Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout310764_Inspection_20190819..Ar I ' _z , °� ` ' :. ate,. C7xDivisionsof at on ° - Fac>>(t Number-4 ;�' 3 = L o aaDivisi °rig f Soilyand Rater -Co y° F 40, - ;=^P _ _ - " ."•".....�. _ _ •;sc,. i �,''`.;, "" y4' e = Type of Visit: QD 7Routine pliance Inspection Operation Review O Structure Evaluation O Technical Assistance Reason for Visit: 0 Complaint 0 Follow-up 0 Referral ' O Emergency 0 Other 0 Denied Access Date of Visit: Arrival Time: Departure Time: County: h-) Region: UA Farm Name: �j U ( kwoo �S Owner Email: Owner Name: Phone: Mailing Address: Physical Address: Facility Contact: Title: Phone: Onsite Representative: Integrator: Certified Operator: Certification Number: Back-up Operator: Certification Number: Location of Farm: Latitude: Longitude: Cuirren`f, =wig Desu;Current ° ;�kr.Tlesign`,6: g q`, z tlS a>> ,. �.E _ «.,r-_ _- f1:.a. _ __ _ _ - ."� _- _ -r =,= __ ti a°Ca aci o - VYet_Poultr' T-°°,;Ca acl Pop. ` __°__ P ti3'°' L��: rY a }... 1?. t3'"-'° �.�' t::s.r` __-'.q's attlen--,a,-. �. ' CaT'aci .o P tya . P• - ` r -'- �� �@ = a5 �r.F6•:- ___'� "MY 'a.�ip yt,�:_ ., , - _ ^•R=€ -�3�a1 .4._.`- lv"b 11 Wean to Finish =I ILayer a, Wean to Feeder - S k�f _ Non -La Layer __Dairy q" Feeder to Finish Farrow to Wean = 477 Desi Ciirrentb.._ ae Farrow to Feeder _ -_ '=,:D . Point` =g .Ca 'aci_ .: ,Po _- ;; Farrow to Finish La ers =f`' Gilts Non -La ers =-= -- Boars Pullets Turkeys = __ F��e.;'.as.; �Otli ' ���y a` Turke Pouets 4 Other = = Other Dairy Cow Calf Dairy Heifer D 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 �io ❑ NA ❑ NE Discharge originated at: ❑ Structure ❑ Application Field ❑ Other: 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 ❑ NA ❑ NE 3. Were there any observable adverse impacts or potential adverse impacts to the waters ❑ Yes VNo ❑ NA ❑ NE of the State other than from a discharge? Page 1 of 3 21412015 Continued s Facility Number: j - 6 L Date of Inspection: � Waste Collection & Treatment 4. Is storage capacity (structural plus storm storage plus heavy rainfall) less than adequate? ❑ Yes U24o ❑ 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: �, - I� W Spillway?: Designed Freeboard (in): Observed Freeboard (in): 0-(a 5. Are there any immediate threats to the int6grity 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 Flo ❑ 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 [D o ❑ 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 [Uo ❑ NA ❑ NE maintenance or improvement? Waste Application 10. Are there any required buffers, setbacks, or compliance alternatives that need ❑ Yes CLIAo ❑ NA ❑ NE maintenance or improvement? 11. Is there evidence of incorrect land application? If yes, check the appropriate box below. [:]Yes L lf' o ❑ 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 PrNo ❑ NA ❑ NE 15. Does the receiving crop and/or land application site need improvement? ❑ Yes [91<o ❑ NA ❑ NE 16. Did the facility fail to secure and/or operate per the irrigation design or wettable ❑ Yes To ❑ 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? Required Records & Documents ❑ Yes Eobdo ❑ NA ❑ NE ❑ Yes Ep llo ❑ NA ❑ NE 19. Did the facility fail to have the Certificate of Coverage & Permit readily available? ❑ Yes EZ,W ❑ NA ❑ NE 20. Does the facility fail to have all components of the CAWMP readily available? If yes, check [:]Yes [VeT o' ❑ 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 ❑�Qo ❑ NA ❑ NE ❑ Waste Application ❑ Weekly Freeboard ❑ Waste Analysis ❑ Soil Analysis ❑ Waste Transfers ❑ Weather Code ❑ Rainfall ❑ Stocking ❑ Crop Yield ❑ 120 Minute Inspections ❑ Monthly and 1" Rainfall Inspections ❑ Sludge Survey 22. Did the facility fail to install and maintain a rain gauge? ❑ Yes [�3<o ❑ NA ❑ NE 23. If selected, did the facility fail to install and maintain rainbreakers on irrigation equipment? ❑ Yes ❑ No NE Page 2 of 3 21412015 Continued FaciliNumber: jDate of Inspection: QJ 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 LK ❑ 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? 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 ®-No ❑ NA 0 NE ❑ Yes ❑ No NE ❑ Yes Ea<o ❑ NA ❑ NE ❑ Yes ®'< ❑ NA ❑ NE ❑Yes 8 o 0NA ❑NE 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 CAWNIP? ❑ 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 Ej_N__o ❑ NA ❑ NE �io ❑ NA ❑ NE E30<o NA ❑ NE 194 o ❑ NA ❑ NE Comments (refer to question f: 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 Signatu Page 3 of 3 ��. C O� orr, Phone: 1(0 jq t 131, re:Z�& LDate: 6 21412015