820188_Routine_20210827

Type of Visit: Compliance Inspection 0 Operation Review 0 Structure Evaluation 0 Technical Assistance
Reason for Visit: WI Routine 0 Complaint 0 Follow-up 0 Referral 0 Emergency 0 Other 0 Denied Access
Date of Visit:
Farm Name:
Arrival Time:19: (13 I Departure Time:
f!r4 fagic
21I
Owner Name: V fQ
Mailing Address:
Physical Address:
Facility Contact: Curti; FR d1 ruu CCI
Onsite Representative: CjC 11�
(e
Certified Operator:
Back-up Operator:
Location of Farm:
1 g:tip 1
Owner Email:
Phone:
County: AiTpSDN
Region: No
food faf'rthbth
Title: Tech Sr
Latitude:
Phone:
Integrator: Cj III ith f "I e 1 d
Certification Number:
Certification Number:
Longitude:
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 tiNo ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Yes ❑ No fNA ❑ NE
❑ Yes ❑ No fNA ❑ NE
❑ Yes 'cLNo ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Yes 1:3.No ❑ NA ❑ NE
El Yes bNo El NA ❑NE
Page 1 of 3
5/12/2020 Continued

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?
Structure 1 Structure 2 Structure 3
Identifier:
Spillway?:
Designed Freeboard (in):
Observed Freeboard (in):
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?
❑ Yes "%(No ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Yes --,N,,o ❑ NA ❑ NE
Structure 5 Structure 6
❑ Yes t1SINNo ❑
❑ Yes ❑
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?
S. Do any of the structures lack adequate markers as required by the permit?
(not applicable to roofed pits, dry stacks, and/or wet stacks)
(� Graft;
o and Drift 0
12.CropType(s): CbQ�J1at; berrnvPa) wil K. -e, &oNl-2{L cbNuCd SumeF -
13. Soil Type(s): NO'
l O (r I O 0
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?
Rewired 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 ❑YesNo ❑ NA ❑ NE
the appropriate box.❑ YE
❑WUp ❑Checklists [Design [Maps 0 Lease Agreements ❑Other:
21. Does record keeping need improvement? If yes, check the appropriate box below.
Waste Application ❑Weekly Freeboard ❑ Yes " lNo ❑ NA 0 NE
]Rainfall ❑ Waste Analysis 0 Soil Analysis 0 Waste Transfers
❑ Stocking ❑ Crop Yield ❑ 120 Minute Inspections❑Weather Code
!2. Did the facility fail to install and maintain a rain gauge? 0Monthly and 1"Rainfall Inspections ❑Sludge Survey
3. If selected, did the facility fail to install and maintain rainbreakers on irrigation equipment? ❑ Yes 'No ❑ NA ❑ NE
Page 2 of3 0 Yes �No 0 NA 0 NE
5/12/2020 Continued
Date of Ins s ection:
Yes 0 No ❑
❑ Yes NRNo ❑
NA ❑ NE
NA ❑ NE
NA ❑ NE
NA ❑ NE
0 Yes Io 0 NA ❑ NE
❑ YesNo ❑ NA ❑ NE
No ❑ NA ❑ NE
9. Does any part of the waste management system other than the waste structures require
maintenance or improvement?
Waste Aonlicatlon
there
10. Areanyequired 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.
0 Excessive Ponding 0 Hydraulic Overload ❑Yee �)
❑PAN ❑ Frozen Ground ❑Heavy Metals (Cu, Zn, etc.)
❑ PAN > 10% or 10 lbs. ❑ Total Phosphorus ❑ Failure to Incorporate Manure/Sludge into Bare Soil
0 Outside of Acceptable Crop Window
❑ Evidence f W' Application Outside of Approved Area
❑ YesRNo
❑ Yes No
❑ Yes No
❑ Yes iSa,bio
❑ Yest,No
❑ NA ❑ NE
❑NA ❑NE
❑NA ❑NE
❑NA ❑NE
❑ NA ❑ NE

Facility Number: 7 -
Date of Inspection: PJ g,t f
24. Did the facility fail to calibrate waste application equipment as required by the permit?
25. Is the facility out of compliance with permit conditions related to sludge? If yes, check
the appropriate box(es) below.
❑ Failure to complete annual sludge survey
❑ Non -compliant sludge levels in any lagoon
List structure(s) and date of first survey indicating non-compliance:
❑ Yes NA ❑ NE
❑ YesNo ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Failure to develop a POA for sludge levels
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:
❑ Yes �No
❑ Yes No
❑ Yes 'No
❑ Yes "No
❑ Yes %1S1,No
❑ Yes ClKI\No
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?
❑ Yes'No
❑ YeN No
❑ Yes %No
Comments (refer to question #): Explain any YESanswers and/or any additional recommendations or any athei
Use drawings of facility to better explain situations (use additional pages as necessary).
❑ NA
❑ NA
❑ NE
❑ NE
❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ NA ❑ NE
❑NA ❑NE
❑ NA ❑NE
❑ NA
❑ NA
❑ NA
cnm
❑ NE
❑ NE
❑ NE
fa\rral four Needs grazed 12ermvcic fi cj,
Note
moon hqs Owl Veg- -cM'DN
Reviewer/Inspector Name:
Reviewer/Inspector Signature:
Page 3 of 3
�71e ft
}(fu& 0`1` f -en C9'1-
ter Pi
Phone: C(1 1 oI`t� ��
C
Date: (� t7j1,✓1(
5/12/2020