MPCA Compliance and Enforcement Odds and Ends. Continuing Education 2017, 2018

Transcription

1 MPCA Compliance and Enforcement Odds and Ends Continuing Education 2017, 2018

2

3 Inspections Complaint or Routine inspections Who do we inspect? Maintainers Inspectors Designers Service providers Installers How do we inspect? Paper work review, MPCA or LGU site visits, surprise inspections Search warrants

4 Types of Complaints Received Verbal complaint-we ask for evidence (pictures, google earth) Written complaint-referral form Legal and illegal land application/frequency of application Septage odors, dumps, or spills Septage spread near waterbodies Septage truck is not moving and side spreading Quality of work-installer, inspector, designer, service provider My neighbor is/has My competitor is LGU s, other MPCA programs

5 Enforcement Process Pieces of the decision making pie Information reviewed from complaint or routine Compliance coordiantor/supervisor/manager check Forum/Meeting Attorney Review

6 Enforcement Process Complaint Received Investigation (Site visit or Request for information) Talk to all parties (RP, LGU, Homeowner, etc Compile information into formalized document Forum takes place (all SSTS inspectors, supervisor, compliance coordinator, manager, attorney) Determine penalty/corrective actions, discuss violations, and all case aspects for consistency Create enforcement document for review Issue document Ensure all penalties are paid and corrective actions are completed Close Case

7 Enforcement Tools Corrective Actions, loss of mentor eligibility Civil Alleged Violation Letter Letter of Warning Notice of Violation Citation Administrative Penalty Order Stipulation Agreement Notice of Sanctions Order of Sanctions Administrative Order Schedule of Compliance Possible referral to U.S. EPA

8 Mentorship Eligibility Action APO OOS (not tank fees) OOS (tank fees) SOC STIP Deny or Revoke Mentorship for 5 Years Following Date on Action Letter + 30 days for appeal Date on Action Letter (no 30 days) Date of Agency's Signature on Final Enforcement Document (Execution) AVL CITATION LOW N/A NOS NOV

9 Case Study Lessons Takeaways Any work that you do keep records, and document, document, document Work with the MPCA Life will be easier Return Phone Calls Make sure your contact information is up to date Talk through and discuss the problems in the Alleged Violations Letter and/or Request for Information Do your best to provide all information available up front it will save everyone's time Each case is independent These cases are not meant to be compared, they are just examples of enforcement These are not complete details of the cases Not all cases lead to enforcement

10 Case Study-Installer LOW Complaint Investigation The issue: Installer changed a design Moved tanks to a better location Installer did not get the signature of the original designer The county did not get the designer s approval for the design change Both the county and the installer received a Letter of Warning (LOW) Violations: Minn. R , INSTALLATION LICENSE. Subpart 1. Authorization. A licensed installation business is authorized to construct, install, alter, extend, maintain, or repair all SSTS according to an approved design. Minn. R , INSTALLATION LICENSE. Subp. 2. Responsibilities. Installation licensees must: ensure all work is done according to an approved design report. Letter of Warning NO fine

11 Case Study-Maintainer Notice of Violation Routine Inspection Request for information was sent to the maintainer per a routine inspection The maintainer only took his septage to the waste water treatment plant The required date, location, and amount of septage was included on his records The maintainer did not keep required homeowner records which is what resulted in the Notice of Violations Corrective actions - the maintainer had to submit homeowner records for the past 30 days Minn. R , Subp. 2A MAINTENANCE LICENSE. Subp. 2. Responsibilities. (A) record leakage below or above the operating depth, the access point used to remove the septage, the method of disposal, the reason for pumping, any safety concerns with the maintenance hole cover, and any troubleshooting or repairs conducted. This information must be submitted to the homeowner within 30 days after the maintenance work is performed. Notice of Violations NO fine

12 Case Study-Maintainer Citation Routine Inspection During the ride-along: Maintainer did everything correctly ph, time, temp, land application Record Review: Some items were found to be missing Violations: certification statements, nitrogen calculations, and information required to be provided to the homeowner Field citation for Minn. Stat , subd. 1(a)(6)(iv), failure to produce or maintain records in accordance with Code of Federal Regulations, title 40, section 503; Citation $250

13 Case Study-Inspector Administrative Penalty Order Complaint Investigation The issues: No attached soil boring log Did not complete compliance criteria #4 Did not report system separation MPCA called county and referred them to a soil dispute resolution. County tried for months to get soil boring log No dispute took place, because there was no prior verification Alleged Violations Letter (AVL) and Subsequent Request For Information (RFI) Sent No information was received MPCA called surrounding counties around where contractor is located for compliance inspections 33 total inspections reviewed All were missing Criteria #4 (system separation) 22/33 missing Soils boring logs

14 Case Study-Inspector Administrative Penalty Order Contractor challenged APO through a Contested Case Hearing During mediation new information came up Violations: Minn. R Subp. 2 Licensees must submit completed version of existing inspection form Minn R Subp. 4(B)(2) Soil separation assessment must be completed Minn. R Subp. 3 Certified Inspectors are responsible for personally conducting the necessary procedures to asses system compliance. Minn. R (B) The ISTS must be protective of groundwater Final settlement after mediation $4862

15 Case Study-Installer Administrative Penalty Oder Complaint Investigation The Issues: A five year old system failed Point of Sale inspection due to zero separation (not 3 feet of separation) County permit was never issued for the system No approved design or as built drawings to local unit of government (LGU), No LGU inspection No complete certification statements on required reports The County and the Contractor who installed the system did not have any records Violations: Minn. S , Compliance with rules required; enforcement. A person who designs, installs, alters, repairs, maintains, pumps, services, inspects, or abandons all or part of a subsurface sewage treatment system shall comply with the applicable requirements , DEFINITIONS. Subp. 5. Applicable requirements. "Applicable requirements" means: local ISTS ordinances

16 Case Study-Installer Administrative Penalty Order Minn. R , Minn. R Required for SSTS Licensed Business & Certified Individuals. ensure that all SSTS work is conducted according to applicable requirements prepare and submit written reports complete a certified statement for required reports Minn. R Installation License Subp. 2. Responsibilities: ensure all work is done according to a design report approved by the local SSTS authority provide adequate notice to the local unit of government and the plumbing program administrative authority when work requires inspection; provide as-built drawings to the owner and local unit of government within 30 days of system installation , Final Treatment and Dispersal. minimum three-foot vertical soil treatment and dispersal zone zone must be above the periodically saturated soil and bedrock Administrative Penalty Order $2035

17 Case Study Designer Stipulation Agreement Complaint Inspection Request for information was sent to the designer requesting design work from last two years after multiple complaints were received regarding failing systems designed by the business Response to the Request for information revealed violations of Minn. R for design work Minn R Subp. 4 Failure to complete three soil observations Minn. R Subp. 4 (G) Designed pressure distribution laterals with more than 36 inches between laterals Minn. R Subp. 3(G) Designed a gravity distribution mound without the use of a professional engineer Two Stipulation negotiation meetings held to discuss corrective actions and penalty Corrective actions - the designer had to attend a U of M class for design as well as repair/replace systems that were found to have violations so that they could be reinspected and issued a COC Stipulation Agreement $1,500

18 What else do we do? Children s water festival State Fair Mini pumper course Homeowner association presentations Tank Fees LGU Assessments Technical assistance U of M Continuing Education classes Contractor Meetings Assist with Unsewered projects Accreditation team

19 Questions? Don t drive yourself crazy! Please call us with questions!