v »; ^
^',>V;'V'VjvO?' '*''>V\;-:':^"r'' {"V-.;--,' ;'','• ."•*•• ,! :-v1' v;;/;v'
X,- ;- - >"'- ":;''*;'- '., . "--'•;:••«"'>o'- r {•'.".<';'v'' -V;; x':,"'';/ ;.-M .•;'
.-;: .'•>.'• •-/•"- ;-"-f. ';"'•;' 1-^;>'"' ,.• • X: :V-,vM' -, \/
-------
9946.1
December 1987
RCRA State Oversight
Inspection Guide
Office of Waste Programs Enforcement
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
Washington, D.C.
-------
Preface 9946.1
PREFACE
The 1988 RCRA Implementation Plan states that EPA must assess the States' performance and progress
in implementing quality RCRA programs. Oversight inspections are important tools for ensuring the
quality of State inspections and can include joint inspections and/or independent EPA inspections. This
guidance manual has been written for EPA and State enforcement staff. It describes the State oversight
inspection, explains how to plan, coordinate and conduct the inspection, and explains methods to be
used to report the findings of the inspection.
The manual has been organized and written to conform to the steps enforcement officials would follow
in planning and conducting State oversight inspections.
Chapter One discusses the basis and the purpose for conducting State oversight inspections, ;md
defines the terminology used in the guidance.
Chapter Two explains how EPA and State management should plan and coordinate the oversight
inspection process, and describes the key items to discuss in the planning effort. It discusses the
qualifications needed by the EPA inspector involved in performing oversight inspections.
Chapter Three explains how to prepare for the oversight inspection. It describes what should
be done prior to conducting the field inspection and discusses the responsibilities of the EPA
and State inspectors.
Chapter Four describes how to conduct both joint and independent State oversight inspections.
A sample oversight inspection form is included as an appendix to help the inspector focus field
activities and record field observations. A separate section is included for evaluation of the State
inspection report.
Chapter Five describes post-inspection procedures including facility exit, debriefing with State
personnel, review of the State inspection report, and procedures for reporting oversight
inspection findings.
The Appendices include the sample oversight inspection form, a bibliography for reference, and
a list of abbreviations.
-------
Table of Contents 9946.1
RCRA STATE OVERSIGHT
INSPECTION GUIDE
TABLE OF CONTENTS
Chapter One: Introduction
1-1 Background 1-1
1-2 Purpose of the Guidance Document 1-2
1-3 Updating Procedures 1-3
1-4 Definitions 1-3
Chapter Two: Planning Activities
2-1 General Program Commitments 2-1
2-2 Qualifications 2-3
Chapter Three: Preparation for the Inspection
3-1 Objectives 3-1
3-2 Responsibility of the EPA Inspector 3-1
3-3 Responsibility of the State Inspector 3-2
Chapter Four: Conducting the Inspection
4-1 Purpose of the Oversight Inspection 4-1
4.2 Pre-Inspection Meeting 4-1
4-3 Facility Entry 4-2
4.4 Inspection Procedures 4-2
4.5 Oversight Evaluation Criteria 4-3
4.6 Use of the Oversight Inspection Form 4-4
4.7 Independent Oversight Inspections 4-4
Chapter Five: Post-Inspection Procedures
5.1 Facility Exit 5-1
5.2 State Enforcement Authority 5-1
5.3 Debriefing State Personnel 5-2
5.4 Review of State Inspection Report 5-2
5.5 EPA Reporting Procedures 5-3
Figures
1 Flow Chart for State Oversight Inspections 5-4
Ul
-------
Table of Contents 9946.1
Appendices
I Sample Oversight Inspection Form
H Bibliography
III List of Abbreviations
IV
-------
Chapter One -- Introduction 9946.1
1.1
Background
Section 3006(b) of the Resource Conservation and Recovery Act (RCRA) of 1976 (as amended),
provides that any State may make application to the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) to
administer and enforce the hazardous waste program. Further, EPA shall authorize a State to earn' out
its program in lieu of the Federal program if it can demonstrate that its program is equivalent (or more
stringent) and consistent with the Federal program and it provides adequate enforcement of compliance
with the requirements. An authorized State is required, among other things, to conduct compliance and
evaluation inspections of hazardous waste management facilities for the purposes of developing
regulations, preparing permits, or ensuring compliance with the provisions or regulations promulgated
under the Act.
The RCRA Evaluation Guide provides guidance to EPA and the States on how to incorporate program
quality criteria (and related policies) into their hazardous waste management activities. It provides both
a valuable reference point for implementing national requirements and a complete protocol for
conducting program reviews. The National Criteria for a Quality Hazardous Waste Management
Program Under RCRA sets basic goals and performance expectations for the States and EPA in
managing the RCRA program.
The RCRA State Program Review process by EPA involves a comprehensive review of State hazardous
waste program activities, including file reviews, oversight inspection evaluations, enforcement
evaluations, oversight record reviews, Hazardous Waste Data Management System information, and the
Compliance and Enforcement Monitoring Logs. The actual state oversight inspection evaluation
comprises only a portion of the overall RCRA review.
The FY'87 RCRA Implementation Plan (RIP) stated that Regions should identify areas of the State
programs that need strengthening and that progress in these areas will be expected prior to making
decisions to authorize a State for the RCRA program. The Regions should review the quality of the
work States have done in the areas of permitting, closure, and enforcement. The Regions were to institute
a mechanism to oversee approximately 10% of the State inspections, including both independent and
joint inspections; and were to perform audits of State inspection records more frequently than on an
annual basis.
The FY'88 REP places greater responsibility upon the Regional offices by allowing the Regions to select
the appropriate number of State oversight inspections. It stresses the point that State oversight
inspections are important tools for ensuring the quality of State inspections and that review of inspection
reports should be conducted as part of the grant oversight process.
It is the purpose of this guidance document to provide a uniform procedure under which State oversight
inspections should be performed and to promote a nationally consistent approach to evaluating State
performance. Among the anticipated benefits of a nationally consistent approach is a clearer
understanding among EPA and State personnel on the scope and extent of each oversight inspection.
