|
Several internal and
external LEA Evaluation Procedure Workgroup participants have identified the
need to maintain an ongoing LEA issue management philosophy.
Goal: To this end, Permitting and
Enforcement Division management and staff will strive to resolve
issues as they arise. The LEA will be
provided timely guidance, direction, assistance, training, answers, or any
support deemed appropriate at the time of issue origin.
Mandatory Evaluation
- Statute requires LEAs
to be evaluated at least once every three years, or more frequently as
determined by the Board (PRC 43214(b)).
- The evaluation
timeframe begins at the conclusion of the last evaluation (the final
evaluation results date or conclusion of LEA Evaluation workplan
monitoring), and concludes with the initiation date for the current
evaluation. The time frame will be
clearly identified in written correspondence notifying the LEA of its
evaluation.
- Any
ongoing issues that began before the
conclusion of the last evaluation and remain unresolved will also be
considered in the current evaluation.
- Staff maintains a 3-6 month LEA
evaluation schedule for Division workload and LEA planning purposes. The schedule will be tentative, approximate,
and subject to change as needed.
Other Circumstances That
Prompt an Evaluation
An
evaluation may be triggered by:
- Board
direction, the Executive Director, and/or the Permitting and Enforcement
Division Deputy Director for specific LEA statutory and/or regulatory duty
performance issues (PRC 43219 (c)).
- Conditions
at a solid waste facility/disposal site that cause a threat to public health
and safety or the environment.
- Board-verified
information provided by California Conference of Directors of Environmental
Health, Enforcement Advisory Council, concerned public, other agencies (local,
state, federal), or regulated industry.
Top
The following describes the process that Evaluation staff,
in conjunction with other Division staff, utilize to gather data for inclusion
into the LEA Evaluation results.
Evaluation staff will:
- Obtain
Solid Waste Information System (SWIS) database reports related to the six
statutory findings for the jurisdiction. The SWIS database provides a variety
of standard/special reports. Various
facility inspection, permit, closure, and enforcement data is easily obtained.
- Review
the data, noting obvious compliance issues relevant
to the findings required by statute (PRC
43214 (d)(1-6)).
- Provide
the data, noting compliance issues to appropriate Division program staff for
discussion and resolution or inclusion in the LEA evaluation results.
- Ensure
that the LEA maintains its certification (Title 14, California Code of
Regulations (CCR), Section 18077).
Division Program staff will:
- Provide
"the latest" information on compliance issues with effort made to
include updates provided by LEA staff.
- Provide
any known compliance issues which are either too recent to be reflected in the
SWIS database, not captured by SWIS, or erroneous. These issues MUST fall within the evaluation timeframe as noted
to the LEA.
After
Division staff’s input, Evaluation staff will:
- Assess Division staff
input and identify LEA program implementation issues and LEA program
strengths.
Top
Pursuant to statute (PRC
43214), evaluation staff find that an LEA is not fulfilling its duties if:
- The
local enforcement agency has failed to exercise due diligence in the inspection
of solid waste facilities and disposal sites;
- The local enforcement agency
has intentionally misrepresented the results of inspections;
- The
local enforcement agency has failed to prepare, or cause to be prepared,
permits, permit revisions, or closure
and postclosure maintenance plans;
- The
local enforcement agency has approved permits, permit revisions, or closure and
postclosure maintenance plans which are not consistent with Part 4 and Part 5
of the Public Resources Code;
- The
local enforcement agency has failed to take appropriate enforcement actions;
and
- The
local enforcement agency has failed to comply with, or has taken actions that
are inconsistent with, or unauthorized by statute or regulations.
The local enforcement agency is also assessed for
compliance with certification requirements pursuant to Title 14, CCR, Chapter
5, article 2.2, Section 18081.
Based on the above-mentioned criteria, evaluation staff
determines:
- If no/minor
program implementation issues exist, Evaluation staff prepares draft LEA
evaluation results for appropriate Division staff review and comment.
- If program
implementation issues exist, the specific information will
be compiled, documented on a site-by-site basis, and discussed with the
LEA for verification. Evaluation
data will be verified internally and revised as appropriate. Evaluation staff then prepares draft
LEA evaluation results for appropriate Division staff review and comment.
