820490_Routine Inspection_20240730 (2)

Type of Visit: A@ -Compliance 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: Arrival Time: Departure Time: ounty:
Farm Name: Owner Email:
Owner Name: yjy� Phone:
Mailing Address:
Physical Address:
Facility Contact: ��.� 134e ,,,e t'Y, Title:
Onsite Representative:
Certified Operator:
r21,t�
Back-up Operator:
Location of Farm:
Latitude:
Phone:
Region: F_12c)
Integrator:rrr<Z
Certification Number: �y
Certification Number:
�1G1 W 0
Longitude:
low,
Wean to Finish
Layer
Dairy Cow
Wean to Feeder
Non -Layer
Dairy Calf
Feeder to Finish
�
Dairy Heifer
Farrow to Wean
H�i j�
�
Dry Cow
Farrow to Feeder
;
Non -Dairy
Farrow to Finish
Layers
Beef Stocker
j Gilts
Non -Layers
Beef Feeder
Boars
Pullets
Beef Brood Cow
is
HimTurkeys
�'i
Turkey PoultsM.:;
Othe[
i
R 1 •
.'
��
anr� ,� r;r 77777777177,777757 xuoni
rc�ti:'3ii:1�t1����x��HIIIIIEItI�VI
{E
��'
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)?
❑ Yes ZNo ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Yes ❑ No ❑ NA ❑ NE
[—]Yes []No ❑ NA ❑ NE
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 JyNo ❑ NA ❑ NE
of the State other than from a discharge?
Page I of 3 1 511212020 Continued

Facili Number: 3777Date of Inspection: r} r/
Waste Collection & Treatment
4. Is storage capacity (structural plus storm storage plus heavy rainfall) less than adequate? ❑ Yes 4E]'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): CiG
Observed Freeboard (in): p�
5. Are there any immediate threats to the integrity of any of the structures observed?
❑ Yes
fNo
❑ 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
, 7No
❑ 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?
�/� Yes
�❑
❑ No
❑ NA ❑ NE
8. Do any of the structures lack adequate markers as required by the permit?
Yes
EfrNo
❑ 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
O'No
❑ NA ❑ NE
maintenance or improvement?
Waste Application
10. Are there any required buffers, setbacks, or compliance alternatives that need
❑ Yes
[,j'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 Pounding ❑ 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):
7�
13. Soil Type(s): Ll )e w
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 F1 No ❑ NA ❑ NE
16. Did the facility fail to secure and/or operate per the irrigation design or wettable ❑ Yes Z� No ❑ NA ❑ NE
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 ;2'No ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Yes 1]'{Io ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Yes R ivo
❑ Yes r�o
❑ Other.
21. Does record keeping need improvement? If yes, check the appropriate box below. ❑ Yes Cj-KIo
❑ Waste Application ❑ Weekly Freeboard ❑ Waste Analysis ❑ Soil Analysis ❑ Waste Transfers
❑ Rainfall ❑ Stocking ❑ Crop Yield ❑ 120 Minute Inspections ❑ Monthly and 1" Rainfall Inspections
22. Did the facility fail to install and maintain a rain gauge? ❑ Yes J 'No
23. If selected, did the facility fail to install and maintain rainbreakers on irrigation equipment? ❑ Yes J21No
Page 2 of 3
❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ NA. ❑ NE
❑ Weather Code
❑ Sludge Survey
❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ NA ❑ NE
511212020 Continued

Facility Number: - T 6 Date of Inspection:
24. Did the facility fail to calibrate waste application equipment as required by the permit? ❑ Yes [D-No ❑ NA ❑ NE
25. Is the facility out of compliance with permit conditions related to sludge? If yes, check ❑ Yes E 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:
26. Did the facility fail to provide documentation of an actively certified operator in charge? ❑ Yes EVNo ❑ NA ❑ NE
27. Did the facility fail to secure a phosphorus loss assessments (PLAT) certification? n Yes F,,�No n NA n NE
Other Issues
28. Did the facility fail to properly dispose of dead animals with 24 hours and/or document ❑ Yes ..EJINo ❑ 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?
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 CAWW?
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?
-ILeed C�
❑ Yes allo ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Yes -Q-IVo ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Yes fl-No ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Yes .-El'No ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Yes EErNo ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Yes �No ❑ NA ❑ NE
Reviewer/InspectorName: r_J o eel5oPhone: /0 VS
Reviewer/Inspector Signature: Z /�,,Z 2c. ro Date: / -jol a y
Page 3 of 3 511212020

racniry NO. Z-" Wo Time In
C �� ��n Time Out
Farm Name
Owner IntegratW
Site Rsr
Operator
No.
Flack -up
HOC Circle: General
FREEBOARD: Design
Observed
Crop Yield
Rain Gauge
Soil Test
Wettable Acres
Weekly Freeboard
Daily Rainfall
Spray/Freeboard Drop
Weather Codes
120 min Inspections _
Waste Analysis:
Date
Nitrogen (N)
all /?-V
/0/1. /Ax
3
No._
or NPDES
Dace
Sludge Survey. ia��a/ate , �-L /0 </';� / a C/ kRJsl
Calibration/GPM 8/7r/ 1.3
Waste Transfers
Rain Breaker
PLAT
1-in Inspections
Date Nitrogen (N)
Flo L3 !a GES' , as