This is why I have oh little faith in our government to protect us!!! Enforcement can NOT and should NOT be the driver behind improved environmental, health and safety performance! The hypocrisy in this report, aimed at the agency tasked with enforcing the very rule they wrote is nothing short of pathetic. Sitting here I look back at all the RMP citations that have been issued to private businesses ONLY TO FIND OUT THAT EPA would have to cite themselves if that were possible. There are a LOT of great professionals working in EPA and many are highly skilled in process safety; however, an agency with inadequate management systems to ensure EVERYONE performing RMP inspections is qualified as a slap in the face to the industry! Here are some highlights from the OIG’s report:
EPA’s management controls for ensuring inspector training and inspection quality provide limited assurance of the effectiveness of its RMProgram inspections.
- EPA’s OIG found that 15 of the 45 RMProgram inspectors nationwide received inspector credentials without documentation indicating that they met minimum training requirements.
- Six of the 12 supervisors did not meet minimum training requirements.
- EPA’s management controls did not detect or prevent the cases of missed or undocumented training.
- Weaknesses in controls included limitations in training tracking systems and a lack of procedures to ensure that supervisors met their training requirements.
- Contracts and cooperative agreements for inspection services did not include training requirements.
- Fifteen of the 37 RMProgram credentialed inspectors nationwide were issued inspection credentials in 2010 without documentation showing that they met the minimum training requirements. Another three contractor inspectors had not taken all required training.
- The OIG contacted all 15 of the EPA and SEE inspectors and they indicated the following:
- Two inspectors confirmed they did not complete the training.
- Two inspectors said they could not get on-the-job training because they were pioneers in implementing the program, but they did not obtain an exemption from the requirement.
- Four inspectors said they had completed the required training but had not documented it, and the undocumented training involved self-studies.
- Four inspectors self-certified that they completed the required self-studies and/or on-the-job training about a year after their credentials were issued.
- Three inspectors provided a list of at least three inspections each of them had participated in as part of the on-the-job training requirement, something they did not do during the re-credentialing process in FY 2010.
- OIG also contacted one of the three contractors with missing or undocumented training; this contractor confirmed that he did not complete the required training.
- Ten inspectors may not have met requirements for basic and program-specific refresher training, depending upon the interpretation of EPA Order 3500.1.
- These 10 inspectors did not take basic or program-specific refresher training on an annual basis. Three regions interpreted EPA’s guidance to only require this training on an as-needed basis, while the other seven interpreted EPA’s guidance to require this training annually.
- A staffer in one region noted that guidance used phrases that he interpreted as meaning training was at the supervisor’s discretion. These phrases included “any necessary refresher” and “additional training necessary.” However, the guidance also used language that could be interpreted to require the training annually, such as “all compliance inspectors/field investigators, full-time or part-time, must complete annual refresher training. . . .”]
- Six of 12 first-line supervisors nationwide did not meet their minimum training requirements. These requirements are to be completed within 1 year of becoming a supervisor. Three more supervisors had not completed the training but were still within the first year of their supervisory position. Missed training included the environmental statutes review course and accompanying a lead inspector on an inspection.
- Two of the six supervisors were not aware of these two requirements. This training helps provide supervisors with the knowledge needed to evaluate the quality and completeness of inspection reports.
The Agency’s management controls over inspector training did not prevent or detect instances where inspectors and supervisors missed or did not record completion of training requirements. Weaknesses in management controls included:
- Limitations in tracking systems for training.
- Missing training provisions in contracts and cooperative agreements.No designated responsibility for issuing credentials to contractor and SEE inspectors.
- Lack of procedures to ensure supervisors meet training requirements.
- No designated responsibility for auditing regional compliance with EPA Order 3500.1
EPA Order 3500.1 requires EPA senior officials to ensure that inspector training requirements are included in extramural agreements for inspection services. All regions had extramural agreements to conduct RMProgram inspections during FYs 2009, 2010, and 2011. With the exception of Region 9’s contract, these agreements did not require compliance with EPA inspector training requirements. Six regions (1, 2, 4, 7, 9, and 10)10 had agreements for contractors to conduct inspections. Only Region 9’s contract included provisions requiring the contractor inspectors to meet EPA Order 3500.1 training requirements. Contracting officers and program personnel who helped develop contracts were not aware of EPA’s policy to include inspector training requirements in contracts. Eight regions (1, 3, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, and 10) used SEE enrollees to conduct inspections, and each region had a cooperative agreement with a grantee. However, none of these agreements contained EPA Order 3500.1 training requirements. The agreements were supplemented with position descriptions, and regional offices generally included some training requirements in the position descriptions. However, Region 3 was the only region to require compliance with EPA Order 3500.1 training requirements in its SEE position descriptions.
EPA Order 3500.1 requires each region to identify a single point-of-contact with responsibility for periodically auditing the region’s compliance with the order. However, eight regions had not designated an audit point of contact. Also, although Regions 4 and 10 had designated points of contact for auditing compliance with the order, no audits had been conducted as of May 2012. Further, the Agency had not issued guidance on how to conduct these audits and how frequently.
CLICK HERE to download the full report.