes ❑ No [g'N ❑ 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 [� ❑ NA ❑ NE
potential adverse impacts to the waters ❑ Yes No ❑ NA ❑ NE
3.Were there any observable adverse impacts or P
of the State other than from a discharge? ,
Page 1 of 3 2/4/2015 Continued

Facility Number: 8 2_ - i{t,.5 Date of Inspection:6042s' 2144
Waste Collection&Treatment •
4.Is storage capacity(structural plus storm storage plus heavy rainfall)less than adequate? El Yes © ❑ 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): 33
5.Are there any immediate threats to the integrity of any of the structures observed? ❑ Yes IA-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 17 ❑ 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 L=1 1Vo ❑ 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 ❑No ❑ NA ❑ NE
maintenance or improvement?
Waste Application �
10.Are there any required buffers,setbacks,or compliance alternatives that need ❑ Yes u No ❑ NA ❑ NE
maintenance or improvement?
11.Is there evidence of incorrect land application?If yes,check the appropriate box below. ❑ Yes ❑o ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Excessive Ponding ❑ Hydraulic Overload El Frozen Ground ❑ Heavy Metals(Cu,Zn,etc.)
❑ PAN ❑ PAN> 10%or 10 lbs. El Total Phosphorus ❑ Failure to Incorporate Manure/Sludge into Bare Soil
❑ Outside of Acceptable Crop Window El Evidence of Wind Drift ❑ Application Outside of Approved Area
12.Crop Type(s): C,f "Rew S6' 0 C�✓ •
13.Soil Type(s): de JD ®d'` K.,
14.Do the receiving crops differ from those designated in the CAWMP? ❑ Yes [ o ❑ 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 l l- 6o ❑ NA ❑ NE
acres determination?
17.Does the facility lack adequate acreage for land application? ❑ Yes 10 ❑ NA ❑ NE
18.Is there a lack of properly operating waste application equipment? ❑ Yes Io El NA ❑ NE
Required Records&Documents
19.Did the facility fail to have the Certificate of Coverage&Permit readily available? ❑ Yes to ❑ 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 El Checklists ❑Design ❑Maps ❑Lease Agreements El Other:
21.Does record keeping need improvement?If yes,check the appropriate box below. ❑ Yes �No 0 NA El NE
El Waste Application ❑Weekly Freeboard El Waste Analysis ❑Soil Analysis ❑Waste Transfers .❑Weather Code
❑Rainfall ❑Stocking El Crop Yield ❑120 Minute Inspections ❑Monthly and 1" Rainfall Inspections El Sludge Survey
22.Did the facility fail to install and maintain a rain gauge? . ❑ Yes 10 ❑ NA ❑ NE
23.If selected,did the facility fail to install and maintain rainbreakers on irrigation equipment? ❑ Yes IheNo ❑ NA ❑ NE
Page 2 of 3 2/4/2015 Continued

Facility Number: 82, - Libs Date of Inspection ( .. 2
?4.Did the facility fail to calibrate waste application equipment as required by the permit? ❑ Yes [ -IQo ❑ NA ❑ NE
Z5.Is the facility out of compliance with permit conditions related to sludge? If yes,check ❑ Yes l=N ❑ 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 [-,-Icro ❑ NA ❑ NE
27.Did the facility fail to secure a phosphorus loss assessments(PLAT)certification? ❑ Yes to ❑ NA ❑ NE
Other Issues
28.Did the facility fail to properly dispose of dead animals with 24 hours and/or document ❑ Yes o ❑ 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 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 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? ❑ Yes [rNo ❑ NA ❑ NE
33.Did the Reviewer/Inspector fail to discuss review/inspection with an on-site representative? ❑ Yes Lo ❑ NA ❑ NE
34.Does the facility require a follow-up visit by the same agency? ❑ Yes El< ❑ NA ❑ NE
Comments(re€er to questtofl#} Explain any DES answers and/or any additi al rechmmendattons of any athe�r comments
0:0 d ra trigs of facility to better explain 01144ons(use as dittonal pag0.*necessary} i. .... `...,
+01 c_( t_ , t 5 ®FC
liaree"Aeck
a Ciczok. tt td ,
l I
�. cuo 308 - 66 5
Reviewer/Inspector Name: ?(I t DIP Phone: t(`1(3 3 33 r
it‘, 610
Reviewer/Inspector Signature: v 1r
Date: Iz, 4.V6 Ozt2
Page 3 of 3 2/4/2015