Evaluation staff modifies the draft by incorporating
and/or responding to Division staff comments.
Top
Evaluation staff provides the LEA with the draft LEA
evaluation results and requests the LEA to contact evaluation staff for an exit
interview. At the exit interview, the
LEA is provided an opportunity to comment on the results and discuss new
developments concerning the evaluation. Evaluation staff modifies the results,
as appropriate, in order to correct any discrepancies in factual information.
- Evaluation staff
finalizes the evaluation results based on discussion during the exit
interview and provides the LEA with evaluation results.
- If no/minor
program implementation issues were identified, this concludes the
process. However, if the LEA is
found not to be fulfilling its duties, the process continues with the
following section.
Top
When staff finds the LEA not to be fulfilling its
responsibilities, the first step to correcting the LEA performance issues
(pursuant to PRC Sections 43214, 43215, 43216.5) is for CIWMB staff to provide
the particular reasons for finding the LEA not to be fulfilling its
responsibilities in the evaluation results.
- If there is no
immediate threat to public health and safety or the environment, and the
LEA agrees with the findings, staff instructs the agency to develop
a corrective action plan (evaluation workplan) for submittal to the CIWMB
for approval within 30 days. Division staff assess the plan for its ability to address the
findings identified in the evaluation results. Once Division staff agree that the plan adequately addresses
the issues identified in the evaluation, it is approved, the LEA is
notified, and workplan implementation and monitoring begins. Division staff assigned to the
jurisdiction typically monitor the LEA’s progress on evaluation workplans
at three, six, and nine-month intervals. Monitoring frequency may increase due to workplan
requirements. Board staff informs
the LEA of their compliance with the workplan requirements at each
interval. Division staff provides
assistance whenever possible to ensure the LEA’s success in meeting its
workplan. Evaluation staff
provides the LEA with the ability to modify workplan due dates for
unforeseen circumstances beyond the LEA’s control.
If the LEA fails to provide an evaluation workplan, the CIWMB considers
withdrawal of its LEA designation approval.
- If the LEA disagrees
with the findings, an administrative conference* will be held. If an administrative conference fails
to resolve the issues, Evaluation staff prepares a Board agenda item.
Evaluation staff attempts to resolve all LEA program
implementation issues through the evaluation workplan. In the unlikely event of an LEA failing to
meet its workplan stipulations, evaluation staff will: 1) schedule an
administrative conference; or 2) if necessary, prepare a Board agenda item
outlining outstanding issues and statutory options for Board consideration.
Administrative steps leading to Board Action: The
primary evaluation follow-up activity consists of monitoring LEA workplan
progress at regular intervals. When a
workplan is not met, staff convenes an administrative conference. The attendees attempt to reach a consensus
that resolves issues. An administrative
conference can result in preparation/revision of a workplan, or in staff
bringing the matter before the Board.
Board
Action: If
administrative remedies to improve LEA performance fail, the Board may exercise
one or more of the following statutory actions (PRC 43216.5 and 43214):
-
The CIWMB may establish a schedule and probationary
period for improved LEA performance (PRC 43216.5). This period allows due process for the LEA to accomplish
performance objectives without direct CIWMB intervention on a local level.
-
The CIWMB may assume partial responsibility for
specified LEA duties (PRC 43216.5). Under this option, the CIWMB considers
partial de-certification, full de-certification, or withdrawal of designation
approval. This action would result in direct CIWMB involvement on a local
level. The CIWMB may assume local enforcement agency responsibility on a
site/facility basis, on one or more certified LEA duties, or on all LEA
certification duties. Full de-certification and withdrawal of designation
approval results in the CIWMB becoming the enforcement agency for the
jurisdiction. Statute allows the CIWMB to recover its expenses when acting in
any of these capacities.
-
The CIWMB may conduct more frequent inspections and
evaluations (PRC 43216.5).
-
The CIWMB may implement any other measures which it
determines to be necessary to improve LEA compliance (PRC 43216.5).
-
The CIWMB may take any actions it determines to be
necessary to ensure LEAs fulfill their obligations (PRC 43216.5).
