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