Another goal is development of a reliable data base to facilitate such State oversight. Specific conditions
will determine, within the scope of the inspection, the extent of oversight that a particular site will
require. A consistent approach to conducting oversight inspections wil] aid in removing a source of
variability, and thus focus more attention on the findings and the methods. Clearly, the findings of the
oversight inspection program are integrally important to the overall enforcement effort in each State.
1-1
-------
Chapter One -- Introduction 9946.1
Finally, the Agency position is that quality oversight inspections must he conducted in order to ensure
that the States are carrying out effective RCRA programs. The focus of this guidance document is to
improve the quality of the oversight inspection program, to institute consistency among State oversight
inspections, and to provide constructive feedback to improve the overall State RCRA program.
The following sections of this chapter provide an overview of the intended use and content of the RCRA
State Oversight Inspection (SOI) Guide.
12
Purpose of the Guidance Document
The major purpose of this document is to provide guidance to designated EPA oversight inspection
personnel on procedures to be used when conducting State oversight inspections and to provide RCRA
program review personnel with information to be used in mid-year and end-of year reviews. Also, this
guidance will clarify for State personnel the Agency objectives and procedures for conducting oversight
inspections. This should help them better prepare for the inspection and improve their understanding
of comments received after the inspection.
A secondary purpose of this document is to provide guidance to EPA oversight inspection personnel
on procedures to be used when conducting oversight of EPA contractors performing RCRA inspections.
The procedures detailed in this document can be used to conduct EPA oversight of contractor
inspections with some minor modifications.
This guidance document can be used for all types of facilities (e.g., generators, land disposal,
non-notifiers) and all types of inspections including:
-- Compliance Evaluation Inspections (CEI)
-- Comprehensive Monitoring Evaluations (CME)
- Record reviews
-- Lab Audit Inspections
-- Operation and Maintenance Inspections (O & M)
— Case Development Inspections (GDI)
However, the use of this guidance document is limited when performing inspections such as a CME,
where a large portion of the inspection is performed in the office by a State hydrogeologist or geologist.
The SOI relates mainly to a review by EPA personnel of State field activities. Therefore, performing
the field portion of the CME which involves a review of well placement, and sampling and analysis
procedures would be applicable to the guidance presented in this document.
The guidance document seeks to provide information that will improve the quality of oversight
inspections and establish a framework for improving the overall performance of both State inspection
programs and EPA contractor inspections.
1-2
-------
Chapter One -- Introduction 9946.1
1.3
Updating Procedures
As individual State RCRA programs are authorized under the Hazardous and Solid Waste Amendments
of 1984 (HSWA) amendments and as more inspections are performed by the States, procedures for
performing State oversight inspections may change; updates to this document will be issued to reflect
these changes. The SOI guidance manual will be revised based upon regulations modifying requirements
for State programs or procedural changes that occur due to statutory modifications to the RCRA
program.
1.4
Definitions
This document presents terminology that needs to be clarified for the user of this guidance. Definitions
are provided below for this purpose:
State Oversight Inspection
A RCRA inspection conducted by EPA personnel to determine the effectiveness of a State
hazardous waste management program and to determine facility compliance. There are two types
of State oversight inspections: joint and independent.
Joint Oversight Inspection
An oversight inspection performed jointly by EPA and the State. The State inspector would be
designated the lead inspector with the EPA inspector mainly acting as an observer.
Independent Oversight Inspection
An oversight inspection performed on different dates and separately by EPA and the State.
Each inspector would report their findings and the EPA inspector would compare the findings
to determine whether the State inspection was complete and thorough.
The following chapters will describe in detail each of these inspections and the procedures to be followed
when conducting these inspections.
1-3
-------
Chapter Two ~ Planning Activities 9946.1
2.1
General Program Commitments
RCRA grants for the FY '88 RIP were prepared on a Regional, rather than a State-by-State, basis. The
grant formula reflects program emphasis on land disposal and incineration facilities. The FY '88 grants
are performance-based, and this approach provides for a consistent nationwide method for managing
and evaluating RCRA programs. As mentioned previously the State oversight inspection is an important
tool for EPA to use when evaluating State performance under RCRA.
In order for the State oversight inspection process to achieve its desired goals, planning is required
between EPA and State personnel at the beginning of each fiscal year. Two levels of planning are
recommended:
1. Upper management planning to discuss overall workplans and State inspection targets; and
2. Middle-level management and first-line management planning to determine numbers,
locations, and scheduling of EPA oversight inspections.
It is expected that some interaction between the two levels of planning will occur as the process moves
toward its goals.
The first level of planning is necessary for upper management to focus on general program elements
(i.e., land ban, used oil, incinerators) and State resource allocation. Planning of this type normally occurs
as part of the State-EPA Agreement (SEA) process and is intended to define overall State program
objectives. This level of planning normally may involve identifying certain procedures and defining ways
to report findings.
During this level of planning there should be a discussion which concludes with a mutual understanding
of what EPA and the State views as an effective, complete site evaluation. The EPA oversight inspection
should attempt to evaluate State performance against this agreed upon standard.
There are inspection guidance documents published by EPA which describe in detail the procedures,
observations and documentation required to meet the standard for a complete and thorough site
inspection. These guidance documents are listed in the bibliography.
This first level of planning does not normally include detailed scheduling and reporting procedures for
conducting State oversight inspections. Additional planning for these tasks is required at a lower
management level. This additional planning is discussed in the following paragraphs.
The second level of planning is more critical to achieving a workable State-EPA relationship for
conducting State oversight inspections. EPA personnel in either the RCRA Program Branch or the
Environmental Services Division should meet with their State counterparts at the beginning of each
fiscal year. Meeting more often during the year is encouraged to revise schedules and update the
inspection targets. It should be emphasized that performing oversight inspections on a routine and
organized basis is the responsibility of both the EPA and the State. This second level of management
should concentrate on developing detailed plans for performing oversight inspections and should include
the following items:
2-1
-------
Chapter Two - Planning Activities 9946.1
1. A rationale for selecting potential oversight candidates.
There should be a concerted effort by the EPA and the State to perform oversight
inspections at various types of facilities, including generators, transporters, Treatment,
Storage and Disposal Facilities (TSDFs), and non-notifiers. In addition, various types
of inspections should be evaluated, including CEI, CME, records review, GDI, lab audit,
and O & M. The RIP will prioritize the types of facilities that should be inspected on
an annual basis. However, for the purposes of conducting State oversight inspections,
the Regions should allow for some flexibility by the States in scheduling facilities and
types of inspections to be performed due to the fact that some States target specific areas
or have unique facilities requiring more intensive inspections.
