Did the Department receive 7 day notification from O/O?
         Follow up with O/O determine if time extension is appropriate
                       NO

        O/O prepares Disconfirmation of Release Report (due in 30 days)

 	YES
                     Contact O/O for additional information
                   Does the Department  concur with report?
                          Was the release confirmed?
                                                                              NO 	                                                NO

                                                                                YES
 Prepare no Further Action for Suspected Release letter.
	YES                      O/O follows release response process

  7.2    Notification of a Suspected Release
 O/Os are required to notify the Department within 24 hours of the discovery of a suspected release. In the majority of cases this notification will occur over the telephone. The staff who receives a call reporting a suspected release must request the necessary information from the caller to complete the Department Standard Interview Form - UST Confirmed/Suspected Release form [Q:UST:Personal:suspected release order]. This form only requires that very general information be collected for the reporting of a suspected release. Requested information includes:

 person reporting

 facility location and contact person

 responsible party

 description and date of suspected release, and

 if the release is confirmed, the reporting O/O or their consultant must provide the Facility ID. If they do not know it, then the staff should query the USTRAC database to find it. The UST staff must request that if the suspected release is confirmed, the Department notification must be sent to the person who received the suspected release call.

 Following the reporting of the suspected release, the UST staff who received the call needs to prepare a standard form letter found [name of the letter?] at Q:\UST\References\Letter [Is this an actual location?]

 In the case of military facilities or the large gasoline franchise retailers, it will not usually be necessary to send the TGM letters as they have previously received this information. [ Do we skip sending a letter to big companies? Roxanne ] Once signed and mailed to the O/O, both the Department Standard Interview Form - UST Confirmed/Suspected Release and Suspected Release Letter should be placed in the UST file for the facility.

  7.3     Discovery of Suspected Release During an Inspection
 A suspected release may be discovered during an UST operation inspection that has not been reported to the UST Section. For example, during an inspection the inspector discovers a shortage of product in the inventory control records for 3 consecutive months. In these cases, the inspector needs to provide guidance to the O/O as to what steps are necessary. Following the inspection, the inspector needs to do the following:

                      Send the owner, operator, and representative our standard Suspected
                 Release Letter

                       The Department Standard Interview form  -  UST Confirmed/Suspected Release form and the Suspected Release Letter must be placed in the UST facility file

                        Provide a data entry copy of the Suspected Release Letter to the LUST Unit leader

 Again, staff needs to keep track of the suspected release until a determination is made whether a release occurred or not. The result of this type of release could either be a confirmed release or a disconfirmed release.

                  If it is a confirmed release, the inspector must log the release in the release log notebook and send a Standard Confirmed Release letter to the O/O. A data entry copy of the Confirmed Release Letter is given to the LUST unit leader for data entry. For additional information, refer to Section 8 "Releases"

                  If it is a disconfirmed release, the information needs to be updated in USTRAC.

 The LUST Tracking Section of USTRAC is used to keep track of suspected releases. In the LUST Tracking Section, an alternate event identification number (release identification number) is not assigned. Instead a notation is made in the Comment Section that a suspected release was reported. All pertinent information is inputted into this section.

  7.4     System Tests

 System tests (tank and line tightness tests or as appropriate interstitial integrity testing) must be used to determine the structural integrity of all parts of a UST system that routinely contain product. The most common type of system test is a tank or line tightness test which requires the use of air or hydrostatic pressure to determine if a tank or line is releasing. Another common tightness test is the tracer test, where a "tracer" ingredient is added to the product and tracer sensors are placed in the soil to determine if a release is occurring. Regardless of the method, tank and line tightness tests performed as system tests must be third-party certified to detect releases as small as 0.1 gallons per hour.

 7.4.1 System Tests in Response to Results of Release Detection Methods
 When a suspected release is reported (by phone, fax or mail), the UST staff person must inquire as to the specific nature of the suspected release to determine the appropriate response. If the suspected release is reported as the result of a failed release detection method, then staff should instruct the O/O to follow these guidelines:

 Warning: Monitoring device (automatic tank gauge (ATG), tank level monitor, ground water monitor, vapor monitor, interstitial monitor) warns of UST release.

 Response: Recommend that a certified technician run a diagnostic check on monitor. If monitor is found to be defective, then immediately repair, recalibrate, or replace the device. If no malfunctions are found, then conduct tank tightness test within 7 days.

 Warning: Monitoring device (ground water monitor, vapor monitor, electronic In-Line monitor, interstitial monitor) warns of release in piping.

 Response: Recommend that a certified technician check for malfunction of the device. If monitor is found to be defective, immediately repair, recalibrate, or replace. If no malfunctions are found, conduct line tightness test within 7 days.

 Warning: Tank or line tightness test fails.

 Response: O/O needs to conduct another tightness test using the most appropriate method for the UST facility and site within 7 days.

 If the UST site fails the follow-up test, the O/O must repair or replace the UST system and begin release response action in accordance with §11-280.1 subchapter 6.

 If the UST site passes the follow-up test and environmental contamination is not the basis for the suspected release, then no further action is required. [No letter?]

