Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout820517_routine_20231027Facility No., Farm Name Owner _M Uperatorbk( Back-up HOC FREEBOARD: Design Observed _ Crop Yield Rain Gauge S it T Time In 11_ iO _ Circle.', General or Time Out�Date SiteRK arpQ Am _ No. J 0052 fo q 6U I 1 y el SQO No. , Or, NPDES o est � Wettable Acres Weekly Freeboard Daily Rainfall �— Spray/Freeboard Drop Weather Codes 120 min Inspections Waste Analysis: �— Date Nitrogen (N) Sludge Survey Calibration/GPM Waste Transfers Rain Breaker PLAT 1-in Inspections Date Nitrogen (N) V l '' I IUU UI )U 0 Other Agency Type of Visit: q Compliance Inspection 0 Operation Review 0 Structure Evaluation 0 Technical Assistance Reason for Visit: Q..Routine 0 Complaint 0 Follow-up 0 Referral 0 Emergency 0 Other 0 Denied Access Date of Visit: O Z Arrival Time: Departure Time: Q: ) County: Y' ill Region: T Farm Name• F. I "l�_ !1 Owner Name:yreGf-aqr-f ki 1 M Mailing Address: Physical Address: Owner Email: Phone: Facility Contact: V J Q rn�S I Q f n b Title: Onsite Representative: Certified Operator: heath Co 1 `CR Back-up Operator: Location of Farm: Design Current Swine Capacity Pop. Wean to Finish Wean to Feeder Feeder to Finish Farrow to Wean Farrow to Feeder Farrow to Finish Gilts Boars Other Latitude: Phone: Integrator: Certification Number: Certification Number: Longitude: Design Current Wet Poultry Capacity Pop. Layer Non -La er Design Current 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)? Ibb�207 Design Current Cattle Capacity Pop. Dairy Cow Dairy Calf Dairy Heifer Dry Cow Non -Dairy Beef Stocker Beef Feeder Beef Brood Cow ❑ Yes V No ❑ NA ❑ NE ❑ Yes qNo ❑ NA ❑ NE ❑ Yes '�No ❑ NA ❑ NE 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 No ❑ NA ❑ NE ElYes No ❑ NA ❑ NE El Yes No ❑ NA ❑ NE Page I of 3 511212020 Continued wnmv • onectum & r remment 4. Is storage capacity (structural plus storm storage plus heavy rainfall) less than adequate? ❑ Yes No ❑ NA ❑ NE a. If yes, is waste level into the structural freeboard? ❑ Yes No ❑ NA ❑ NE Structure I Structure 2 Structure 3 Structure 4 Structure 5 Structure 6 Identifier: Spillway?: Designed Freeboard (in): Observed Freeboard (in): 2 5. Are there any immediate threats to the integrity of any of the structures observed? ❑ Yes 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 qNo ❑ NA ❑ 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? ❑ Yes No ❑ NA ❑ NE 8. Do any of the structures lack adequate markers as required by the permit? ❑ Yes No ❑ 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 No ❑ NA ❑ NE maintenance or improvement? Waste Application 10. Are there any required buffers, setbacks, or compliance alternatives that need ❑ Yes No ❑ NA ❑ NE maintenance or improvement? 11. Is there evidence of incorrect land application? If yes, check the appropriate box below. ❑ Yes No ❑ NA ❑ NE ❑ 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): G e i RAe 13. Soil Type(s): U_ V n e 14. Do the receiving crops differ from those designated in the CAWMP? ❑ Yes �No ❑ NA ❑ NE 15. Does the receiving crop and/or land application site need improvement? ❑Yes L N ❑ NA ❑ NE 16. Did the facility fail to secure and/or operate per the irrigation design or wettable ❑ Yes qNo ❑ NA ❑ NE acres determination? 17. Does the facility lack adequate acreage for land application? ❑ Yes No ❑ NA ❑ NE 18. Is there a lack of properly operating waste application equipment? ❑ Yes No ❑ NA ❑ NE Reguired Records & Documents 19. Did the facility fail to have the Certificate of Coverage & Permit readily available? ❑ Yes No ❑ NA ❑ NE 20. Does the facility fail to have all components of the CAWMP readily available? If yes, check ❑ Yes No ❑ NA ❑ NE the appropriate box. ❑WUP []Checklists ❑ Design ❑ Maps ❑ Lease Agreements ❑Other. 21. Does record keeping need improvement? If yes, check the appropriate box below. ❑ Yes E� No ❑ Waste Application ❑ Weekly Freeboard ❑ Waste Analysis ❑ Soil Analysis ❑ Waste Transfers ❑ Rainfall ❑ Stocking ❑ Crop Yield ❑ 120 Minute Inspections ❑ Monthly and V Rainfall Inspections 22. Did the facility fail to install and maintain a rain gauge? ❑ Yes 4No 23. If selected, did the facility fail to install and maintain rainbreakers on irrigation equipment? ❑ Yes qNo Page 2 of 3 ❑ NA ❑ NE ❑ Weather Code ❑ Sludge Survey ❑NA ❑NE ❑ NA ❑ NE 511212020 Continued L,4. um me tacwty tau 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. ❑ 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? ❑ Yes HNo ❑ 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 [�] No ❑ 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 No ❑ NA ❑ NE 33. Did the Reviewer/Inspector fail to discuss review/inspection with an on -site representative? ❑ Yes No ❑ NA ❑ NE 34. Does the facility require a follow-up visit by the same agency? ❑ Yes No ❑ NA ❑ NE Comments (refer to question #): Explain any YES answers and/or any additional recommendations or an y other comments. Use drawings of facility to better explain situations (use additional pages as necessary). -m r v1(i n-r l etlxeej . fl" IooK� good. Reviewer/InspectorName: VI(to Phone:9 Reviewer/Inspector Signature: K,� Date: 10 3 Page 3 of 3 511212020