090060_Inspection_20201028

"° , Division of Water Resources. �, : ,.
.Facility Number ' 7 -` , 0 Division of Soil and Water Conservation
` :- , ` , Other��Agency n -
Type of Visit: CCmpliance Inspection 0 Operation Review 0 Structure Evaluation 0 Technical Assistance
Reason for Visit: O1utine 0 Complaint 0 Follow-up 0 Referral 0 Emergency 0 Others 0 Denied Access
Date of Visit:I/�ffi c7 Arrival Time: %f.?jam Departure Time: ,,'(,La] County: V *^.vwi. Region: FM
Farm Name: //7 7 -4 i01.444 f Owner Email:
Owner Name: 594,fell,a4 /7)rzyTc- f��rytt: // Phone:
•
Mailing Address:
Physical Address:
Facility Contact: 4€1 Zr/'iiv i( Title: /�1i) 1��, Phone:
Onsite Representative: 5� e..— Integrator: Awi Ti-a
Certified Operator: Ear,er 7y-%4s Certification Number: 9/7 CY
Back-up Operator: Certification Number:
Location of Farm: Latitude: Longitude:
Design Current Design Current E3 Design Current
,', Swine , 'I-Capacity Top. Wet,Poultry ',Capacity ,Pop., . Cattle, . Capacity Pop. a
Wan to Finish Layer Dairy Cow
—Wean to Feeder 400 f j 77 0 Non-Layer Dairy Calf
Feeder to Finish Dairy Heifer
Farrow to Wean - .zy Design .Current Dry Cow
Farrow to Feeder , D Poul Ca'aci Po I.` Non-Dairy
Farrow to Finish IMERE -- Beef Stocker
_Gilts I.Non-La ers -- Beef Feeder
Boars •Pullets -- Beef Brood Cow
Other •Turke Poults , -
Other •Other
Discharges and Stream Impacts �
1.Is any discharge observed from any part of the operation? El Yes E1-3 ❑ NA ❑ NE
Discharge originated at: ❑ Structure ❑ Application Field ❑ Other:
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 0 ❑ NA ❑ NE
3.Were there any observable adverse impacts or potential adverse impacts to the waters ❑ Yes ❑ NA ❑ NE
of the State other than from a discharge?
Page 1 of 3 2/4/2015 Continued

Facility Number: - tQ Date of Inspection: /12 Z2C
Waste Collection&Treatment
4.Is storage capacity(structural plus storm storage plus heavy rainfall)less than adequate? ❑ Yes LJ 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:
Spillway?:
Designed Freeboard(in): /
Observed Freeboard(in):
5.Are there any immediate threats to the integrity of any of the 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 lErZ ❑ 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? afes ❑ No ❑ NA ❑ NE
8.Do any of the structures lack adequate markers as required by the permit? ❑ Yes [/]o ❑ 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 �No ❑ NA ❑ NE
maintenance or improvement?
11.Is there evidence of incorrect land application?If yes,check the appropriate box below. ❑ Yes Erclo ❑ 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): `Z /lJdsrSz"z�1
13. Soil Type(s): /C'9
14.Do the receiving crops differ from those designated in the CAWMP? ❑ Yes [ f o ❑ NA ❑ NE
15.Does the receiving crop and/or land application site need improvement? Yes ❑ No ❑ NA ❑ NE
16.Did the facility fail to secure and/or operate per the irrigation design or wettable ❑ Yes Erg-O.- ❑ NA ❑ NE
acres determination?
17.Does the facility lack adequate acreage for land application? ',❑ Yes 0— ❑ NA ❑ NE
18.Is there a lack of properly operating waste application equipment? ,❑ Yes Q'Nlo ❑ NA ❑ NE
•
Required Records&Documents
19.Did the facility fail to have the Certificate of Coverage&Permit readily available? ❑}'Yes []'ITo ❑ NA ❑ NE
20.Does the facility fail to have all components of the CAWMP readily available?If yes,check , .0,Yeso ❑ 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 ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑Waste Application ❑Weekly Freeboard ❑Waste Analysis ❑Soil Analysis ❑Waste Transfers ❑Weather Code
❑Rainfall ❑Stocking ❑Crop Yield ❑120 Minute Inspections ❑Monthly and 1"Rainfall Inspections LI Sludge Survey
22.Did the facility fail to install and maintain a rain gauge? ❑ Yes No ❑ NA ❑ NE
23.If selected,did the facility fail to install and maintain rainbreakers on irrigation equipment? ❑ Yes �No ❑ NA ❑ NE
Page 2 of 3 2/4/2015 Continued

Facility Number: ?` -/¢0 Date of Inspection: 42' ,0At
24.Did the facility fail to calibrate waste application equipment as required by the permit? 0 Yes Q'lCro ❑ NA ❑ NE
25.Is the facility out of compliance with permit conditions related to sludge? If yes,check ❑ Yes io ❑ 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 ©moo ❑ NA ❑ NE
27.Did the facility fail to secure a phosphorus loss assessments(PLAT)certification? ❑ Yes lallo ❑ NA ❑ NE
Other Issues
28.Did the facility fail to properly dispose of dead animals with 24 hours and/or document ❑ Yes R''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 lErIV-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 IYNo ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑Application Field ❑ Lagoon/Storage Pond ❑ Other:
32.Were any additional problems noted which cause non-compliance of the permit or CAWMP? ❑ Yes E No ❑ NA ❑ NE
33.Did the Reviewer/Inspector fail to discuss review/inspection with an on-site representative? ❑ Yes 'o ❑ NA ❑ NE
34.Does the facility require a follow-up visit by the same agency? ❑ Yes 126o ❑ NA ❑ NE
Continents(refer to'question=#)rExplain any YES answers'and/or any additional recommendations or any other comments.,
Use drawings of facility*better explain situations(use4dditional pages as necessary).:
f s rea— pk. 7244 1-0DES G-r.
Cejt2 /201P TeY1 Ce7 der fr.1/17' ,ot-z-fds aette ,i.1—c-e---7e7Liao1/4
F7evpivdte ��7L11f� ,hOcv is-%_ t
( 17
Reviewer/Inspector Name: � r�L Phone: 'O-5-0
Reviewer/Inspector Signature: Date: It.)
Page 3 of 3 2/4/2015