 If environmental contamination is the basis for the suspected release and the UST site passes the system test, then O/O must conduct a site assessment according to §11-280.1-52 to determine the origin of the release.

   Site Assessment
 O/O are required to collect soil and/or groundwater samples from locations at the site where the potential for release of contaminants from the tank are the greatest. In general, site sampling and analysis methodology should follow that described in the HEER Technical Guidance Manual, section 5. Justification should be provided by the O/O for the location of collected samples in either the Initial Release Response Report or the Suspected Release Disconfirmation Report. The HEER TGM (http://www.hawaiidoh.org/tgm.aspx) also provides a list of required chemical analyses based upon the type of regulated substances stored in the tank. As in all cases when analytical data is produced as part of an environmental investigation, the quality and acceptability of the data must be considered in the inspector's review of the report.

  Seven Day Notification
 7 days following the discovery of the suspected release the O/O is required to confirm the existence or non-existence of the release from the subject tank system. If at the end of 7 days the O/O has failed to reply, the UST project officer must contact the O/O and request a site status. If the O/O is requiring more time than 7 days to complete release confirmation, they must be informed that a written request is required for an extension. The extension request must provide a rationale why the extension is required and how much additional time is needed to complete the suspected release investigation §11-280.1-52(a).

  Suspected Release Disconfirmation Report
 If it is determined that a release has not occurred, the O/O is required to submit a Suspected Release Disconfirmation Report to the Department within 30 days of the discovery of the suspected release.

 The report must include at a minimum the required system testing and site assessment done as part of the investigation. In addition, the report needs to include the equipment manufacturer's or installer's written documentation of any performance claims and their manner of determination.

 The inspector assigned to evaluate the report should consider in their review the 1) accuracy of the systems test and; 2) acceptability of the site check performed. Consideration should be given to the appropriateness of the sample location and depth and the appropriateness of the analytical method (see Section 5 of the HEER TGM). The UST unit must review the system test component of the report as well as manufacturer's performance claims, and the LUST unit must review the site assessment component if environmental sampling and analysis was conducted as part of the investigation.

 If the Department concurs with the O/O's suspected release disconfirmation report, a letter will be sent to the O/O confirming no further action is required for the suspected release investigation. [What is the name of the letter?]

  Suspected Release Confirmed
 See §11-280.1, Subchapter 6 for O/O release response requirements and Section 8 of this manual for the Department inspector's role in a confirmed release response. If a suspected release is confirmed within the 7-day period (or later time if appropriate), a release ID number needs to be assigned to the facility and a Confirmed Release Letter sent to the O/O (see Section 8.2 of this manual).

                                     SECTION 8

                                   RELEASES

  8.1    General Discussion [release inspections need to be implemented]
 UST release sites are difficult to generalize due to the high degree of specificity inherent to each site. This specificity is a direct result of site-specific geology, hydrogeology, and the amount of product released, etc. As the inspector, your primary goal is the protection of human health and the environment. All decision-making and investigation is be undertaken with this goal in mind. The release investigation process does take time. Be aware that an individual site inspection during the investigative process is really to determine that the O/O of the site is in compliance with State and Federal regulations at the time of the inspection and intends to continue to be in compliance with future actions concerning the release.

 The Standard Operating Procedure (SOP) to investigate releases involves 3 related procedures: "Log in and Case Assignment"; "Field Inspection"; and "Field Inspection After a Confirmed Release". The guide that follows is intended as a quick reference to the types of information and documentation required for a release investigation.

 As a UST inspector, you will receive telephone reports of suspected and confirmed releases. You are responsible for collecting pertinent information about the release and sending out guidance materials to the responsible party's (RP's). See section 7.2 For example, the first letter is the letter Confirmed Release Notification (CRN) once a release is confirmed. The site then becomes part of the LUST section to investigate. The LUST unit leader handles case assignment on a revolving system so that inspectors have comparable caseloads.

 Site visits and inspections should be conducted to ensure that applicable State and Federal regulations are adhered to during investigative and cleanup activities. Various types of reports documenting the above-mentioned activities will be submitted for review. Our response is dictated by the type of report being reviewed and the criteria each different type of report is subject to.

  8.2     Log-in and Case Assignment
 Confirmed Release Notifications (CRNs) are reported to the UST section both verbally and in writing (Department CRN Form) by the facility O/O or their consultant. Once a release is called-in, the Standard Interview Confirmed Release form is filled out and a release I.D. number assigned and entered on the release log book. On a rotating basis, a Project Officer (PO) will be assigned to receive a certain number of cases as determined by the LUST unit leader and based upon their work share assignment.

 The assigned PO is informed of the release call and given the Standard Interview Confirmed Release Form. The assigned PO will then complete all necessary documents from the information received, including the Department's CRN letter to the O/O informing them of their responsibilities in response to a release from their UST system.

 Once a release I.D. number is assigned to a facility, the O/O is required to send the Department a completed CRN notification form within 7 days after discovery of a release. Pertinent information also needs to be acquired from reporting parties and a Standard Confirmed Release letter needs to be sent to the facility O/O. Inspectors receive the CRN forms, enter the information into USTRAC, and files them into the facility folders. For additional information, see Appendix 9- A Sample CRN letter [Insert letter Shun Sheng, update citation].

