830007_routine_20240717

i ype of visit: Ixuompuance inspection U operation Review U Structure Evaluation U 'Technical Assistance
Reason for Visit: b Routine 0 Complaint 0 Follow-up 0 Referral 0 Emergency 0 Other 0 Denied Access
Date of Visit: Arrival Time: d1 Departure Time: County:
Farm Name: T lA Owner Email:
Owner Name: ``l I �-t Phone:
Mailing Address:
Physical Address:
Facility Contact: �n�c..�-P� (���� Title: ��.�, `�; Phone:
Onsite Representative: ��Integrator:
�r.r
Certified Operator: �l�rrL 6� �, u'V fl !I Certification Number:
Back-up Operator:
Location of Farm:
Latitude:
Certification Number:
Longitude:
Region:
Design Carrent�� ,�
a
Design
Current .z
Design Current . ,q
Swine
Capacity Pop..-.
WeiPouitry
Cattle
Capacity- Pop
,Capacity
„Pop
,
e
s'
Wean to Finish
Layer
a
Dairy Cow
a.
Wean to Feeder
11
INon-Layer'
Dairy Calf.
Feeder to Finish
Dairy Heifer
Farrow to Wean
Design
Current
a°°
Dry Cow
Farrow to FeederDry`Poulfrv,;
-'Capacity
Pip
"�
Non -Da'
Farrow to Finish
Layers
Beef Stocker
Gilts
Non -Layers
Beef Feeder
Boars
Pullets
Beef Brood Cow
Turkeys
E`
Other
Turkey Poults
>
E
Other
_
y
,.
-
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] No
r
❑ Yes No
❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Yes
n No
❑ NA
❑ NE
❑ Ye's
W No
[:]NA
❑ NE
❑ Yes]
No
❑ NA
ONE
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:
Spillway?:
Designed Freeboard (in):
Observed Freeboard (in):
5. Are there any immediate threats to the integrity of any of the structures observed?
(i.e., large trees, severe erosion, seepage, etc.)
❑ Yes No ❑ NA ❑ NE
v
6. Are there structures on -site which are not properly addressed and/or managed through a ❑ Yes 14 No ❑ NA ❑ NE
waste management or closure plan? r
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 [_V1 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 M No ❑ NA ❑ NE
maintenance or improvement?
11. 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.) v
❑ PAN ❑ PAN > 10% or 10 lbs. ❑ Total Phosphorus ❑ Failure to Incorporate Manure/Sludge into Bare Soil
❑ Outside of Acceptable Crop
Window (❑�Evidence
rof} .Wind nDrift ❑ Application Outside of Approved Area
\J
12. Crop Type(s): 4! 1 ym � t `iw�\- t� ��+`.
13. Soil Type(s): QUA-, �\i ffll KU � 1 �O } 1 lU
14. Do the receiving crops differ from those designated in the CAWMP? ❑ Yes [q 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 10-1 No ❑ NA ❑ NE
acres determination? `
17. Does the facility lack adequate acreage for land application?
❑ Yes
No
❑ NA
❑ 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 ❑ 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 ❑ Lease Agreements ❑Other:
21. Does record keeping need improvement? If yes, check the appropriate box below. ❑ Yes 1� No ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Waste Application ❑ Weekly Freeboard ❑ Waste Analysis ❑ Soil Analysis ❑ Waste Transfers ❑ Weather Code
❑ Rainfall ❑ Stocking ❑ Crop Yield ❑ 120 Minute Inspections ❑ Monthly and 1" Rainfall Inspections ❑ Sludge Survey
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 N No ❑ NA ❑ NE
Page 2 of 3 511212020 Continued

Facility Number: jDate of Inspection:
24. Did the facility fail to calibrate waste application equipment as required by the permit? ❑ Yes 4 No
25. Is the facility out of compliance with permit conditions related to sludge? If yes, check [:]Yes \ 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 of an actively certified operator in charge? ❑ Yes No
27. Did the facility fail to secure a phosphorus loss assessments (PLAT) certification? ❑ Yes 4 No
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?
DNA ❑NE
❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Yes
[ No
❑ NA
❑ NE
❑ Yes]
No
❑ NA
❑ NE
❑ Yes
Q No
❑ NA
❑ NE
❑ Yes
No
0 NA
❑ NE
[:]Yes
No
❑ NA
❑ NE
[—]Yes
No
❑ NA
❑ NE
❑ Yes
® No
❑ NA
❑ NE
iComments (refer to question #);: Explain any •YESanswers and/or any additional,recommendatious or any'other comments.
u-se,ifr"a'Wings=6fEf-a,cility,iobetterexplain'situ'a'tions (use additionalpages.as necessary).
i qMA ru Spray (IMOM NgooV too( .
� mz p- T_ ov-az 400.
c00 K� Oa��
rvMewecl
t-r'00w d .
1W
c.��t)�9P� 5ti�vey wq!
p
Reviewer/Inspector Name: Phone: 1
\�V�ij U\i/ I
Reviewer/Inspector Signature: Date: _
Page 3 of 3