780033_Inspection_20200129

0 Division of Water Resources
0 Division of Soil and Water Conservation
0 Other Agency
Type of Visit: Compliance Inspection 0 Operation Review 0 Structure Evaluation 0 Technical Assistance
Reason for Visit: 0 Routine 0 Complaint • Follow-up 0 Referral 0 Emergency 0 Other 0 Denied Access
Date of Visit:
Farm Name:
Arrival Time:
`(,A) coV\
Owner Name: 71)6/") tr `f /U't t " f`' v`cr"15
Departure Time:
Mailing Address:
Physical Address:
Facility Contact:
•
Owner Email:
Phone:
County:
AlCet Region:
Ai, Lk, t
Onsite Representative,: tatii5
/
Certified Operator:
Back-up Operator:
Location of Farm:
Title:
Latitude:
Integrator:
Phone:
Certification Number:
Certification Number:
Longitude:
J
Q tlf 5 er!t
ct.i� 1+,fir! r7
Wean to Finish
Wean to Feeder
Feeder to Finish
Farrow to Wean
Farrow to Feeder
Farrow to Finish
Boars
Other
Design Current
Capacity Pop.
1~_3e
wet Poultry Lapacrty rop.
Layer
Non -Layer
Design Current
D Poult Ca i acity Po f .
La ers
Non -Layers
Pullets
Turkeys
Turkey Pouets
Other --'
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 ❑ Other:
a. Was the conveyance man-made?
❑ Yes n` No 0 NA ❑ NE
❑ 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 0 No NA ❑ NE
2. Is there evidence of a past discharge from any part of the operation? ❑ Yes ❑ No ❑ NA ❑ NE
3. Were there any observable adverse impacts or potential adverse impacts to the waters ❑ Yes 0 No ❑ NA D NE
of the State other than from a discharge?
Page 1 of 3
2/4/2015 Continued

Facility Number: '% g - 33
Date of Inspection: lizql24)
Waste Collection & Treatment
4. Is storage capacity (structural plus storm storage plus heavy rainfall) less than adequate?
a. If yes, is waste level into the structural freeboard?
❑ Yes
❑ Yes
Structure 1 Structure 2 Structure 3 Structure 4 Structure 5
Identifier: 1 "'Co %rio 11'(
Spillway?:
Designed Freeboard (in):
Observed Freeboard (in):
Pig1 74
37 3(W g
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
No ❑ NA ❑ NE
No 4] NA ❑ NE
Structure 6
n Yes
❑NA ❑NE
❑ Yes yi No ❑ NA ❑ NE
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 y 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 E No ❑ NA 0 NE
maintenance or improvement?
11. Is there evidence of incorrect land application? If yes, check the appropriate box below. ❑ Yes [ No ❑ NA ❑ NE
n 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): 0.0q54v( 6c
13. Soil Type(s): ( j)(/ ` 1 e -,, )(LAA-,` 41 (dJltak` (14 _LILA) MiDna mitiT
14. Do the receiving crops differ from those designated in the CAWMP? ❑ Yes E] No ❑ 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 [79 No ❑ NA ❑ NE
acres determination?
17. Does the facility lack adequate acreage for land application? ❑ Yes ® No 0 NA ❑ NE
18. Is there a lack of properly operating waste application equipment? n Yes No ❑ NA ❑ NE
Required Records & Documents
19. Did the facility fail to have the Certificate of Coverage & Permit readily available? ❑ Yes No ❑ 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 ❑ Checklists ❑ Design ❑ Maps ❑ Lease Agreements ❑ Other:
21. Does record keeping need improvement? If yes, check the appropriate box below. ❑ Yes p No ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Waste Application ❑ Weekly Freeboard ❑ Waste Analysis n Soil Analysis ❑ Waste Transfers ❑ Weather Code
❑ Rainfall ❑ Stocking ❑ Crop Yield ❑ 120 Minute Inspections ❑ Monthly and 1" Rainfall Inspections 0 Sludge Survey
22. Did the facility fail to install and maintain a rain gauge? ❑ Yes T1 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

IFacihty Number: ; I 'Date of Inspection: / ' �Z ,' 1
� - ,�
24. Did the facility fail to calibrate waste application equipment as required by the permit? 0 Yes
25. Is the facility out of compliance with permit conditions related to sludge? If yes, check ❑ Yes
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?
27. Did the facility fail to secure a phosphorus loss assessments (PLAT) certification?
Other Issues
28. Did the facility fail to properly dispose of dead animals with 24 hours and/or document
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?
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
permit? (i.e., discharge, freeboard problems, over -application)
31. Do subsurface tile drains exist at the facility? If yes, check the appropriate box below.
El Application Field Lagoon/Storage Pond ❑ Other:
❑
32. Were any additional problems noted which cause non-compliance of the permit or CAWMP?
33. Did the Reviewer/Inspector fail to discuss review/inspection with an on -site representative?
In No ❑ NA ❑ NE
No ❑ NA ❑ NE
34. Does the facility require a follow-up visit by the same agency?
Comm
ents (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).
0 Yes
❑ Yes
❑ Yes
O Yes
O Yes
0 Yes
Qr'cl`nct( Lte
3 ,O° pM
kr
co I- 0, uc` 0 P1
— 3 1-3 o 4-3,-_ Co lvi- f (O4'tc
yet_ '17 0,—
ett,d
144-
14-6?-),/ t
/ Oct) trta_d--
❑ Yes
❑ Yes
❑ Yes
M No ❑ NA ❑ NE
No ❑ NA ❑ NE
No ❑NA ❑NE
No ❑NA ❑NE
y3No ❑NA ❑NE
qiNo ❑NA ❑NE
No ❑ NA ❑ NE
No ❑ NA ❑ NE
No ❑NA ❑NE
-tor Name:
4--/ L2(.0
Phone: C l cJ- �(3j '_.3 Z)_-"
r Signature:
j(lit(? 1(
Date:
2/4/2015