  8.3     Field Inspection

 Field inspections of reported releases, site investigations, and cleanup activities oversight are often necessary and important components of a Project Officer's review and management of a UST release site. Field visits and inspections acquaint the PO with the release site and surrounding area that the review of submitted reports alone cannot do. A site visit will assist the PO in their review of submitted documents by familiarizing them with the site conditions.

 Situations may arise where specific expertise is required in the field which the PO does not possess. In these cases, it may be necessary to use in-house expertise in areas such as geology, engineering, or toxicology to assist with the site inspection.

 It is usually advisable to notify the O/O or their consultant of the intended visit to the site for the purpose of a inspection. All field inspections must be prepared for in advance, and when in the field, done with caution and safety in mind. Good judgement is always required when visiting a release site with respect to the hazards that may exist in the area. The PO must consider site specific conditions which dictate the level of personal protective equipment (PPE) that must be worn at the site and take the appropriate equipment to the field. The PO must receive a safety briefing from the O/O's consultant upon their arrival at the site. If not, request one.

 The PO should prepare accurate and thorough notes while in the field describing their observations. It is advisable the PO reviews all pertinent rules and regulations that must be complied with to produce informed notes and concerns. Preparation of drawings and photographs of the site are also useful and must be done as part of the confirmed release inspection.

 Upon return to the office, the PO must prepare a written description of the confirmed release site inspection and include any photos or drawings for inclusion in the site inspection report which will be included in the facility file. The HEER TGM should be consulted for specific Department policy on UST release response site investigation and cleanup procedures. Particularly useful Sections in the HEER TGM to review and be familiar with include Section 2 "Site Discovery, Investigation, and Cleanup", Section 5 "Field Collection of Soil and Sediment Samples", Section 6 "Groundwater and Surface Water Sampling", Section 7 "Soil Vapor and Indoor Air Sampling Guidance" and Section 11 "Handling and Analysis of Samples".

 8.3.1 Field Inspection After a Confirmed Release
 O/Os are required to notify the Department within 24 hours of the discovery of a release of regulated substances from their UST system. It may be appropriate for the Department to visit and inspect the location of the confirmed release. The decision to conduct a field inspection upon notification of a release is made by the PO assigned to the case. Judgement as to the potential severity of impact from the release to human health and the environment and the existing work load of the PO often dictates whether a field inspection will occur. However, it is important that the PO attempt to perform field inspections of reported releases as much as feasible. This will increase their field knowledge of the assigned site and assist in establishing a strong Department field presence at LUST sites.

 Field inspection after a confirmed release are largely done to:

 determine if any immediate hazard exists to human health or the environment from the release which must be promptly mitigated

 determine if the O/O or their consultant has properly contained the releases to prevent further spreading of contaminants, and

 collect general information about the release site, potential receptors, and potential pathways of exposure.

 It should be kept in mind by the PO conducting the inspection, that if it appears the release has created unsafe conditions for people working at or living near the site, it may be appropriate to contact the DOH Hazardous Evaluation and Emergency Response Office (HEER)<PHONE_NUMBER>) and request their participation or lead role at the site. For additional information, see Section 10 "Health and Safety During Inspections".

 Field inspection after a confirmed release notification should include:

      Identify if any safety hazard exists and if it has been mitigated

                       Confirm status of tank: locate and verify above and below ground components of tank and piping system as shown on available plans

      Inspect to determine if action is needed to prevent further
                             releases into the environment from the site

                 Inspect to determine if actions have been taken to prevent or minimize the spread of contamination

                      Visually inspect the area around the UST or tank system for evidence of above ground releases or exposed below ground releases

                      Inspect to determine if the O/O or contractor has taken efforts to remedy hazards such as dust and vapors and the potential for leachate generation posed by contaminated soils and debris that have been excavated or exposed as result of the release confirmation activities

                 Inspect to determine the possible presence of free product

                 Inspect to determine if the O/O or their contractor has sampled for the presence of a release in the areas likely to be present

                 Evaluate the need for the posting of signs to inform the public of potential hazards from the site

                 Inspect the site for potential human receptors and pathways of contaminant migration;

                 Inspect for location on-site of any observable subsurface structure (i.e., sewer lids, buried utility line signs, etc.);

                 Inspect the site for obvious ecological concerns that might be impacted by the release (creeks, ponds, wetland areas, etc.);

                 Describe the type of facility and location where the release occurred, the substance released, and estimated quantity; and

  Take photos as appropriate of the release area, excavated soils, or cleanup activities occurring at the site.

 <IP_ADDRESS> Equipment for Field Inspection of a Confirmed Release
 The necessary field equipment for a confirmed release inspection will vary from site to site. But in general, the following equipment may be useful at most site inspections:

 Camera
 Field notebook
 Facility map
 Tape Measure
 Personal Protective Equipment (i.e., safety glasses, safety shoes, hard hat, etc.)
 Copies of any pertinent information from the facility file.

