820234_Inspection_20201118

Facility Number
Division of Water Resources In S ii f (f l 2
0 Division of Soil and Water Conservation
0 Other Agency
Type of Visit: 1 J Compliance Inspection 0 Operation Review 0 Structure Evaluation 0 Technical Assistance
Reason for Visit: 0 Routine 0 Complaint 0 Follow-up 0 Referral 0 Emergency 0 Other 0 Denied Access
Date of Visit:
Farm Name:
Owner Name:
ij•15.9U
Arrival Time
•. 6n
Departure Time:
ft in Ci rinad' Ron
Alien Cahndsi
Owner Email:
Phone:
County:
Region: FO
Mailing Address:
Physical Address: /-
Facility Contact: CU r I B( l Title: 17CH ' e c •
Onsite Representative: c 1 f `1 Q,
Certified Operator: r0; bett- fk in C a n wj n
Back-up Operator:
Location of Farm:
Latitude:
Phone:
Integrator: Sr'n I e 14
Certification Number: 91 (peif3,9,
Certification Number:
Longitude:
Swine
Design Current
Capacity Pop.
Wean to Finish
Wean to Feeder
Feeder to Finish
gri(DF
Farrow to Wean
Farrow to Feeder
Farrow to Finish
Gilts
Boars
Other
Other
Design Current
Wet Poultry Capacity Pop.
Layer
Non -Layer
Design Current
Dry Poultry Capacity Pop.
Layers
Non -Layers
Pullets
Turkeys
Turkey Poults
Other
Cattle
Design Current
Capacity Pop.
Dairy Cow
Dairy Calf
Dairy Heifer
Dry Cow
Non -Dairy
Beef Stocker
Beef Feeder
Beef Brood Cow
Discharges and Stream Impacts
1. Is any discharge observed from any part of the operation?
Discharge originated at: ❑ Structure ❑ Application Field
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?
❑ Yes No ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Other:
❑ Yes No ❑NA ❑NE
❑ Yes •:41 No ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Yes
❑ Yes
❑ Yes
No
No
No
❑NA ❑NE
❑NA ❑NE
❑ NA ❑ NE
Page 1 of 3
2/4/2015 Continued

Facility Number: -
Waste Collection & Treatment
Date of Inspection: i+ 116/ 'Jo
4. Is storage capacity (structural plus storm storage plus heavy rainfall) less than adequate?
a. If yes, is waste level into the structural freeboard?
Identifier:
Spillway?:
Designed Freeboard (in):
Observed Freeboard (in):
❑ Yes
❑ Yes
Structure 1 Structure 2 Structure 3 Structure 4 Structure 5
iv
21
5. Are there any immediate threats to the integrity of any of the structures observed?
(i.e., large trees, severe erosion, seepage, etc.)
6. Are there structures on -site which are not properly addressed and/or managed through a
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
VINo ❑NA ❑NE•
VIINo ❑NA ❑NE
Structure 6
7. Do any of the structures need maintenance or improvement?
8. Do any of the structures lack adequate markers as required by the permit?
(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
maintenance or improvement?
Waste Application
10. Are there any required buffers, setbacks, or compliance alternatives that need
maintenance or improvement?
11. Is there evidence of incorrect land application? If yes, check the appropriate box below.
❑ Yes '1'" No ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Yes pi No ❑ NA ❑ NE
Yes ❑ No
❑ Yes j] No
❑ NA
❑ NA
❑ NE
❑ NE
❑ Yes XI No ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Yes RI No ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Yes No ❑ 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
LI Outside of Acceptable Crop Window
, I ❑ Evidence of Wind Drift
12. Crop Type(s): &Qxrnti c1 Ct I OV-e r�-►'C, C d
13. Soil Type(s): q ovd� G'i[n
14. Do the receiving crops differ from hose
❑ Application Outside of Approved Area
designated
21. Does record keeping need improvement? If yes, check the appropriate box below.
❑ Waste Application ❑ Weekly Freeboard ❑ Waste Analysis ['Soil Analysis
❑ Rainfall ❑ Stocking ❑ Crop Yield ❑ 120 Minute Inspections ❑ Monthly and 1"
22. Did the facility fail to install and maintain a rain gauge?
23. If selected, did the facility fail to install and maintain rainbreakers on irrigation equipment?
Page 2 of 3
❑ Yes
OK NAY
KF
❑ Yes
❑ Yes
❑ Yes
❑ Yes
❑ Yes
0 No
I No
VIZ
No
No
gl No
1 No
❑ NA
❑ NA
❑ NA
❑ NA
❑ NA
❑ NA
❑ NA
❑ NE
❑ NE
❑ NE
❑ NE
❑ NE
❑ NE
❑ NE
❑ Yes Ai No ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Waste Transfers ❑ Weather Code
Rainfall Inspections LI Sludge Survey
❑ Yes
❑ Yes
No ❑NA ❑NE
No ❑ NA ❑ NE
2/4/2015 Continued

Facility Number: er) - /39
Date of Inspection: Ill IN f2
24. Did the facility fail to calibrate waste application equipment as required by the permit?
❑ Yes 4 No ❑ NA ❑ NE
25. Is the facility out of compliance with permit conditions related to sludge? If yes, check ❑ Yes kJ 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 Q No ❑ NA ❑ NE
27. Did the facility fail to secure a phosphorus loss assessments (PLAT) certification? ❑ Yes No ❑ NA ❑ NE
Other Issues
28. Did the facility fail to properly dispose of dead animals with 24 hours and/or document ❑ Yes © 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 © 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 El Yes Q 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 0 No ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Application Field ❑ Lagoon/Storage Pond El 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 No ❑ 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).
- Sivdge curve,' forms i•c dui. ciec '3o aoao
- ovace-ed h1C hot- b€erg p1Qr ec1. Covercro* feed, to b_e pijri-..ed
- g -oIA Hal oft sequprneht I b@ rng firecL
ititp. Ch.ec,K w-etc ble ncXrXG yovr f.rrffd-moll paff-ern 1-C flfr.
DnirigrpihC Lhoui ). Owe fhi c Ch.eGK2c.
�-: von< en wire. of. (cigoon, t-hzre e t.c
ipn
Reviewer/Inspector Name:
Kcu-f e Fohte1r
Phone:
Reviewer/Inspector Signature{< Q J (014 ( "
Page 3 of 3
Date: 111611:2''
2/4/2015