820160_Routine Inspection_20220714

Facility Number
g
APO
Division of Water Resources
O Division of Soil and Water Conservation
Q Other Agency
e)ffJs
jII�`�22
Type of Visit: + Compliance Inspection 0 Operation Review 0 Structure Evaluation 0 Technical Assistance
Reason for Visit: t Routine 0 Complaint 0 Follow-up 0 Referral 0 Emergency 0 Other 0 Denied Access
Date of Visit:
Arrival Time:
` 3o
Farm Name: AQ % 4 e ri fond I u rce rJ
Owner Name: cir1- -IDf1' , dQr1erg
Mailing Address:
Physical Address:
Facility Contact: C') til S b'1
Onsite Representative:
Certified Operator:
Back-up Operator:
Location of Farm:
" "
Departure Time:
�c iti
Owner Email:
Phone:
County: carc al Region: Fro
ENTERED TO
LASERFICHE
J U L 1 5 2022
Title: Tech S P
FAYET EVILLEWR RWQROS
EGIONAL OFFICE
anthenpi dt1n
Latitude:
Phone:
Integrator: Cjm, cj
f��l
Certification Number: 1 Q)3-3-0
Certification Number:
Longitude:
Swine
Design Curr
Capacity Pop.
Wean to Finish
Wean to Feeder
Feeder to Finish
(ioo
iiooc
Farrow to Wean
Farrow to Feeder
Farrow to Finish
Gilts
Boars
Other
Capacity Pop.
Layer
Non -Layer
Design Current
Dr v Poultry Capacity Pon.
Layers
Non -Layers
Pullets
__Turkeys
Turkey Poults
Other
Dairy Cow
Dairy Calf
Dairy Heifer
Dry Cow
Non -Dairy
Beef Stocker
Beef Feeder
Beef Brood Cow
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 g No ❑NA ❑NE
❑ Yes ❑ No it NA ❑ NE
❑ Yes ❑ No J NA ❑ NE
❑ Yes
❑ Yes
❑ Yes
❑ No
No
No
tg] NA ❑ NE
❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ NA ❑NE
Page 1 of 3
5/12/2020 Continued

Facility Number: ?)` - 1 O
Date of Inspection: 1 • ILI y,.2,
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
Identifier: 1
Spillway?: o t1 D
Designed Freeboard (in):
Observed Freeboard (in):
I9
'3 Go
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,
7. Do any of the structures need maintenance or improvement? Lq q O®N Yes
8. Do any of the structures lack adequate markers as required by the permit? ❑ Yes
(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?
❑ Yes
❑ Yes
Structure 5
No ❑ NA ❑ NE
No ❑ NA ❑ NE
Structure 6
11. Is there evidence of incorrect land application? If yes, check the appropriate box below.
❑ Yes
❑ Yes
❑ Yes
No
k No
❑ No
.'"'� No
No
❑ Yes Ki No
❑ Yes t No
❑ 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): COQ;tot e€ rnud a Over ce.e
❑NA ❑NE
❑ NA ❑ NE
notify DWR
NA
NA
❑ NA
❑ NA
13. Soil Type(s): WC1g rU 1I
❑ NA
❑ NE
❑ NE
❑ NE
❑ NE
❑ 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? Wee G
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.
❑ Waste Application ❑ Weekly Freeboard ❑ Waste Analysis ❑ Soil Analysis
❑ Yes 41 No ❑ NA ❑ NE
Yes ❑ No ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Yes t No ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Yes No ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Yes I] No ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Yes (I No ❑ NA ❑ NE
E Yes No ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑Yes FpNo ❑NA ❑NE
❑ Waste Transfers ❑ Weather Code
❑ Rainfall ❑ Stocking ❑ Crop Yield ❑ 120 Minute Inspections ❑ Monthly and 1" Rainfall Inspections ❑ Sludge Survey
22. Did the facility fail to install and maintain a rain gauge?
23. If selected, did the facility fail to install and maintain rainbreakers on irrigation equipment?
Page 2 of 3
❑ Yes
❑ Yes
No
Dt No
❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ NA ❑ NE
5/12/2020 Continued

Facility Number: 0r.) - ((p
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 El Yes No ❑ NA ❑ 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?
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 ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Yes Etl No ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑Yes No ❑NA ❑NE
❑ Yes I No ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Yes No ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Yes 1j6 No ❑ NA ❑ NE
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
No ❑ NA ❑ NE
No ❑ NA ❑ NE
No ❑ NA ❑ NE
Comments (refer to question #): Explain any YES answers and/or any additional recommendations or a
Use drawings of facility to better explain situations (use additional pages as n
1(POW on ire req at- Iqqoon a,
I�. KeeF wnrKing On weeds your betrnvqq fiefs.
mote- caiibrcctrory 5oi1 eve 1da.P.
re(o4s
'rfrlfg11:�/
u, c1 t-e : Sao (1 22,
Sludge: 12.2 Z(
)o)ti
CryIl121-04 j0i1'g®iq
Reviewer/Inspector Name:
Reviewer/Inspector Signature:
KQti fbntefct )t,e0-Wfla t/iiikN
Phone: 1 q eAV 1C
Date: -1
Page 3 of 3
5/12/2020