 Remedial Activities at Site of Confirmed Release
 Project officers may choose to inspect remedial activities. Release sites that have resulted in significant contamination or have a high potential to impact human or ecological receptors must be routinely inspected by the PO. It is advisable that all sites assigned to PO be inspected during the investigation and remedial activities. However, it is recognized that a PO's caseload may not permit the inspection of all assigned cases. Therefore, releases resulting in minor amounts of contamination may not warrant a field inspection.

 The purpose of these inspections is to ensure that field investigations are occurring as described in work plans and that remedial activities are being performed as described in Corrective Action Plans (CAP) or design documents.

 Prior to going into the field the following information must be collected and reviewed as appropriate:

 Corrective Action Plan (CAP)
 Site work plan
 Contractor SPs
 HEER TGM
 Remedial design documents.

 If a release inspection was not conducted following initial notification of a release, then the items in Section 8.3.1 should be inspected for as needed.

 If required, contact the appropriate in-house technical people (geologist, engineer, or toxicologist) to assist you in the field and determine a site visit date acceptable to all.

 The following should be considered for inspection if soil and/or groundwater sampling is occurring as part of the investigation at the site:

  Soil

 Are samples collected in locations given in the work plan?

 Do sample collection methods follow HEER TGM or other Department approved guidelines?

 Inspect to ensure that collected samples to be tested for
                            TPH-gasoline, TPH-diesel, Volatile Organic Compounds, Halogenated
                            Volatile Organic Compounds and volatile Polynuclear Aromatic
                            Hydrocarbons are minimally disturbed and not composited

 Are samples labeled, properly preserved, and stored?

 Does the sampling effort appear to be adequately characterizing the horizontal and lateral extent of contamination?

 Groundwater

                Are samples collected in locations given in the work plan?

                Do sample collection methods follow TGM or other Departmental approved guidelines?

                Are samples labeled and properly preserved and stored?

 Stockpiled soil

                Do sample collection procedures comply with HEER TGM or other Departmental approved guidelines?

                Are samples labeled and properly preserved and stored?

                Inspect the design and management procedures for soil stockpiles

                If free product is discovered during the investigation the owner and/or operator should attempt to remove the free product to maximum extent practicable as determined by the Department.

 Field inspection of remedial activities should be to ensure that cleanup activities are occurring as scheduled and in accordance with work plan and design documents. If a Corrective Action Plan (CAP) was required for the site, then the inspection should focus on compliance with the CAP.

 <IP_ADDRESS> Equipment for Field Inspection of a Site Investigation or Remedial Activity
 Similar to the equipment needs for a release inspection, the equipment requirements will vary from site to site. The following equipment should be considered for the inspection:

                Work plans, SOPs, remediation plans as appropriate
                Camera
                Notebook
                Map
                Measuring tape
                Personal Protective Equipment (i.e., safety glasses, safety shoes, hard hat, etc.),
                Copies of any pertinent information from the facility file.

 8.3.3	Preparation of Report of Field Inspection Findings [not clear when this situation takes place]
 It is recommended that a written report be prepared of the completed field investigation which describes your findings and includes photographs taken at the site. The format for the report must follow the LUST Facility Inspection Record. The completed report should be placed in the facility file. This material may be of assistance to the PO in the future review of submitted release response reports. [sample INSPECTION RECORD is available on original paper copy of inspectors manual]

     Report Review for Release Response

 8.4.1     UST Closure/Release Response Report
 At least 30 days before beginning permanent closure of a UST or tank system, O/Os must notify the Department in writing of their intent to permanently close. At least 7 days before excavation work for a permanent closure, O/O must notify the Department of the exact date that the work will occur, and follow the rest of the closure assessment and procedures according to §11-280.1-71.

 Before permanent closure is completed, O/Os must measure for the presence of a release where contamination is most likely to be present at the UST site. In selecting sample types, sample locations, and measurement methods, O/Os must consider the method of closure, the nature of the stored substance, the types of backfill and surrounding soil, the depth and flow of groundwater, and other factors appropriate for identifying the presence of a release §11-280.1-72.

 The requirements of §11-280.1-72 are satisfied if one of the external release detection methods allowed in §11-280.11-43(5) (vapor monitoring) and (6) (groundwater monitoring) is operating in accordance with the requirements in section §11-280.1-43 at the time of closure, and indicates no release has occurred.

 However, according to §11-280.1-72(b), if contaminated soils, contaminated groundwater, or free product as a liquid or vapor is discovered, O/Os must begin release response action in accordance with 11.280.1 subchapter 6. It is recommended the inspector review subchapter 6 to make sure O/O are in compliance.

 For example, no later than 90 days following a confirmation of a release, O/Os must submit a written report to the Department in the format specified in §11-280.1-65.2. This is considered the first report. Beginning 180 days following confirmation of a release, O/Os must submit to the Department written quarterly progress reports and an electronic copy of the written report in a format specified by the Department in §11-280.1-65.2(b).

 The inspector will reply with a response to their report [name of letter? Sample of letter?]. As this step the letters get more specific [per shung shang]

  If the RP requests a "No Further Action" (NFA) determination, the closure report should
  contain or be accompanied by the above-mentioned checklist [ask Shung Shang about
  this checklist]. The checklist was
  developed to serve as a guide for compliance with the Department reporting
  requirements and to help ensure that all relevant issues are covered in the closure report.

