820138_Routine Inspection_20240701

Type of Visit: OTompliance Inspection 0 Operation Review O Structure Evaluation p Technical Assistance
Reason for Visit: - Routine 0 Complaint 0 Follow-up 0 Referral Q Emergency 0 Other 0 Denied Access
Date of Visit: % / Arrival Time: Departure Time: Cis County:177
Farm Name: z�e/'ji� C� R2EG Owner Email:
Owner Name:GG Jril� FGcr�,�v7 7?�, Phone:
I
Mailing Address: _.
Physical Address:
Facility Contact: /4 b,>dot' Title:
Onsite Representative: ll
!
Certified Operator: /
Back-up Operator:
Location of Farm:
Phone:
Integrator:
Certification Number:
Certification Number:
Latitude: Longitude:
Region: '160
/ Sf 373
t 4
it Wean to Finish
La er
Dairy Cow
Wean to Feeder
on -Layer
Dairy Calf
Ii#
Feeder to Finish
Dairy Heifer
Farrow to Wean
Dry Cow
Farrow to Feeder
Non -Dairy
Farrow to Finish
iI
Layers
Beef Stocker
Gilts
Non -La ers
Beef Feeder
Boars
�i,�ji
Pullets
I Beef Brood Cow
I
Turkeys
Turkey Puults
Other
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 o ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Yes ❑ No ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Yes ❑ No ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Yes ❑ No ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Yes effNo ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Yes -nNo ❑ NA ❑ NE
Page 1 of 3 511212020 Continued

Facility Number: V7 - Date of Inspection:
Waste Collection & Treatment
4. Is storage capacity (structural plus storm storage plus heavy rainfall) less than adequate?
❑ Yes _J�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: l
Spillway?:
Designed Freeboard (in): lei
Observed Freeboard (in): 30
5. Are there any immediate threats to the integrity of any of the structures observed?
❑ Yes J2'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
❑ 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?
0Yes ❑ No
❑ NA
❑ NE
8. Do any of the structures lack adequate markers as required by the permit?
[—]Yes „e'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 .e'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?
11. Is there evidence of incorrect land application? If yes, check the appropriate box below.
❑ Yes ®'No
❑ NA
❑ NE
❑ Excessive Pending ❑ 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 Window ❑ Evidence of Wind Drift\ Applicatioonn/ Outside of Approved Area
�Crroopp
c❑^
12. Crop Type(s): W�'wAa'(,lc�/' �r.✓ePrrs..tc (ft� �i..lceR./J clGC.)Nl�:ale.���••2�1.t.=ra
13. Soil Type(s): J�E
14. Do the receiving crops differ from those designated in the CAWMP?
❑ Yes ,'No
❑ NA
❑ NE
15. Does the receiving crop and/or land application site need improvement?
❑ Yes EI'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 F] No
❑ NA
❑ NE
18. Is there a lack of properly operating waste application equipment?
❑ Yes Z "No
❑ NA
❑ NE
Required Records & Documents
19. Did the facility fail to have the Certificate of Coverage & Permit readily available?
❑ Yes J�No
❑ NA
❑ NE
20. Does the facility fail to have all components of the CAWMP readily available? If yes, check
❑ Yes O'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
,,❑"Yes ❑ No
❑ NA
❑ NE
Waste Application ❑ Weekly Freeboard Z] Waste Analysis rsollAnalysis
❑ Waste Transfers
❑ Weather Code
❑ Rainfall ❑ Stocking ❑ Crop Yield .,J�T120 Minute Inspections ❑ Monthly and 1" Rainfall
Inspections ZSludge Survey
22. Did the facility fail to install and maintain a rain gauge?
❑ Yes 12'No
❑ NA
❑ NE
23. If selected, did the facility fail to install and maintain minbreakers on irrigation equipment?
❑ Yes ;2'NNo
❑ NA
❑ NE
Page 2 of 3
511212020 Continued

Facili Number: I Date of Ins eetion:
24. Did the facility fail to calibrate waste application equipment as required by the permit? )2 Yes ❑ No ❑ NA ❑ NE
25. Is the facility out of compliance with permit conditions related to sludge? If yes, check 'EaYes ❑ 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
List structure(s) and date of first survey indicating non-compliance: �IAy,- ir, ��61�1
26. Did the facility fail to provide documentation of an actively certified operator in charge? ❑ Yes —0-go ❑ NA ❑ NE
27. Did the facility fail to secure a phosphorus loss assessments (PLAT) certification? ❑ Yes [2 NNo ❑ NA ❑ NE
Other Issues
28. Did the facility fail to properly dispose of dead animals with 24 hours and/or document ❑ Yes,�ffNo ❑ 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 EJNo ❑ 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 .[DNo ❑ 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 _[..]'*go ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Application Field ❑ Lagoon/Storage Pond ❑ Other:
32. Were any additional problems noted which cause non-compliance of the permit or CAWNIP? ❑ Yes J2-No ❑ NA ❑ NE
33. Did the Reviewer/Inspector fail to discuss review/inspection with an on -site representative? ❑ Yes -E]-No ❑ NA ❑ NE
34. Does the facility require a follow-up visit by the same agency? ❑ Yes E-LNo ❑ NA ❑ NE
Reviewer/Inspector Name:
Reviewer/Inspector Signature:
Page 3 of 3
Phone: 9/o
Date: �7(/may
511212020

a5e"r-ek1 t-1.2y/ff 0�, C'o27,
p kA&6�"h, ,9g33y
racony No. Time In Time Out
Farm Names lniegratO^
Owner Site Ra7,
Operator No.
Sack -up
No. _
COC Circfe: General or NPDES
FREEBOARD: Design
Observed
Crop Yield
Rain Gauge " �/
Soil Test Zg& kZr'A#epttSble Acres
Weekly Freeboard Daily Rainfall
Spray/Freeboard Drop
Weather Codes 120 min Inspections
Data
Sludge Survey � ;2rJF °-
Calibration/GPM iGGt®! �t2 jtltaD o �•2
Waste Transfers
Rain Breaker
PLAT
1-in Inspections
Waste Analysis:
DatNitrogen (N) Date Nitrogen (N)