2. Submittal of lists of scheduled inspections at the beginning or each quarter.
The State should submit a list of scheduled inspections to EPA at least three weeks prior
to the beginning of each quarter. The list should include the name and type of the facility,
the State inspector assigned and the type of inspection planned for the facility. Changes
to the tentative schedule should be forwarded to EPA within a reasonable time frame.
If possible, a list at the beginning of the fiscal year would assist in the planning process.
3. Criteria for selecting EPA/State oversight inspectors
EPA and State management should discuss the mechanism for selecting personnel that
will perform State oversight inspections. Arrangements should be made, to the extent
possible, to maximize the use of different State and Regional personnel to assure that
the evaluations provide a broader base of information and are less a product of personal
biases. Different State inspectors should be chosen for oversight trips as well as selected
EPA personnel in offices that have a sufficient number of inspectors to allow for this
activity.
4. Followup reporting procedures to be used by EPA.
EPA and State management should determine specific procedures to be followed for
transmitting oversight inspection findings and recommendations. EPA and State
management should also develop procedures for State responses to EPA oversight
comments and recommendations (e.g., State response should usually be via telephone
call, letter, etc.). Chapter Five presents various options for reporting the findings from
the oversight inspections to the State and EPA Program Office.
2-2
-------
Chapter 2 -- Planning Activities 9946.1
22
Qualifications
The role of the EPA inspector in performing State oversight inspections is demanding. The EPA
inspector must objectively evaluate the State inspector's ability to observe and document violations of
the hazardous waste regulations, and concomittantly evaluate the facility's compliance at the same time.
In addition, the EPA inspector must perform the inspection in such a way that fosters a positive
relationship between the State and EPA. These tasks are not easily accomplished in view of the facts
that State programs operate differently; individual personalities are involved; and varying professional
approaches can be assumed. It is for these reasons that EPA personnel assigned to perform State
oversight inspections should, to the extent possible, be experienced, qualified and fully understand the
objectives.
The EPA inspector should have sufficient experience in the field to evaluate different facilities (i.e.,
generators, TSDF's) and should have a knowledge of both federal and State regulations. Upper
management in EPA should attempt to assign oversight inspections to the more experienced personnel
on their staffs. When experienced EPA personnel are not available, EPA management should closely
review the findings to determine their suitability. In addition, EPA management should be willing to
discuss the selection of personnel with their State counterparts prior to the inspection. If necessary,
EPA may choose to change the inspection to a joint inspection, rather than a joint oversight inspection,
until the EPA staff person gains more experience.
2-3
-------
Chapter Three -- Preparation for the Inspection 9946.1
3.1
Objectives
The oversight inspection planning program involves the following key components:
-- Planning by management/inspectors,
-- Adequate preparation and coordination between EPA and State inspectors, and
~ Adequate time to review pertinent facility information.
In some cases the preparation time will not be adequate and this can lead to scheduling difficulties.
Such situations can be minimized by good planning which allows the inspectors at least one week to
prepare for an oversight inspection.
3.2
Responsibility of the EPA Inspector
The EPA inspector should verify the name, address, location, and date for the oversight inspection at
least two days prior to the actual inspection date. In most cases this will require calling the State inspector
in advance to verify the information. It is the responsibility of the EPA inspector to review any files
provided by the State on the particular facility, or to gather similar information through normal channels
(e.g., regional files, inspection reports). The EPA inspector may visit State offices to obtain information
on inspection candidates and review various enforcement files.
The EPA inspector should be prepared on the day of the inspection to meet the State inspector at an
appropriate location prior to the inspection. EPA personnel should be prepared to discuss the objective
of the oversight inspection and the procedures which will be followed during the inspection. It is also
necessary that the EPA inspector understand the objective of the State inspection (e.g., followup
inspection of a generator may not require a detailed review of all records). The EPA oversight inspector
is responsible for objectively evaluating State inspection practices and determining the thoroughness
and adequacy of the inspection.
The EPA inspector should discuss safety concerns with the State inspector prior to the oversight
inspection. If the inspection involves sampling, the State inspector should provide the EPA inspector
with a copy of the site safety plan and sampling plan. However, the EPA inspector should be prepared
to deal with most safety problems and should have personnel protective equipment available (e.g. hard
hat, safety glasses, safety boots, gloves, disposable clothing, foul weather gear). If sampling is involved,
additional safety equipment may be necessary (e.g., full-face respirator with appropriate cartridges,
self-contained breathing apparatus, chemical resistant clothing, air monitoring equipment).
In addition, the EPA oversight inspector is responsible for preparing a report summarizing the findings
of the inspection. The oversight inspection reports should be completed and forwarded to the
appropriate EPA and State offices. Chapter Five presents options for reporting inspection findings.
3-1
-------
Chapter Three -- Preparation for the Inspection 9946.1
Responsibility of the State Inspector
The State inspector has the responsibility of scheduling the inspection at the subject facility and
informing the EPA inspector of the name, address, location, and date for the inspection. The State
inspector must allow sufficient time, usually at least one week, to inform the EPA inspector of the above
information. If there are changes to the schedule, the State inspector should inform EPA personnel
within a reasonable time. The State inspector should make arrangements to get pertinent information
about the subject facility to the EPA inspector by either:
1 . forwarding copies of documents,
2. making arrangements for the EPA inspector to review the documents, or
3. verbally discussing the facility in detail prior to the oversight inspection.
This is extremely important if the scope of the inspection will be limited to reviewing compliance with
specific State actions that the EPA inspector has not been informed of or is unfamiliar with.