  Within thirty days of completing a permanent closure, O/Os must submit a notification to the
  Department indicating completion of the closure §11-280.1-71(e).

  A closure report is required whether there is a confirmed release or not during closure
  procedures.

  In these cases, only EPA Form 7530, Closure Notification Form (Form 1), is required
  to be submitted.

  Permanent Closure and Changes-in Service

  8.4.2     Quarterly Progress Reports
 Beginning 180 days after the confirmation of a release, quarterly reports of release response actions taken at the site and future release response actions planned are required to be submitted to the Department by RP's §11-280.1-65.2(b). These reports must be reviewed promptly, and a response sent regarding the progress at the site. The inspector can use this opportunity to address any issues she may have with the work that has been done or planned.

  8.4.3     Corrective Action Plan (CAP)
 The Department can also require that RPs submit a written CAP for responding to a release in the format established by the Department within 30 days of the Department's request, unless an extension of time is granted by the Department. O/Os are responsible for submitting a CAP that provides for adequate protection of human health and the environment as determined by the Department and must make necessary modifications to the plan when directed by the Department to do so. The Department will approve the CAP only after ensuring that implementation of the plan will adequately protect human health, safety, and the environment according to §11-280.1-66.

                                     SECTION 9

                                                      ENTRY

  9.1 	General Discussion
 The inspector has specific legal rights and responsibilities when entering onto private property to conduct an inspection. It is extremely important that proper procedures for entry are followed to avoid legal action taken against the inspector and/or the Department. This section discusses:

       Notifying the facility
                      Inspector's authority to enter
       Gaining consensual entry
       Proper procedures for entering
       Documenting the entry, and
       Gaining entry when access is denied.

  9.2     Courtesy Notice for the Facility
 It is practice to provide a facility O/O with a courtesy notice of an inspection via email, fax, or telephone call. The notice must confirm the inspection date and ensure that an appropriate facility representative will be present for the inspection. This notice will allow the facility time to transfer applicable records to the inspection site so they are available upon an inspector's request. If this notice was provided to the O/O and they cannot provide the appropriate records at the time of the inspection, they should be cited accordingly for recordkeeping violations. The State will as a routine practice provide a courtesy notice of inspections but may as needed conduct unannounced inspections.

  9.3     State Authority for Entry
 An inspector's legal right to enter a facility to conduct an UST investigation comes from Hawaii Revised Statutes Chapter 342-L-7(b) on UST investigations, inspections, and corrective actions:

       "For the purpose of ... conducting any study, investigating an actual or suspected release, monitoring for compliance or noncompliance with this chapter, any rule or standard adopted pursuant to this chapter, ... taking release response action, or enforcing this chapter, any duly authorized representative of the Department may:

 Enter at reasonable times any establishment or place;

 Inspect and obtain samples from any person of any regulated substances contained in any underground storage tank or tank system;

 Conduct monitoring or testing of the tanks or tank systems, associated equipment, contents, or soils, air, surface water, or groundwater; and

 To take release response action."

 The statute gives inspectors clear authority to enter private property, conduct the necessary investigation to complete an inspection, and request any additional information from the UST O/O. The inspector must always refer to this section of the statute when a question arises over established lawful authority to enter onto a facility.

 Upon entry and prior to conducting the inspection, the inspector must first present her inspector credentials to the O/O and explain the purpose of the inspection.

  9.4     Obtaining Consensual Entry
 Although inspectors have legal authority to enter private property for an inspection, it is advisable to obtain the consent of the facility O/O and, in some cases, the property owner before entering the property. Obtaining this consent may help the Department avoid potential lawsuits for trespassing. Before entering a property, the inspector must identify herself the O/O, or authorized agent of the property owner, establish the reasons for being there, and that she has a right to enter the property to inspect the UST facility under the authority cited in Hawaii Revised Statute Chapter 342-L-7(b).

 Inspectors use a Notice of Inspection (NOI) to gain lawful entry to a site and make necessary inspection notes, recommendations and give citations. The inspector asks the property or facility owner to initial the section of the Notice of Inspection to legally give the inspector legal permission to enter. Conversely, the inspector asks the property owner or facility owner to sign the section of the Notice of Inspection that denies legal permission to enter. This type of written document is the strongest evidence inspectors have to gain consent or denial of legal entry.

 The NOI is also a place for the inspector to make recommendations, write out violations with brief descriptions, or request in writing any necessary documentation. The inspector leaves the original white copy with the O/O or site representative and keeps the yellow copy for record keeping and further consultation during the potential creation of a report.

 In some instances, the property owner, facility owner, or facility operator may refuse to initial the Notice of Inspection to consent to entry but will give the inspector verbal consent to conduct the inspection. In these situations, the inspector marks in herr field notes the circumstances of the verbal approval, including: the identity and description of the person giving consent, the time and place of the conversation, and, if possible, the exact words used to give you consent. Also, if possible, a third party should witness the verbal consent and sign your field notes.

