820369_Routine Inspection_20210804

Onsite Representative:
Certified Operator: z'YL
Back-up Operator:
Location of Farm:
Latitude:
Facility Number
G-iivision of Water Resources
0 Division of Soil and Water Conservation
0 Other Agency
Type of Visit: compliance Inspection 0 Operation Review 0 Structure Evaluation
0 Technical Assistance
Reason for Visit: outine 0 Complaint 0 Follow-up 0 Referral 0 Emergency 0 Other
Date of Visit:
Farm Name:
Owner Name:
g;" y geA/ Arrival Time:
fio: i/
Fawryt
JJ
Departure Time:
Owner Email:
County:
0 Denied Access
Region:
v %/vr- 7IMP 1'r d ✓ i �r --- Phone:
Mailing Address:
Physical Address:
Facility Contact: -/7.) i GU- Title: re es Phone:
rs2
Integrator:
Certification Number:
Certification Number:
Longitude:
9f3-73 1,
Swine
Design Current
Capacity Pop.
Wean to Finish
can to Feeder
Feeder to Finish
35-5;1-
Farrow to Wean
Farrow to Feeder
Farrow to Finish
Gilts
Boars
Other
Other
Design Current
Wet Poultry Capacity Pop.
Layer
Non -Layer
Design Current
Dry Poultry Capacity Pop.
Pullets
Turkeys
Turkey Poults
Cattle
Design Current
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 any discharge observed from any part of the operation? 0 Yes ErNo NA El NE
Discharge originated at: [1 Structure fl Application Field ® Other:
a. Was the conveyance man-made? ❑ Yes ❑ No NA Ei NE
b. Did the discharge reach waters of the State? (If yes, notify DWR) El Yes D No Ej NA 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 ri No El NA El NE
2. Is there evidence of a past discharge from any part of the operation'? pi Yes PrNo NA El NE
3. Were there any observable adverse impacts or potential adverse impacts to the waters [1 Yes No ❑ NA NE
of the State other than from a discharge?
Page I of 3
2/4/2015 Continued

Facility Number: o3 - 3 w9'
Waste Collection & Treatment
Date of Inspection:
4. is storage capacity (structural plus storm storage plus heavy rainfall) less than adequate? n Yes [TNo ❑ NA ❑ NE
a. If yes, is waste level into the structural freeboard'? n Yes ❑ No ❑ NA ❑ NE
Structure 1 Structure 2 Structure 3 Structure 4 Structure 5 Structure 6
Identifier:
Spillway?:
Designed Freeboard (in):
Observed Freeboard (in):
5. Are there any immediate threats to the integrity sf any of the structures observed? ❑ Yes �No ❑ 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 0 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
12--es ❑ No ❑ NA ❑ NE
8. Do any of the structures lack adequate markers as required by the permit? ❑ Yes lErzNo ❑ NA n 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 9No ❑ NA ❑ NE
maintenance or improvement?
Waste Application
10. Are there any required buffers, setbacks, or compliance alternatives that need ❑ Yes U 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 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 ❑ Evidence of Wind Drift ❑ Application Outside of Approved Area
7. Do any of the structures need maintenance or improvement?
12. Crop Type(s): - 7 C., 57-r-eti
13. Soil Type(s): (,(
14. Do the receiving crops differ from those designated in the CAWMP? ❑ Yes 12KNo 0 NA ❑ NE
15. Does the receiving crop and/or land application site need improvement? 9Yes ❑ No ❑ NA ❑ NE
16. Did the facility fail to secure and/or operate per the irrigation design or wettable n Yes /["No ❑ NA ❑ NE
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? 0 Yes n 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 n Checklists ❑ Design ❑ Maps ❑ Lease Agreements ❑ Other:
21. Does record keeping need improvement? If yes, check the appropriate box below. ( Yes ❑ No ❑ NA ❑ NE
n Waste Application ❑ Weekly Freeboard n Waste Analysis ,gin Soil Analysis ❑ Waste Transfers n Weather Code
El Rainfall ❑ Stocking ❑ Crop Yield F1Imo'20 Minute Inspections I Monthly and 1" Rainfall Inspections ❑ Sludge Survey
22. Did the facility fail to install and maintain a rain gauge? n Yes 'No n NA ❑ NE
23. If selected, did the facility fail to install and maintain rainbreakers on irrigation equipment? ❑ Yes O No ❑ NA n NE
Page 2 of 3 2/4/2015 Continued
❑ Yes ZNo ❑ NA ❑ NE
n Yes FT\'-io ❑NA ❑NE

Facility Number
Date of Inspection: g='� ,94),
24. Did the facility fail to calibrate waste application equipment as required by the permit?
25. Is the facility out of compliance with permit conditions related to sludge? If yes, check
the appropriate box(es) below.
ri Failure to complete annual sludge survey n Failure to develop a POA for sludge levels
n 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'?
Yes No 0NA 0NE
Y s 0No 0NA 0NE
01D19-
n Yes Eo 0 NA 0 NE
n Yes [ /No 0 NA 0 NE
Other Issues
28. Did the facility fail to properly dispose of dead animals with 24 hours and/or document El Yes ❑ 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? fl Yes No ❑ NA 0 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 [ZNo 0 NA 0 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. 0 Yes No ❑ NA El NE
I- Application Field 7 Lagoon/Storage Pond n 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?
0 Yes �No NA 0 NE
❑ Yes [No ❑ NA ❑ NE
n Yes �No 0 NA El 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).
a,fr )<-)017-0( 5T- /V'"G r/k
Le p oC 'i
iv)/vtk c,U
Walt? 7t)a_ )QD--r- 64 74
y
Reviewer/Inspector Name:
Phone:
9/D 30 )27
Reviewer/Inspector Signature:
Page 3 o f' 3
Date:
5/12/2020