State inspectors should review their own files and be familiar with available facility information prior
to the inspection. State personnel should have all required safety equipment and other specialized
equipment (i.e., sampling equipment, tools, etc.) needed to perform the inspection and should discuss
safety concerns with the EPA inspector. If sampling is to be performed, the State inspector should give
the EPA inspector a copy of the site safety plan and sampling plan.
The State inspector should be prepared to discuss with the EPA inspector the type of inspection to be
conducted and the information to be reviewed with the owner/operator of the facility.
The State inspector is responsible for preparing the facility inspection report. Procedures for submission
of State inspection reports to the EPA oversight inspector for review should be agreed upon during the
second level of planning described in Section 2.1. Both EPA and State inspectors should know these
procedures. It is the responsibility of the State inspector to meet the deadlines for submitting completed
inspection reports.
In cases where enforcement action is initiated, the inspection report should be forwarded with a copy
of the action (e.g., notice of violation, consent order) taken so that EPA can evaluate the enforcement
response. Timing for forwarding of enforcement actions should be agreed upon by EPA and State
management. Moreover, it is incumbent upon EPA to inform the State of untimely reporting through
the procedures agreed to by management.
3-2
-------
Chapter Four — Conducting the Inspection 9946.1
4.1
Purpose of the Oversight Inspection
The general purpose of the State oversight inspection is to assess the quality and completeness of a
State RCRA inspection which will provide EPA and the State with information to assist in evaluating
the overall State program; in addition it should serve to increase the level of proficiency of both State
and EPA personnel by exposure to different field techniques employed by various inspectors. EPA and
the States are equally accountable for establishing public confidence that hazardous waste is being
properly handled and disposed of in compliance with all laws and regulations. The State oversight
inspection is a useful tool to aid in accomplishing this objective.
The specific purposes of the State oversight inspection are to satisfy EPA's obligation to:
1. Determine facility compliance, including all Class I violations.
2. Check for federal requirements only (e.g. HSWA and future amendments to RCRA).
3. Obtain factual information about facility processes, waste generation, and waste handling
practices in those instances when the State inspector fails to do so.
NOTE: This should include questions to the owner/operator required to complete the
inspection.
One goal of the oversight inspection program is to improve the quality of inspections performed by the
State by identifying deficiencies that can aid State management in concentrating their limited resources
on specific problem areas. However, EPA does not intend to use the oversight inspection program to
reprimand individual inspectors or have EPA oversight inspectors perform appraisals reserved for and
the responsibility of the State first-line supervisors. EPA oversight inspectors should evaluate State
personnel on an unbiased basis keeping in mind the overall objectives of improving both facility
compliance and the State hazardous waste management program.
42
Pre-Inspection Meeting
A critical step in performing a thorough and organized State oversight inspection is for EPA and State
personnel to meet prior to the inspection. This meeting should take place on the day of the inspection,
if possible, at a location other than the facility to be inspected. The major purpose of the pre-inspection
meeting is to discuss the procedures to be used by EPA and State personnel during the inspection. EPA
and State personnel should discuss the following:
-- Type of inspection (i.e., CME, CEI, records review)
-- Information to be reviewed (i.e., plans, permit applications, inspection records)
-- Sampling, if appropriate, to be performed
-- Enforcement orders, if appropriate, to be reviewed
-- Actions to be taken if EPA observes a violation not observed by the State
-- EPA participation during the inspection
-- Exit interview with owner/operator
-- Procedures for feedback to the State and submission of inspection report to EPA
4-1
-------
Chapter Four - Conducting the Inspection 9946.1
It should be emphasized that the State inspector at this time should inform EPA personnel of specific
items that will not be reviewed. For example, various plans, including the contingency plan, training
plan, and waste analysis plan might not be reviewed during the inspection. State personnel should inform
EPA of specific reasons for not reviewing certain information or not conducting a complete inspection
(e.g., records reviewed during previous inspections).
In the event that a pre-inspection meeting between State and EPA personnel cannot be arranged, the
State inspector should contact the EPA inspector to discuss the information described in the previous
paragraph sometime prior to the oversight inspection. Faflure to discuss the scope of the oversight
inspection may lead to inaccurate information being presented by EPA in the followup report or lead
to misunderstanding about the scope and intended purpose of the inspection.
4.3
Facility Entry
State personnel should make arrangements with the facility, or conduct a surprise inspection, depending
on the individual State operating procedure. The EPA inspector will follow the procedure used by the
State. The owner/operator should be informed that the inspection will be a joint oversight review with
the State inspector having the lead. The owner/operator should be made aware of EPA's role to evaluate
the State program and also to determine compliance with federal requirements not enforceable by the
State (e.g., HSWA requirements).
EPA oversight inspectors and State inspectors should review the specific procedures for handling
confidential business information and for presenting government identification to the owner/openuor.
These procedures are described in tlie RCRA Inspection Manual (1988 version).
In the event that the owner/operator refuses entry to EPA and/or State personnel, all inspectors should
document the name and title of the individual denying entry, and should leave the facility immediately.
The appropriate inspector should then contact their legal counsel for assistance in how to proceed.
4.4
Inspection Procedures
State personnel will gather related information, review the facility records, and perform the inspection
according to State standard operating procedures. EPA personnel should observe and document
procedures used by the State inspector to ascertain facility compliance. The EPA inspector should
evaluate the thoroughness and adequacy of the overall inspection based on the criteria established in
Section 4.5. The EPA inspector also should make preliminary judgments regarding the facility's
compliance. The EPA inspector should participate during the inspection if:
1. the State inspector specifically requests assistance;
2. the EPA inspector requires information to complete the inspection or verity facility status:
3. the EPA inspector observes errors during the inspection.
The State inspector or inspection team rr.ay require assistance during a r.ar;ipiin2 inspection Tbs EPA
inspector may assist in ancillary functions, su-'-h as helping inspection personnel don protr-tti'-'i
equipment or storing sample containers for transport to the laboratory. The EPA inspector will
determine in specific instances whether, and to what extent, assistance to State personnel is appropriate.
