Transcript SAB Role and Responsibilities

What Makes a Good
Local E&S Program?
Level IB: Advanced Fundamentals Seminar
Education and Training Certification
Requirements for Persons Involved with Land
Disturbing Activities
Issued May 2009
1
Overview
• Purpose of the local program
– Erosion and sediment control program implemented
on the local level
• Principles of the local program
– Five key standards of an effective program
• Processes of the Local Program
– Ordinance adoption and implementation
– Program Administration
•
•
•
•
Permitting process
Inspection process
Complaint investigation process
Enforcement process
2
Purpose of the Local Program
• Georgia Erosion and Sedimentation
Control Act of 1975 states that cities and
counties shall adopt a comprehensive
ordinance establishing procedures for land
disturbing activities
• If a city or county fails to adopt an
ordinance, DNR Board will adopt rules
governing activities in that jurisdiction
• District offices of EPD enforces NPDES
Construction Activity Permit
3
Purpose of the Local Program
Intent of law = Local programs
Local officials have…
– Local knowledge of
– Local authority over
– Local responsibility for
soil and water resources.
4
Principles of an Effective
Local Program
Manual for Erosion and Sediment
Control in Georgia
Chapter 4
5
Principles of an Effective
Local Program
1. Erosion and sediment control should be a
stated public policy and have buy-in of:
•
•
•
•
•
Public and private agencies
Developers
Landowners
Consultants
Planners and engineers
6
Principles of an Effective
Local Program
2. Public and private support should be
encouraged through public information
and education programs
7
Principles of an Effective
Local Program
3.Local programs should have competent
personnel
• Technically skilled
• Knowledgeable about local conditions
• Familiar with local procedures
8
Principles of an Effective
Local Program
4. Provisions for erosion and sediment
control must be made in the planning
stage
•
•
Design principles planned and applied
Local government involvement in process
9
Principles of an Effective
Local Program
5. Program should be reviewed periodically
to determine needed improvements
• Observation by program personnel
• Evaluation by outside parties
10
Local Program Processes
Ordinance Development and Implementation
• To be a certified Local Issuing Authority
(LIA), a city or county must adopt an
ordinance
• Meets or exceeds the standards of the Georgia
Erosion and Sedimentation Control Act of 1975
and the state general permit
• Adopted ordinances and ordinance changes must
be submitted to GSWCC and EPD and be certified
by EPD
11
Local Program Processes
Ordinance Development and Implementation
• GSWCC developed
Model Ordinance
– Reflects current
statutes
– 2009 most recent
– Intended to provide
guidelines for local
ordinance
– Should be tailored to
fit specific needs of
program
12
Local Program Processes
Ordinance Development and Implementation
• Local ordinance must be comprehensive
– May integrate with other local ordinances
relating to land development
•
•
•
•
Tree protection
Flood plain protection
Stream buffers
Storm water management
13
Local Program Processes
Ordinance Development and Implementation
Ordinance Summary
List of certified LIAs is
available in the course
notebook
www.gaswcc.georgia.gov
www.gaepd.org
14
Local Program Processes
Program Administration
Commonly seen program administration problems:
• Staffing
– If we had more people/time/support
• Policies and Procedures
– This is the way we’ve always done it
– This is how I think we do it
– This is how my boss says to do it but I think…
• Program Growth
– We have a proactive program with excellent
personnel and established procedures, why would we
need to change?
15
Program Administration
Why are written procedures important?
– Demonstrate program is being operated in an efficient
manner
– Provides program credibility
– Allows staff to understand expectations
– Quicker program recovery in times of staff turnover
16
Program Administration
Written Procedures
• Procedures should be written by those with
knowledge of:
–
–
–
–
Regulations
City/county management culture
Implementation issues
Reality of situation
• Writing style
– Step by step, easy to read format
– Not overly complicated
– Should not be wordy, redundant or overly lengthy
17
Program Administration
Written Procedures
• Checklists
– Checklists or forms that are part of an activity
should be included in the written procedure
– Checklists are not the written procedure but
part of the written procedure
18
Program Administration
Written Procedures
• Written procedures are needed for the
following aspects of the local program:
– Permitting process
– Inspection process
– Complaint Investigation Process
– Enforcement process
19
Program Administration
Written Procedures
• Document contents
– Personnel involved and their qualifications
– Equipment and supplies
• Inventory of required equipment
• Maintenance of equipment
– Outline of procedural steps
– Data and records management
•
•
•
•
Identification of forms to be used
Reports to be written
Examples of correspondence
Recordkeeping procedures
20
Program Administration
Recordkeeping
Each LDA Permit should have a project file
containing:
– Permit application
– Approved plan
– Inspection reports
– Photographic evidence
– Correspondence
– Complaint information
– Record of enforcement action
21
Program Administration
Personnel
Adequate Staff
• Division of responsibilities
• How many inspectors?
