760028_Compliance Evaluation Inspection_20180327

Division of Water ResourceN
M
Facility amber %�p o Drvisioii of Soil and Water( ery hone
0 of Agency.`_
her . _
Type of Visit: W �Compliance Inspection U Operation Review Q Structure Evaluation Q Technical Assistance
Reason for Visit: 5a✓ Routine 0 Complaint 0 Follow-up 0 Referral 0 Emergency 0 Other 0 Denied Access
Date of Visit: Arrival Time: ` Departure Time: ounty: 9-0) P h Region:
Farm Name: to.6haAk baA r 11 Owner Email:
Owner Name: '6 i d 11 eat Phone:
Mailing Address: - 10,3: I)aXIs l ,0UAA-r U 0 Al • 1 R.D� 1� le 1y� l�-6'1 Ky-' a -7317
Physical Address:
Davis , or a a,vs h-�&r 10AN L5 336 - `i1nS-3 a 3 y
Facility Contact: Title: Phone: *Att4w 3_:3L-' y6!;'—_3,3
Onsite Representative: Integrator:
� o�,chc�ry Casha-t4
Certified Operator: Certification Number:
Back-up Operator: Certification Number:
Location of Farm: Latitude: .�- (OS7 t 4,3 lI Longitude: 9� SQt 19 i
0Y 311 you car g . Facie kl9) ct +ur L o � D env is Couvt+ry P-c
Design Current Design Current
Swine Capacity Pop. Wet Poultry Capacity Pop.
Wean to Finish
Wean to Feeder
Feeder to Finish
Farrow to Wean
Farrow to Feeder
Farrow to Finish
Gilts
Boars
I Other
I J 1Other
Design Current'
Dry Poultry Capacity,Po
Layers
Non -Layers
Pullets
Turkeys
Turkey Poults
Other
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?
Cattle
Dairy Cow
Dairy Calf
Dairy Heifer
Dry Cow
Non -Dairy
Beef Stocker
Beef Feeder
Beef Brood Cow
❑ Yes WNo ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Yes
❑ No
❑ NA
❑ NE
❑ Yes
❑ No
❑ NA
❑ NE
❑ Yes ❑ No ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Yes >No ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Yes 14No ❑ NA ❑ NE
Page 1 of 3 21412015 Continued

Facili Number: - Date of Ins ection:
Waste Collection & Treatment
4. Is storage capacity (structural plus storm storage plus heavy rainfall) less than adequate? Yes ❑ 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 qNo ❑ 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
�S'No
❑ 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?
g Yes
❑ No
❑ NA
❑ NE
8. Do any of the structures lack adequate markers as required by the permit?
❑ Yes
0 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
15?(No
❑ NA
❑ NE
maintenance or improvement?
11. Is there evidence of incorrect land application? If yes, check the appropriate box below. ❑ Yes X 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
.4 — to i w_ _ e A n _
12. Crop Type(s):
13. Soil Type(s):
14. Do the receiving crops differ from those designated in the CAWMP?
❑ Yes
R' No
❑ NA
❑ NE
15. Does the receiving crop and/or land application site need improvement?
❑ Yes
ONo
❑ NA
❑ NE
16. Did the facility fail to secure and/or operate per the irrigation design or wettable
❑ Yes
❑ No
VNA
❑ NE
acres determination?
17. Does the facility lack adequate acreage for land application?
❑ Yes
[Z No
❑ NA
❑ NE
18. Is there a lack of properly operating waste application equipment?
❑ Yes
JV'No
❑ NA
❑ NE
Required Records & Documents
19. Did the facility fail to have the Certificate of Coverage & Permit readily available? ❑ Yes ❑ NA ❑ NE
20. Does the facility fail to have all components of the CAWMP readily available? If yes, check ❑ Yes VNo ❑ NA ❑ NE
the appropriate box.
❑ WUP ❑ Checklists ❑ Design ❑ Maps ❑ Lease Agreements ❑ Other:
21. Does record keeping nee improvement? ^u gk tW ^^p^ fi'`@ b ❑ Yes 0 No ❑ NA ❑ NE
Waste A li ation Weekly Freeboard Waste Analysis Soil Analysis [Weather Code
pp� Y
Rainfall Stocking Crop Yield [�] Monthly and 1" Rainfall Inspections n "'��
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 YNA ❑ NE
Page 2 of 3 21412015 Continued

FacilityNumber: - a.. Date of Inspection:
24. Did the facility fail to calibrate waste application equipment as required by the permit?
❑ Yes
)aj No
❑ NA ❑ NE
25. Is the facility out of compliance with permit conditions related to sludge? If yes, check
❑ Yes
❑ 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
01 No
❑ NA ❑ NE
27. Did the facility fail to secure a phosphorus loss assessments (PLAT) certification?
❑ Yes
�XNo
❑ NA ❑ NE
Other Issues
28. Did the facility fail to properly dispose of dead animals with 24 hours and/or document
❑ Yes
MrNo
9
❑ NA ❑ NE
and report mortality rates that were higher than normal?
T
29. At the time of the inspection did the facility pose an odor or air quality concern?
❑ Yes
1XNo
❑ 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 the drains exist at the facility? If yes, check the appropriate box below.
❑ Yes
5(No
❑ NA
❑ NE
❑ Application Field ❑ Lagoon/Storage Pond ❑ 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
C%No
❑ NA
❑ NE
34. Does the facility require a follow-up visit by the same agency?
❑ Yes
0 No
❑ NA
❑ NE
t � , o� O 18 '(,al l b t'a.�-► o►� Cb� ���e c�, ? N�a-i' �, �.-� �ouv�1 e-�eC� � Gin eC 1�- �� v �5 t
L`vve-tr- Crop a,_da e-A 4-& wu P 2 yC0.5 j4E a_l. YL \1 du
r e, - v jor 1, d.k v ex- 5 'to n d, t+cin czar ov A p p Q-Gj-5 -tinveL
6 % 404_k tech Spec i 0-05
P I eo►s e IVL urn o-vty�'b l ©-� �'� e5� �` t w o a�r wow l 1
iCQD- + Ck-'S -e� c> u� ontOct fi�-h 5p�ioJ t k r5 u�p5in-0Vt S
'i �D►S-�� ��J�l t 5 ��� h t h .�® �v `��ev1o,� �`o o
\, u P a5 �n c� �De.&Ai orn • C'0V'A \r M ��► e�
Tn
V1 con ( C�' V-GL-+. V,\'PO- t
p
i u1 No��ln bear- oZv I to .
5oc 1 +se,-)+ d.v2- in 0201`�o
S' V)e e, Vie. 5 u% �oA_C-e_ Cxt✓GL o t ok-d-Ird�S c%�n c� P_6 , In �c3i � u 9aja+e_1n➢
( e,w b377 To OF 15,71 `,, i t ✓1 � Vl um er-5 � p,
Reviewer/Inspector Name: �►i[E[ 66& K-0. V `b C�� Phone: ,���p �� 1 �2 ! 109 9
Reviewer or Signature: Date: 319 7
A re-v► in e.✓-tPn 0-+ e.OY1ay- MM �s ai°Zols` r
q,�, u.➢ t I.1 to -�8 rev c F�u� i+ �I 'I v) OXIP&Vr� [� (p n„ IM %Ao �a .P -tAC1r, OP—c i a[ i 5-1