310367_INSPECTIONS_20171231

NUH I H UAHULINA
Department of Environmental Qual

a
3
Type of Visit 6 mpliance Inspection 0 Operation Review 0 Structure Evaluation 0 Technical Assistance
C
Reason for Visit Routine 0 Complaint 0 Follow up 0 Referral 0 Emergency 0 Other ❑ Denied Access
Date of Visit: Arrival Time: i Departure Time: County: AA/Ar&tlJ Region:
Farm Name:
Owner Name:
Mailing Address:
Physical Address:
Facility Contact:
Title:
Owner Email:
Phone:
Onsite Representative: s/vn/IlYA&J //.tea k/,JL, Integrator:
Certified Operator:
Back-up Operator:
Location of Farm:
Phone No:
Operator Certification Number:
Back-up Certification Number:
Latitude: 0 0 0' = Longitude: [= ° = 4
Design Current
Design Current
Mgn Current
Swine Capacity Population
Wet Poultry Capacity Population
Cattle Capacity Population
❑ an to Finish
❑ Layer
❑ Dai Cow
❑ Dairy Calf
❑ an to Feeder ❑ Non -Layer
❑ Feeder to Finish
❑NA
❑ Dai Heifer
El Farrow to Wean W6
Dry Poultry
❑ D Cow
❑ Farrow to Feeder
❑ Non -Dairy
❑ Farrow to Finish
❑ La ers
❑ Beef Stocker
❑ Gilts
Non -Layers ers
❑Beef Feeder
❑ Boars
❑ Pullets
❑ Beef Brood Co
❑ Turkeys
Qther
❑ Turkey Poults
❑ Other I
ID Other I
Number of Structures:
Discharges & 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 DWQ)
c. What is the estimated volume that reached waters of the State (gallons)?
d. Does discharge bypass the waste management system? (If yes, notify DWQ)
2. Is there evidence of a past discharge from any part of the operation?
3. Were there any adverse impacts or potential adverse impacts to the Waters of the State
other than from a discharge?
Page I of 3
❑ Yes dNo [--INA ❑NE
❑Yes
El No
El NA
0 N
❑ Yes
❑ No
❑ NA
❑ NE
❑NA
F-1NE
❑ Yes
❑lNo
❑Yes
WN
El NA
[I NE
El Yes
❑ NA
❑ NE
12128/04 Continued

If any of questions 4-6 were answered yes, and the situation poses an immediate public health or environmental t eat, notify DWQ
7. Do any of the structures need maintenance or improvement? ❑ Yes No ❑ NA ❑ NE
8. Do any of the stuctures lack adequate markers as required by the permit? ❑ Yes 2(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 FNo ❑ NA ❑ NE
maintenance or improvement?
Waste Application
10. Are there any required buffers, setbacks, or compliance alternatives that need ❑ YesZ, ElNA ElNE
maintenance/improvement?
11. Is there evidence of incorrect application? If yes, check the appropriate box below. [jYes 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 Area
12. Crop type(s)
13. Soil type(s)
14. Do the receiving crops differ from those designated in the CAWMP?
❑ Yes [3NNo
,f
Facility Number: '51 Date of Inspection
15. Does the receiving crop and/or land application site need improvement?
Waste Collection & Treatment
El
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
StrluctureI Structure 2 Structure 3 Structure 4
Structure 5 Structure 6
Identifier: LA(�1 &ew,1 1 Akmkl—,3
❑ NE
Spillway?:
❑ Yes ❑ N
❑ NA
Designed Freeboard (in):
Observed Freeboard (in): bf
5. Are there any immediate threats to the integrity of any of the structures observed?
�,/
[I Yes Ld No ❑ NA ❑ NE
(ie/ large trees, severe erosion, seepage, etc.)
6. Are there structures on-site which are not properly addressed and/or managed
❑ Yes 0No ❑ NA ❑ NE
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 t eat, notify DWQ
7. Do any of the structures need maintenance or improvement? ❑ Yes No ❑ NA ❑ NE
8. Do any of the stuctures lack adequate markers as required by the permit? ❑ Yes 2(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 FNo ❑ NA ❑ NE
maintenance or improvement?
Waste Application
10. Are there any required buffers, setbacks, or compliance alternatives that need ❑ YesZ, ElNA ElNE
maintenance/improvement?
11. Is there evidence of incorrect application? If yes, check the appropriate box below. [jYes 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 Area
12. Crop type(s)
13. Soil type(s)
14. Do the receiving crops differ from those designated in the CAWMP?
❑ Yes [3NNo
❑ NA
❑ NE
15. Does the receiving crop and/or land application site need improvement?
❑ YesVr
El
El NE
16. Did the facility fail to secure and/or operate per the irrigation design or wettable acre determination?❑ Yes //
ElNA
El
❑NE
17. Does the facility lack adequate acreage for land application?
ElYes 2
❑ NA
❑ NE
18. Is there a lack of properly operating waste application equipment?
❑ Yes ❑ N
❑ NA
❑ NE
Reviewer/Inspector Name/ Phone: 91111
Reviewer/Inspector Signature: Date: L
Page 2 of 3 12128104 Continued

1
Facility Number: 31 — 30 Date of Inspection
Required Records & Documents
19. Did the facility fail to have Certificate of Coverage & Permit readily available? ❑ Yes ,_. No El NA El NE
20. Does the facility fail to have all components of the CAWMP readily available? If yes, check El Yes 21 o ❑ NA ❑ NE
the appropirate box.
❑ WUP El Checklists El Design ❑Maps ❑ 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 ❑ Annual Certification
❑ Rainfall ❑ Stocking ❑ Crop Yield ❑ 120 Minute Inspections ❑ Monthly and 1" Rain Inspections ❑ Weather Code
22. Did the facility fail to install and maintain a rain gauge? ❑ Yes ON ❑ NA ❑ NE
23. If selected, did the facility fail to install and maintain rainbreakers on irrigation equipment? ❑ Yes YJ N ❑ NA ❑ NE
Page 3 of 3 12/28/04
24.
Did the facility fail to calibrate waste application equipment as required by the permit?
❑ Yes
P No
❑ NA
❑ NE
25.
Did the facility fail to conduct a sludge survey as required by the permit?
❑ Yes
No
[-INA
El NE
26.
Did the facility fail to have an actively certified operator in charge?
El Yes
Eft
Z No
❑ NA
❑ NE
27.
Did the facility fail to secure a phosphorus loss assessment (PLAT) certification?
❑ Yes
�No
❑ NA
❑ NE
Other Issues
28.
Were any additional problems noted which cause non-compliance of the permit or CAWMP?
❑ Yes
ZNo
❑ NA
❑ NE
29.
Did the facility fail to properly dispose of dead animals within 24 hours and/or document
❑ Yes
dNo
❑ NA
❑ NE
and report the mortality rates that were higher than normal?
30.
At the time of the inspection did the facility pose an odor or air quality concern?
❑ Yes
Id No
O'
❑ NA
❑ NE
If yes, contact a regional Air Quality representative immediately
31.
Did the facility fail to notify the regional office of emergency situations as required by
❑ Yes
dNo
❑ NA
❑ NE
General Permit? (ie/ discharge, freeboard problems, over application)
32.
Did Reviewer/Inspector fail to discuss review/inspection with an on-site representative?
❑ Yes
❑ No
❑ NA
❑ NE
33.
Does facility require a follow-up visit by same agency?
❑ Yes
�/No
❑ NA
❑ NE
Page 3 of 3 12/28/04