400128_Inspection_20221102

Facility Number: 1,[d - / f
Date of Inspection: 1/ — —��-
6
Additional Comments and/or drawings:
k.)/( _ CDmi/4nC)1sp. - "do
,?rr, v J 9 ; 0D Separf: �, j'.
dAte,ti,___ — 1(),t/W
Cp-art 01J-02 - 7,3 7 —
k.zotf,ve÷ tei //t/G
sF
lG : Cam � �z3i6 4( 9)
67ttd—: •
62m4Le.,
939-1���3
5/12/2020

Facility Number: LI(j -
Date of Inspection: f /��—
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):
❑ Yes IIKTO ❑NA ❑NE
❑ Yes ❑No ❑NA ❑NE
Structure Structure 2 Structure 3 Structure 4 Structure 5 Structure 6
/9
4
5. Are there any immediate threats to the integrity of any of the structures observed? ❑ YesNo ❑ NA
(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 o ❑ NA
7. Do any of the structures need maintenance or improvement? ❑ Yes No E NA
8. Do any of the structures lack adequate markers as required by the permit? ❑ Yes g(No ❑ NA
(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 ❑ Yes 12No ❑ NA
maintenance or improvement?
11. Is there evidence of incorrect land application? If yes, check the appropriate box below. ❑ Yes No ❑ NA
❑ 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
❑ Yes jNo ❑ NA
❑ NE
❑ NE
❑ NE
❑ NE
❑ NE
❑ NE
❑ NE
12. Crop Type(s):
13. Soil Type(s):
14. Do the receiving crops differ from those designated in the CAWMP? E Yes No ❑ NA
15. Does the receiving crop and/or land application site need improvement? ❑ Yes [ No ❑ NA
16. Did the facility fail to secure and/or operate per the irrigation design or wettable E Yes [ No ❑ NA
acres determination?
17. Does the facility lack adequate acreage for land application? ❑ Yes dNo ❑ NA
18. Is there a lack of properly operating waste application equipment? ❑ Yes No ❑ NA
Required Records & Documents
19. Did the facility fail to have the Certificate of Coverage & Permit readily available? ❑ Yes [ '1No ❑ NA
20. Does the facility fail to have all components of the CAWMP readily available? If yes, check ❑ Yes No ❑ NA
the appropriate box.
❑ WUP ❑ Checklists ❑ Design ❑ Maps ❑ Lease Agreements ❑ Other:
21. Does record keeping need improvement? If yes, check the appropriate box below. E Yes No ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Waste Application ❑ Weekly Freeboard ❑ Waste Analysis ❑ Soil Analysis ❑ Waste Transfers ❑ Weather Code
❑ Rainfall ❑ Stocking ❑ Crop Yield ❑ 120 Minute Inspections ❑ Monthly and 1" Rainfall Inspectio ❑ Sludge Survey
22. Did the facility fail to install and maintain a rain gauge? E Yes No ❑ NA ❑ NE
23. If selected, did the facility fail to install and maintain rainbreakers on irrigation equipment? E Yes No ❑ NA ❑ NE
Page 2 of 3 5/12/2020 Continued
❑ NE
❑ NE
❑ NE
❑ NE
❑ NE
❑ NE
❑ NE

Facility Number: 1,40 - r
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 ❑ 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:
Date of Inspection: // — —
❑Yes �o D NA ❑NE
❑ Yes No ❑ NA
❑ NE
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.
❑ Yes © o ❑ NA
❑ Yes [' No ❑ NA
❑ Yes �No ❑ NA
❑ Yes [ No ❑ NA
❑ Yes ❑NA ❑NE
❑ Yes LId l7o ❑ NA
❑ NE
❑ NE
❑ Application Field ❑ Lagoon/Storage Pond ❑ Other:
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
❑ Yes
❑ Yes
❑ NE
❑ NE
❑ NE
[ No ❑ NA ❑ NE
[o ❑NA ❑NE
No ❑ NA ❑ NE
(refe0dii.inisticni T 1n. any YES answers anljor any addifiioual recotn nendations orno a#tierc
;q s fakii o 004 ua situatiaus (use additional pages as necessary).
Z(2-e/44 /4
41.e/ 00/
daat
Reviewer/Inspector Name:
Reviewer/Inspector Signature:
Page 3 of 3
Phone:
Date:
5/12/2020