290021_Compliance Evaluation Inspection_20210602

Type of Visit: 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: I (? 'l t 1 Arrival Time:I 01. C) 0 Q Departure Time:I
'418'A
County: Ilk v 14561 Region: 1A) 5 'Z (1
Farm Name: e,d AorN a ie m , L L. Owner Email:
Owner Name: N %1 Cri/e S 1(7 A(h e3 1 1) Phone: 3'i - ZZ S q Z 1 W l c l 1 >
Mailing Address:
Physical Address:
Facility Contact:
Title:
Onsite Representative:
Certified Operator:
Back-up Operator:
Location of Farm:
'.eSrn-1.1q
Integrator:
Phone:
Certification Number:
Certification Number:
Latitude: 55 O L-13 ' '3' Longitude: U V
ZI "
N uy 5Z S L (\ Sod C-' x , i- ) zl ? o r rO.nnp , H u,s y 4 7- ,
-3(• a(cx Hn,rvu ►2-d- ;retYrn (Sag
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?
❑ YesNo ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Yes ❑ No ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Yes ❑ No ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Yes ❑ No ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Yes it -No ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Yes No ❑ NA ❑ NE
Page 1 of 3
2/4/2015 Continued

Facility Number: ' 4 - 7 j
IDate of Inspection:
7. Do any of the structures need maintenance or improvement?
8. Do any of the structures lack adequate markers as required by the permit?
(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
maintenance or improvement?
Waste Application
10. Are there any required buffers, setbacks, or compliance alternatives that need
maintenance or improvement?
11. Is there evidence of incorrect land application? If yes, check the appropriate box below.
Waste Collection & Treatment
4. Is storage capacity (structural plus storm storage plus heavy rainfall) less than adequate?
a. If yes, is waste level into the structural freeboard?
Identifier:
Spillway?:
Designed Freeboard (in):
Observed Freeboard (in):
Structure 1 Structure 2
W 5P 1 Ws?Z
If
Structure 3 Structure 4
5. Are there any immediate threats to the integrity of any of the structures observed?
(i.e., large trees, severe erosion, seepage, etc.)
6. Are there structures on -site which are not properly addressed and/or managed through a
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
,Yes ❑ No ❑ NA ❑ NE
'Yes ❑ No ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Yes 32CNo ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Yes Fslo ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Yes IIo ❑ NA ❑ NE
D 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): CO 1 �i) �Yi�.11`1A SW (A a t 4-r - (0IP
❑ Yes $No ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Yes ❑ No ❑ NA ❑ NE
Structure 5 Structure 6
13. Soil Type(s):
❑ Yes yiNo ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Yes 'No ❑ NA ❑ NE
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
❑ Yes
❑ Yes
No
IXCNo
❑ No
❑ NA
❑ NA
�NA
❑ NE
❑ NE
❑ NE
❑ Yes tgrdNo ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Yes yiNo ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Yes IgNo ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Yes 71 No ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Other:
21. Does record keeping need improvement? If yes, check the appropriate box below. ❑ Yes 18:{No ❑ NA ❑ NE
Waste Application Weekly Freeboard VATaste Analysis 0 Soil ?analysis. r, "'--`o Tr....sfr4 Weather Code
Rainfall gStocking Crop Yield 0 120 gMonthly and 1" Rainfall Inspections ��'-''
22. Did the.facility fail to i stall 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 ❑ No NA ❑ NE
Page 2 of 3 2 4/2015 Continued

Facility Number: Z(i - 'L
Reviewer/Inspector Name:
Date of Inspection: Lott
171
Reviewer/Inspector Signature: Date:
Page 3 of 3
24. Did the facility fail to calibrate waste application equipment as required by the permit?
❑ Yes)4.- No ❑ NA ❑ NE
25. Is the facility out of compliance with permit conditions related to sludge? If yes, check ❑ Yes ❑ No ANA ❑ 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 KNo ❑ NA ❑ NE
27. Did the facility fail to secure a phosphorus loss assessments (PLAT) certification? ❑ Yes 'No ❑ NA ❑ NE
Other Issues
28. Did the facility fail to properly dispose of dead animals with 24 hours and/or document ❑ Yes gNo ❑ 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? 0 Yes "No ❑ 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 2(No ❑ 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 ❑ No XfNA ❑ NE
❑ Application Field ❑ Lagoon/Storage Pond ❑ Other:
32. Were any additional problems noted which cause non-compliance of the permit or CAWMP? ❑ Yes ONo ❑ NA ❑ NE
33. Did the Reviewer/Inspector fail to discuss review/inspection with an on -site representative? ❑ Yes Io ❑ NA ❑ NE
34. Does the facility require a follow-up visit by the same agency? ❑ Yes KNo ❑ NA ❑ NE
Comments (refer to question #): Explain any YES answers and/or any additional recommendations or any other comments.
Use drawings of facility to better explain situations (use additional pages as necessary).
SO‘1SdutZOZZ. 3?Y1 9(vfn
ZA? p I;ca+vnS
Zoiq CGIib�hho-Ox aria ZoZI D6s�6��
' C W M P topdal&d
0 Mavker rip Uir kc1 V `��l,�a i►�7� - 11)Z '/a)z 1 �rcLra ��ne?
Jes; 'lv2 warm
00\--N \-, pic«As �e ui nk,k "note i
9 31,11 wa v so ► I re m ov0 l 7 w i 1 ‘ CkklN \ 0- eA r rQ S iAn9 m o,-(\uf agc4r
150MA \119 0\\ 01\bV\k- o4 ins?Z.`kntl(M. a ( out( 4aack4i-1f,
L)Spi Yam- M ku be move t p tiro-iaill iNemov'-(_(-i),,k nc1 Ini dr\ock,c 1t-h-1[
zjLl wily
Z 1Ag co 3.5 t-C(.��L�� CAI CAA4Cl.ci Glf r"'S 19ASednA clireqi,z1
1 1 Phone: 74e/ t4
C07 70? 1
/12 2020