010003_Compliance Evaluation Inspection_20180712

ru3Division of Water Resource`"
�, ervation (QP�
Number, �: � Division of Soil and Water'
Other Agency �..
Type of Visit: WCompliance Inspection 0 Operation Review 0 Structure Evaluation 0 Technical Assistance
Reason for Visit: kRoutine 0 Complaint 0 Follow-up 0 Referral 0 Emergency 0 Other 0 Denied Access
Date of Visit: Arrival Time: Departure Time: ; C)C>ounty: 0. Region:
Farm Name: P..0_Vyd, 0.l ( L' Q.uu 1S' FGLtrm Owner Email:
Owner Name: RD--V1 y L U-) t `7 Phone:
Mailing Address: 9% 1 L -LL3 i � ci . J s cn o L° L a
3 3 q
Physical Address: `Y
Facility Contact: Qz" 1 A y L_'e_w I Title:
Onsite Representative:
Certified Operator:
Back-up Operator:
Location of Farm:
Design ` Current
Swine Capacity Pop.
Wean to Finish
Wean to Feeder
eeder to Finish & 0 o
Farrow to Wean
Farrow to Feeder
Farrow to Finish
Gilts
Boars
Other
Other
Phone: 33(o- G %S — S671
Integrator:
Certification Number:
Certification Number:
_ _ r
Latitude: 3.5 O L / la- Longitude:
Design
Current
Wet Poultry
Capacity
Pop.
Layer
Non -La er
Design
Current
Dry Poultry
Canacity
Pon.
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?
Page I of 3
Design {Current : " �;
Cattle Capacity =Pop
Dairy Cow
Dairy Calf
Dairy Heifer
Dry Cow
Non -Dairy
Beef Stocker
Beef Feeder
Beef Brood Cow
❑ Yes ZNo ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Yes ❑ No
[—]Yes ❑ No
❑ Yes ❑ No
❑ Yes NrNo
❑ Yes jeNo
❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ NA ❑ NE
21412015 Continued
00

Facility Number: - 0 Date of Inspection: '"j j Z,- O(
r
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: a- 06 n
Spillway?: (Z
Designed Freeboard (in): I Z
Observed Freeboard (in): ' ` : '�
IAT4-
5. Are there any immediate threats to the integrity of any of the structures observed? ❑ Yes X No ❑ 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 �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? Yes ❑ No ❑ NA ❑ NE
8. Do any of the structures lack adequate markers as required by the permit? ❑ Yes XfNo ❑ 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 To, No ❑ NA ❑ NE
maintenance or improvement?
Waste Application
10. Are there any required buffers, setbacks, or compliance alternatives that need ❑ Yes ;gNo ❑ NA ❑ NE
maintenance or improvement?
11. Is there evidence of incorrect land application? If yes, check the appropriate box below. ❑ Yes JVNo ❑ 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): �0- Q rQ� � O� — +1 Q( V
13. Soil Type(s): /
14. Do the receiving crops differ from those designated in the CAWMP? [:]Yes �RNo ❑ 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 tR"'No ❑ NA ❑ NE
acres determination?
17. Does the facility lack adequate acreage for land application?
❑ Yes
[d o
❑ NA
❑ NE
18. Is there a lack of properly operating waste application equipment?
❑ Yes
R,o
❑ NA
❑ NE
Required Records & Documents Records & Documents
19. Did the facility fail to have the Certificate of Coverage & Permit readily available?
❑ Yes
t5;�ltio
❑ NA
❑ NE
20. Does the facility fail to have all components of the CAWMP readily available? If yes, check
❑ Yes
�10
❑ NA
❑ NE
the appropriate box.
❑ WUP ❑ Checklists ❑ Design ❑ Maps ❑ Lease Agreements
❑ Other:
21. Does record keeping need improvement? �, ❑ Yes XNo ❑ NA ❑ NE
[" Waste Application [Weekly Freeboard [Waste Analysis Soil Analysis rs rweather Code
[Rainfall ❑ Stocking ❑ Crop Yield ❑ 120 Minute Inspections Monthly and 1" Rainfall Inspections fudge Survey
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 4N�'l�A ❑ NE
Page 2 of 3 21412015 Continued

Facili Number: Q - 2 Date of Inspection: 7 2�
24. Did the facility fail to calibrate waste application equipment as required by the permit? ❑ Yes N No ❑ NA ❑ NE
25. Is the facility out of compliance with permit conditions related to sludge? If yes, check ❑ Yes CR'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 ❑NA ❑ NE
27. Did the facility fail to secure a phosphorus loss assessments (PLAT) certification? ❑ Yes�XV�o
o ❑ 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 Cg Vo ❑ 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 X 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.
Ors 1 y--
06 Yes
❑ No
❑ NA
❑ NE
Application Field Lagoon/Storage Pond Other:
❑ Pp � ❑� MX M eI Gi
32. Were any additional problems noted which cause non-compliance of the permit or CAWMP?
❑ Yes
foNo
❑ NA
❑ NE
33. Did the Reviewer/Inspector fail to discuss review/inspection with an on -site representative?
❑ Yes
>No
❑ NA
❑ NE
34. Does the facifiiy require a follow-up visit by the same agency?
❑ Yes
Da'No
❑ NA
❑ NE
Ca Soi( ke5�� cod"-PIe+mod 67-d-6Q. (Sood �r
i9-
S. LQ5-- 5urv" waS in P613. pi Inave- VAG�
S(y1L2 .20k3,6uv'v L tQo 36 :5 a.Oj2)a
Y<wl n-tP-*' � V) n vc�l� e d o �S C� a Yv\ o v�-l-7 o t s i d b a.� p l i cAt-►
wtndou_) dui pia v`►e_+ SPf-i"I
1 K)e ed -t& INF7 kA o U.) d 0_rA d
�5 eW has beanp1"-�P,4 to 5 v4omfL V+'eA- b urhl"(3ams►) Irye)
k1e60r35 Ioo1e-300d 1
A L 5 a v 8 1 65. NI I OCO 0_ '. 5'6 42- 9/ 1 g'
M a_na q 0_A pum+ed'm a e_6up1,e_&j So
Reviewer/Inspector Name:
Reviewer/Inspector Signatui
Page 3 of 3
Phone: 33(D— 776 _ ?6? 9
Date: %1) ZI,;Z,Cy 1 D
21412015