Loading...
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.
Home
My WebLink
About
310834_Compliance Evaluation Inspection_20200918
Facility Number ©- U J O Division of Soil and Water Conservation Lasp►fiched O Other Agency Type of Visit: (VCompliance Inspection. Operation Review O Structure Evaluation O Technical Assistance Reason for Visit: (JRoutine O Complaint O Follow-up O Referral O Emergency O Other O Denied Access Date of Visit: � Arrival Time: Departure Time: nT OOaF. County: UAA Farm Name:-}y..qA_ /v 14A,Ig' •, Owner Email: Owner Name: ' 1p/f/L V�/1My Phone: Mailing Address: Physical Address: Facility Contact: Onsite Representai Certified Operator Back-up Operator: Location of Farm: Swine Wean to Finish Wean to Feeder Feeder to Finish Farrow to Wean Farrow to Feeder Farrow to Finish Gilts Boars Other Phone: Integrator: Region: Certification Number: do{b), Certification Number: Latitude: Longitude: Design Current Design Current Capacity Pop. Wet Poultry Capacity Pop. NNon-- La er Design Current Dry Poultry Canacitv Pon. Layers Non -Layers Pullets Turkeys Turkey Poults Other Discharees 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? Design Current Cattle Capacity Pop. Dairy Cow Dairy Calf Dairy Heifer Dry Cow Non -Dairy Beef Stocker Beef Feeder Beef Brood Cow ❑ Yes ® No ❑ NA ❑ NE ❑ Yes ❑ No ❑ NA ❑ NE ❑ Yes ❑ No ❑ NA ❑ NE ❑ Yes ❑ No ❑ NA ❑ NE ❑ Yes " No ❑ NA ❑ NE ❑ Yes FA No ❑ NA ❑ NE Page 1 of 3 511212020 Continued Facilit Number: Date of inspection: 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? ❑ Yes ❑ No ❑ NA ❑ NE Structure I Structure 2 Structure 3 Structure 4 Structure 5 Structure 6 Identifier:�a Kati Spillway?: Designed Freeboard (in): Observed Freeboard (in): 3 5. Are there any immediate threats to the integrity of any of the structures observed? ❑ Yes [Z 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 N 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 N 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 F71 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): 13, Soil Type(s): 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 No ❑ NA ❑ NE 16. Did the facility fail to secure and/or operate per the irrigation design or wettable ❑ Yes 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 �j 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 ❑ Weekly Freeboard ❑ Waste Analysis ❑ Soil Analysis ❑ Waste Transfers ❑ Weather Code ❑ Rainfall ❑ Stocking ❑ Crop Yield ❑ 120 Minute Inspections ❑ Monthly and 1" Rainfall Inspections ❑ Sludge Survey 22. Did the facility fail to install and maintain a rain gauge? ❑ Yes DQ No ❑ NA ❑ NE 23. If selected, did the facility fail to install and maintain rainbreakers on irrigation equipment? ❑ Yes ❑ No ® NA ❑ NE Page 2 of 3 511212020 Continued Facilit Number: Date of Inspection: 24. Did the facility fail to calibrate waste application equipment as required by the permit? ❑ Yes DU 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 PDA for sludge levels Non -compliant sludge levels in any lagoon ,,,,, List date first indicating �'" 300 V 1-7 /)P structure(s) and of survey non-compliance: ,)O�� 26. Did the facility fail to provide documentation of an actively certified operator in charge? ❑ Yes 52 No ❑ NA ❑ NE 27. Did the facility fail to secure a phosphorus loss assessments (PLAT) certification? ❑ Yes ❑ No X] 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 P 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 gNo ❑ NA ❑ NE 34. Does the facility require a follow-up visit by the same agency? ❑ Yes RNo ❑ NA ❑ NE IOomments (refer to question #): Explain any YES answers and/or any additional recommendations or any other comments. Use drawings of facility to better explain situations (use additional pages as necessary). SLUd� Q1t�e-2s bah 1a��6,� vw� wt.+- c, ���,c�� 1� e -POA �{ dettt5 ?rt�,'6 U-S PAN d c SPrl-) J,; n,r.S J J Reviewer/Inspector Name: Reviewer/Inspector Signature: Page 3 of 3 r 1 Phone: 1 to 4/ W'Idb Date: a' 511212020