820166_Routine Inspection_20210701

Facility Number
/LG
vision of Water Resources
0 Division of Soil and Water Conservation
0 Other Agency
Type of Visit: 0-Compliance Inspection 0 Operation Review 0 Structure Evaluation 0 Technical Assistance
Reason for Visit: t1outine 0 Complaint 0 Follow-up 0 Referral 0 Emergency 0 Other 0 Denied Access
Date of Visit: 7-1--,i)�) Arrival Time:
Farm Name:
Owner Name: 74id x.-S //f; Cja yo / I -Apr
Departure Time:
1-APf-- Soto
Mailing Address:
Physical Address:
Facility Contact: _y<</' 3Cl✓GeA
Onsite Representative:
Certified Operator: �yJi /4
Back-up Operator:
Location of Farm:
/ 190
Owner Email:
Phone:
County: ,"`—Region:
Title: Phone:
Integrator:
Certification Number:
?-g---92--
Certification Number:
Longitude:
Latitude:
Design Current
Capacity Pop. Wet Poultry Capacity Pop. Cattle Capacity Pop.
Wean to Finish
Wean to Feeder
Feeder to Finish
Farrow to Wean 0
Farrow to Feeder
Farrow to Finish
Gilts
Boars
Other
Other
Design Current Design Current
Layer
Non -Layer
Design Current
Dry Poultry Capacity Pop.
Layers 1�
Non -Layers
Pullets
Turkeys
Turkey Poults
Other
Discharges and Stream Impacts
1. Is any discharge observed from any part of the operation?
Discharge originated at: {i Structure PI Application Field [1 Other:
a. Was the conveyance man-made?
b. Did the discharge reach waters of the State'? (If yes, notify DWR) D Yes No ❑ NA El 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) pi Yes ❑ No ❑ NA ❑ NE
2. Is there evidence of a past discharge from any part of the operation'? n Yes ENo El NA El NE
3. Were there any observable adverse impacts or potential adverse impacts to the waters n Yes ErNo NA NE
of the State other than from a discharge?
Dairy Cow
Dairy Calf
Dairy Heifer
Dry Cow
Non -Dairy
Beef Stocker
Beef Feeder
Beef Brood Cow
Yes (90 ❑ NA NE
® Yes 0 No D NA 0 NE
Page 1
f3
2/4/2015 Continued

Facility Number: - /(,4
Date of Inspection: Y— / --9Z-f
Waste Collection & Treatment
4. Is storage capacity (structural plus storm storage plus heavy rainfall) less than adequate? ❑ Yes .No ❑ 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:
Spillway?:
Designed Freeboard (in):
Observed Freeboard (in):
117
5. Are there any immediate threats to the integrity of any of the structures observed? ❑ Yes10 ❑ 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 H 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
7. Do any of the structures need maintenance or improvement? �'�es ❑ No ❑ NA ❑ NE
8. Do any of the structures lack adequate markers as required by the permit? fl 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 ❑ Y• es ❑'No ❑ NA ❑ NE
maintenance or improvement?
Waste Application
10. Are there any required buffers, setbacks, or compliance alternatives that need ❑ Yes ❑ NA ❑ NE
maintenance or improvement?
11. Is there evidence of incorrect land application? If yes, check the appropriate box below. ❑ Yes ErNo ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Excessive Ponding ❑ Hydraulic Overload n 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 ri Evidence of Wind Drift n Application Outside of Approved Area
12. Crop Type(s):
13. Soil Type(s):
5
74u
14. Do the receiving crops differ from those designated in the CAWMP? 0 Yes [] 1f0 ❑ NA ❑ NE
15. Does the receiving crop and/or land application site need improvement? n Yes ❑14o ❑ NA ❑ NE
16. Did the facility fail to secure and/or operate per the irrigation design or wettable ❑ Yes No 0 NA ❑ NE
acres determination?
17. Does the facility lack adequate acreage for land application? 0 Yes 121-No ❑ NA ❑ NE
18. Is there a lack of properly operating waste application equipment? n Yes l 7 No ❑ NA ❑ NE
Required Records & Documents
19. Did the facility fail to have the Certificate of Coverage & Permit readily available? n Y• es No 0 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 F(No ❑ NA 0 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? PI Y• es ONo ❑ NA ❑ NE
23. If selected, did the facility fail to install and maintain rainbreakers on irrigation equipment? ❑ Yes No ❑ NA ❑ NE
Page 2 o1'3 2/4/2015 Continued

Facility Number: — - /6 (,
Date of Inspection:
24. Did the facility fail to calibrate waste application equipment as required by the permit?
0 Yes ENo ❑ NA ❑ NE
25. Is the facility out of compliance with permit conditions related to sludge? If yes, check 0 Yes ❑ 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 [fNo ❑ NA ❑ NE
27. Did the facility fail to secure a phosphorus loss assessments (PLAT) certification? ❑ Yes No ❑ NA 0 NE
Other Issues
28. Did the facility fail to properly dispose of dead animals with 24 hours and/or document ❑ Yes 12110 ❑ 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 ErNo 0 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 R/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 Q No ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ 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
❑ Yes
❑ Yes
❑ NA
❑ NA
❑ NA
Comments (refer to question #): Explain any YES answers and/or any additional recommendations- other comments.
Use drawings of facility to better explain situations (use additional pages as necessary).
❑ NE
❑ NE
❑ NE
Reviewer/Inspector Name:
Reviewer/Inspector Signature:
Page 3 of 3
,f7
=ontel)i
Phone:
lioy-yoyoK I
Date:
2/4/2015