• What type of inspectors?
• Chain of command
22
Program Administration
Personnel
Trained Personnel
– Must be “Certified Inspectors” within 6 months
of hire date
– Level IB Advanced Fundamentals Course
• Requires 60 days of experience or Level IA
certification
– Importance of continuing education
23
Program Administration
Personnel
Inter-departmental Cooperation
– Often many city/county departments are
either directly or indirectly involved with E&SC
•
•
•
•
Planning and Zoning
Engineering
Public Works
Code Enforcement
– Different departments must communicate and
have clear responsibilities
24
Program Administration
Permitting Process
Local issuing authorities are responsible for
processing land disturbing activity applications
and issuing permits
Every LIA must have a defined permitting process
25
Program Administration
Permitting Process
Commonly seen problems
– Confusing maze of permits
– LDA permits not acted on quickly enough
– Plan review process not implemented
correctly
– Lack of communication between LIA and
applicant
– Recordkeeping
26
Program Administration
Permitting Process
• Process must be well defined and
manageable
– Written procedures for accepting permits,
reviewing permits, approving permits
– Must meet state requirements - 45 days
– Must work in conjunction with other
permitting and review processes within the
LIA
– Easy to follow and communicate
27
Program Administration
Permitting Process
• Identify types of permits issued
– Overall LDA Permit
– Timber harvesting
– Clearing and grubbing
– Grading
– Demolition
• Identify related ordinances
28
Program Administration
Permitting Process
• How are permit applicants informed of
permitting requirements?
– Informational packets
– Website information
– Pre-construction conferences
29
Program Policies and Procedures
Permitting Process
• Who reviews plans?
– Does the city/county have an MOA
– Identify SWCD approving plan and
identification of technical reviewer
– Plan review process - LIA responsible for
forwarding plan to District for review
30
Program Administration
Permitting Process
• Are pre-construction conferences
conducted with applicant?
– Who attends?
•
•
•
•
Developer
Contractor
Plan designer
E&SC Inspector
– Exchange all pertinent contact information
– Review construction schedule
– Outline expectations
31
Program Administration
Permitting Process
• Identify permit fees and collect accordingly
– Accurate formula
– Inclusion of NPDES permitting fees
– Purpose of NPDES permitting fee for LIA was
to help off-set workload
32
Program Administration
Permitting Process
• Recordkeeping
– Accurate log of permits by identifier
•
•
•
•
•
•
Applicant with contact information
Accurate site name and location
Application date
Plan review status
Date permit issued
Project status
– Permit log should correspond to inspection,
enforcement and complaint logs
– Project files kept up to date
33
Program Administration
Inspection Process
Commonly seen problems
– Inspection frequency
– Inconsistent approach to inspections
– “Drive-by inspections”
– Lack of documentation
– Follow-up
34
Program Administration
Inspection Process
• Ratio of sites per E&SC Inspector?
– Reasonable work load for wet periods not just drought
conditions
– Is an individual site assigned to an inspector or are
daily inspections assigned?
– Consideration for project size
• How often are sites inspected for erosion and
sediment control compliance?
– Weekly?
– Construction activity schedule?
– In response to complaints?
35
Program Administration
Inspection Process
• Develop or refine written procedures for
inspections
– Consistency regardless of inspector
– Fairness to all sites
– Method of inspections
• Inspect entire perimeter of site
• Inspect BMPs
• Apparent violations and emerging violations
36
Program Administration
Inspection Process
• Good documentation
of inspections
– Checklist or report
completed for every
inspection
– Photographic evidence
– Completed inspection
reports entered or filed
as appropriate
37
Program Administration
Inspection Process
• Inspection Follow-up
– Finish recordkeeping responsibilities
– Communicate with owner/operator
– Re-inspect as required
– Follow through on required enforcement
action
38
Program Administration
Complaint Investigation Process
Commonly seen problems
– No record of complaint
– No inspection
– Lack of follow-up with referring authority
– No referral to EPD when needed
39
Program Administration
Complaint Investigation Process
• City or county must follow a Complaint
Investigation Process
– Investigation of the complaint by the local
issuing authority within 5 business days
– Mechanism for referral of unresolved
complaints to the Division
– Monthly log of complaints and inquiries
including actions taken
DNR Rule 391-3-7-.09
40
Program Administration
Complaint Investigation Process
Monthly log of complaints and inquiries including
actions taken
41
Program Administration
Complaint Investigation Process
• LIA must investigate
complaint within 5
days
• Respond to
Citizen
Complaints
complainant
as appropriate
EPD
Complaint
Referral
Local Issuing
Authority
GSWCC
Complaint
Referral
Inter-departmental
Complaint
Referral
42
Program Administration
Enforcement Process
Commonly seen problems
– Lack of enforcement
– Inadequate use of enforcement tools
– Inconsistent enforcement
– No follow-up after enforcement action
– Recordkeeping
43
Program Administration
Enforcement Process
• Enforcing the local ordinance requires
complying with procedures for:
– Notice of Violations
– Stop Work Orders
– Court Actions
• Enforcing the ordinance is not a choice
44
Program Administration
Enforcement Process
• Considerations for written procedures
– What triggers enforcement action?
