Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout090017_Routine Inspection_20210616Facility Number ivision of Water Resources 0 Division of Soil and Water Conservation 0 Other Agency Type of Visit: Compliance Inspection 0 Operation Review 0 Structure Evaluation 0 Technical Assistance Reason for Visit: outine 0 Complaint 0 Follow-up 0 Referral 0 Emergency 0 Other 0 Denied Access Date of Visit: Farm Name: Owner Name: Mailing Address: Physical Address: Facility Contact: /Arrival Time: / /P0 Departure Time: //:v Owner Email: Phone: County: 45" Region: Onsite Representative: Certified Operator: Back-up Operator: Location of Farm: Title: 7GC-if?Phone: Latitude: Integrator: Certification Number: //Z,a2 (o' Certification Number: Longitude: Swine Design Current Capacity Pop. Wean to Finish i/'Vean to Feeder f'a /.1 rr0 : ( Feeder to Finish Farrow to Wean Farrow to Feeder Farrow to Finish Gilts Boars Other Design Current Wet Poultry Capacity Pop. Layer Non -Layer Dr v Poultr 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) ❑ Yes ❑ No ❑ NA ❑ NE 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) [] Y• es ❑ No ❑ NA ❑ NE 2. Is there evidence of a past discharge from any part of the operation? n Y• es ❑'No ❑ NA ❑ NE 3. Were there any observable adverse impacts or potential adverse impacts to the waters [1 Yes { No ❑ NA [1 NE of the State other than from a discharge? ❑ Y• es No ❑ NA ❑ NE El Yes No ❑NA ❑NE Page 1 of 3 5/12/2020 Continued Facility Number: - / 7 Waste Collection & Treatment Date of Inspection: er'Z - 4. Is storage capacity (structuralplus storm storageplus heavyrainfall)less than adequate? Yes No NA NE g p Yg q �� n � "� ❑ ❑ 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: Spillway?: Designed Freeboard (in): Observed Freeboard (in): jJ / 5. Are there any immediate threats to the integrity of any of the structures observed? (i.e., large trees, severe erosion, seepage, etc.) 6. Are there structures on -site which are not properly addressed and/or managed through a 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 ❑ Yes ❑'No ❑ NA ❑ NE 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 evident: of incorrect land application? If yes, check the appropriate box below. ❑ Yes ❑'lgio ❑ NA ❑ NE .r` Yes No ❑ NA ❑ NE ❑ Yes 0-No ❑ NA ❑ NE ❑ Yes f No ❑ NA ❑ NE ❑ Yes ❑NA ❑NE ❑ Yes lallo ❑ 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 n Evidence of Wind Drift ❑ Application Outside of Approved Area 12. Crop Type(s): -/ 2Gto�oc /pc., e./3 /g-'„ /MI 1 hf 7/c/Pg 7 13. Soil Type(s): � i�c L 14. Do the receivingcrops differ from those designated in the CAWMP? Yes No NA NE p g ❑ � ❑ ❑ 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? 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'? ❑ Yes ❑" 110 ❑ NA ❑ NE 20. Does the facility fail to have all components of the CAWMP readily available? If yes, check ❑ Yes [J 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 ❑`Yes ❑ No ❑ NA ❑ NE ❑-Yes 'No ❑ NA ❑ NE ❑ Waste Application ❑ Weekly Freeboard ❑ Waste Analysis ❑ Soil Analysis fl 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 ❑ 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 2/4/2015 Continued Facility Number: 9- - I >' Date of Inspection: 24. Did the facility fail to calibrate waste application equipment as required by the permit? 0 Yes No 0 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 n Failure to develop a POA for sludge levels [i]'11on-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? 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. ❑ Yes •j No ❑ NA ❑ NE ❑ Yes 04 ❑ NA ❑ NE ❑ Yes ❑ No ❑ NA ❑ NE ❑ Yes ❑No ❑ NA ❑ NE ❑ Yes ❑(No ❑ NA ❑ NE ❑ Yes ❑ Application Field n Lagoon/Storage Pond ❑ Other: 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 ❑ Yes ❑ Yes ❑NA LINE ❑ NE ❑ NE ❑ NE Comments (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). tf f Reviewer/Inspector Name: Reviewer/Inspector Signature: Page 3 of 3 Phone: 9`7P 5e3—, /L3 Date: —/ 2/4/2015