4-2
-------
Chapter Four -- Conducting the Inspection 9946.1
Examples of errors that may cause the EPA inspector to intervene in the inspection include:
-- Incorrect statements to the owner/operator that a particular process or unit is not regulated.
-- State inspector does not observe a release of hazardous waste (e.g., leaking tank or drums)
-- Inadequate documentation of a violation (e.g., no photo taken of an actual release of
hazardous waste)
NOTE: When an error is observed at a facility, it is very important for the inspectors to use discretion
and never argue or appear confused during discussions with facility representatives. If possible,
request the use of a meeting room to discuss and compile notes prior to a final meeting with
the facility manager. Use this time to resolve differences, make informational phone calls, or
develop a strategy to deal with the observed problems.
4.5
Oversight Evaluation Criteria
The specific task of the EPA oversight inspector is to determine if the State is:
1, Following its inspection and compliance monitoring procedures.
2. Detecting all violations at RCRA facilities.
3. Providing adequate training and guidance to its inspection staff.
4. Providing adequate safety equipment and field equipment to its staff.
5. Properly informing the regulated community of the subject regulations.
In order to accomplish this task, the EPA inspector must ask certain specific questions of the State
inspector and must evaluate State performance during an actual inspection. In the case of an independent
oversight inspection, the same evaluation should be made, but the findings reported must be carefully
reviewed by supervisory personnel for their suitability. Among the criteria to be used to evaluate the
State inspection program on a consistent and objective basis are:
-- Inspector preparedness (knowledge of facility history)
-- Knowledge of applicable Federal/State hazardous waste regulations
-- Ability to obtain facility information to determine whether operations and regulated units
meet the RCRA requirements
-- Determination of facility type, including facility processes and regulated waste streams
-- Field documentation practices
-- Elements of field presence (i.e., ability of inspector to actively control the inspection agenda)
-- Conduct of exit interview with owner/operator
- Post inspection documentation practices (inspection report and findings)
4-3
-------
Chapter Four - Conducting the Inspection 9946.1
4.6
Use of Oversight Inspection Form
The EPA inspector should utilize an oversight inspection form to aid in evaluating and organizing
observations made during the inspection. A sample form that can be used is included in Appendix 1. It
is recommended that each Region tailor the form to its needs and the needs of the individual States.
General questions asked by the EPA oversight inspector regarding the amount and quality of training,
safety and sampling equipment availability, and inspector experience are focused to objectively aid in
determining the adequacy of the State hazardous waste management program.
The form includes a narrative section to be used by the EPA oversight inspector to record the following
information:
-- specific observations regarding facility compliance
- inspector's ability to deal with the owner/operator
-- unexpected problems occurring during the inspection
-- overall quality of the inspection
~ mitigating factors that may have a bearing on the inspector evaluation (e.g., facility
complexity or ongoing litigation)
The oversight inspection form allows the EPA inspector to discuss site specific factors that are bryor.J
the State inspector's controi and may complicate the inspection. Examples include interiin status vs.
permitted status questions, definition of solid waste interpretations, on-site recycling :ctivair..: ,:r,.; lav^
facility inspections involving numerous regulated units.
The name of the State inspector should not be included on the EPA oversight inspection form.
The form is divided into two parts. Part 1 is used during the actual inspection to record observations
made in the field. Part 2 of the form is to be used to evaluate the State inspection report relative to field
observations. Both parts of the oversight inspection form should be completed by the EPA inspector.
4.7
Independent Oversight Inspections
Discussions up to this point in the guidance manual have focused upon the procedures tc be used when
conducting joint EPA/State oversight inspections. As an alternative to a joint inspection, independent
oversight inspections can be performed at the same RCRA facility on different dates by EPA and Suite
personnel. The inspections should occur within a two week period in order to minimize inspecting tho
facility during various states of compliance, ongoing industrial process operations, and management
changes. Independent oversight inspections pose difficult scheduling problems, place additional biirJ^s
upon the EPA oversight inspector, and may disturb the owner/operators that are inspected r.vice in .1
short period of time. This may appear to them as poor communications between the State and the
Region.
Independent State oversight inspections may not be routinely conducted, but may be a component of
the Regions' oversight policy. Independent oversight inspection should be used when joint oversight
inspections cannot be performed duo to trained State relations, scheduling problems v/ith State
personnel, or to verify the status of facilities requiring intense oversight by Regional personnel.
4-4
-------
Chapter Four -- Conducting the Inspection 9946.1
EPA does not envision that independent oversight inspections will be carried out without prior discussion
with and notification to the State. However, this procedure may be appropriate when EPA has concerns
about the quality of State inspections that is not verifiable through the joint oversight inspection process
or through the Regional review of the State program. In these cases, Regional management should he
apprised of the interagency problems which may result. The following paragraphs present guidance on
performing independent oversight inspections involving prior State notification, or unscheduled EPA
inspections.
In cases where the State and EPA have discussed and planned to conduct independent oversight
inspections, scheduling should be done so that the State inspection is performed initially, followed within
two weeks by the EPA inspection. If this procedure cannot be followed, the EPA inspection can be
performed initially with the State inspection performed within two weeks. However, every attempt
should be made to schedule the State inspection as the initial inspection.
An element in performing scheduled independent oversight inspections is that there should be some
minimal discussion between the EPA and State inspector to clarify the scope of the inspection. If
possible, a pre-inspection meeting to discuss the facility and any related matters can be arranged prior
to either the State inspection or the EPA inspection.
EPA and State personnel should then complete the scheduled oversight inspections within the specified
time frame. The State inspector should forward the completed inspection report to the EPA oversight
inspector for review. The EPA oversight inspector should then review the report to determine whether
the State inspector has observed and documented violations accurately. Reporting procedures for the
completed oversight inspection form are discussed in Chapter Five.
Unscheduled independent oversight inspections also may be conducted under this program. In these
situations, EPA will have to obtain a list of completed inspections from the State and attempt to inspect
these facilities within a reasonable time frame (should be less than one month). After the oversight
inspection is completed, the EPA inspector should review the State inspection report to determine
whether EPA observed violations were reported by the State.
