820266_Inspection_20200715

li, tf_, _ D�v�dtir of later Resources �, W
Facility Number' C;Z 21 £ 0 Division of Soil and" ate!ConS rvt t o 'e 1
' ,*z , „ .v. ,. I . ... :.;O OtherAgency .. . _ *,'' " . a? } 4-
Typi ;of Visit: QEbm lance Inspection 0 Operation Review 0 Structure Evaluation 0 Technical Assistance
ReasJJon for Visit: Routine 0 Complaint 0 Follow-up 0 Referral 0 Emergency 0 Other 0 Denied Access
Date of Visit: m Arrival Time: 1/13 4- Departure Time: / ;.3a T County: c9�14 Pc�D 4egion: pA
Farm Name: (?eL,'`-1 -e`1.&y PLt` 'ey IL Owner Email:
Owner Name: ,C 1.--e_ .14X Phone:
Mailing Address: -
Physical Address:
Facility Contact: CAL,, 4 .1?—ill Title: Phone:
Onsite Representative: . 1 ( . Integrator: 4-Tt� 35 t
Certified Operator: 1t Certification Number: Jk1f3 I
Back-up Operator: Certification Number:
Location of Farm: Latitude: Longitude:
on ( I r\-1- -51-c rt, 1 fi _ .
y �� •
�� _: ,. Design CTl rent Design Curirent �1t Design Current
e'Swune 1 F, Capacity £ 'op ; Wet Poultry `Capacity Pop Cattle _ Capaeit op
3
oa-
Wean to Finish == Layer Dairy Cow
r- Wean to Feeder -, 4:• Non-Layer - Dairy Calf
Feeder to Finish' 3,5 Q0 ' ihr) =) Dairy Heifer
Farrow to Wean _ ; °. Design Current _ Dry Cow -„it:
Farrow to Feederrt...';Pou s lt °.Ca Pi aci "Pa' Non-Dairy
-
Farrow to Finish o _ Beef Stocker
' Gilts °= -.Non-La ers Beef Feeder
Boars II Pullets f Beef Brood Cow
Others '. - , ' 1'
.�. 3 ;,_ `�Turke Poults
Other .°' U Other - 0 � `
e ,.a
F
Discharges and Stream Impacts
1.Is any discharge observed from any part of the operation? ❑ Yes NA ❑ NE
Discharge originated at: ❑ Structure ❑ Application Field ❑ Other:. ,
a. Was the conveyance man-made? ❑ Yes ❑ No [Cl-Iser" ❑ NE
b. Did the discharge reach waters of the State?(If yes,notify DWR) ❑ Yes ❑ No I ❑ NE
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) ❑ Yes ❑ No TA ❑ NE
2.Is there evidence of a past;discharge from any part of the operation? ❑ Yes DK ❑ NA ❑ NE
3.Were there any observable adverse impacts or potential adverse impacts to the waters ❑ Yes dNo ❑ NA ❑ NE
of the State other than from a discharge?
Page 1 of3 2/4/2015 Continued

Facility Number: ea- ,b Date of Inspection: ,I SAY9,ackD
Waste Collection&Treatment
4.Is storage capacity(structural plus storm storage plus heavy rainfall)less than adequate? . ❑ Yes © ❑ NA ❑ NE
a.If yes,is waste level into the structural freeboard? ❑ Yes ❑ No ErciA7❑ NE
Structure 1 Structure 2 Structure 3 Structure 4 Structure 5 Structure 6
(11 Identifier:
Spillway?:
f1 esigned Freeboard(in):
Observed Freeboard(in): /�(
5.Are there any immediate threats to the integrity of any of the structures observed? ❑ Yes r 1 o ❑ 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 environ ntal threat,notify DWR
7.Do any of the structures need maintenance or improvement? es 0 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?
Waste Application
10.Are there any required buffers,setbacks,or compliance alternatives that need ❑ Yes [J 1 0 ❑ 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 Acceptable Crop Window ❑ Evidence of Wind Drift ❑ Application Outside of Approved Area
12. Crop Type(s): • �"�v,,,- t) —1 11(
13. Soil Type(s): Web itb
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 ❑ No ❑ NA ❑ NE
acres determination?
17.Does the facility lack adequate acreage for land application? ❑ Yes ❑ No ❑ 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 ❑ No ❑ 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 ❑ 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 ❑ No ❑ NA ❑ NE
23.If selected,did the facility fail to install and maintain rainbreakers on irrigation equipment? ❑ Yes ❑ No ❑ NA ❑ NE
Page 2 of 3 2/4/2015 Continued

Facility Number: gt, - oC,(£ Date of Inspection:/-`P„
24.Did the facility fail to calibrate waste application equipment as required by the permit? ❑ Yes 24 ❑ NA ❑ NE
25.Is the facility out of compliance with permit conditions related to sludge? If yes,check ❑ Yes J ❑ 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 12Ko ❑ NA ❑ NE
,—�� ti
27.Did the facility fail to secure a phosphorus loss assessments(PLAT)certification? El Yes lag;l�° ❑ NA ❑ NE
Other Issues
28.Did the facility fail to properly dispose of dead animals with 24 hours and/or document ❑ Yes J' O ❑ 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 To ❑ 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 -( ❑ 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 13'‹ ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Application Field ❑ Lagoon/Storage Pond ❑ Other:
32.Were any additional problems noted which cause non-compliance of the permit or CAWMP? ❑ YesN/o El NA El NE
33.Did the Reviewer/Inspector fail to discuss review/inspection with an on-site representative? ❑ Yes ©Tlo ❑ NA ❑ NE
34.Does the facility require a follow-up visit by the same agency? ❑ Yes El No ❑ NA ❑ NE
Comments(refer to question#):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).
Cal ih.4-I on ( -23- /1 gtaft rt,„.4, I I (r.--6 cs-
44-7 1,5 0 oil, 6 ce.frtik
4t -14Grb‘e--3-c-j-- %co L-ty-19-
c---ell 710- ?-- k s(
Reviewer/Inspector Name: j C - Cyy11 Phonelb 1(3 f' `J c)3
0
Reviewer/Inspector Signature: tuk,Pip
Date: )
Page 3 of 3 2/4/20 5