  9.5     Procedures for Proper and Lawful Entry
 Other procedures to follow when entering onto a facility for an inspection include:

 The inspector explains to the facility O/O or authorized agent that
                       she may need to inspect all areas of the facility. Prior to beginning
                       the inspection, the inspector informs the facility O/O or authorized
                       agent that the inspection may require inspecting all areas of the
                       property. This will help avoid situations in which the owner gives
                       consent to enter the facility and then denies access to specific areas.

 Conduct the inspection during working hours. The Hawaii UST
                       statute requires that entry and inspections take place "at
                       reasonable times." Therefore, the inspector must arrive at a
                       facility during normal working hours and note arrival time of
                       arrival in the field notes.

          Enter the facility through the main gate or door. If the inspector enters
                        through the main entrance, the facility O/O or authorized agent is less
                       likely to believe the inspector is attempting to "sneak up on him".

  9.6     Denial of Entry
 In cases where the facility O/O or authorized agent or on-site representative denies the inspector access to the property, the measures an inspector must take depend on whether an emergency exists. An emergency is defined as a situation that immediately threatens public health and/or the environment, and action must be taken in order to prevent or mitigate harm from occurring. For UST facilities, this may include any toxic or explosive vapor problem that requires evacuation of residences or businesses; any imminent or actual contamination of public water supply; or imminent or actual contamination of sole-source domestic water supply. The procedures for obtaining access when entry is denied are discussed for both non-emergency and emergency situations below.

  9.6.1     Emergency Situations
 Emergency situations must be handled by the HEER office. However, if an inspector is the first to respond to the emergency and the facility O/O or authorized agent denies access in an emergency situation, the inspector has sufficient justification to take steps to immediately enter the property. However, if the action the inspector seeks to undertake can be deferred long enough for the inspector to obtain a court order with no harm to the public health or the environment, then it may not be an emergency. If the inspector has doubts of whether she has an emergency situation, she should confer with her supervisor.

 When entry is denied, the inspector must:

          Contact the HEER office's onsite coordinator

 Obtain the name and title of the individual denying entry and record
                                 the date and time, and the nature of the emergency

 Cite the appropriate State authority for legal right to entry. Ask if
                       the individual heard and understood the reason for the
                       inspector's presence. Document the answer and any reason given
                       for denial of entry

 If the situation allows, explain that the Department has authority to
                       obtain denial of entry access or a search warrant to return and
                       conduct the inspection; and

          Leave the premises

 Once the inspector has documented an emergency and access has been denied, the inspector has several options:

 In the most serious emergency situations, the inspector must seek
                  the assistance of uniformed law enforcement officials, such as State police, sheriffs, or fire marshals. Arrest of the facility O/O or authorized agent who obstructs entry should only be considered in the most extreme emergencies.

                   In less extreme situations, have the Department of the Attorney General call the facility O/O or authorized agent to discuss the situation and explain the Department's concerns and authority.

                   If contacts by the Department of the Attorney General are unsuccessful, court-ordered access or a search warrant, as discussed below, may be necessary.

  9.6.2     Non-Emergency Situations
 Most of the UST compliance inspections discussed in this manual will involve non emergency situations. If the facility O/O or authorized agent denies the inspector access in a non-emergency situation, the inspector must document the denial as outlined in Section 9.6.1. The inspector must then contact her supervisor to determine whether further immediate action should be taken to enter the facility. The Department of the Attorney General may be contacted to request that they call the facility O/O or authorized agent to inform him or her of Departmental legal rights to enter the property. As a last resort, a court order may be obtained.

  9.6.3     Denial of Access During the Inspection
 In general, consent for entry is handled at the beginning of an inspection. As noted in 9.4, the O/O can consent access by initialing the Notice of Inspection. Be aware, however, that consent issues can arise throughout the course of an inspection. Any action taken by the facility representatives to restrict inspector's activities can be considered a denial or revocation of consent and is subject to potential enforcement activities. Examples of this type of denial are: limiting the inspector's picture-taking or copying of documents; requiring the inspector to sign passes or agreements with restrictive language, waivers, or indemnity agreements, releases, or any other document by which the inspector agrees to forego some of her inspection or enforcement authority; or demanding the inspector sign confidentiality agreements.

 If it appears that a denial or revocation of consent occurs during an inspection for a minor issue, use common sense. For example, it is sensible for the inspector to follow a facility's safety requirements, such as wearing a hard hat in certain areas. However, if the inspector feels she cannot have access to information or samples that are critical to her inspection, then she must tell the facility representative that she considers him or her to have denied or revoked her entry and why. The inspector must not threaten or attempt to coerce the on-site representative to give her entry. In most cases, the inspector should leave the facility and obtain access to the facility at a future date using the procedures discussed above.

 9. 7	Securing and Inspecting with Court-Ordered Access and Search Warrants
 Search warrants and court-ordered access are judicial authorizations to enter a specific location to perform specific inspectorial tasks. In general, search warrants are obtained
 without notifying the O/O, whereas court-ordered access is an order granted to the inspector after a hearing at which both parties have the opportunity to present evidence and argument. The inspector can obtain either type of authorization prior to an inspection, when facility representatives have denied the inspector entry, or when consent has been revoked during an inspection.

