820119_routine_20240318

UDivision of Water Resources
Facility Number 0 Division of Soil andWater Conservation
� -
0 Other Agency
Typelof Visit: ompliance Inspection 0 Operation Review 0 Structure Evaluation 0 Technical Assistance
C
Reason for Visit: � routine 0 Complaint 0 Follow-up 0 Referral 0 Emergency 0 Other 0 Denied Access
Date of Visit: Arrival Time: / l Departure Time: �J, County: Region: %7 D•
Farm Name: Gu`j��j/`�ya/ ,�ilG. Owner Email:
Owner Name: Phone:
Mailing Address:
Physical Address:
Facility Contact: Title: Phone:
Onsite Representative: JGr Integrator:y,°�
Certification Number: yPJo Certified Operator: ,�ci,��= ,
Backup Operator: Certification Number:
i
Location of Farm: Latitude: Longitude:
Design Current Design Current
Capacity Pop. WetPoultry Capacity Pop.
Layer
Non -Layer
Wean to Finish
Wean to Feeder
Feeder to Finish
0
Farrow to Wean
Farrow to Feeder
Farrow to Finish
Gilts
Boars
Design Current
bry Poultry Capacity Pon.
Layers
Non -Layers
Pullets
Turkeys
Turkey Poults
Other
Design Current
Cattle " Capacity. ; ,Pop.
Dairy Cow
Dairy Calf
Dairy Heifer
Dry Cow
Non -Dairy
Beef Stocker
Beef Feeder
Beef Brood Cow
Discharges and Stream Impacts
1. Is ai y discharge observed from any part of the operation?
❑ Yes
�—,�
�fo
❑ NA
❑ NE
Discharge originated at: ❑ Structure ❑ Application Field ❑ Other:
i
a. Was the conveyance man-made?
❑ Yes
❑ No
❑ NA
❑ NE
b. Did the discharge reach waters of the State? (If yes, notify DWR)
❑ Yes
❑ No
❑ NA
❑ NE
jc. What is the estimated volume that reached waters of the State (gallons)?
i
d. Does the discharge bypass the waste management system? (If yes, notify DWR)
❑ Yes
❑ No
❑ NA
❑ NE
2. Is there evidence of a past discharge from any part of the operation?
❑ Yes
�lo
❑ NA
❑ NE
3. Were there any observable adverse impacts or potential adverse impacts to the waters
❑ Yes
❑-lglo
❑ NA
❑ NE
of the State other than from a discharge?
I
Page I of 3
511212020 Continued

Facility Number: ,V- - / .Date of Inspection: 3—
Waste Collection & Treatment
4. Is storage capacity (structural plus storm storage plus heavy rainfall) less than adequate? ❑ Yes . 10 ❑ 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:
i
Spillway?:
Designed Freeboard (in):
i
Observed Freeboard (in):
5. ArIe there any immediate threats to the integrity of any of the structures observed?
❑ Yes F Io ❑ NA ❑ NE
(i.e., large trees, severe erosion, seepage, etc.)
1
6. Are there structures on -site -which are not properly addressed and/or managed through a
❑ Yes [�To ❑ 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?
E3-Y—es [:]No ❑ NA ❑ NE
8. Do any of the structures lack adequate markers as required by the permit?
❑ Yes ❑ No ❑ NA ❑ NE
(nit 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 Ea'<o ❑ NA ❑ NE
maintenance or improvement?
Waste Application
10. Are there any required buffers, setbacks, or compliance alternatives that need
❑ Yes 2KO ❑ NA ❑ NE
maintenance or improvement?
11. IJ
there evidence of incorrect land application? If yes, check the appropriate box below.
❑ Yes 4�1V o ❑ 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. Clop
TYPe(s):
13. Soil
Type(s):I/^L�2/ Iwo
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
E] No
❑ NA
❑ NE
16. Did the facility fail to secure and/or operate per the irrigation design or wettable
acres determination?
❑ Yes
0 No
❑ NA
❑ NE
17. Does the facility lack adequate acreage for land application?
❑ Yes
Q�No
❑ NA
❑ NE
18. Is !there a lack of properly operating waste application equipment?
[:]Yes
❑i NNoo
❑ NA
❑ NE
Reauired Records & Documents
19. Did the facility fail to have the Certificate of Coverage & Permit readily available?
❑ Yes
E2rf4o
❑ NA ❑ NE
20. D es the facility fail to have all components of the CAWMP readily available? If yes, check
❑ Yes
[TIo
❑ NA ❑ NE
the appropriate box.
❑WUP ❑Checklists ❑Design ❑Maps ❑ Lease Agreements
❑Other:
21. Does record keeping need improvement? If es check the appropriate box below.
P� g p Y❑
Yes
o
[�
NA ONE
❑ ❑
❑i
Waste Application ❑ Weekly Freeboard ❑ Waste Analysis ❑ Soil Analysis
❑ Waste Transfers
❑ Weather Code
❑ Rainfall ❑ Stocking ❑ Crop Yield ❑ 120 Minute Inspections ❑ Monthly and 1 " Rainfall Inspections
❑ Sludge Survey
22. Did the facility fail to install and maintain a rain gauge?
❑ Yes
dNo
❑ NA ❑ NE
23. If 'selected, did the facility fail to install and maintain rainbreakers on irrigation equipment? ❑ Yes [�!J'No ❑ NA ❑ NE
Page 2 of 3 511212020 Continued
i

Facility Number: Date of Inspection:
24. Did the facility fail to calibrate waste application equipment as required by the permit? ❑ Yes ZNo ❑ NA ❑ NE
25. Is the facility out of compliance with permit conditions related to sludge? If yes, check ❑ Yes E�Ko ❑ 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 to 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
/ No
❑ NA
❑ NE
❑ Yes
®'N//o
❑ NA
❑ NE
❑ Yes EEJ<o ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Yes [-No
[:]Yes [�to
❑ Yes ENo
❑ NA ❑ NE
❑NA ❑NE
❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Yes
Q'N10
❑ NA
❑ NE
❑ Yes
D/No
❑ NA
❑ NE
❑ Yes
[2To
❑ NA
❑ NE
Comments (refer,to question #)t Explain' any YES answers and/or any additional recommendations or any other comments.'
Use drawings of facility to better•explain situations (use additional pages as necessary).
na l
Reviewer/Inspector Name: � _ / �' Phone: 9/VJ 03-0 1,5
Reviewer/Inspector Signature: Date:
Page 3 of 3 511212020