Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout820193_routine_20230511Division of Water Resources Tfi6 ity'Number - F O Division of'Soil and Water Conservation OOther .Agency - 5�12 Type of Visit: Compliance Inspection O Operation Review O Structure Evaluation O Technical Assistance Reason for Visit: Routine O Complaint O Follow-up O Referral O Emergency O Other O Denied Access Date of Visit: Arrival Time: Departure Time: County: sa� IP�on Farm Namelmold 6-elum4 1- Owner Email: Owner Name:O� Oe LoDdk Phone: Mailing Address: Physical Address: Region: Facility Contact: Kondid Pt4, N Title: DA-er Phone: 10 Onsite Representative: Integrator: e�!a-u Certified Operator: ' Certification Number:U)q Back-up Operator: Location of Farm: Latitude: Certification Number: Longitude: Design ,Current Design Current Design.: CurrentL Swine Capacity Pop. Wet Poultry Capacity Pop. Cattle° Capacity Pop:. Wean to Finish Wean to Feeder Feeder to Finish Farrow to Wean Farrow to Feeder Farrow to Finish Gilts Other Layer Non -Layer Design Current Dry Poultry C'anaeity Pon. Layers Non -Layers Pullets Turkeys Turkey Poults Other Discharges and Stream Impacts 1. Is any discharge observed from any part of the operation? Discharge originated at: ❑ Structure ❑ Application Field ❑ Other: Dairy Cow Dairy Calf Dairy Heifer Dry Cow Non -Dairy Beef Stocker Beef Feeder Beef Brood Cow ❑ Yes No ❑ NA ❑ NE a. Was the conveyance man-made? ❑ Yes No ❑ NA ❑ NE 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) ❑ Yes No ❑ NA ❑ NE 2. Is there evidence of a past discharge from any part of the operation? ❑ Yes No ❑ NA ❑ NE 3. Were there any observable adverse impacts or potential adverse impacts to the waters ❑ Yes No ❑ NA ❑ NE of the State other than from a discharge? Page 1 of 3 511212020 Continued Facility Number: - Date of Inspection: Waste Collection & Treatment 4. Is storage capacity (structural plus storm storage plus heavy rainfall) less than adequate? 0 Yes 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: Spillway?: Designed Freeboard (in): 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.) 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? 0 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 Application 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. ❑ 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 0 NE acres determination? i 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 No ❑ NA ❑ NE Required Records & Documents 19. Did the facility fail to have the Certificate of Coverage & Permit readily available? 0 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 El Checklists ❑ Design ❑ Maps ❑ Lease Agreements ❑Other: 21. Does record keeping need improvement? If yes, check the appropriate box below. ❑ Yes V No ❑ Waste Application ❑ Weekly Freeboard ❑ Waste Analysis ❑ Soil Analysis ❑ Waste Tran fers ❑ Rainfall ❑ Stocking ❑ Crop Yield ❑ 120 Minute Inspections ❑ Monthly and 1 " Rainfall Inspections 22. Did the facility fail to install and maintain a rain gauge? ❑ Yes No 23. If selected, did the facility fail to install and maintain rainbreakers on irrigation equipment? ❑ Yes No ❑ NA ❑ NE ❑ Weather Code ❑ Sludge Survey ❑ NA ONE ❑ NA ❑ NE Page 2 of 3 511212020 Continued Facility Number: jDate of Inspection: 24: Did the facility fail to calibrate waste application equipment as required by the permit? ❑ Yes No 25. Is the facility out of compliance with permit conditions related to sludge? If yes, check ❑ Yes No the appropriate box(es) below. ❑ Failure to complete 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: 26. Did the facility fail to provide documentation of an actively certified operator in charge? ❑ Yes No 27. Did the facility fail to secure a phosphorus loss assessments (PLAT) certification? ❑ Yes No Other Issues ❑NA ❑NE ❑ NA ❑ NE ❑NA ❑NE ❑ NA ❑ NE 28. Did the facility fail to properly dispose of dead animals with 24 hours and/or document ❑ Yes No ❑ NA ONE 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) N 31. Do subsurface tile drains exist at the facility? If yes, check the appropriate box below. ❑ Yes N 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 V ❑ 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 NNo ❑ NA ❑ NE —�7 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): Trote- wQrsre a.h011CA5 wds to .be 00 dojs of Pvmping. Not, w" for ITca.Ks aivnd Reviewer/Inspector Name: Phone: Reviewer/Inspector Signature: A/V_ a U" L-1 tu"I Date: Page 3 of 3 511212020