– Who is authorized to issue warning notices,
citations, fine and stop work orders for
violations?
– How is enforcement action carried out from
beginning to end?
45
Program Administration
Enforcement Process
• Procedures for notifying project owners that a
site is out of compliance
– Issue written warnings
– Enforcement orders should contain specific
measures or corrections which need to be
made and specify deadlines for completion
– Proper mailing precautions
• Registered or certified mail
• Hand delivered with signature
46
Program Administration
Enforcement Process
Required Enforcement Actions
• 1st or 2nd Violation → Written warning
– 5 days for correction
– No correction → Stop Work Order
• 3rd Violation → Stop Work Order
47
Program Administration
Enforcement Process
• Case for immediate Stop Work Order
– Violation presents imminent threat to public
health or state waters
– Action without a permit
– Failure to maintain a stream buffer
– Sediment discharged into state waters
– BMPs not properly designed, installed or
maintained
48
Program Administration
Enforcement Process
• Enforcement of Stop Work Orders
– Effective immediately upon issuance
– Effective until corrective action or mitigation is
completed
– Applies to all land-disturbing activities on the
site except for installation and maintenance of
erosion and sediment controls
49
Program Administration
Enforcement Process
• Civil Penalties
– Staff should be trained
to issue and follow-up
on citations
– Good relationship with
municipal or
magistrate judge
– Maximum penalty $2500/violation/day
50
Program Administration
Enforcement Process
• Additional tools for enforcement
– $3000 per acre bond
– Forfeiture of business licenses
– Denial of Certificate of Occupancy
– Denial of building inspections
51
Internal Program Evaluation
• Overall program should be systematically
reviewed on periodic basis
– Are policies current and reflective of current
regulations?
– Do written procedures need to be changed?
– Are inspections being done regularly and
consistently?
• Where is there room for improvement?
52
Local Program Overviews
Purpose:
To provide administrative and technical
assistance in an effort to improve the
effectiveness of local programs
53
Local Program Overviews
• GSWCC is required by law to
conduct overviews
semi –annually
• LIAs are required to complete
and submit the Semi –
Annual Report to GSWCC
(Jan and July)
• GSWCC’s review of the
report will determine if a more
in depth overview is required
54
Local Program Overviews
• SWCD will send correspondence to LIA
scheduling an overview
– Before the overview, LIA will receive a
questionnaire which must be completed
before day of overview with all required
documentation
• DAT (GSWCC, SWCD, NRCS, etc) will
conduct program overview including office
visit and site visits
55
Overview Criteria Questionnaire
56
Local Program Overviews
• Overview Report
– Outline of findings
– Notes strong points and deficiencies
– Recommendations for improvement
– Rating
• Consistent
• Provisionally Consistent
• Inconsistent
57
Local Program Overviews
• LIAs with Memorandum of Agreement
– Must receive two grades of at least
provisionally consistent.
• Overall effectiveness of the E&SC Program has to
be at least provisionally consistent and the
• Quality of Plan Review Section has to be at least
provisionally consistent.
– The Final Grade will be weighted 80% to the
overall effectiveness of the E&SC Program
and 20% to Quality of Plan Review
58
EPD Overview
Purpose:
• Ensure local issuing authorities are
properly implementing the
requirements of the Georgia Erosion
and Sedimentation Control Act
• Review of certification status
59
EPD Overview
• May be done in response to notification by
SWCD or GSWCC to investigate
ineffective local program
• LIA must submit documentation showing
continued compliance with criteria for
certification and plans for program
improvement
60
Review
• Effectiveness of local program depends on
adoption of credible procedures and
implementation of those procedures
• Recordkeeping vital to program success
• SWCD, GSWCC and EPD may perform
periodic overviews
• Periodic internal reviews necessary for
program success
61
Resources for Assistance
– Technical Guidance information on
www.gaswcc.georgia.gov and
www.gaepd.org
– GSWCC Regional Representatives
– Soil and Water Conservation District
Supervisors
– EPD District Offices
– EPD NonPoint Source Program
62
Questions?
63