820620_Inspection_20210414

fit ---4,7--?/
visiowof Wate:
O Division of SoiI a
Q Other Agenc;
Type of Visit: (eCOmpliance Inspection 0 Operation Review 0 Structure Evaluation 0 Technical Assistance
Reason for Visit: /al�outine 0 Complaint 0 Follow-up 0 Referral 0 Emergency 0 Other 0 Denied Access
Date of Visit: 4./Gj_ I Arrival Time:
Farm Name: /lle.-7
Owner Name:
Mailing Address:
Physical Address:
Facility Contact:
Departure Time:
aJ/ /iLaf .v y / k,04 -
62.5 gad
12.3D I
Owner Email:
Phone:
County:] Region:
Onsite Representative:
/774-7;fa ; I
Title: APowi' .r Phone:
Certified Operator:
Back-up Operator:
Location of Farm:
Latitude:
Integrator: /gs-r_
Certification Number: s�
Certification Number:
Longitude:
Discharges and Stream Impacts
1. Is any discharge observed from any part of the operation?
Discharge originated at: ❑ Structure El 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 2'No ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Yes ❑ No ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Yes ❑ No ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Yes ❑ No ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Yes []No ❑NA ❑NE
❑ Yes ro ❑ NA ❑ NE
Page 1 of 3
2/4/2015 Continued

Facility Number: 0— - 6,7 D
Date of Inspection:
y/iN/email
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):
ObAerved Freeboard (in):
❑ Yes [] N ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Yes ❑ No ❑ NA ❑ NE
Structure 1 Structure 2 Structure 3 Structure 4 Structure 5 Structure 6
OZ�
5. Are there any immediate threats to the integrity of any of the structures observed? ❑ Yes Q No ❑ 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 Ifr-No ❑ NA 0 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? 2Yes ❑ No ❑ NA 0 NE
8. Do any of the structures lack adequate markers as required by the permit? ❑ Yes algo ❑ 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 ago ❑ NA ❑ NE
maintenance or improvement?
Waste Application
10. Are there any required buffers, setbacks, or compliance alternatives that need ❑ Yes Et< ❑ NA ❑ NE
maintenance or improvement?
11. Is there evidence of incorrect land application? If yes, check the appropriate box below. In Yes L N ❑ NA ❑ NE
O 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): %-tnw,itti— Atroy._ /Ottent l /cciirn. ' rA
13. Soil Type(s):
W n�
14. Do the receiving crops differ from those designated in the CAWMP? ❑ Yes Q No ❑ NA 0 NE
15. Does the receiving crop and/or land application site need improvement? ❑ Yes 13<o 0 NA 0 NE
16. Did the facility fail to secure and/or operate per the irrigation design or wettable 0 Yes Ia No 0 NA ❑ NE
acres determination?
17. Does the facility lack adequate acreage for land application? 0 Yes Q'lio ❑ NA ❑ NE
18. Is there a lack of properly operating waste application equipment? 0 Yes [/] No 0 NA ❑ NE
Required Records & Documents
19. Did the facility fail to have the Certificate of Coverage & Permit readily available? ❑ Yes ENo 0 NA ❑ NE
20. Does the facility fail to have all components of the CAWMP readily available? If yes, check 0 Yes Ergo 0 NA 0 NE
the appropriate box.
❑WUP El Checklists 0 Design ❑Maps 0 Lease Agreements 0 Other:
21. Does record keeping need improvement? If yes, check the appropriate box below. ales 0 No 0 NA ❑ NE
❑ Waste Application ❑ Weekly Freeboard 0 Waste Analysis ❑ Soil Analysis ❑ Waste Transfers a Weather Code
O Rainfall ❑ Stocking 0 Crop Yield 0120 Minute Inspections 0 Monthly and 1" Rainfall Inspections 0 Sludge Survey
22. Did the facility fail to install and maintain a rain gauge? 0 Yes /❑rNo 0 NA 0 NE
23. If selected, did the facility fail to install and maintain rainbreakers on irrigation equipment? ales 0 No 0 NA 0 NE
Page 2 of 3 2/4/2015 Continued

Facility Number: $ --
Date of Inspection:
24. Did the facility fail to calibrate waste application equipment as required by the permit? ❑ Yes No ❑ NA ❑ NE
25. Is the facility out of compliance with permit conditions related to sludge? If yes, check „Yes ❑ No ❑ NA ❑ NE
the appropriate box(es) below.
❑ allure 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 provide documentation of an actively certified operator in charge? ❑ Yes ENo ❑ 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 / No ❑ 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? ❑ 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 I 14o ❑ 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 ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Application Field ❑ Lagoon/Storage Pond ❑ Other:
32. Were any additional problems noted which cause non-compliance of the permit or CAWMP? ❑ Yes 131 o ❑ NA ❑ NE
33. Did the Reviewer/Inspector fail to discuss review/inspection with an on -site representative? ❑ Yes Ergo ❑ NA ❑ NE
34. Does the facility require a follow-up visit by the same agency? ❑ Yes 'No ❑ NA ❑ NE
7 mk ertai3- b'r,G.rt- Lc) oftC B-._ `h'3 Gv ly n- to 6
475.
021 air.g- ,Xre-ad -wz ems- etje, tip mTh. J s -1 yoGt %6W't Art.
19 T ,s bau—GDo1 I- er 7 u �z m O1-) �t 7 7Z won,..- 7ou Pa..-
I t, 7 h-e iJ�vi i-- Kl« eo -»4r eel 75 ii'"'// -Ad caek r TELL
a JnbrnC .e 1S ren- .e/ r data 51nr)! ori"--
.r * / Dtot �-5rn.i T / l t (/
!-2.f-eb-r J 4-c- ; S ,�'•,- Gf3�•' ;•�� ,,,, j! rc, evr , - i� v / pir
Ug'�sr
n-Yoor r-cotell
Reviewer/Inspector Name:
Phone: 97D-_-sa��s—�C��(.51
Reviewer/Inspector Signature: - Date: %J /47 pry—(
Page 3 of 3
2/4/2015