 Any decision to seek such authorization must be made jointly by the inspector and her supervisor, and representatives from the Department of the Attorney General. To obtain judicial authorization for inspection the inspector may be required to work closely with the Department of the Attorney General to assemble the facts and legal support that justifies the inspector's request.

 The inspector's role in obtaining judicial access for inspection is critical. The inspector must provide the facts and case history necessary to support the request for the warrant or order. If it is decided to seek judicial authorization for inspection, the inspector may be asked by the Department of the Attorney General to prepare an affidavit (a sworn written statement) containing the following information: a detailed explanation of why the inspector needs entry for inspection (either the facts justifying an emergency situation, or how the inspector selected this facility for inspection); a description of how and when entry was refused; and what type of inspection the inspector needs to perform, including what parts of the facility, equipment, and documents the inspector must examine and/or what samples the inspector needs to collect. Much of this information should be contained in rough form in the inspector's field notes.

 Once a warrant or access order is received, the inspector may proceed with her inspection. The inspection must be performed as soon as possible, and must be conducted strictly in accordance with the terms of the warrant or order. If the inspector suspects that she may still face denial of entry at the facility or threats of violence, she must seek assistance from uniformed law enforcement officials.

                                    SECTION 10

                       HEALTH AND SAFETY DURING INSPECTIONS

  10.1     General Discussion
 This section deals with health and safety considerations at UST inspections. Health and safety issues are important both from the point of view of the inspector and from the point of view of workers installing, repairing or removing UST-related equipment. A number of hazardous conditions can arise, particularly during change in service or closures of UST systems.

 This section will describe the principal safety concerns and how hazardous situations can be eliminated or avoided.

 The major types of health and safety hazards at UST sites are:

          Chemical exposure

          Fire and explosion, and

 Safety hazards relating primarily to excavations, damage to gas or
                                 electrical lines, and the operation of heavy equipment.

  10.2       Chemical Exposure
 The inspector is most likely to be exposed to petroleum-derived fuels and other hazardous substances at UST facilities when inspecting repairs, or closures at existing facilities. These activities generally involve the excavation of soil materials that are often contaminated. These contaminated soils that overlay the tank must be removed to allow cutting a manway into the tank in order to clean the tank or to excavate the tank. These activities create exposure to vapors, particularly for those doing the work, but also for the inspector.

  10.2.1    Exposure to Hydrocarbon Fuels
 Hydrocarbon fuels (gasoline, gasohol, diesel, kerosene, aviation fuel, jet fuels, and others) present exposure risks, despite the fact that we are accustomed to handling these substances casually. These fuels contain hundreds of different hydrocarbons and different additives with a wide range of chronic and acute health effects.

 Acute effects include headaches, dizziness, nausea, confusion, tremors, intoxication, and central nervous system depression. Chronic exposure to hydrocarbon fuels may cause cancer, nerve or kidney damage.	Inhalation, skin contact, and ingestion are all possible routes of absorption into the body. Gasoline vapor with a benzene concentration of only 40 to 50 ppm is capable of producing chronic effects.

   10.2.2     Measuring Exposure
 Measurements of hydrocarbon vapors should be made whenever exposure to hydrocarbon vapors is thought to be a potential problem. Any time a strong odor of gasoline or other fuel is noted at a UST site, the inspector must measure vapor levels to determine whether levels exceed the recommended threshold values for short term exposure. The Occupational Health and Safety Administration (OSHA) has set the recommended occupational exposure to benzene at 1 ppm (based on a daily occupational exposure of 8 hours) and the short-
  term exposure limit at 5 ppm. Other volatile gasoline constituents have higher limits.

 Different types of equipment are available for measuring hydrocarbon vapors. For example, photoionization detectors and detector tubes measure the presence of aromatic hydrocarbons such as benzene, toluene, and xylene. When interpreting results from these instruments, remember that they are not measuring a single compound, but rather a group of related compounds. Based on the OSHA short-term exposure standard for benzene, aromatic hydrocarbon detector readings of 50 ppm or more should be viewed with concern.

 The best procedure is to avoid exposure to measurable levels of fuel vapors. The inspector must not remain in an area with hydrocarbon vapor levels in excess of 50 ppm without protective breathing apparatus designed for the substance of concern.

  10.2.3     Exposure to Hazardous Chemicals
 Although Hawaii has a relatively small number of hazardous substance USTs compared to petroleum USTS, you need to be aware that hazardous substances present a wide range of exposure problems. Chemicals stored in USTs will include:

          Solvents, many of which are highly flammable and volatilize easily

 Corrosive substances such as acids or caustics which will burn the
                                 skin on contact, and

          Alcohols and other organic chemicals which are absorbed through the
                       skin.

 There are thousands of liquid chemicals and mixtures which may be stored in USTs. It is impossible to generalize the types of risks associated with these chemicals. The best practice is to always be cautious. Avoid inhalation and skin contact with either the stored substance or soils and water contaminated by the substance.

