110006_Inspection_20201201

Facility Number [ —J - L1.LJ O Division of Soil and
O Other Agency
for Visit: O Routine O Complaint O Follow-up O Referral O Emergenev O Other
Date of Visit: obi Arrival Time: . Departure Time:/ County: FU of 1k, Region: Ad-. I',
Farm Name: `T G pttf}rig/ \ Owner Email: ,d
Owner Name: r/SP�VG �. /T C%T�'i�,l �pS�� Phone: _ �—� —rip %Z — Ts(a;L—
Mailing Address: QBpi(. %E-6-Rt5--tt te.✓✓L/��/J-�. F� 7
Physical Address: )-aZ,tJ e fe,--- ` S//
Facility Contact gym, Title: oCJ)t P—✓L Phone:
Onsite Representative: 67��, i��)� Integrator:
Certified Operator: (7N,-, I�Sbt� Certification Number: fi
Back-up Operator: Certification Number: �.I.J T3 Zt3J J
r`
PAL f
Location ofFarm: Latitude: `jam, d"l�J, �'rd- Longitude:
Swine
Design Current Design Current
Capacity Pop. Wet Poultry Capacity Pop.
La er
Non -Layer
Wean to Finish
Wean to Feeder
Feeder to Finish
Farrow to Wean
Farrow to Feeder
Farrow to Finish
Gilts
Boars
Other
Other
Design Current
Dry Poultry Capacity Pop.
La ers
Non -La era
Pullets
Turks s
Tndce Points
Other
Discharges and Stream Impacts
1. Is any discharge observed from any part ofthe 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 D WR)
e. 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 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
Design Current
Cattle Capacity Pop.
Dairy Cow
Dairy Calf
Dairy Heifer
Dry Cow
Nan-Dai
Beef Stocker
Beef Feeder
Beef Brood Cow
❑ Yes ® No ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Yes ❑ No ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Yes [:]No ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Yes ❑ No ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Yes KLNo ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Yes gNo ❑ NA ❑ NE
21412015 Continued

Facili Number: - /"\ Dale al'Inspection: ZPJ
Waste Collection & Treatment
4. Is storage capacity (structural plus storm storage plus heavy rainfall) less than adequate? ❑ Yes Ea No ❑ NA ❑ NE
a. If yes, is waste level into the structural freeboard? ❑ Yes ❑ No ❑ NA ❑ NE
Structure I Structure 2 Structure 3 Structure 4
Structure 5
Structure 6
Identifier:
Spillway?:
Designed Freeboard (in): ' , 2) r,
Observed Freeboard (in): too F
5. Are there any immediate threats to the integrity of any of the structures observed?
❑ Yes
RNo
❑ 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
gNo
❑ 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
�D'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 smeks, 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 butlers, setbacks, or compliance alternatives that need ❑ Yes [ZNo ❑ NA ❑ NE
maintenance or improvement?
11. Is there evidence of incorrect land application? If yes, check the appropriate box below, ❑ Yes Q No ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Excessive Pending ❑ 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
� ❑ r Application Outside of Approved Aea
1.f
12.. Crop Type(s): �aYGtJ S+'i iry-G� SJ-(��t4✓��PG�-T
13, Soil Type(s): /btLF,I `�b37w1M(1 �lzn,t�zr/LI 414""
14. Do the receiving crops differ from those designated in the CAWMP? ❑ Yes No ❑ 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
W No
❑ NA
❑ NE
acres determination?
17. Does the facility lack adequate acreage for land application?
❑ Yes
UNo
❑ NA
❑ 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
No
❑ NA
❑ NE
20. Does the facility fail to have all components of the CAWMP readily available? If yes, check
❑ Yes
allo
❑ NA
❑ NE
the appropriate box.
❑WUP ❑Checklists ❑Design ❑Maps ❑ Lease Agreements
❑Other:
21. Does record keeping need improvement? If yes, check the appropriate box below.
❑ Yes
and No
❑ NA
❑ NE
❑ 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
[l No
❑ NA
❑ NE
23. If selected, did the facility fail to install and maintain rainbreakers on irrigation equipment?
❑ Yes
E&No
❑ NA
❑ NE
Page 2 of 3
21412015 Continued

Faciti Number: Q Date 7 Ins action:
24. Did the facility fail to calibrate waste application equipment as required by the permit?
❑ Yes
Eg No ❑ NA [:]NE
25. Is the facility out of compliance with permit conditions related to sludge? If yes, check
❑ Yes
�I No []NA [:]NE
the appropriate box(es) below.
TT��''
❑ Failure to complete annual sludge survey ❑ Failure to develop a PDA 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
,,,,---�,,,tsst
❑ NA ❑ NE
27, Did the facility fail to secure a phosphorus loss assessments (PLAT) certification?
❑ Yes
qNo
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
allo ❑ 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
M'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
❑ Application Field ❑ Lagoon/Storage Pond ❑ Other:
32. Were any additional problems noted which cause non-compliance of the permit or CAWMP?
❑ Yes
C�kNo ❑ 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
[ANo
❑ NA ❑ NE
L� 11 ✓9 (Lo tNSic, /� N�s6 t aSf'sied
�'lr w�rl � due t.0 2-oa-l.
Ca/,��at,o Glue aid put- Vcc��ds 6y Qccauh.. 3l, Z�zo.
W G 7 Cab 'A'Tr
e 201�- zozo 1-a
L'V M" Veq Gr aecwt.l7 a.e-c ltiai-
U2q(u7re/d 'h I.,,e .fu-b�; fted uµ1�'i 7-Lr�tcw� re -so
Reviewer/Inspector Name: ttA4 yZr
Reviewer/Inspector Signature:
Page 3 of � J
Phone:
Date:
21412015