-
If the lack of LEA performance has contributed to
significant non-compliance with state minimum standards at solid waste
facilities, the CIWMB shall withdraw its approval of designation (PRC
43214(c)).
Urgency Step (can be applied at any time given conditions): If
the CIWMB finds that conditions at solid waste facilities threaten public
health and safety or the environment, the CIWMB shall, within 10 days of
notifying the LEA, become the enforcement agency until another local agency is
designated and certified (PRC 43214)(c). Staff prepares a CIWMB agenda item recommending this option when the
statutory conditions apply.
Top
Final Evaluation Results Example
California Integrated Waste Management Board
Permitting and Enforcement Division
LEA Support Services Branch
LEA Program Assistance and Evaluation Section
Permitting and Enforcement Division
LEA Support Services Branch
LEA Program Assistance and Evaluation Section
1001
I Street
P.O. Box 4025
Sacramento, CA 95812-4025
(916) 341-6400
(Name) County LEA Evaluation Results
Month, day, year
Authority
Statute requires the California Integrated Waste
Management Board (CIWMB) to find a Local Enforcement Agency (LEA) not to be fulfilling its
responsibilities, if the CIWMB, in conducting the LEA performance review makes one or more of the following findings
(Public Resources Code 43214 (d)):
- The local enforcement agency has failed to
exercise due diligence in the inspection of solid waste facilities and disposal
sites;
- The local enforcement agency has
intentionally misrepresented the results of inspections;
- The local enforcement agency has failed to
prepare, or cause to be prepared, permits, permit revisions, or closure and
postclosure maintenance plans;
- The local
enforcement agency has approved permits, permit revisions, or closure and
postclosure maintenance plans which are not consistent with Part 4 and Part 5
of the Public Resources Code;
- The
local enforcement agency has failed to take appropriate enforcement actions;
and
- The
enforcement agency has failed to comply with, or has taken actions that are
inconsistent with, or unauthorized by statute or regulations.
Activity
The Activity section
identifies the specific LEA jurisdiction undergoing the performance
evaluation. It states that the CIWMB
evaluated the agency’s programs for effective implementation and enforcement of
statutory and regulatory requirements at solid waste facilities, operations,
and disposal sites in its jurisdiction through the evaluation end date.
Summary
The Summary identifies the
LEA and the jurisdiction being evaluated. It mentions whether the LEA is or is not fulfilling its responsibilities
in accordance with the six statutory findings (listed above). The details will be specified in the
following analysis. A status is also
provided in the Summary for the LEA’s permitting, inspection, enforcement, and
closure/post closure activities.
Analysis
The Analysis
outlines the LEA’s data, some of which may lead to one or more finding(s), on a
site-specific basis. The Analysis will
help define and focus the LEA’s efforts and, if necessary, assist in the
development of an evaluation workplan.
1. Diligence in Inspections (14 CCR18083)
a.
Active/Permitted Sites.
- Determine if the LEA
diligently inspected active/permitted facilities, operations, and disposal
sites pursuant to regulatory requirements. The sites that are not inspected accordingly are
identified explicitly.
- In addition,
evaluation staff discusses other inspection issues that are related to these
sites.
b.
Closed and/or Exempt Sites.
- Determine if the LEA
diligently inspected closed /exempt sites pursuant to
regulatory requirements. The CIWMB
explicitly identifies sites that are not inspected accordingly.
- Discuss any other
inspection issues that are related to these sites. With the direction of CIA staff, the CIWMB
makes a determination if the LEA needs to pursue the Site Identification
Process (SIP) to alter inspection frequencies.
2. Inspection Results (14CCR18083).
- Describe any circumstance(s) in which the LEA
intentionally misrepresented the results of inspections.
3.
Permits and Closure Plans (14CCR18082)
Permit
Processing per Title 27 Section 21650 and Applicable Tiered Permit Processing
Requirements
- Identify sites, include SWIS number and describe status
or permit needs.
- ·Describe LEA accomplishments to date and extenuating
circumstances regarding lack of permit action taken by LEA if applicable.
