Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout820349_Compliance Inspection_20210622Facility Number P2)v\ i7 JD Division of Water Resources suns K� 0 Division of Soil and Water Conservation 0 Other Agency Type of Visit: .'j Compliance Inspection 0 Operation Review 0 Structure Evaluation 0 Technical Assistance t Reason for Visit: it) Routine 0 Complaint 0 Follow-up 0 Referral 0 Emergency 0 Other 0 Denied Access Date of Visit: Farm Name: Owner Name: (Fc);.m. P-aa Frc?cotaqe fatn INC ti.cst0 Mailing Address: Physical Address: Facility Contact: 20 al Departure Time: Owner Email: Phone: Region: Title: Phone: Onsite Representative: Integrator: ppotae Certified Operator: Back-up Operator: Location of Farm: andi)i €ot— ufflue dem lhdr-Ni-ON Latitude: Certification Number: I 776169 Certification Number: Longitude: u1�1- 1NGr 012e it Swine Design Current Capacity Pop. Wean to Finish Wean to Feeder Feeder to Finish Farrow to Wean Farrow to Feeder WOO i Farrow to Finish Gilts Boars Other Wet Poultry Design Current Capacity Pop. Layer Non -Layer Dry Poultry Design Current Capacity Pop. Layers Non -Layers Pullets Turkeys Turkey Poults Other Cattle Design Current Capacity Pop. Dairy Cow Dairy Calf Dairy Heifer Dry Cow Non -Dairy Beef Stocker Beef Feeder Beef Brood Cow 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 Vo ❑ NA ❑ NE D Yes IS,No ❑ NA ❑ NE ❑ Yes �No ❑ NA ❑ NE ❑ Yes tb4o ❑ NA ❑ NE ❑ Yes ILNo ❑ NA ❑ NE ❑ Yes n No ❑ NA ❑ NE Page 1 of 3 5/12/2020 Continued _Facility Number: Fxa - 0 4j 9 Waste Collection & Treatment Date of Inspection: (p •-0,1 4. Is storage capacity (structural plus storm storage plus heavy rainfall) less than adequate? a. If yes, is waste level into the structural freeboard? Identifier: Spillway?: Designed Freeboard (in): Observed Freeboard (in): Structure 1 Structure 2 t9" 9,1 Structure 3 Structure 4 ❑ Yes 'No ❑ NA ❑ NE ❑ Yes tf.No ❑ NA ❑ NE Structure 5 Structure 6 C IroChoWINgGON4L- N ;7" 35 5. Are there any immediate threats to the integrity of any of the structures observed? (i.e., large trees, severe erosion, seepage, etc.) ❑ Yes �No ❑ NA ❑ NE 6. Are there structures on -site which are not properly addressed and/or managed through a ❑ Yes 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? 8. Do any of the structures lack adequate markers as required by the permit? (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 maintenance or improvement? Waste Application 10. Are there any required buffers, setbacks, or compliance alternatives that need maintenance or improvement? 11. Is there evidence of incorrect land application? If yes, check the appropriate box below. ❑ Yes E:31\lo ❑ NA ❑ NE ❑ Yes'IE No ❑ NA ❑ NE ❑ Yes allo ❑ NA ❑ NE ❑ Yes .1:ZNo ❑ Yes 4M. No El NA ❑NE El 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 ElEvidence of Wind Drift ❑ Application Outside of Approved Area Kit 1C L T e Yp( s): NorfoiK u �Noi• crDp � 13. Type(s): COt\L Wheat at )Oy be cci 7 14. Do the receiving crops differ from those designated in the CAWMP? 15. Does the receiving crop and/or land application site need improvement? 16. Did the facility fail to secure and/or operate per the irrigation design or wettable acres determination? 17. Does the facility lack adequate acreage for land application? 18. Is there a lack of properly operating waste application equipment? Required Records & Documents 19. Did the facility fail to have the Certificate of Coverage & Permit readily available? 20. Does the facility fail to have all components of the CAWMP readily available? If yes, check ❑ Yes EI,No ❑ Yes �No ❑ Yes N ❑ NA ❑ NA ❑ NA ❑ NE ❑ NE ❑ NE ❑ Yes NNo ❑ NA ❑ NE ❑ Yes No ❑ NA ❑ NE ❑ Yes ❑ Yes the appropriate box. ❑ WUP ❑ Checklists ❑ Design ❑ Maps ❑ Lease Agreements ❑ Other: lip No ❑ NA AI No ❑ NA ❑ NE ❑ NE 21. Does record keeping need improvement? If yes, check the appro riate box below. ❑ Yes No 3. Waste Application WeeklyFreeboard Wal sis Soil Analysis Waste Transfers ❑ pp ❑ ❑ Y ❑ Y ❑ ❑ Rainfall E Stocking D Crop Yield ❑ 120 Minute Inspections ❑ Monthly and 1" Rainfall Inspections ❑ Yes t No 23. If selected, did the facility fail to install and maintain rainbreakers on irrigation equipment? ❑ Yes 14 No rou Nbre- 22. Did the facility fail to install and maintain a rain gauge? Page 2 of 3 ❑NA ❑NE El NA I] NE ❑ Weather Code ❑ Sludge Survey ❑NA ❑NE ❑ NA ❑ NE 2/4/2015 Continued Facility Number: ag_ - Date of Inspection: (P•X-). g 25. Is the facility out of compliance with permit conditions related to sludge? If yes, check the appro5i e o es) below. L ❑ Failure to IOr1e 24. Did the facility fail to calibrate waste application equipment as required by the permit? IDI ) I ❑ Yes ❑ Yes tt 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: No al No ❑ NA ❑ NA ❑ NE ❑ NE 26. Did the facility fail provide documentation of an actively certified operator in charge? 27. Did the facility fail to secure a phosphorus loss assessments (PLAT) certification? Other Issues 28. Did the facility fail to properly dispose of dead animals with 24 hours and/or document 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? 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 permit? (i.e., discharge, freeboard problems, over -application) 31. Do subsurface tile drains exist at the facility? If yes, check the appropriate box below. ❑ Application Field ❑ Lagoon/Storage Pond ❑ Other: ❑ Yes nNo ❑ NA ❑ NE ❑ Yes tl No ❑ NA ❑ NE ❑ Yes [S\No ❑ NA ❑ NE ❑ Yes NNo ❑ NA ❑ NE ❑ Yes IENNo ❑ NA ❑ NE ❑ Yes II\No ❑ NA ❑ NE 32. Were any additional problems noted which cause non-compliance of the permit or CAWMP? 33. Did the Reviewer/Inspector fail to discuss review/inspection with an on -site representative? 34. Does the facility require a follow-up visit by the same agency? ❑ Yes NsNo ❑ NA ❑ NE ❑ Yes NNo ❑ NA ❑ NE ❑ Yes NNo ❑ NA ❑ NE Comments (refer to question #): Explain any YES answers and/or any additional recomniendations'or any other comments. Use drawings of facility to better explain situations (use additional pages as necessary). ou- Pur1Wec on cP11001 SPt ON corN a0a0 hq'vftc wheat 6-ecuq, corN Reviewer/Inspector Name: KCf1 Reviewer/Inspector Signature: Page 3 of 3 Fbrde1nOJ ectIL Pn°n, ql� 3q( .q7Jc Date: 2/4/2015