HomeMy WebLinkAbout990031_Compliance Evaluation Inspection_20181231Facility Number �❑ 0Division of Soil and Water Gonservation
N-0
Q Othen ncy
Type of Visit: P Compliance Inspection 0 Operation Review 0 Structure Evaluation 0 Technical Assistance
Reason for Visit: A& Routine 0 Complaint 0 Follow-up 0 Referral 0 Emergency 0 Other 0 Denied Access
Date of Visit: �� Arrival Time: i �, 0� Departure Time: ` County:
Farm Name: U ���afpns Y) G Owner Email:
Owner Name: L� d �d (�n �— Phone:
Mailing Address:
Region: r__
Physical Address: �155'yQ.Y1S �(�l , , �� �dki nV1 it N C Ern o 55
Facility Contact: ��� (� ICJY Ql - Title: Phone: `mts—
Onsite Representative:
Certified Operator: 'N ikk `MUV�ir-
Integrator:
Certification Number: JC `.fWW U-1
Back-up Operator: Certification Number:
Location of Farm: Latitude: b �� ��Longitude: ly
Design Current
Design
Current
Design Current -
Swine
Capacity :; Pop.
Wet Poultry
Capacity
Pop.
Cattle Capacity Pop.
Wean to Finish
Layer
Dairy Cow
Wean to Feeder
Non -Layer
Dairy Calf
Feeder to Finish
p
Dairy Heifer
Farrow to Wean
Design
Current
Dry Cow
Farrow to Feeder
ry-Poultry
Pop.
Non -Dairy
Farrow to Finish
I Layers
I
113eef Stocker
Gilts
Non -Layers
Beef Feeder
Boars
Pullets
113eef Brood Cow
Turkeys
;Other.
Turkey Poults
F—TO—ther
V.
Other
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 0 No ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Yes ❑ No ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Yes ❑ No ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Yes ❑ No
❑ Yes '5Q No
❑ Yes 1�6 No
❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ NA ❑ NE
Page 1 of 3 21412015 Continued
Facili Number: - Date of Inspection: j
Waste Collection & Treatment
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? Om"IN
❑ Yes
❑ No
❑ NA
n NE
Structure 1 Structure 2 Structure+3 Structure 4
Structure 5
Structure 6
Identifier:
�
Spillway. • .
Designed Freeboard (in):
Observed Freeboard (in):
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
No
❑ 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?
1� 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): �/`'� �� Q -C 5 GUe
13. Soil Type(s):
14. Do the receiving crops differ from those designated in the CAWMP?
❑ Yes
Do No
❑ NA
❑ NE
15. Does the receiving crop and/or land application site need improvement?
❑ Yes
rA No
❑ NA
❑ NE
16. Did the facility fail to secure and/or operate per the irrigation design or wettable
❑ Yes
N No
❑ 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
Required 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
No
❑ NA ❑ NE
Waste Application 0 Weekly Freeboard Waste Analysis Soil Analysis
vst�
ransiL.L�Weather
Code
Rainfall Stocking Crop Yield DQ 120 Minute Inspections Monthly and 1" Rainfall Inspections ge-Si�xvey 91_1� U
22. Did the facility fail to install and maintain a rain gauge?
❑ Yes
Q No
❑ NA ❑ NE
23. If selected, did the facility fail to install and maintain rainbreakers on irrigation equipment?
❑ Yes
❑ No
00 NA ❑ NE
Page 2 of 3
21412015 Continued
Facili Number: Lj q - 51 71 1 Date of inspection: W
24. Did the facility fail to calibrate waste application equipment as required by the permit? ❑ Yes 0 No ❑ NA ❑ NE
25. Is the facility out of compliance with permit conditions related to sludge? If yes, check ❑ Yes 'Zn 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 provide documentation of an actively certified operator in charge? ❑ Yes Vj No ❑ 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? (f,V 66f C (
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.
10 No
❑ NA
❑ NE
permit? (i.e., discharge, problems,freeboard over -application)
31. Do subsurface tile drains exist at the facility? If yes, check the appropriate box below.
0 Yes
`K 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
0 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
+� r .���r�Ve
",Y-� 1oUGK-
\r\)t fab1R- Aare S revis�,ol
ed (L4 Vi �d1 �j ICI `Q bn had GCx-eS
�.� so;is SarnPled? co)rnr;+-t�, eve au .
�u . Ca�j brU�'►"cam cam Pad ? C0�(�(:Q.-�--�ci lU(2�� ►� �u� (;�Of�v� �� .
�5 . S�udge. S�r�e� dve- �..e_�4- •�ea�.
iru fCd atl ► oY qr�� eNu✓t
PA� cal u W-W .
t
Reviewer/Inspector
Reviewer/Inspector
Page 3 of 3
Phone: 'J3Vlj — o�
Date: p
21412015