820026_Routine_20211022

K-pal roc to 26 ,a3
Type of Visit: Q Compliance Inspection 0 Operation Review 0 Structure Evaluation 0 Technical Assistance
Reason for Visit: `0 Routine 0 Complaint 0 Follow-up 0 Referral 0 Emergency 0 Other 0 Denied Access
Date of Visit:
;o,aa•ai
Arrival Time:
Igip
Farm Name: TM J O W fQ r 1 I I
Owner Name: Ti 11 -Fa t r G He,
Departure Time:
Mailing Address:
Physical Address:
Facility Contact: CQt. 7 SQ C
Onsite Representative: cAra e
Certified Operator:
Back-up Operator:
Location of Farm:
'OA WO
Owner Email:
Phone:
County: 5d j'Y} p jQ fl Region: 'Pro
Title: th GFC .
Latitude:
Integrator:
Phone:
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 IS]No ❑NA El NE
❑ Yes 11 No ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Yes n No ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Yes ' No ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Yes ®No ❑NA ❑NE
❑ Yes No ❑NA ❑NE
Page I of 3
5/12/2020 Continued

Facility Number:a - ( o
Date of Inspection:
lakd
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
ato
Structure 3 Structure 4
❑ Yes No ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑Yes t No ❑NA ❑NE
Structure 5 Structure 6
5. Are there any immediate threats to the integrity of any of the structures observed? ❑ 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 ❑ 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?
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.
❑ Yes NI No ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Yes t1 No ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Yes INNo ❑NA ❑NE
❑ Yes MW No ❑ NA ❑ NE
E4Yes ❑No El NA ❑NE
❑ Excessive Ponding ❑ Hydraulic Overload ❑ Frozen Ground ❑ Heavy Metals (Cu, Zn, etc.)
❑ PAN 14 PAN > 10% or 10 lbs. ❑ Total Phosphorus ❑ Failure to Incorporate Manure/Sludge into Bare Soil
❑ Outside of Acceptable Crop Window 0 Evidence of Wind Drift ❑ Application Outside of Approved Area
12. Crop Type(s): U C,Qq �jWj
' / Rom I 1 dui
13. Soil Type(s): I I IQ � N, at a ge urg
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 ❑Other:
21. Does record keeping need improvement? If yes, check the appropriate box below. 0 Yes ❑ No ❑ NA 0 NE
❑ Waste Application ❑ Weekly Freeboard ❑ Waste Analysis ❑ Soil Analysis Waste Transfers ❑ Weather Code
❑ Rainfall ❑ Stocking 0 Crop Yield ❑ 120 Minute Inspections ❑ Monthly and 1" Rainfall Inspections ❑ Sludge Survey
22. Did the facility fail to install and maintain a rain gauge? ] Yes 0 No ❑ NA ❑ NE
23. If selected, did the facility fail to install and maintain rainbreakers on irrigation equipment? 12 Yes ❑ No ❑ NA ❑ NE
Page 2 of 3 5/12/2020 Continued
❑ Yes
0 Yes
❑ Yes
❑ Yes
❑ Yes
❑ Yes
❑ Yes
[1;1 No
I1 No
No
No
No
No ❑NA
IN No ❑NA
❑ NA
❑ NA
❑ NA
❑ NA
❑ NA
❑ NE
❑ NE
❑ NE
❑ NE
❑ NE
❑ NE
❑ NE
❑ Yes NI No
❑ Yes No

Facility Number: ea - (p
Date of Inspection: I() - al
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 .4n.kTo ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Yes tallo ❑ 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 D Lagoon/Storage Pond ❑ Other:
❑ Yes
❑ Yes
❑ Yes
❑ Yes
❑ Yes
❑ Yes
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?
lEkNo ❑ NA ❑ NE
EINNo ❑ NA ❑ NE
allo ❑ NA ❑ NE
Q. No ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ NA ❑ NE
allo ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Yes [,No
❑ Yes "�No
❑ Yes �No
❑ NA
❑ NA
❑ NA
❑ NE
❑ NE
❑ NE
Comments (refer to question #): Explain any YES answers and/or any additional recommendations or any her comments.
Use drawings of facility to better explain situations (use additional pages as necessary).
u. w-exit ov4- ran on trau- ip b1 t its cluhlvg' Feb'dogI duhn9
chlvhuc lain Go I undticrcund.
Note: cC l t brau-roh due la,31' al -3 Soli ahGljsi S
hot tuc ge Q•ifeni-fon is n 20 .
Reviewer/Inspector Name:
KUt1'e font -mot -
Phone: III' V 9- 7 J
Reviewer/Inspector Signature:
Page 3 of 3
Date: odrF'a'
5/12/2020