820586_Routiue Inspection_20240723

1 ype ur visit: X,; t-ompnance inspection V Vperation Review U Structure Evaluation O Technical Assistance I
Reason for Visit: 0 Routine O Complaint O Follow-up O Referral O Emereencv O Other O Denied Access
Date of Visit: Arrival Time•�'I Departure Time: ; dD County:
`T Region:
`7
Farm Name: jvy=•ct �J�c t/ Owner Email:
17
Owner Name: llr—LzuL ayo.'c N e jT G Phone:
Mailing Address:
Physical Address:
Facility Contact: Title:
Onsite Representative:
Certified Operator: A
Back-up Operator:
Location of Farm:
Latitude:
Phone:
Integrator:i,��
Certification Number: 1 d(1 3 71
Certification Number:
Longitude:
A
Wean to Finish
Layer
Dairy Cow
i I
Wean to Feeder
Non -La er I
Dairy Calf
Feeder to Finish$
ik3j
Dairy Heifer
Farrow to Wean
��
�� F•
o I
Dry Cow
Farrow to Feeder`
�
� iflr���??Ilt,�€
��I`'�,..f z
Non -Dairy
Farrow to Finish
Layers
Beef Stocker
Gilts
Non -Layers
y'
Beef Feeder
;?
Boars
Pullets
Beef Brood Cow
E! I
r fin'
Turkeys
�� t?S
'�
i #i �,�' I;
Turkey Ponits
II
Other,N
?$
gym,
nuu
u, , tie
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 ,;ErNo ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Yes
[:]No
❑ NA
❑ NE
❑ Yes
❑ No
❑ NA
❑ NE
❑ Yes
❑ No
❑ NA
❑ NE
❑ Yes
E'No
❑ NA
❑ NE
❑ Yes
0 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 o
❑ NA El NE
a. If yes, is waste level into the structural freeboard?
❑ Yes ❑ No
❑ NA ❑ NE
Structflre 1 Structure 2 Structure 3 Structure 4
Identifierr O) ,? SrAH
Structure 5 Structure 6
Spillway?:
Designed Freeboard (in): y�
Observed Freeboard (in): 1
5. Are there any immediate threats to the integrity of any of the structures observed?
0YesQo
❑ 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 n 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?
'Zyes ❑ No
❑ NA ❑ NE
8. Do any of the structures lack adequate markers as required by the permit?
❑ Yes _j] 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
❑ NA ❑ NE
maintenance or improvement?
�ENo
11. Is there evidence of incorrect land application? If yes, check the appropriate box below.
❑ Yes
❑ NA ❑ NE
_[24Qo
❑ 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 Window ❑ Evidence of Wind Drift ❑ Application Outside of Approved Area
12. Crop Type(s):
13. Soil Type(s):
14. Do the receiving crops muter rrom nose 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 properly operating waste application equipment?
Required Records & Documents
19. Did the facility fail to have the Certificate of Coverage & Permit readily available?
20. Does the facility fail to have all components of the CAWMP readily available? If yes, check
the appropriate box.
❑ Yes
❑"No
❑ NA
❑ NE
❑ Yes
E:2-No
❑ NA
❑ NE
❑ Yes
ErNo
❑ NA
❑ NE
❑ Yes
;]'No
❑ NA
❑ NE
❑ Yes
�o
❑ NA
❑ NE
❑ Yes ❑No ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Yes ONo ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑WUP ❑Checklists ❑Design ❑ Maps ❑ Lease Agreements ❑Other:
21. Does record keeping need improvement? If yes, check the appropriate box below. ❑ Yes ZNo ❑ 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 arain gauge? ❑ Yes iff No ❑ NA ❑ NE
23. If selected, did the facility fail to install and maintain rainbreakers on irrigation equipment? ❑ Yes E]�No ❑ NA ❑ NE
Page 2 of 3 511212020 Continued

Facility Number: -
Date of Ins ection: �
24. Did the facility fail to calibrate waste application equipment as required by the permit? ❑ Yes ,� o ❑ NA ❑ NE
25. Is the facility out of compliance with permit conditions related to sludge? If yes, check ❑ Yes ,ffNo ❑ 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:
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:
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?
Reviewer/Inspector Name:
Reviewer/Inspector Signature:
❑ Yes -ffrNo ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Yes .'No ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Yes ❑iVo ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Yes E�'No ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Yes _`No ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Yes -E:rNo ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Yes
E.JNo
❑ NA
❑ NE
❑ Yes
Q"No
❑ NA
❑ NE
❑ Yes
FTNo
❑ NA
❑ NE
Phone: �j/O ?3,5 5 7e5—
Date: 712 3%2- 9e
Page 3 of 3 511212020

racmty No.
Farm Name
Owner
Operator
dack-up
.11,
PRE—OARu: uesign
Observed
Crop Yield
Rain Gauge ��y
Soil Test /7/a S
Weekly Freeboard V
SpraylFreeboary Drop
Weather Codes
Time In
Circle: General
Wettable Acres
Daily Rainfall
120 min Inspections
Waste Analysis: Ic
Date NitrogeN(N) 57
144,J 9 3 A 3-2
,,n
Time Out
Integra[o" _
Site Rec
No.
No.
NPDES
Dare
Sludge Survey /O[ / t (o
Calibration/GPM
Waste Transfers
Rain Breaker
PLAT
1-in Inspections
Date -5 '5 SG -
Nitrogen (N)
A)1el
,,7 �aa ,e,v
Goats ,,54
A6)13 ,fir;