HomeMy WebLinkAbout190029_Compliance Evaluation Inspection_20190318L
U/ty
UDlvision of Water Resources
Facility Number ®- ® 0 Division of Soil and Water Conservation
0 Other Agency
Type of Visit: 0 Co 'nee Inspection 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
Date of Visit:'-'--' Arrival Timer Departure Time: i v „ County: C Region:
G -'
Farm Name: WCO Owner Email:
Owner Name:
Mailing Address:
Physical Address:
Facility Contact:
Phone:
Title: Phone:
Onsite Representative: y Nr✓ M +?1A/ _.. Integrator:
Certified Operator:
Back-up Operator:
Location of Farm:
Design Current
Swine Capacity Pop.
Wean to Finish
Wean to Feeder
Feeder to Finish
Farrow to Wean
Farrow to Feeder
Farrow to Finish
Gilts
Boars
Other
Other
Certification Number:
Certification Number:
Latitude:
Design Current
Wet Poultry Capacity Pop.
Layer I I _�]
Non -La er
Pullets
Other
Poults
Design Current
Longitude:
Design Current
Cattle Capacity Pop.
Dairy Cow p
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? ❑ Yes 0 No ❑ NA ❑ NE
Discharge originated at: ❑ Structure ❑ Application Field ❑ Other:
a. Was the conveyance man-made? ❑ Yes o ❑ 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) ❑ YesNA E] NE
2. Is there evidence of a past discharge from any part of the operation? ❑ Yesr/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 21412015 Continued
Facility Number: 19 Date of Inspection:
Waste Collection & Treatment
4, is storage capacity (structural plus storm storage plus heavy rainfall) less than adequate? ❑ Yes
a. If yes, is waste level into the structural freeboard?
Structure 1 Structure 2 Structure 3 Structure 4
Identifier:
Spillway?:
Designed Freeboard (in):
Observed Freeboard (in): �23 it
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?
❑ Yes
Structure 5
0"NA [:]NE
tf-jNo ❑ NA ❑ NE
Structure 6
❑ Yes o ❑ NA
❑ Yes No ❑ NA
❑ NE
❑ NE
If any of questions 4-6 were answered yes, and the situation poses an immediate public health or environmFNN
eat, notify DWR
7. Do any of the structures need maintenance or improvement? [E:]Yes❑ NA ❑ NE
8. Do any of the structures lack adequate markers as required by the permit? ❑ Yes❑ 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 10 ❑ NA ❑ NE
maintenance or improvement?
Waste Application
10. Are there any required buffers, setbacks, or compliance alternatives that need
❑ Yes
L.d <o ❑ 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 ❑ FaiIure 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):
I4. Do the receiving crops differ from those designated in the CAWMP?
❑ YesN
❑ NA
❑ NE
15. Does the receiving crop and/or land application site need improvement?
❑ Yes
u N ❑ 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
❑ NA
❑ NE
18. Is there a lack of properly operating waste application equipment?
❑ YesNo
❑ NA
❑ NE
Reauired Records & Documents
19. Did the facility fail to have the Certificate of Coverage & Permit readily available?
❑ Yes
o ❑ 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. ❑ YesNo ❑ NA E] NE
❑ Waste Application ❑ Weekly Freeboard ❑ Waste Analysis ❑ SoiI Analysis ❑ Waste Transfers ❑ Weather Code
❑ Rainfall ❑ Stocking ❑ Crop Yield ❑ 120 Minute Inspections ❑ Monthly and I" 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 2/412015 Continued
Facili Number: - Date of Inspection:
24. Did the facility fail to calibrate waste application equipment as required by the permit? []Yes ��NoE]
❑ NA NE
25. Is the facility out of compliance with permit conditions related to sludge? If yes, check ❑ Yes 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 provide documentation of an actively certified operator in charge? ❑ YesNo NA ❑ NE
27. Did the facility fail to secure a phosphorus loss assessments (PLAT) certification? ❑ Yes o ❑ NA ❑ NE
Other Issues
28. Did the facility fail to properly dispose of dead animals with 24 hours and/or document
❑ Yes ❑ No ❑ NA ❑ NE
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)
3I. Do subsurface tile drains exist at the facility? If yes, check the appropriate box below.
❑ Yes ❑ 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 ❑ NA ❑ NE
33_ Did the Reviewed]nspector 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 ❑ 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 pates as necessarv).
6-v�/it b ,,;♦A di, s / I7— 2 -/ 7 ~ D k c x4.34,' < 04-2=r>)
Reviewer: Inspector Name:
Reviewer..'Inspector Signature: iJ 4 SJl
Page 3 of 3
Phone: 79/— �/Z DO
Date: 3M11?
21412015