120 likes | 229 Views
AGENDA ITEM 18: 2003 AUDIT IN RESPONSE TO CRIPPEN FIRE. Board Meeting January 13-14, 2003. CHRONOLOGY. April 2003 – JLAC requested audit May 22 – audit begins Nov. 13 – “exit” interview Nov. 19 – redacted draft, 5 days to respond Nov. 25 – formal staff response
E N D
AGENDA ITEM 18:2003 AUDIT IN RESPONSE TO CRIPPEN FIRE Board Meeting January 13-14, 2003
CHRONOLOGY • April 2003 – JLAC requested audit • May 22 – audit begins • Nov. 13 – “exit” interview • Nov. 19 – redacted draft, 5 days to respond • Nov. 25 – formal staff response • Dec. 19 – final report released
CONTEXT FOR STAFF RESPONSE • Made clear did not reflect Board opinion • Audit process and draft report confidential • Board unable to deliberate outside of public meeting • Chair committed to item for public discussion • Follow-ups dependant on Board direction
REPORT FINDINGS • LEA Advisory 12 • Plus misclassifications about sites • C&D Debris Phase II Regulations • Activities in “Excluded” Tier • Appeals of Enforcement Orders • LEA Evaluations
LEA ADVISORY 12 • Auditor Finding: Clarify advisory intent re: remaining nontraditional activities • Staff Response: • Developed during transition to tiered system • After C&D Phase II, no longer needed • Suspended in November • Follow-up: If Board agrees, then rescind
C&D PHASE II REGULATIONS • Auditor Finding: Board should complete and implement C&D Phase II Regs • Staff Response: • Board adopted September 17 • Submitted to OAL November 10 • OAL approved December 26 • Effective Feb. 24, 2004 • Follow-up: None
EXCLUDED SITES • Auditor Finding: • Board require LEAs to compile and track information on excluded operations • LEAs work with cities/counties to get information • Board require LEAs to periodically monitor • Board review compliance with these instructions as part of LEA evaluation
EXCLUDED SITES • Staff Response: • Seems based primarily on Crippen, inappropriate • Excluded ops designated by Board through rulemaking • Recommendation essentially would make excluded activities = semi-Notification • Concerned with ANY activities that operate outside tier requirements • excluded, illegal, growing beyond current permit
EXCLUDED SITES • Staff Response (continued): • LEAs still responsible for knowing about changes in activities in their jurisdiction • Consider local tracking in conjunction with planning, code enforcement, etc.? • Follow-ups: • If directed, discuss with EAC and CCDEH, return to Board for further discussion • Review excluded activities?
APPEALS OF ENFORCEMENT ORDERS • Auditor Finding: Legislature may amend appeal process to make more effective, including modifying “stay” provision • Staff Response: • Agree that “stay” provision has stymied timely and effective enforcement • Follow-up: • If directed, work through Legislative office
LEA EVALUATION CYCLE • Auditor Finding: Complete evaluations in 3-year timeframe. Set firm deadlines for LEA corrective action • Staff Response: • Agree, but also note most evaluations timely • 3rd cycle can be completed on time • Follow-up: • February: annual item on LEA evaluation • If cannot complete in time, return to Board with ideas re: prioritization
SUMMARY • Audit provides fresh look • Advisory 12: Already suspended • C&D Phase II Regulations: Completed • Assist on Misclassifications: Continue to do • Excluded Sites: Disagree w/ requiring tracking, but seek Board direction • Enforcement Appeals: Agree • LEA Evaluation Cycle: Can do