670053_Inspection_20190509

Division of Water Resources
Facility Number rT71 d Division of Soil and Water Conservation
O Other Agency
Type of Visit: Compliance Inspection 0 Operation Review O Structure Evaluation O Technical Assistance
(Reason for Visit: Routine O Complaint O Follow-up O Referral O Emergency O Other O Denied Access
Date of Visit: Arrival Ti : LLI Departure Time: County: s�Dw Region: P i go.
�19
Farm Name: t• ` Owner Email:
Owner Name: Phone:
Mailing Address:
Physical Address:
Facility Contact: Title:
Onsite Representative: r-� S kr-w(4_,- Integrator•
Certified Operator:
Back-up Operator:
Location of Farm:
Latitude:
Phone:
Certification Number:
Certification Number:
Longitude:
Design Current
Design Current
Design Current
Swine: Capacity wpe Fop..
Wet Poultry '
CapacityPop.
Cattle Capacity E` °Pop.
Wean to Finish
La er
Dairy
Pullets
Other
—.Turkeys
Turke Poults
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)
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?
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)
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?
Cow
❑ Yes K No ❑ NA ❑ NE 91
❑ Yes
❑ No
❑ NA
❑ NE
❑ Yes
❑ No
❑ NA
❑ NE
❑ Yes ❑ No ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Yes No ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Yes No ❑ NA ❑ NE
Page 1 of 3 2/4/2015 Continued

Facility Number: - Date of Inspection:
Waste Collection & Treatment
4. Is storage capacity (structural plus storm storage plus heavy rainfall) less than adequate? ❑ Yes
a. If yes, is waste level into the structural freeboard? ❑ Yes
Structure 1 Structure 2 Structure 3 Structure 4 Structure 5
Identifier: i
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?
IN No ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑No ❑NA ❑NE
Structure 6
❑ NA
❑ NE
❑ Yes
P No
❑ Yes
hdNo
❑ 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? ❑ Yes No ❑ 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 ADDlication
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 ❑ 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 Dr'ft ❑ Application Outside of Approved Area
12. Crop Type(s): !� ki)w
13. Soil Type(s):
14. Do the receiving crops differ from those designated in the CAWMP?
❑ Yes 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 No
❑ NA
❑ NE
acres determination?
17. Does the facility lack adequate acreage for land application?
❑ Yes No
❑ NA
❑ NE
18. Is there a lack of properly operating waste application equipment?
❑ Yes No
❑ NA
❑ NE
Required Records & Documents
19. Did the facility fail to have the Certificate of Coverage & Permit readily available?
❑ Yes [yNo
❑ NA
❑ NE
20. Does the facility fail to have all components of the CAWMP readily available? If yes, check
❑ Yes o
❑ 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 EYNO
❑ Waste Application ❑ Weekly Freeboard ❑ Waste Analysis ❑ Soil Analysis ❑ Waste Transfers
❑ Rainfall ❑ Stocking ❑ Crop Yield ❑ 120 Minute Inspections ❑ Monthly and 1" Rainfall Inspections
22. Did the facility fail to install and maintain a rain gauge? ❑ Yes No
23. If selected, did the facility fail to install and maintain rainbreakers on irrigation equipment? ❑ Yes §No
❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Weather Code
❑ Sludge Survey
❑NA ❑NE
❑ NA ❑ NE
Page 2 of 3 21412015 Continued

Fateili Number: I - jDate of —Inspection:
24. Did the facility fail to calibrate waste application equipment as required by the permit? ❑ Yes V-1 No ❑ NA ❑ NE
25. Is the facility out of compliance with permit conditions related to sludge? If yes, check [—]Yes o ❑ 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 No ❑ NA ❑ NE
27. Did the facility fail to secure a phosphorus loss assessments (PLAT) certification? ❑ Yes 7❑] No )a NA ❑ NE
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?
An,C6rc� �n - 81� � ►g
ilk
�l
❑ Yes No
❑ Yes No
❑ Yes No
❑ Yes No
❑ Yes No
❑ Yes No
❑ Yes �] No
❑ NA ❑ NE
❑NA ❑NE
❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ NA
❑ NA
❑ NA
❑ NE
❑ NE
❑ NE
'e(I gib_C )A —14 ci�
Reviewer/Inspector Name: C�� 1 Wl.. Phone: --jj Ut — u 1
Reviewer/Inspector Signature: Date:
Page 3 of 3 2141 iOI