Independent oversight inspections can be a useful tool to determine State performance. However, there
are disadvantages to the use of these inspections. Even though EPA and State personnel inspect the
same facility within a relatively short time frame, there is no way of verifying that both inspectors
actually observed similar situations. The owner/operator could have changed operations based on
business considerations, or the previous State or EPA inspector's comments and observations. In the
event that EPA and State oversight inspectors do not discuss the facility prior to conducting the
inspections, it may be difficult to evaluate the overall quality of State inspections. However, if violations
are unreported repeatedly by State personnel at a number of facilities, more definitive information can
be used to discuss State performance at the mid-year and end-of-year reviews.
Another disadvantage of performing independent oversight inspections are that they are more time
consuming and inconvenient for the facility that receives two inspections within a relatively short time.
Also, enforcement against a particular facility may be a problem if EPA and State inspection reports
differ in their findings.
There also can be advantages to utilizing independent oversight inspections. One of these is that
ultimately the use of independent oversight inspections may force accommodation and resultant
cooperation between EPA and the State. This may be the case where State oversight work is targetted
when the Region identifies performance problems. Although the State may initially view the use of
independent oversight inspections as an unnecessary tool, the final State response could be a positive
reaction that will result in improved performance.
4-5
-------
Chapter Four — Conducting the Inspection 9946.1
A second advantage may be that EPA obtains a more accurate evaluation of the State inspection
program. The State may choose to have senior inspectors participate in the oversight inspection program
and this group may not fully represent the overall inspection workforce. By performing independent
oversight inspections EPA will obtain information on a broader range of State inspection personnel
that can be used more effectively in evaluating the overall State program.
Another point to be considered is that complex sites, such as land disposal facilities, or incinerators,
require more intensive inspections to ascertain compliance. These facilities are required to comply with
numerous regulations. The use of independent oversight inspections is one mechanism to allocate
resources for the purpose of ascertaining whether these facilities are complying with the regulations on
a more frequent basis.
The comments stated above are not meant to discourage the use of independent oversight inspection"
to determine Siate performance, but to emphasize that their use as a tool for Slate program ;evi-v
should be carefully planned and coordinated to minimize misunderstandings hetvv?er, FIPA r.nd t.-e Sta*1?.
4-6
-------
Chapter Five -- Post Inspection Procedures 9946.1
5.1
Facility Exit
For a significant number of RCRA inspections, the exit interview with the owner/operator is the most
difficult portion of the inspection. The inspector must be prepared to answer questions, to the t;;tcnt
possible, to prepare necessary receipts for samples, to provide relevant information on the State
hazardous waste management program, and to request additional information not available at the time
of the inspection. During an oversight inspection, the State inspector has the additional knowledge that
the EPA inspector has observed the inspection and may have varying opinions. Such potential uneasiness
can be minimized if the EPA and State inspectors have discussed exit interviews during the
pre-inspection meeting.
If the EPA oversight inspector believes that erroneous or incomplete information may be passed on to
the owner/operator during the exit interview, he should request private consultations with the State
inspector and conflicts should be resolved at that time. If these conflicts cannot be resolved, it is the
EPA inspector's obligation to advise the owner/operator of problems observed at the facility regarding
potential violations of either State requirements or other federal requirements not enforceable by the
State (e.g. HSWA or other changes to RCRA). These actions by the EPA inspector will be important
in cases where a future enforcement action is taken by EPA. Section 5.2 discusses concerns that arise
with State inspector enforcement authority that should be considered when performing State oversight
inspections.
S3,
State Enforcement Authority
State hazardous waste regulations can vary greatly in the authority granted inspectors relative to issuance
of formal, i.e. legal notices of violations and/or orders mandating compliance. It is advisable for EPA
oversight inspectors to know relevant State regulations in order to better understand the limitations
which such regulations may impose on the State inspector. In any case, the EPA oversight inspector
should note the procedures used by the State inspector in the reporting of violations occurring at the
facility to the owner/operator. In addition, the EPA inspector should compare the State inspector's
findings with their own assessment of the facility's compliance.
Relative to actual enforcement authority, Section 3008 (a)(2) of RCRA reserves to EPA the right to
initiate unilateral enforcement actions in an authorized State-but only upon giving notice to such State
prior to issuing an order or commencing a civil action. The reasons for EPA taking such unilateral actions
can be many and varied and include:
-- State may have taken no action against a violator,
-- State may be untimely in its enforcement response,
-- State response may not be considered appropriate to the level and seriousness of the alleged
violations (including penalties, or lack of such),
-- State may not have sufficient enforcement personnel to handle the case, or
-- The case would establish a legal precedent (these cases are expected to arise infrequently).
Specific guidance on these issues can be found in the 1984 Enforcement Response Policy (ERP) and the
respective State/EPA Enforcement Agreements.
5-1
-------
Chapter Five -- Post Inspection Procedures 9946.1
EPA oversight inspectors should also realize that they may be called as a witness in future State or EPA
administrative or other enforcement actions. Therefore, they should take all measures necessary to
assure that all observations, field notes, and other evidence obtained during the oversight inspection are
accurate and factual as if they were the lead inspector for compliance of the site.
5.3
Debriefing State Personnel
At the conclusion of the exit interview with the owner/operator, the State and EPA inspector should
meet at a location other than the facility inspected to discuss their observations and conclusions. The
EPA oversight inspector iiiould review the oversight inspection form with the State inspector,
commenting on strengths tmd weaknesses noted. EPA oversight personnel shjuU- note that the:;e
comirents are only infoimul and that after submission and review of the State report, form-il written
comments will be transmitted to the State. Every attempt should be made to provide constructive
feedback.
If debriefing with State personnel cannot be conducted immediately after the oversight inspection,
arrangements should be made to discuss the inspection within three days. It is very important that EPA
and State inspectors discuss their mutual observations, findings, and application of the hazardous waste
regulations noted during the inspection. This is the forum to present observed problems and for the
State inspector to explain his approach and any rebuttal of EPA observations or comments.
