Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout260008_routine_20230921Division of Water Resources Facility Number 0 Division of Soil and Water Conservation 0 Other Agency Type of Visit: 0 Compliance Inspection Operation Review 0 Structure Evaluation 0 Technical Assistance Reason for Visit: 0 Routine 0 Complaint 0 Follow-up 0 Referral 0 Emergency 0 Other 0 Denied Access Date of Visit: Q (' Arrival Time: Departure Time: County: Farm Name: �J7aI�/"imes/� Qn`'i hall j Owner Email: YA Owner Name: J `I i 1 Ik,`j �y "1 I l Phone: Mailing Address: Physical Address: Facility Contact: Onsite Representative: _�t�► me Certified Operator: 0 I t I% Back-up Operator: Location of Farm: Swine Wean to Finish Wean to Feeder Feeder to Finish Farrow to Wean Farrow to Feede Farrow to Finish Gilts Boars Other Title: (,UmUmb Region:-&_ Phone: Integrator: Certification Number: Certification Number: Latitude: Longitude: Design Current Design Current Capacity Pop. Wet Poultry Capacity Pop. Layer ;,t--I JNon-Laycr Design Current Dry Poultry Ca DaeitV POD. 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: a. Was the conveyance man-made? 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 b. Did the discharge reach waters of the State? (If yes, notify DWR) ❑ Yes y 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) 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 EkNo ❑ NA ❑ NE ❑ Yes NNo ❑ NA ❑ NE ❑ Yes No ❑ NA ❑ NE Page I of 511212020 Continued Facility 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: �L/, 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? [:]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 Pending ❑ 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): C W. L3 13. Soil Type(s): QUJ'N V J t' [e I W Q g PA t 1 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 ❑ 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 V 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 511212020 Continued Facili Number: Date of Inspection: 24. Did the facility fail to calibrate waste application equipment as required by the permit? ❑ Yes � 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 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? 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) ❑ Yes N No ❑ Yes [IRNo ❑ Yes No ❑ Yes No ❑ Yes N No 31. Do subsurface tile drains exist at the facility? If yes, check the appropriate box below. ❑ Yes ❑ Application Field ❑ Lagoon/Storage Pond ❑ Other: 32. Were any additional problems noted which cause non-compliance of the permit or CAWW? ❑ Yes 33. Did the Reviewer/Inspector fail to discuss review/inspection with an on -site representative? ❑ Yes 34. Does the facility require a follow-up visit by the same agency? ❑ Yes ❑ NA ❑ NE ❑ NA ❑ NE ❑ NA ❑ NE ❑ NA ❑ NE ❑NA ❑NE IQ No ❑ NA ❑ NE INNo ❑NA ❑NE [� No ❑ NA ❑ NE No ❑ NA ❑ 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). Reviewer/Inspector Name: Reviewer/Inspector Signature Callbr"`M � 22 sl\jdge ►i131a Soii wQSi2 TQ-2- 3 12-iy.22 1 RRv ofl WAINMI Phone: Date: Page 3 of 511212020