740019_Inspection_20201120

Division of Water Rem!o
0"Division of Soil and WaterConser
O Other Agency'
Type of Visit: • Compliance Inspection 0 Operation Review 0 Structure Evaluation 0 Technical Assistance
Reason for Visit: • Routine 0 Complaint 0 Follow-up 0 Referral 0 Emergency 0 Other 0 Denied Access
Date of Visit: 1-2o— 20 Arrival Time:
Farm Name:
Owner Name:
ct aOc --
Departure Time:
Mailing Address:
Physical Address:
Facility Contact:
\Grc
31LL4 { csaAls Cro55roQcJS
County: 'p l - Region: �Q
Owner Email:
Phone:
Gre.en)i 1L 1 ►vC c)7 g55Y
Onsite Representative:
Certified Operator:
Back-up Operator:
Location of Farm:
Title:
I ; I,&OL(r
Latitude:
Phone:
Integrator: SM 1 i1A11 elQ
Certification Number:
Certification Number:
Longitude:
.d 1 � �I� a �M�,•���� 1 cikkc 1 & -
Design Current
Capacity Pop.
Wean to Finish
Wean to Feeder
Feeder to Finish
k-i%1k
410 co
Farrow to Wean
Farrow to Feeder
Farrow to Finish
Gilts
Boars
Other
Design Curren
Wet Poultry Capacity Pop
Layer
Non -Layer
Design Current
Capacity Pop
Layers
Non -Layers
Pullets
Turkeys
Turkey Poults
Other
Cattle
Design Current
Capaeity 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?
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) ❑ Yes ❑ N ❑ NA ❑ NE
2. Is there evidence of a past discharge from any part of the operation? ❑ Yes Ni I]NA I]NE
3. Were there any observable adverse impacts or potential adverse impacts to the waters ElYes No ❑ NA ❑ NE
of the State other than from a discharge?
❑ Yes
❑NA ❑NE
❑ Yes D No ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Yes ❑ No ❑ NA ❑ NE
Page 1 of 3
2/4/2015 Continued

Facility Number: ' 1,14 - C{
Date of Inspection: 4 (_2,0 _ 2.0
Waste Collection & Treatment
4. Is storage capacity (structural plus storm storage plus heavy rainfall) less than adequate? ❑ Yes 0 NA ❑ NE
a. If yes, is waste level into the structural freeboard? 0 Yes ❑ 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?
(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?
❑ Yes No ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Yes "No ❑NA ❑NE
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?
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 [XNo ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Yes No ❑ NA ❑ NE
n Yes dNo ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Yes ][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
❑ Outside of Acceptable Crop Window ❑ Evidence of Wind Drift ❑ Application Outside of Approved Area
12. Crop Type(s): % e , S ; i, I
13. Soil Type(s):
14. Do the receiving crops differ from those designated in the CAWMP? ❑ Yes Q/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 0 Yes C3 No ❑ NA ❑ NE
acres determination?
17. Does the facility lack adequate acreage for land application?
18. Is there a lack of properly operating waste application equipment?
Required Records & Documents
19. Did the facility fail to have the Certificate of Coverage & Permit readily available? ❑ Yes No ❑ NA ElNE
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 12Kcklists ❑ Design ❑ Maps ❑ Lease Agreements ['Other:
21. Does record keeping need improvement? If yes, check the appropriate box below. ❑ Yes ' o ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Waste Application ❑ Weekly Freeboard ❑ Waste Analysis ❑ Soil Analysis ❑ Waste Transfers ❑ Weather Code
❑ Rainfall ❑ Stocking ❑ Crop Yield n 120 Minute Inspections ❑ Monthly and 1" Rainfall Inspections ❑ Sludge Survey
22. Did the facility fail to install and maintain a rain gauge? ❑ Yes [/ o ❑ 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
❑ Yes Wo ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Yes No ❑ NA ❑ NE

Facility Number: � - 1 °l
Date of Inspection: 0120?II
24. Did the facility fail to calibrate waste application equipment as required by the permit?
25. Is the facility out of compliance with permit conditions related to sludge? If yes, check
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:
❑NA ❑NE
No ❑ NA ❑ NE
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.
❑ 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?
34. Does the facility require a follow-up visit by the same agency?
❑ Yes Q o ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Yes No ❑ NA- ❑ NE
❑ Yes La l to ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Yes �No ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Yes ]dNo ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Yes 'No ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Yes 6-No ❑NA El NE
❑ Yes ['' ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Yes No ❑ NA ❑ NE
Conunents (refer to question #): Explain any YES answers and/or ankadditional recommendations or any other comments
Usedrawings of facility to better explain situations (use additional pages as necessary).'°
,z o ee NNaLj515 ck5
t—yet 20 I 1 q
• R. a,
C ►JYr,I ice^ - 9- 20 F-0Y 5 S t> 1 2 9 f''^'— k \r\o-y•Avaqcop c.i c , 3-10-2_0
Sl��dc Sus- 1— Z. _ 20 —7\A; —ihrowe
1
cif Wct c 'cl s;S
❑ Yes
❑ Yes
as\-
a C,4 IrriX0.Ti�_
FNeAc. rd. CD ti, co rr-t sTon d -1 1 rr;•C ^
Se;1 v oL fklykAilly 1%4 Neto-j5
-c ac
20 20
Reviewer/Inspector Name:
Reviewer/Inspector Signature:
Page 3 of 3
.- 5Li oa39
Phone:
Date:
11 2o--2C)
2/4/2015