Since going into business in 1988, August Mack personnel have participated in hundreds of environmental compliance audits. In recent years, it appears that more and more companies are becoming very proactive with regards to environmental compliance. The first step in this process is usually performing a detailed environmental compliance audit. Having personally participated in more than 100 audits in the past few years, here are some common observations related to audits.

First, before going down the path of performing an audit, it is important to have the facility’s management team in agreement to perform the audit and then willing to put forth the necessary resources to correct any deficiencies identified. In many instances, our audits are performed through an attorney-client privileged relationship to further protect the client. Any legal questions concerning audits should be directed to your attorney.

Although every facility is unique and has it own specific findings, there are a number of observations that tend to be more common and are often observed at multiple facilities. A few of these observations are not necessarily a violation of any particular regulatory requirement, but fall into the “Best Management Practice” (BMP) category.  One of the most common observations is that facilities lack a well organized environmental filing system. When asked to provide documentation, it is not always readily accessible. During an actual regulatory inspection, this lack of organization casts doubt within the mind of the regulator.  This may cause the regulator to “dig deeper” and “inquire further.”  If file organization is extremely poor, data may be missing and this could actually be a violation if the missing data is a requirement of a permit or regulatory plan. Another common problem observed is when inquiring how regulatory reports were prepared. The person who completed the report goes through a verbal explanation of the process of preparing the regulatory report.  When asked for written documentation of the preparation process, this is often non-existent or lacking. The major pitfall here is if this person leaves the company, no one is able to easily explain how prior reports were prepared.  A system needs to be developed so that documentation and report preparation is not dependent on a specific person in case the facility experiences turnover in personnel.

Common findings that are of regulatory consequence do vary from facility to facility but it is not unusual to find missing paperwork/documentation that may be required as part of a permit.  Many facilities that have air permits are required to record numerous variables that could include pressure drop readings, production throughputs, paint usage, etc.  It is not unusual to find that some of this data is missing.  Another common finding deals with required regulatory plans.  Many facilities are required to develop regulatory plans such as a Storm Water Pollution Prevention Plan (SWPPP). When reviewing these plans, they are not always kept up-to-date.  For instance, someone may be identified in the plan as the Emergency Coordinator and when asked to speak with this person, they may no longer be employed by the company.  It is important to maintain these as “living documents” and keep them up-to-date. Likewise, make sure all training, inspection and documentation requirements are being maintained for the plan.

The last area that has common findings is what I term “floor practices.” These are items that are out in the facility and not necessarily paperwork related. This could include violations such as unlabeled hazardous waste drums, no working communication device in the 90-day hazardous waste storage area, air pollution control equipment not operating properly and a number of other similar observations. In order to identify these shortcomings, it is important to inspect the entire facility with a thorough walking inspection. 

During my participation in hundreds of audits, our audit teams have identified numerous audit findings that can be easily corrected with minimal resources. Many of these deficiencies, if not corrected, are a regulatory violation where fines could be imposed if discovered by a regulatory agency. Much less often are findings of gross neglect or major oversight of regulatory standards. But when those major findings are discovered, it is much better to begin the process of correcting them under your terms and demonstrate that proactive corrective actions are being taken. This proactive effort will be viewed favorably by the regulatory agencies and you’ll be able to sleep better!