860028_Inspection_20221114

Type of Visit: `(
Reason for Visit:
Compliance Inspection 0 Operation Review 0 Structure Evaluation 0 Technical Assistance
lip Routine 0 Complaint 0 Follow-up 0 Referral 0 Emergency 0 Other 0 Denied Access
Date of Visit:
Arrival Time:
Farm Name:
\NL Earm
Owner Name: GA t/ V Y 1(e%
Departure Time:
C10ta
Owner Email:
Phone:
County:
Region: VVSI2--0
Mailing Address: 4 q V \ n t f `-- ' 4 .) e (t(n No 9-8 69-
Physical Address:
Facility Contact: Dti VJYI.I rCJ Title: Phone:
Onsite Representative:
Certified Operator:
Back-up Operator: Yan/\
Location of Farm:
Latitude:
Integrator:
Certification Number:
Certification Number:
Longitude:
to z-I-6' 66 '
t-7"7 N > I,JWQ 4 r ed.> 20 n Ca KS I2d• 7 lern iori---\23. -) Facrn o^ 6
�
E¢
ia,esg�!'f-,r.,ens
i frlaI > tttllliii
6$ 9$�k%43Xrt: 1r
p.w R$ CAm Popa$yp pp� $9 q
a�#aoa'gi ® s+gt¢a»�s+aSr -0 q
gg P h t t�i
5 GM yY a
Ituiepu(tRy vt15� r Ito�k affi a
S b4TM- b #4 "44� b y6':, '0. h,.9u'S Wi ea ti
Wean to Finish
,
Layer
"� Dairy Cow
Wean to Feeder
$
Non Layer i
Dairy Calf
Feeder to Finish
xa$tvauw is isi wasa ifs
> s av$ ir$$t�i
u Dairy Heifer
--¢
$$
si
�Farrow
Farrow to Wean
7`
,it
7..
s }$
SsIIaa$#,�as PI tr snt.i
'
Dry Cow
».
to Feeder/���
39#)tyj03 tJt}fo
p ajj $$ i Non -Dairy
Farrow to Finish
Layers
Beef Stocker..
Gilts
Non -Layers
Beef Feeder
egr
Boars
sr
Pullets
Beef Brood Cow 1;r
3gg
"�1i i3
iav;)ks M�ii �i= *&2 t,l'oi
tr fi 5 9 i.a P
Turke s
y
ugri«sb&I$$$$s ggxxpx �' BRaI
}
Turkey Poults
( 4ttP '# •fl �: xat, tPoPat+&.at;s b'.i«&'ZJ~'Y°. �'8a#k aOthek7{tz...,.., t Y, 'ksnse05.aka2E. }'
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?
❑ Yes INo ❑ NA ❑ NE
El Yes No ❑NA ❑NE
❑ Yes ❑ No ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Yes ❑ No ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑Yes No NA ❑NE
❑ Yes �f No ❑ NA ❑ NE
Page 1 of 3
5/12/2020 Continued

Facility Number: fi -
Date of Inspection: (ll It —
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?
Identifier:
Spillway?:
Designed Freeboard (in):
Observed Freeboard (in):
Structure 1
❑ Yes No ❑NA El NE
❑ Yes El No ❑NA El NE
Structure 2 Structure 3 Structure 4 Structure 5 Structure 6
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 ❑ 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
❑ Yes [4 No ❑ NA ❑ NE
7. Do any of the structures need maintenance or improvement? ❑ Yes
8. Do any of the structures lack adequate markers as required by the permit? ❑ Yes
(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
maintenance or improvement?
Waste Application
10. Are there any required buffers, setbacks, or compliance alternatives that need ❑ Yes
maintenance or improvement?
11. Is there evidence of incorrect land application? If yes, check the appropriate box below. ❑ Yes 14 No ❑ NA
❑ 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):'j& J 9(9(\(it, 6 . cc -et- ( c (h a c
13. Soil Type(s):
$No ❑ NA
No ❑ NA ❑ NE
No ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ NE
❑ NE
14. Do the receiving crops differ from those designated in the CAWMP? ❑ Yes Z No ❑ NA ❑ NE
15. Does the receiving crop and/or land application site need improvement? ❑ Yes t�� No ❑ NA ❑ NE
16. Did the facility fail to secure and/or operate per the irrigation design or wettable El Yes I X I No ❑ NA ❑ NE
acres determination? 1�
17. Does the facility lack adequate acreage for land application? ❑ Yes A No E NA El 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 inNo ❑ 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? ❑ Yes m No ❑ NA El NE
Waste Application Weekly Freeboard �J Waste Analysis �]-S FAnalysis TC ers 0 Weather Code
LI Rainfall ((Stocking Crop Yield 120 Minute Inspections N Monthly and 1" Rainfall Inspections Sludge Survey
22. Did the facility fail to install and maintain a rain gauge? 0 Yes W\No ❑ NA ❑ NE
23. If selected, did the facility fail to install and maintain rainbreakers on irrigation equipment? 0 Yes ❑ No X- NA ❑ NE
Page 2 of 3 5/12/2020 Continued

Facility Number: %/-3 -
Date of Inspection: 1 t (t 4 ( 'ar
24. Did the facility fail to calibrate waste application equipment as required by the permit? ❑ Yes ,Esilt/, No ❑ NA ❑ NE
25. Is the facility out of compliance with permit conditions related to sludge? If yes, check ❑ Yes I AI No ❑ NA ❑ NE
the appropriate box(es) below. n
❑ Failure to complete annual sludge survey EFailure 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 to 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 No ❑ 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 No ❑ NA ❑ NE
If yes, contact a regional Air Quality representative immediately. 1,�.
30. Did the facility fail to notify the Regional Office of emergency situations as required by the ❑ Yes rNo ❑ NA ❑ NE
permit? (i.e., discharge, freeboard problems, over -application) T
31. Do subsurface tile drains exist at the facility? If yes, check the appropriate box below. ❑ Yes 4No E NA ❑ NE
❑ Application Field ❑ Lagoon/Storage Pond ❑ Other:
32. Were any additional problems noted which cause non-compliance of the permit or CAWMP? ❑ Yes X No ❑ NA ❑ NE
33. Did the Reviewer/Inspector fail to discuss review/inspection with an on -site representative? ❑ Yes No ❑ NA ❑ NE
34. Does the facility require a follow-up visit by the same agency? ❑ Yes No ❑ NA ❑ NE
ans
ar;
ao rS` T , { C C tt2c:.n CU\)\—c h ' Q' z F-<.t \o 1/4Arr
C C.Ucnn011- ,-•i\ a-tyar r
Tor `1ucvCc ‘,fa cec&$L d tou*.
{No , 1'\
cc i-C cstr — SLt1 t2-- t thif Comm kA..a _ Q�
32 • (. 13u1 c: i t veC i (C t C jc_ CAJ,tt l trb 1. c+c L ,_st.^n
�QZY1 V'tv� o ot,,��.�.. .. . \cs.to:JVv
\U\)-Q\7\ -19$ - i I 'El icot0-
\uc .ice
rz. V\c,cs.
Reviewer/Inspector Name:
abecca Gt&aikol I Qx
Reviewer/Inspector Signature:��
Page 3 of 3
Phone:116 '"l1 w
C
Date: t k 1 4 t 0
5/12/2020