820030_Routine_20220830

i% 1'1 6 )T r--
Facility Number
Division of Water Resources
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: ('Routine 0 Complaint 0 Follow-up 0 Referral 0 Emergency 0 Other 0 Denied Access
Date of Visit:
Farm Name:
Arrival Time:
Net dog farm -;j
Departure Time:
Owner Name: ilot dog farm LAC
Mailing Address:
Physical Address:
Facility Contact:
Owner Email:
Phone:
County: S4IT R ON Region: f io
Cul tIC @ah,.u1 CiI<
Title: �,Gb CP C
Phone:
Onsite Representative: S a I I1"`. Integrator: SIp 1 f n f ie/4
Certified Operator: Back-up Operator: Lee browN Certification Number: I Db! 'JO
Location of Farm:
Jerern i SestSamc
Latitude:
Certification Number: 10 O 7/7
Longitude:
Swine
Design Current
Capacity Pop.
Wean to Finish
Wean to Feeder
'y
Feeder to Finish
! Q a`f b
19 t)
Farrow to Wean
Farrow to Feeder
Farrow to Finish
Gilts
Boars
Other
Design Current
Wet Poultry Capacity Pop.
Layer
Non -Layer
Design Current
Dry Poultry Capacity Pop.
Layers
Non -Layers
Pullets
Turkeys
Turkey Poults
Other
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?
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) ❑ Yes No 0 NA ❑ NE
2. Is there evidence of a past discharge from any part of the operation? ❑ Yes No ❑ NA ❑ NE
3. Were there any observable adverse impacts or potential adverse impacts to the waters ❑ Yes 11 No ❑ NA ❑ NE
of the State other than from a discharge?
❑ Yes No ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑Yes TJNo ❑NA ❑NE
❑Yes 131No ❑NA ❑NE
Page 1 of 3
5/12/2020 Continued

Facility Number: 4?-0 - 60
Date of Inspection: - —
Waste Collection & Treatment
4. Is storage capacity (structural plus storm storage plus heavy rainfall) less than adequate?
a. If yes, is waste level into the structural freeboard?
Identifier:
Spillway?:
Designed Freeboard (in):
Observed Freeboard (in):
❑ Yes
❑ Yes
Structure 1 Structure 2 Structure 3 Structure 4 Structure 5
No
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?
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? 1 \'Q (I up
8. Do any of the structures lack adequate markers as required by the permit?
(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
maintenance or improvement?
Waste Application
10. Are there any required buffers, setbacks, or compliance alternatives that need
maintenance or improvement?
11. Is there evidence of incorrect land application? If yes, check the appropriate box below.
it Yes No ❑NA ❑NE
❑ Yes No ❑ NA El NE
Yes ❑ No ❑ NA El NE
❑ Yes t No ❑ NA El NE
❑ Yes tNo ❑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 Windows ❑ Evidence of Wind Drift ❑ Application Outside of Approved Area
12. Crop Type(s): CO � S I � 1 �� H ' ` -e
13. Soil Type(s): CQ(flhO,7) 'eon Q5mQhc/wI<
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? ❑ Yes No El NA El 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 El NA ❑ NE
20. Does the facility fail to have all components of the CAWMP readily available? If yes, check El Yes "``©���� No ❑ NA ❑ NE
the appropriate box.
❑ WUP El Checklists ❑ Design ❑ Maps E Lease Agreements ❑ Other:
❑ Rainfall ❑ Stocking ❑ Crop Yield ❑ 120 Minute Inspections
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 X No ❑ NA ❑ NE
Page 2 of 3 5/12/2020 Continued
No ❑ NA ❑ NE
No El NA El NE
Structure 6
❑ Yes lk No ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Yes '6No ❑NA ❑NE
❑ Yes Lt No ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Yes Pt No ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Yes No ❑NA ❑NE
21. Does record keeping need improvement? If yes, check the appropriate box below. El Yes 6 No ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Waste Application E Weekly Freeboard El Waste Analysis ❑ Soil Analysis ❑ Waste Transfers ❑ Weather Code
❑ Sludge Survey
❑ Monthly and 1" Rainfall Inspections

Facility Number: Ms - 30
Date of Inspection: ,3"-/ r
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.
E Failure to complete annual sludge survey
❑ 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?
Other Issues
28. Did the facility fail to properly dispose of dead animals with 24 hours and/or document
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?
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
permit? (i.e., discharge, freeboard problems, over -application)
31. Do subsurface tile drains exist at the facility? If yes, check the appropriate box below.
❑ Application Field ❑ Lagoon/Storage Pond ❑ Other:
❑ Yes
Yes
❑ Failure to develop a POA for sludge levels
❑ Yes
❑ Yes
❑ Yes
❑ Yes
❑ Yes
❑ Yes
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?
Coaimme
Use,dra
❑ Yes
❑ Yes
❑ Yes
No ❑ NA ❑ NE
No ❑ NA ❑ NE
[0 No
No
No
No
O'No
[�]No
�., .... uestion#): Explain, any YES answers and/or any additional recommendations or any of
gs Of facility to better situations (use additional pages as necessary).
❑ NA
❑ NA
❑ NE
❑ NE
❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ NA
❑ NA
❑ NA
❑ NA
❑ NA
er comme
❑ NE
❑ NE
❑ NE
❑ NE
❑ NE
fang won<ecl or (acjoor Lani c, feed fib Keq it up ucnt-
-ectnbl fshe5
i Vegetati o
9. on Cc GIde, house. (ecuRi'nq fi-orn broom fovhc/ctI.oh
apt cep Dorojnrilext area, h o s been C 1€ an-ec/ LJ f
n cl to fry-Ou►hy.atcohs mohitor Wh-en qou vct-f-
Reviewer/Inspector Name:
Reviewer/Inspector Signature:
Page 3 of 3
Phone:
tK�e i tni-- ?D�tj�j gi.JR goon cite "I U' TD ` ' Date: 9' ✓,+�
aao-
5/12/2020