The procedures and time frames for completion and forwarding of the State inspection report should
have been established by management in prior discussions (see Section 2.1). The EPA oversight
inspector should discuss these procedures with the State inspector.
The EPA inspector will review the State inspection report and prepare Part 2 of the oversight inspection
form. The EPA inspector should inform the State inspector that the completed oversight inspection
report will be sent to the office designated by the State, and to the EPA program office for its use in
mid-year and end-of-year reviews.
5.4
Review of State Inspection Report
After completion of the field portion of the State oversight inspection, the EPA inspector should prepare
Part 1 of the oversight inspection checklist. Upon receiving a copy of the State inspection report, the
EPA inspector should review the State report ibr the following items:
1. Observations and documentation of such
2. Timeliness of report
3. Accuracy of report in relation to field observations
4. Documentation of findings and/or conclusions
After reviewing the State report, the EPA inspector should complete Part 2 of the oversight inspection
report and the completed report should be forwarded to the appropriate offices in the State and in the
EPA.
5-2
-------
Chapter Five ~ Post Inspection Procedures 9946.1
NOTE: Any comments or conflicting views stated in the EPA and State reports could be
potentially dangerous to an enforcement action if obtained during discovery. Care
must be taken in how written comments are made about specific findings.
5.5
EPA Reporting Procedures
The oversight inspection report prepared by the EPA inspector should be used by State personnel as a
tool to improve performance and focus on potential programmatic problems, including insufficient
training, and improper safety and/or sampling equipment. Also, the State should use the report to
implement appropriate program changes and provide a response to EPA via the agreed to procedures
(i.e., specific response to each oversight inspection form or feedback on program changes during
mid-year and end-of-year reviews).
There are a number of options for transmitting the EPA oversight inspection report to the State. These
include:
-- Forwarding the report directly to the State inspector.
— Forwarding the report directly to the State inspector's first-line supervisor.
-- Forwarding the report directly to the State central office with a copy to the State inspector.
As mentioned in Chapter 2.1, EPA and State management should discuss and agree upon the mechanism
for transmittal of the oversight inspection reports.
EPA RCRA program offices also should use oversight inspection reports as a tool for focusing the State
program management on improving State inspections via better training, possible redistribution of
resources to more important areas, or other needed improvements. The EPA program office also should
be open to the fact that the States' deficiencies may be indicative of lack of sufficient EPA/State guidance
or training, inadequate transmittal of information to or within the State, poor communication between
and within the State and the Region, or changing priorities for inspections.
Satisfactory evaluations by EPA oversight personnel indicate the State inspection program is adequate
during the period reviewed by EPA. However, oversight inspections should continue to be used as a
major tool to assess the States' hazardous waste program and for determining whether the States are
maintaining a quality inspection workforce.
A flowchart depicting the RCRA oversight inspection process is presented in Figure 1.
5-3
-------
Chapter Five — Post Inspection Procedures
9946.1
FIGURE 1
Flow Chart for State Oversight Inspections
Overlap
STATE-EPA V
GRANT
PROCESS
1 Planning (or
general pro-
gram direc-
lion
2. SUte pro-
gram alloca-
tion
MIDDLE LEVEL
PLANNING
1 Meet to discuss
detailed lists of
-^ inspection cartdi- —
dates
2. Finalize criteria
to use for select
ing EPA over-
sight Inspectors/
inspections
3. Develop report-
ing proced ures
for Slate and
EPA
PREPARATION
FOR
INSPECTION
1. State inspector
schedules the in-
— > spection, reviews
files, transmits in-
formation to
EPA inspector
2. EPA inspector
verifies schedule,
reviews facility in-
formation
CONDUCTING
THE
INSPECTION
1. Pre -inspection
meeting with
> State and EPA
personnel to dis-
cuss procedures
and information
to be reviewed
2. Facility entry
3. Oversight evalu-
ation criteria
4. Exit interview
REPORT
REVIEW
1. State submits ir-
spection report
— > to EPA for re-
view
2. EPA inspector
reviews State re-
port and pre-
pares oversight
inspection report
to be sent to
State
PROGRAM
REVIEW
1. Slate reviews
EPA oversight in-
— > spectioo reports
and implements
changes to the
RCRA program
2. EPA program of-
fice reviews over-
sight inspection
reports in con-
junction with
other informa-
tion to be used
in mid-year and
end-of-year re-
views
-------
Appendix I -- Sample Oversight Inspection Form
9946.1
APPENDIX I
Oversight Inspection Form
Instructions:
The form is divided into two parts. Part 1 is used during the
actual inspection to record observations made in the field. Part 2
of trie form is used to evaluate the State inspection report relative
to field observations. Both parts of the oversight inspection
report have to be completed by the EPA oversight inspector.
In the remarks column, N/A may be appropriate in some instances.
PART 1
I. Facility Name:
EPA ID #:
II
III,
Facility
Activities:.
Inspection
Type:.
Items To Be
Reviewed:.
Inspection
Format:.
EPA Oversight
Inspector:.
Organization:.
Telephone:.
Small Quantity Generator
Generator
Transporter
Treatment/Storage/Disposal Facility
CEI
CME
Records Review
GDI
Full Scope
Joint
0 & M
Lab Audit
Compliance Monitoring
Other (specify)
Limited Scope
Independent
IV. Inspection
Date(s) :.
Appendix 1-1
-------
Appendix I - Sample Oversight Inspection Form 9946.1
Yes No Remarks
V. Pre-Inspection Review
1. Did the State inspector
arrange the logistics of the
inspection by assuring:
a. facility actively operating?
b. EPA properly notified?
2. Did the State transmit requested
documents according to the
established schedule?
3. Was the inspector prepared
to conduct the inspection?
The inspector should have
pertinent information (permit
application, previous inspection
reports, waste types handled)
and equipment (safety and
sampling)?
Did the inspector present the
appropriate identification and
advise the owner/operator of the
purpose of the inspection and
briefly describe the agenda?
VI. Facility Information (Observations)
l. Did the inspector demonstrate
or obtain knowledge of the facility
processes and an understanding of
its RCRA history?
