Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout820423_routine_20241016JQ Division of Water Resources Facility Number -.I '-OG-J 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: �L Routine 0 Complaint 0 Follow-up 0 Referral 0 Emergency 0 Other 0 Denied Access Date of Visit: Arrival Time: Departure TimeflFau--1 County:�fl Region: Fe U Farm�Name: m C V I IM FQ M "J 0 Owner Email: Owner Name: �G (� MC (0I e n Phone: Mailing Address: Physical Address: Facility Contact: 2 a Gh Inc m I e n Title: O WO P—r— Phone: Onsite Representative: C,-) I L Integrator: Certified Operator: me Certification Number: Back-up Operator: Certification Number: Location of Farm: Design Current Swine,' Capacity, Pop. Wean to Finish Wean to Feeder eeder to Finish Farrow to Wean Farrow to Feeder Farrow to Finish Gilts Boars OtherFT Latitude: Design Current Wet;Poultry Capacity . Pop. Layer Non -Layer Design Current Dry Poultry Canacitv 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: a. Was the conveyance man-made? Longitude: 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 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 No ❑ NA ❑ NE ❑ Yes No ❑ NA ❑ NE ❑ Yes No. ❑ NA ❑ NE Page l of 3 5/1212020 Continued Facility Number: jDate 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 1 Structure 2 Structure 3 Structure 4 Structure 5 Structure 6 Identifier: Spillway?: Designed Freeboard (in): Observed Freeboard (in): p� 5. Are there any immediate threats to the integrity of any of the structures observed? ❑ Yes `ter' 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 Q 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 AcceptableCrop Window ❑ Evidence of Wind Drift ❑ Application Outside of Approved Area 12. Crop Type(s): S9 I ] I II I I-q-1- 13. Soil Type(s): I V V T\� f 14. Do the receiving crops differ from those designated in the CAWMP? ❑ Yes CR 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? 18. Is there a lack of properly operating waste application equipment? ❑ Yes Iq No ❑ NA ❑ NE ❑ Yes E� No ❑ NA ❑ NE Required Records & Documents 19. Did the facility fail to have the Certificate of Coverage & Permit readily available? ❑ Yes [SL No ❑ NA ❑ NE 20. Does the facility fail to have all components of the CAWMP readily available? If yes, check ❑ Yes [S�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 1� No ❑ Waste Application ❑ Weekly Freeboard ❑ Waste Analysis ❑ Soil Analysis ❑ Waste Transfers ❑ 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 ❑ NE ❑NA ❑NE Page 2 of 3 511212020 Continued Facility Number: I Date 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 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: 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? Comments (refer to question ft Explain any YES answers and/or any ❑NA ❑NE ❑ NA ❑ NE ❑ NA ❑ NE ❑NA ❑NE ❑ Yes N No ❑ NA ❑ NE ❑ Yes 4 No ❑ NA ❑ NE ❑ Yes 4 No ❑ NA ❑ NE ❑ Yes t No ❑ NA ❑ NE ❑ Yes No ❑ Yes No ❑ Yes No or any Use drawings of facility to better explain situations (use additional pages as necessary). evi' weal SOS 1,1�/�+� , WWO, 91Uq3-C-A11'hRP0 Reviewer/Inspector Name: Reviewer/Inspector Signature: Page 3 of 3 ❑NA ❑NE ❑ NA ❑ NE ❑ NA ❑ NE Phone: ii Date: 511212020