Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout310477_Compliance Evaluation Inspection_20211112( Division of Water Resources a Division of Soil and Water'Conse 0 Other Agency Type of Visit: (Co liance 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 E1- ra Date of Visit: -ram Arrival Time:-14 Farm Name: kiwi £,/1QN j Owner Name: IN) LL.i �M k £ VANS Mailing Address: Departure Time: 1)-6 0dv, Owner Email: Phone: County:) 9L./ /'I Region: 14 iRO Physical Address: Facility Contact: Onsite Representative: Certified Operator: CVCu 4 S Back-up Operator: Location of Farm: Title: Latitude: Integrator: Phone: Certification Number: I ?i 4 Certification Number: Longitude: S1 Design Ca)aeit3 o Wean to Finish Wean to Feeder Feeder to Finish a4c7 ratio Farrow to Wean Farrow to Feeder Farrow to Finish Gilts Boars Des 6 a Current Poultry Capacity Pop. Layer Non -Layer Design Curren 'oultry Capacity Pop. Layers Non -Layers Pullets Turkeys Turkey Poults Other apoci :urre�n 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? Page 1 of 3 ❑ Yes No El NA ❑ NE ❑ Yes LJ 1V ❑ NA El NE ❑ Yes No ❑ NA ❑ NE ❑ Yes [%f No ❑ NA ❑ NE ❑ Yes ❑ NA ❑ NE ❑ Yes No ❑ NA ❑ NE 5/12/2020 Continued Facility Number: `3 - 1117 Date of Inspection: I - a-',, .O / Waste Collection & Treatment 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): ❑ Yes ❑ Yes Structure 1 Structure 2 Structure 3 Structure 4 Structure 5 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? ❑NA ❑NE El NA ❑NE Structure 6 ❑ Yes IZr;I: ❑ NA ❑ NE ❑ Yes ❑NA El NE If any of questions 4-6 were answered yes, and the situation poses an immediate public health or environmental hreat, 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 'N ❑ NA ❑ NE ❑ Yes No ❑ NA ❑ NE ❑ Yes EK ❑ NA ❑ NE ❑ Yes No ❑ NA ❑ NE ❑ 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): V 1 Cj f c 1 13. Soil Type(s): 14. Do the receiving crops differ from those designated in the CAWMP? ❑ Yes L"J 1"- ❑ NA ❑ NE 15. Does the receiving crop and/or land application site need improvement? ❑ Yes To ❑ NA ❑ NE 16. Did the facility fail to secure and/or operate per the irrigation design or wettable ❑ Yes io ❑ NA ❑ NE acres determination? 17. Does the facility lack adequate acreage for land application? El Yes Flo El NA ❑ NE 18. Is there a lack of properly operating waste application equipment? El Yes to El NA ❑ NE Required Records & Documents 19. Did the facility fail to have the Certificate of Coverage & Permit readily available? El Yes ❑ NA ❑ NE 20. Does the facility fail to have all components of the CAWMP readily available? If yes, check ❑ Yes [ o ❑ NA El NE the appropriate box. ❑ WUP ❑ Checklists ❑ Design El Maps ❑ Lease Agreements ❑ Other: 21. Does record keeping need improvement? If yes, check the appropriate box below. ❑ Yes o ❑ NA ❑ NE ❑ Waste Application El Weekly Freeboard ❑ Waste Analysis ❑ Soil Analysis ❑ Waste Transfers ❑ Weather Code ❑ Rainfall ❑ Stocking ❑ Crop Yield ❑ 120 Minute Inspections El Monthly and 1" Rainfall Inspections El 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 [)❑ NA ❑ NE Page 2 of 3 5/12/2020 Continued !Facility Number: 3 J - (Date of Inspection:1 1— 11 - 31 ❑ Yes ❑ Yes EFailure to develop a POA for sludge levels 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 Yy ❑NA El NE an(No El NA El NE 24. Did the facility fail to calibrate waste application equipment as required by the permit? 25. Is the facility out of compliance with permit conditions related to sludge? If yes, check the appropriate box(es) below. ❑ Failure to complete annual sludge survey ❑ Non -compliant sludge levels in any lagoon List structure(s) and date of first survey indicating non-compliance: 26. Did the facility fail to provide documentation of an actively certified operator in charge? ❑ 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 ❑ Yes ❑ Yes ❑ Yes Comments (refer to question #): Explain any YES answers and/or any additional recommendations or Use drawings of facility to better explain situations (use additional pages as necessary). -- tA(s i(..tfaT "A zAd of ;1_0� jud y- E%4 r ()v.. — rot;bre '- Reviewer/Inspector Name: Reviewer/Inspector Signature: Page 3 of 3 Sc W 1J RP F2-tf ❑ Yes ❑ Yes ❑ Yes LIJ No ❑ No No N ❑N ❑NE NA ❑ NE ❑ NA ❑ NE ❑NA ❑NE ❑NA ❑NE ❑ NA ❑ NE ❑NA ❑NE ❑ NA ❑ NE ❑ NA ❑ NE Phone: Date: -'Op� 5/12/2020