820491_routine_20240627

type of visit: V t,ompnance inspection V Vperation Keview U structure Evaluation () Technical Assistance I
Reason for Visit: 0 Routine 0 Complaint 0 Follow-up 0 Referral 0 Emergency 0 Other 0 Denied Access
Date of Visit: Arrival Time: Departure Time: County:
Farm Name: CM fop fan Owner Email:
Owner Name: �JQ O- 0-1 N g Phone:
Mailing Address:
Physical Address:
Region:
Facility Contact: V Vl `j Title: Phone:
Onsite Representative:�QI��I" Integrator:
Certified Operator: N 1 1 -C� ; NOW— Certification Number: 1 / 03q
Back-up Operator: Certification Number:
Location of Farm:
Latitude:
Longitude:
Design i Current s
_ � Design
Curarent
Design Current .
Swine a Capacity Pop
Wet Poultry -Capacity
3'op
Cattle £Capacity Pop
P
,
Wean to Finish
Layer
Dairy Cow
Wean to Feeder
I
INon-Layer
I
Dairy Calf_
Feeder to Finish
-
Dairy Heifer
Farrow to Wean
Design mitent'`
Dry Cow
•`
Farrow to Feeder
D' Poultry° •� Ca` acity
Po
Non -Dairy
Farrow to Finish
Layers
Beef Stocker
=
Gilts
Non -Layers
Beef Feeder
Boars
Pullets
Beef Brood Cow
Turkeys
other
Turkey Poults
Otherz
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 0 No ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Yes
�4 No
❑ NA
❑ NE
❑ Yes
1P No
❑ NA
❑ NE
❑ Yes
No
❑ NA
❑ NE
❑ Yes
No
❑ NA
❑ NE
❑ Yes
No
❑ NA
❑ NE
Page 1 of 3 511212020 Continued

Facility Number: - Date of Inction:
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:
Spillway?:
Designed Freeboard (in):
Observed Freeboard (in): 3_
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?
[A No ❑NA ❑NE
No ❑ NA ❑ NE
Structure 6
❑ Yes
® No
❑ NA
❑ NE
❑ Yes
1P No
❑ 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? I�
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 AcceptableCropWindow ❑ Evidence of Wind Drift ❑ Application Outside of Approved Area
12. Crop Type(s): 1 � ceI � ike t '",e I C�
13. Soil Type(s):
14. Do the receiving crops differ from those designated in the CAWMP?
15. Does the receiving crop and/or land application site need improvement?
16. Did the facility fail to secure and/or operate per the irrigation design or wettable
acres determination?
17. Does the facility lack adequate acreage for land application?
18. Is there a lack of properly operating waste application equipment?
Required Records & Documents
19. Did the facility fail to have the Certificate of Coverage & Permit readily available?
20. Does the facility fail to have all components of the CAWMP readily available? If yes, check
the appropriate box.
❑ Yes
OQ No
❑ NA
❑ NE
Yes
❑ No
❑ NA
❑ NE
❑ Yes
rVj No
rK
❑ NA
❑ NE
❑ Yes
No
❑ NA
❑ NE
❑ Yes
No
❑ NA
❑ NE
❑ Yes
No
❑ NA
❑ NE
❑ Yes
No
❑ NA
❑ NE
❑WUP ❑Checklists ❑Design ❑ Maps ❑ Lease Agreements ❑Other:
21. Does record keeping need improvement? If yes, check the appropriate box below. 0 Yes [ No
❑ Waste Application ❑ Weekly Freeboard ❑ Waste Analysis ❑ Soil Analysis El Waste Tra sfers
❑ 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 0 NE
❑ Weather Code
❑ Sludge Survey
❑NA ❑NE
❑ NA ❑ NE
Page 2 of 3 511212020 Continued

Facility Number: I jDate of Inspection:
24. Did the facility fail to calibrate waste application equipment as required by the permit?
[:]Yes 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 to provide documentation of an actively certified operator in charge?
❑ Yes XNo ❑ 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?
fV
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.
30. Did the facility fail to notify the Regional Office of emergency situations as required by the
❑ Yes V1 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.
❑ Yes No ❑ NA ❑ NE
10
❑ 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 No ❑ NA ❑ NE
34. Does the facility require a follow-up visit by the same agency?
❑ Yes No ❑ NA ❑ NE
Connments,(refer to question, #)'; Expla n;any N�S.answers and/or any additional _recommendations or any, other comments:
Lise.drawingsaof facility. o better;explain situations (use additional pages as necessary). - 6P
". `E
R4.Uiewed
CQ ( i'MI flON _ 5 I1- Z
Not DUP,I2 V L4
qpl,
Wq , [-25 Zq, 10, 15. Z� .
�meboa
* rids imfroverrieot
Reviewer/Inspector Name: 1a�
Phone:
Reviewer/Inspector Signature:
Date:
Page 3 of 3 V 511212020