820580_Routine Inspection_20240919

Operation Review
for Visit: j2rRoutine O Complaint O Follow-up O Referral
Date of Visit: Arrival Time: . oU Departure Time:70,007
Farm Name: Q ki,(i � Owner Email:
Owner Name: 26a P'40 /N Phone:
Mailing Address:
Physical Address:
Facility Contact: zly�� Title:
Onsite Representative:
Certified Operator:
Back-up Operator:
Location of Farm:
Other O Denied Access
Region:
Phone:
Integrator:
Certification Number:
Certification Number:
Latitude: Longitude:
Wean to Finish
11
ILayer
Dairy Cow
Wean to Feeder
Non -Layer
Dairy Calf
Feeder to Finish
l U��
Dairy Heifer
Farrow to Wean
Dry Cow
Farrow to Feeder
Non -Dairy
Farrow to Finish
Layers
Beef Stocker
Gilts
Non -Layers
Beef Feeder
Boars
Pullets
Beef Brood Cow
Turkeys
Turkey Poults
Mils
Other
1,�Jl,
Discharges and Stream Impacts
1. Is any discharge observed from any part of the operation?
❑ Yes 'JL211�o
❑ NA
❑ NE
Discharge originated at: ❑ Structure ❑ Application Field ❑ Other:
a. Was the conveyance man-made?
❑ Yes ❑ No
❑ NA
❑ NE
b. Did the discharge reach waters of the State? (If yes, notify DWR)
❑ Yes ❑ No
❑ NA
❑ NE
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)
❑ Yes ❑ No
❑ NA
❑ NE
2. Is there evidence of a past discharge from any part of the operation?
❑ Yes Eno
❑ NA
❑ NE
3. Were there any observable adverse impacts or potential adverse impacts to the waters
[:]Yes [2Ao
❑ NA
❑ NE
of the State other than from a discharge?
Page I of 3 511212020 Continued

Facili Number: Date of Inspection:
Waste Collection & Treatment
4. Is storage capacity (structural plus storm storage plus heavy rainfall) less than adequate?
❑ Yes.�o
❑ NA ❑ NE
a. If yes, is waste level into the structural freeboard?
❑ Yes ❑ No
❑ NA ❑ NE
Structure 1 Structure 2 Structure 3 Structure 4
Identifier:
Structure 5 Structure 6
Spillway?:
Designed Freeboard (in): 2
Observed Freeboard (in):��
5. Are there any immediate threats to the integrity of any of the structures observed?
❑ Yes 17No
❑ 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?
'[2
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 4t5'No
❑ NA ❑ NE
8. Do any of the structures lack adequate markers as required by the permit?
❑ Yes „E2- 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 Eno
❑ NA ❑ NE
maintenance or improvement?
Waste Application
10. Are there any required buffers, setbacks, or compliance alternatives that need
❑ Yes Z No
❑ NA ❑ NE
maintenance or improvement?
11. Is there evidence of incorrect land application? If yes, check the appropriate box below. ❑ Yes 21'No ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ 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): 11"'e� &'Pkf/ � r5
13. Soil Type(s):
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 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.
❑WUP ❑Checklists ❑Design ❑ Maps ❑ Lease Agreements
❑ Yes 4;7No
❑ NA
❑ NE
❑ Yes ,❑i No
❑ NA
❑ NE
❑ Yes J2-No
❑ NA
❑ NE
[:]Yes ja" FNo
❑ NA
❑ NE
❑ Yes jC2-1qo
❑ NA
❑ NE
❑ Yes E�r`No
❑ NA
❑ NE
❑ Yes ❑'No
❑ NA
❑ NE
❑Other:
21. Does record keeping need improvement? If yes, check the appropriate box below. ❑ Yes ETNo ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Waste Application ❑ Weekly Freeboard ❑ Waste Analysis ❑ Soil Analysis ❑ Waste Transfers ❑ Weather Code
❑ Rainfall ❑ Stocking ❑ Crop Yield ❑ 120 Minute Inspections ❑ Monthly and I " Rainfall Inspections ❑ Sludge Survey
22. Did the facility fail to install and maintain a rain gauge? ❑ Yes [':J'No ❑ NA ❑ NE
23. If selected, did the facility fail to install and maintain rainbreakers on irrigation equipment? ❑ Yes E �o ❑ 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 E� o
25. Is the facility out of compliance with permit conditions related to sludge? If yes, check ❑ Yes E] 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 �tdb
27. Did the facility fail to secure a phosphorus loss assessments (PLAT) certification? ❑ Yes O�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?
Reviewer/Inspector Name:
❑NA ❑NE
❑ NA ❑ NE
❑NA ❑NE
❑NA ❑NE
❑ Yes E2-No ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Yes F,;Mo ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Yes .ED`Ro ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Yes .,❑'No ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Yes
.❑'No
❑ NA
❑ NE
❑ Yes
�] No
❑ NA
❑ NE
[—]Yes
[:].No
❑ NA
❑ NE
Phone: f-IldI��5
Reviewer/Inspector Signature:
Date:
Page 3 of 3 511212020

"cnny NO, �02- Time In Time Out _
Farm Name tntegrara
Owner Site Re-,,
Operator No.
lack up No. _
HOC Circle: General or NPDES
Date
Des' n
Current I I Design Current
Wean - Feed
Farrow - Feed
Wean— Finish
Farrow - Firiis`
Feed : Finish
Gilts / Boars
Farrow -.Wean
I I ��=
FREEBOARD: Design
Observed
Crop Yield
Rain Gauge
Soil Test
Weekly Freeboard _
Spray/Freeboar Drop -
Weather Codes
Wettable Acres _
- Daily Rainfall
120 min Inspections
Waste Analysis:
Date Nitrogen (N)
�A h-qbtrl
Sludge Survey / : 1
Calibration/GPM
Waste Transfers
Rain Breaker
PLAT
1-in Inspections
Date Nitrogen (N)
& a -52-�4?