820385_routine_20230817

I ype of visit: pa % ompnance inspection V Vperation xeview U structure Evaluation (> 'Technical Assistance I
Reason for Visit: k Routine 0 Complaint 0 Follow-up 0 Referral 0 Emergency 0 Other 0 Denied Access
Date of Visit: Arrival Time: Departure Time: County: M " Kola
Farm Name: r' I OU N I Owner Email:
Owner Name: 1 13 o LS Phone:
Mailing Address:
Physical Address:
Region:
Facility Contact: C Vf( BQ U I * Title: TA / Phone:
Onsite Representative: Cj-�m� Integrator:
Certified Operator: RQ}A ON DI Certification Number:
Back-up Operator: Certification Number:
Location of Farm:
Latitude: Longitude:
Design Current :
Design Current ° Design Current
�.°:;
=Swinea Capacity Pop
Wet Poultry
'.
Capacity Pap
Cattle Capacity Pap s
.� ...,
,
= e� : x
to Finish
Layer
Dairy Cow
"A" °
FWean
Wean to Feeder
Non -Layer
Dairy Calf
Feeder to Finish
f
Dairy Heifer
to Wean
yl'Farrow
�` �
Design Current
Dry Cow
Farrow to Feeder
D'r ff oultry
Ca ick Po' . _
Non -Dairy
_
Farrow to Finish
Layers
Beef Stocker
Gilts
4
Non-Layers
Beef Feeder
Boars
Pullets
Beef Brood Cow
K
Turkeys
- _n
�"
.
Other-`.... °``
Turkey Poults
a
A
d.
Other
x
x
_
_ x
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)
2. Is there evidence of a 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?
❑ Yes
No
❑ NA
❑ NE
❑ Yes
❑ Yes
fi No
1� No
❑ NA
❑ NA
❑ NE
❑ NE
[:]Yes
q No
❑ NA
❑ NE
❑ Yes
❑ No
❑ NA
❑ NE
❑ Yes
b No
❑ NA
❑ NE
Page I of 3 511212020 Continued

Facility Number: jDate of Inspection:
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: i 2
Spillway?:
Designed Freeboard (in):
Observed Freeboard (in): _1oc
5. Are there any immediate threats to the integrity of 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
N
❑ 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
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
No
❑ NA
❑ NE
maintenance or improvement?
1'l . Is there evidence of incorrect land application? If yes, check the appropriate box below. ❑ Yes M No ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Excessive Ponding ❑ Hydraulic Overload ❑ Frozen Ground ❑ Heavy Metals (Cu, Zn, etc.)
I ❑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): C R + "'e
13. Soil. Type(s): (1 V +1N V 1 1 I?_
14. Do the receiving crops differ from those designated in the CAWMP? ❑ Yes M 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
❑ NA
❑ NE
18. Is there a lack of properly operating waste application equipment?
❑ Yes
LNo
E o
❑ NA
❑ NE
Required Records & Documents
19. Did the facility fail to have the Certificate of Coverage & Permit readily available?
❑ Yes
RNo
❑ 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 ❑LeaseAgreements ❑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 Trans ers ❑ Weather Code
❑ Rainfall ❑ Stocking ❑ Crop Yield ❑ 120 Minute Inspections ❑ Monthly and V Rainfall Inspections ❑ Sludge Survey
22. Did the facility fail to install and maintain a rain gauge? ❑ Yes N No ❑ NA ❑ NE
23. If selected, did the facility fail to install and maintain rainbreakers on irrigation equipment? ❑ Yes N No ❑ NA ❑ NE
Page 2 of 3 511212020 Continued

Facility Number: I jDate of Inspection:
24. Did the facility fail to calibrate waste application equipment as required by the permit? ❑ Yes No ❑ NA ❑ NE
25. Is the facility out of compliance with permit conditions related to sludge? If yes, check Yes N No ❑ 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 {� r/j /� n
List structure(s) and date of first survey indicating non-compliance: 1i'L�j UZI� , 7(Y 1
26. Did the facility fail to provide documentation of an actively certified operator in charge? ❑ Yes No ❑ NA ❑ NE
27. Did the facility fail to secure a phosphorus loss assessments (PLAT) certification? ❑ Yes No ❑ NA ❑ NE
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:
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
No
❑ NA
❑ NE
❑ Yes
No
❑ NA
❑ NE
❑ Yes
No
❑ NA
❑ NE
❑ Yes
1� No
❑ NA
❑ NE
❑ Yes
�Q No
❑ NA
❑ NE
❑ Yes
No
❑ NA
❑ NE
❑ Yes
.No
❑ NA
❑ NE
Not form added top W 19 Geed to i q q oonS .
Nk firm updcftd wVP GhanLVU
nod soma Vow Mor jLN u CDdS1 j_
CQIi6f4fii'oiV.2rn2
waste- ��ti�23
4-t0 23
2-l�121�
�IUdg2= i2.5 22
P41 fall ? levclsr
Reviewer/Inspector Name: fO 61+ Phone:
Reviewer/Inspector Signature: Datef .17-23
Page 3 of 3 511212020