820692_routine_20240416

Facility Number0 Division of Soil and Water Conservation
Q Other Agency
Type of Visit: efCompliance 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: 17/tom pq Arrival Time: Departure Time: County: Region: 744
Farm Name: a Ge0 -bzJ n Owner Email:
Owner Name: ' In / Phone:
Mailing Address:
Physical Address:
Facility Contact: en Title:
Onshe Representative: �t
Phone:
Integrator: 1,77F (%
Certified Operator: ddlL Certification Number: -z g
Back-up Operator:
Location of Farm:
Swine
Certification Number:
Latitude:
00
Wean to Finish
Wean to Feeder
Other
Design Current
Dry Poultry Capacity Pon.
Layers
Non -Layers
Pullets
Turkeys
Turkey Poults
Other
Discharees 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?
Longitude:
Design Current
Cattle Capacity Pop.
Dairy Cow
Dairy Calf
Dairy Heifer
Dry Cow
Non -Dairy
Beef Stocker
Beef Feeder
Beef Brood Cow
❑ Yes
Discharees 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?
Longitude:
Design Current
Cattle Capacity Pop.
Dairy Cow
Dairy Calf
Dairy Heifer
Dry Cow
Non -Dairy
Beef Stocker
Beef Feeder
Beef Brood Cow
❑ Yes
❑ Yes
No
❑ NA
❑ NE
❑ Yes
�� No
❑ NA
❑ NE
❑ Yes]
No
❑ NA
❑ NE
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 No ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Yes No ❑ NA ❑ NE
Page I of 3 511212020 Continued

Facility Number: - Date 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 I Structure 2 Structure 3 Structure 4 Structure 5 Structure 6
n
Identifier: r
Spillway':
Designed Freeboard (in):
Observed Frceboard(in):
5. Are there any immediate tlsreats to the integrity of any of the structures observed? ❑ Yes I C% No
`j�'
❑ 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 environmental threat,
notify DR'R
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? T
Waste Application
10. Are there any required buffers, setbacks, or compliance alternatives that need ❑ Yes No
❑ NA
❑ NE
maintenance or improvement?
11. Is there evidence of incorrect land application? If yes, check the appropriate box below. ❑ Yes No
❑ NA
❑ NH
❑ Excessive Ponding ❑ Hydraulic Overload ❑ Frozen Ground ❑ Heavy Metals (Cu, Zn, etc.)
❑ PA ❑ 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): L�UZ.r.. .k'tirv«o(l y�LC./17 LJ �n�t�t c2S ['UGI-) az ,S v �' <l -✓
13. Soil Type(s): /_-at-CLsvY�
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?
18. Is there a lack of propetiy operating waste application equipment?
Required Records & Documents
19. Did the facility fail to have the Certificate ofCoverage & Permit readily available?
20. Does the facility fail to have all components of the CAWMP readily available? If yes, check
the appropriate box.
❑ WUP ❑Checklists ❑ Design ❑ Maps ❑ Lease Agreements
2I. Does record keeping need improvement? If yes, check the appropriate box below.
❑ Waste Application ❑ Weekly Freeboard ❑ Waste Analysis ❑ Soil Analysis
❑ Rainfall ❑ Stocking ❑ Crop Yield ❑ 120 Minute Inspections ❑ Monthly and V
22. Did the facility fail to install and maintain a rain gauge'?
23. If selected, did the facility fail to install and maintain rainbreakers on irrigation equipment?
El Yes ,h, No
❑ Yes nl No
El Yes No
El Yes No
El Yes 41 No
❑NA ❑NE
❑NA ❑NL
❑NA ONE
❑NA ❑NE
❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Yes No ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Yes No ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑Other:
❑ Yes 41 No
s ❑ Waste Transfers
Rainfall Inspections
❑ Yes n No
❑ Yes t)No
❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Weather Code
❑ Sludge Survey
❑NA ❑NE
❑ NA ❑ NE
Page 2 of 3 511212020 Continued

Facility Number: - ��-��.%-- Date of Inspection:
24. Did the facility fail to calibrate waste application equipment as required by the permit? ❑ Yes No
25. Is the facility out of compliance with permit conditions related to sludge? If yes, check ❑ Yes X No
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 to provide documentation ofan 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 an quality concern?
If yes, contact a regional Air Quality representative innnediately.
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:
❑NA ❑NE
❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Yes
V No
❑ NA
❑ NE
❑ Yes
No
❑ NA
❑ NE
❑ Yes
No
❑ NA
❑ NE
❑ Yes P No ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Yes P No ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Yes © No ❑ NA ❑ NE
32. Were any additional problems noted which cause non-compliance of the permit or CAWMP? ❑ Yes No ❑ NA ❑ NE
33. Did the Reviewer/Inspector fail to discuss review/inspection with an on -site representative? ❑ Yes No ❑ NA ❑ NE
34. Does the facility require a follow-up visit by the same agency? ❑ Yes 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).
t_,1ean ii��h �tr� ►�l�D�I�, r �,Irl��e Nn
c�\A��
Reviewer/Inspector Name: `<�/iL_ vtrel, � �<<r4P �rj,2/Z"5
Reviewer/Inspector Signature:
Page 3 of 3
Phone:
Date:
5/12/2020