Loading...
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