Did the inspector conduct a
thorough walk-through of the
industrial processes and
associated hazardous waste
generation areas in the facility?
Were there any areas not
inspected? If so, why?
Appendix 1-2
-------
Appendix I -- Sample Oversight Inspection Form 9946.1
Yes No Remarks
3. Did the inspector fail to note
any violations or improper
waste handling activities?
Did the inspector fail to
identify any hazardous waste
handling areas not previously
identified in previous reports
or records?
5. Upon identifying a potential
violation, did the inspector
initiate case development
procedures (i.e., gather
detailed evidence to support
the findings of violations)?
Did the inspector check the
requirements for preparedness and
prevention, including adequate
aisle space, emergency equipment
availability, and access to
communications during hazardous
waste handling operations?
If applicable, was sampling
performed by State personnel
in accordance with standard
operating procedures specified
by the State and/or EPA?
8. Was proper safety and sampling
equipment used to perform the
sampling?
9. Was the inspector helpful to the
owner/operator by providing
explanation of the regulations?
Appendix 1-3
-------
Appendix I -- Sample Oversight Inspection Form 9946.1
Ye_s_ No Remarks
10. Was the inspector able to answer
questions accurately or commit
to provide answers at a later
date?
11. If the facility was permitted,
did the inspector determine
compliance with permit-specific
conditions?
12. Did the inspector perform an
exit interview with the owner/
operator summarizing the key
findings of the inspection?
NOTE: The inspector should not
make a finding of violation
during the inspection, but
should only discuss the
findings.
VII. Knowledge of the Regulations
1. Was the inspector knowledgeable
about hazardous waste
regulations applicable to the
facility?
2. Was the inspector aware of
recent amendments to the
regulations that may affect
the conduct of the inspection?
Appendix 1-4
-------
Appendix I -- Sample Oversight Inspection Form 9946.1
Yes No Remarks or Not Applicable
VIII. Document Inspection (Review)
(Please note if review was performed prior to or during inspection)
1. Did the inspector thoroughly
review the following documents?
A.For Generators:
-Inspection records for hazardous
waste storage areas
-Personnel training records
-Contingency plan
-Emergency equipment testing
and maintenance records
-Waste analysis records
-Manifests and exception reports
-State annual and/or EPA biennial
reports
-Waste minimization plan
B.In addition, for TSDF's;
-Part A permit application or
final issued permit
-Part B application prior to
permit issuance
-Operating record
-Waste analysis plan
-Inspection schedule
-Closure and Post Closure Plan
-Financial instruments
-Ground Water Monitoring/Reports
-Other information (treatment
plant operations, internal
correspondence)
Appendix 1-5
-------
Appendix I -- Sample Oversight Inspection Form 9946.1
PART 2
INSPECTION REPORT REVIEW
Yes No Remarks
I. Review of Inspection Report
1. Did the inspector submit the
completed inspection report
within the established SEA
or grant deadlines?
2. Did the inspection report
contain factual observations
rather than opinion?
Comments:
Was the report accurate and
did it sufficiently document
all the violations? Were the
regulations interpreted
correctly?
4. Did the report contain a
discussion of changes that
have occurred at the facility
.since the previous inspection?
If not explain items that
should have been included:
5. Did the inspection report
accurately reflect the EPA
oversight inspector's
observations? If not, explain
the differences:
Appendix 1-6
-------
Appendix I -- Sample Oversight Inspection Form 9946.1
II. Remarks
1. What is your overall assessment of the inspection and the
inspection report?
2. Describe recommendations that may improve the quality of the
State inspection and/or inspection report?
NOTE: Indicate whether the inspector is is need of additional
training or is lacking in a particular skill (e.g.
hazardous waste sampling) needed for an adequate inspection.
Comments on the inspection that could have a bearing on the
State inspector evaluation (e.g., facility status under
litigation, inadequate time allocated to perform inspection,
complex industrial processes and waste handling practices, or
numerous regulated units located on site).
Appendix 1-7
-------
Appendix II -- Bibliography 9946.1
APPENDIX II
Bibliography
1- United States Environmental Protection Agency. 1986.
National Criteria for a Quality Hazardous Waste Management Program under
RCRA. Washington, D.C.
2. United States Environmental Protection Agency. 1984.
Resource Conservation and Recovery Act fRCRA^l Evaluation
Guide. Washington, D.C.
3. United States Environmental Protection Agency. 1986.
FY 87 RCRA Implementation Plan. Washington, D.C..
4. United States Environmental Protection Agency. 1987.
FY 88 RCRA Implementation Plan. Washington, D.C..
5. United States Environmental Protection Agency. 1984.
Enforcement Response Policy. Washington, D.C.
6. United States Environmental Protection Agency. Final Version Due 1988.
RCRA Inspection Manual. Washington, D.C.
7. United States Environmental Protection Agency. Final Version Due 1988.
Technical Case Development Guidance. Washington, D.C.
8. United States Environmental Protection Agency. Final Version Due 1988.
Inspection Manual for Hazardous Waste Storage and Treatment Tank
Systems. Washington, D.C.
9. United States Environmental Protection Agency. Final Version Due 1988.
Laboratory Audit Inspection Guidance. Washington, D.C.
10. United States Environmental Protection Agency. Final Version Due 1988.
Operation and Maintenance Inspection Guide: RCRA Ground Water
Monitoring Systems. Washington, D.C.
Appendix II
-------
Appendix III -- Lists of Abbreviations
9946.1
APPENDIX III
List of Abbreviations
GDI Case Development Inspection
CEI Compliance Evaluation Inspection
CME Comprehensive Monitoring Evaluation
EPA U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
ERP Enforcement Response Policy
HSWA Hazardous and Solid Waste Amendments of 1984
HWDMS Hazardous Waste Data Management System
O & M Operation and Maintenance Inspection
RCRA Resource Conservation and Recovery Act
RTF RCRA Implementation Plan
SEA State-EPA Agreement
SOI State Oversight Inspection
TSDF Treatment, Storage, and Disposal Facility
Appendix III
------- |