HomeMy WebLinkAbout760022_Inspection_20190918Type of Visit: Compliance Inspection 0 Operation Review 0 Structure Evaluation 0 Technical Assistance
Reason for Visit: (Routine 0 Complaint 0 Follow-up 0 Referral 0 Emergency 0 Other 0 Denied Access
Date of Visit: {p Arrival Time: �� Departure Time: County: U h
Farm Name: �; Cj Owner Email:
Owner Name: ��p l Phone: `7 D n,6
Mailing Address:.
Physical Address: "V
Facility Contact: Ov $1 eYS Title:
Onsite Representative: I
Certified Operator:V
Back-up Operator:
Location of Farm:
Region: NS R6
and1pry)an NC a-13II
(14er)
Phone:
Integrator:
Certification Number:
Certification Number:
Latitude:'&6- D�2� ko" Longitude: 1010 5�bt f 0"
Us5' S Z,40 E
t� 17-y3
/ago6 • EX%+ (Zvel CraSS I2al. +Urr)
0v1bve
DC,
.
Wean to Finish
Layer
Dairy Cow
Wean to Feeder
Non -La er
Dairy Calf
Feeder to Finish
;t
�
Dairy Heifer
Farrow to Weantl
Dry Cow
Farrow to Feeder
Non -Dairy
Farrow to Finish
Layers
Beef Stocker
Gilts
Non -Layers
Beef Feeder
Boars
Pullets
Beef Brood Cow
rl�'
.,
Turke ults
Other
Other
tyd �}til i I
`
II.. dR G ki
i i n tt ANHIIILFI94iH.3
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 14 No NA ❑ NE
Yes No ❑ NA Ej NE
Ej Yes ❑ No ❑ NA ❑ NE
Yes No
❑ Yes EANo
Yes 0 No
❑ NA NE
NA NE
NA NE
Page I of 3 21412015 Continued
Facility Number: - Date of Inspection: q
Waste Collection & Treatment
4. Is storage capacity (structural plus storm storage plus heavy rainfall) less than adequate?
❑ Yes
tg' No
❑ NA
❑ NE
a. If yes, is waste level into the structural freeboard?
❑ Yes
❑ No
❑ NA
❑ NE
Structure 1 Structure 2 Structure 3 Structure 4
Structure 5
Structure 6
Identifier: O F-W
Spillway?:
Designed Freeboard (in):
ll _ s1SL
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.)
TT''
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?
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 ADMication
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. 0 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 Manuro/Sludge into Bare Soil
❑ Outside of Acceptable Crop Window ❑ Evidence of Wind Drift ❑ Application Outside of Approved Area
12.Crop TYpe(s): 0YVi ZoJ(lUIt JUrXIV1
'61I(A 1 14U
lw)�)
Y9*j-ALAyV,JUY
rlu1V� `JjJLk
}4/
1
13. Soil Type(s):
14. Do the receiving crops differ from those designated in the CAWMP?
❑ Yes
J No
❑ NA
❑ NE
15. Does the receiving crop and/or land application site need improvement?
❑ Yes
FNo
❑ NA
❑ NE
16. Did the facility fail to secure and/or operate per the irrigation design or wettable
❑ Yes
t'No
0 NA
❑ NE
acres determination?
17. Does the facility lack adequate acreage for land application?
❑ Yes
EANo
❑ NA
❑ NE
18. Is there a lack of properly operating waste application equipment?
❑ Yes
qNo
❑ NA
❑ NE
Required Records & Documents
19. Did the facility fail to have the Certificate of Coverage & Permit readily available?
❑ YesNo
❑ NA
❑ NE
20. Does the facility fail to have all components of the CAWMP readily available? If yes, check
❑ Yes
gNo
❑ 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, Q [—]Yes rV No ❑ NA ❑ NE
Ilkwaste Application CAWeekly Freeboard Waste Analysis iz:j oull—afyNth . ❑ems rs N Weather Code
Rainfall Stocking jFCrop Yield r59120 Minute Inspections Monthly and 1" Rainfall Inspections
22. Did the facility fail to install and maintain a rain gauge? ❑ Yes " No ❑ NA ❑ NE
23. If selected, did the facility fail to install and maintain rainbreakers on irrigation equipment? ❑ Yes ❑ No rNA ❑ NE
Page 2 of 3 21412015 Continued
Facifi Number: - Date of Inspection: j
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 ❑ Yes ❑ No M NA ❑ NE
the appropriate box(es) below.
❑ Failure to complete annual sludge survey ❑ Failure to develop a PDA 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
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? `
29. At the time of the inspection did the facility pose an odor or air quality concern?
❑ Yes
MA 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
! si take IAac l fie. - oo mti vo + rya e�
5:a t s jo'b n',0W .
i N\u gin ► bv�w(�e� 5P ' el #� I S Styz ,,kc�
eAu`vP c�n+��ceXers�,`�
e,n Opp ? N° wl�fi�� w Q W +a r ask l
tlwlet
Coll
`gyp rn� Qv reARNstu Pr ('vS� c�B 4-cr �'g_e ACr _ �a CIA-
Sov�rA vved 5p.\C'w+.`�2 cry^
�f U\0-a�� LiS2�/t�i 0� ) /� L 0. n �I
�O Jk M 'Yr a-*)^11"
sl"11 q
oq a.
Reviewer/Inspector
Reviewer/Inspector
Page 3 of 3
�,JI7(19 51�d��W Q�i�1ll`1
.-D vSe. OP4
Phone:
Date: Q
21412015