Processing
Report of Facility Information Amendments (for full Solid Waste Facility
Permits only) per Title 27 Section 21665
- Identify sites that have RFI amendments on file.
- Describe LEA accomplishments in processing amendments
or circumstances explaining why amendments were not processed. Describe improper approvals or lack of
determinations if applicable.
Five-Year
Permit Review per Title 27 Section 21675
- Identify facilities, include SWIS number, for which the
LEA has completed the five-year permit review and describe finding (i.e.
significant change).
- Describe LEA accomplishments in completing Permit
Review Reports (PRR) or include circumstances explaining why PRRs were not
completed as required.
Closure and
Postclosure Maintenance Plan Review and Approvals
- Describe LEA accomplishments in approving or denying
closure plans (per Title 27 Section 21860), requiring revisions to closure
plans, and meeting timeframes (or if applicable, proper referral to CIWMB per
Title 14 Section 18072).
- Identify sites requiring closure plans and EA’s role in
causing plan to be prepared.
- Identify ongoing approvals of amendments/revisions and
appropriate actions taken by LEA if applicable (Title 27 Sections 21870 and
21890). Note closure plan
implementation concerns not maintained by LEA if applicable (Title 27 Section
21870).
- If needed, describes circumstances explaining why plan
reviews or approvals were not conducted.
Participation
in California Environmental Quality Act as Lead or Responsible agency
- Identify CEQA projects which require LEA input (if
applicable) and describe LEA accomplishments or indicate areas where
improvement is needed (Title 27 Section 21650(f)(7)).
4. Approval of Inconsistent Permits/Closure
Plans
- Describe
any circumstances in which the LEA approved inconsistent permits/closure plans.
5. Enforcement (14 CCR18084)
- Indicate the site name and SWIS number for the
site(s) that were issued enforcement orders by the LEA.
- Include the general scope and status of the
enforcement order (Minimum Standard, permit, closure/postclosure).
- Indicate
if compliance dates have lapsed and explain any extenuating circumstances.
- Describe LEA
enforcement accomplishments to date.
6. Failure to comply with, or actions
inconsistent with statute or regulations.
- Describe actions by the LEA that were
inconsistent with statute or regulations.
7. Designation/Certification Maintenance
(14CCR18081)
- Determine if the Enforcement Program Plan
updates and current conditions reveal that the LEA’s designation continues to
be valid. Ensure that staffing and the agency’s budget remain consistent with
the time-task analysis and that the agency maintains non-conflict of interest
with the operating unit. Review the
components of the EPP (Title 14 Section 18077) to determine if updates are
needed.
Conclusion
Based
upon the above analysis and findings, and pursuant to Public Resources Code
Section 43214, this document constitutes notification that the County (name)
Department (name), Division (name if any) as LEA:
- is/is not exercising due diligence in the inspection of solid waste facilities
and disposal sites;
- has/has not intentionally misrepresented the results of inspections;
- has/has not failed to prepare, or cause to be prepared, permits, permit
revisions, or closure and postclosure maintenance plans;
- has/has not approved permits, permit revisions, or closure and postclosure
maintenance plans which are not consistent with Part 4 and Part 5 of the Public
Resources Code;
- has/has not failed to take appropriate enforcement actions; and
- has/has not failed to comply with, or
has taken actions that are inconsistent with, or unauthorized by statute or
regulations.
Either (1) commend the Local Enforcement
Agency for implementing a program that successfully applies solid waste statute
and regulations or (2) describe the program implementation issues /findings and
the circumstances that they appear to stem from. In addition, describe LEA
accomplishments during the evaluation period. Also, include any new developments that are relevant to program
implementation issues.
* Note: An administrative conference is held to resolve any conflicts arising
from a LEA evaluation or subsequent evaluation workplan monitoring. Attendees include the Permitting and
Enforcement Division Deputy Director, Permitting and Enforcement Committee representative,
LEA Program Assistance and Evaluation supervisor, or their designees, and other
technical staff as needed. The Board’s
Executive Director may also be in attendance. External attendees will be LEA management/authorized representative,
possibly a local governing body representative or designee, or representatives
from the California Conference of Directors of Environmental Health and/or the
Enforcement Advisory Council.
|