  10.3     Explosion and Fire Risks

 The most serious risk associated with UST sites is that of explosion or fire due to the ignition of explosive concentrations of vapors, usually from gasoline. These conditions may exist in mostly empty tanks, in excavations, or in other relatively closed spaces, due to an accumulation of vapors generated by volatile fuels such as gasoline. Diesel fuel is less of a problem in this regard because of its much lower volatility.

 The risks of explosion can be prevented by observing a few common-sense precautions:

 Eliminate all sources of ignition. Strictly enforce a no smoking
                    policy. Other ignition sources include all non-intrinsically safe
                    electrical equipment, radios, and vehicles. Vehicles that have been
                    recently turned off may still have hot mufflers which may be an
                    ignition source.

 Monitor explosivity. This should be done frequently whenever
                    contaminated soil or free product is present and during all tank
                    closures or upgrades. Operations should be ceased, or
                    blowers used to disperse vapors, if vapor levels reach 20 percent of
                    the lower explosive limit. Blower motors should be intrinsically safe
                    if used in an area where vapors could accumulate.

 Have at least one 20 BC rated fire extinguisher readily available.
                       This rating indicates that the extinguisher will effectively extinguish a
                       flammable liquid fire in a 20 square foot area. It may also be used for
                       electrical fires.

 It is the responsibility of the facility representative and the contractor performing the work to assure that the steps above are taken and that work is performed in a safe manner.

 The inspector may not have the authority, as a UST compliance inspector, to insist that these steps be taken. However, generally, the inspector's advice will be followed. It is imperative the inspector speaks up if she observes unsafe conditions. If the contractor refuses to correct the problem, do not remain in an unsafe area. Leave the area and contact the local fire marshal's office or the state OSHA representative. These officials have the regulatory authority to stop work that presents an explosive hazard or endangers workers.

  10.4     Other Safety Hazards at UST Sites
 A number of potential safety risks are presented by work at UST sites. These can be divided into the following categories:

       Unsafe excavations

       Heavy equipment operation, including drill rigs, and

 Damage to underground or overhead utilities -- particularly electrical
                                 or natural gas lines.

 Never enter an excavation for any reason. Working around the edges of an excavation may also be dangerous to the inspector or other personnel because of the potential for collapse. Stay back from the edges of excavations and be alert for areas where the ground or pavement is undercut.

 The use of heavy equipment at UST sites also presents a number of safety hazards:

 Inattentive operation of the bucket of a backhoe can cause it to
                    strike workers or others when tanks are being excavated

 Chains or cables being used to pull or lift tanks out of the ground
                    can break suddenly causing the cable to strike workers in the vicinity.

 Drill rigs used to install monitoring wells present a number of
                    hazards:

 Drilling steel or augurs being swung into position

 The mast of the drill rig coming into contact with electric lines during erection or while swaying during drilling, and

 Buried utility lines may be struck during drilling with serious consequences (lines should always be "blue-staked" prior to drilling).

 The inspector's primary responsibility is inspecting the UST operations, not enforcing health and safety violations. However, in the interest of protecting oneself, and as a public health agency representative, the inspector must be aware of potential hazards. The best policy while inspecting is to stay as removed from heavy equipment operations as possible and, when it is necessary to be directly in the vicinity of working equipment, to stay alert to possible risks.

 10.5      Site Safety Plan
 A generic site safety plan is used for each routine inspection at an UST site. A specific site safety plan is developed for more unusual sites such as sites with hazardous substance tanks, sites where there is a confirmed or suspected release, and sites where sampling is to be conducted. The site specific plan may include the following:

             Site name

             Date of inspection

             Site safety officer and telephone number

             Objectives of the inspection

             Hazardous materials present

             Hazard assessment (e.g., toxic effects, reactivity, physical
                    hazards)

             Possible need for pre-entry monitoring

             Level of personal protection required

             Decontamination and disposal procedures to be followed

             Emergency procedures (for skin contact, inhalation, or ingestion)

             Emergency telephone numbers (e.g., nearest hospital, ambulance, fire
                    department), and

             Directions to nearest hospital.

                                     SECTION 11

                                                     CONDUCTING INSPECTIONS

 11.1      General Discussion
 This section discusses the general steps to take when conducting any inspection. The policies and procedures described here apply to all of the types of inspections previously described. This section includes the following topics:

           Holding Opening Conferences

           Recognizing and Responding to Serious Environmental Problems

           Gathering Evidence and Documentation

           Inspecting Records

           Taking Field Notes

           Taking Photographs

           Sampling and Analysis

           Drawings, Sketches, Maps, and Diagrams

           Conducting Interviews

           Citing Violations, and

           Maintaining a Professional Demeanor.

  11.2      Holding Opening Conferences
 The opening conference refers to a face-to-face meeting between the inspector and the on site representative prior to beginning the actual inspection. An opening conference is often the first opportunity for the on-site representative to meet the inspector, and it may set the tone for the rest of the inspection. In the opening conference, the inspector's goals are to explain in general the purpose and scope of the inspection, and to learn more about the facility and its operation. The following steps should always be followed during the opening conference:

    Present identification and identify the O/O. After the inspector
                       has gained entry to the facility, she presents her  Department of
                       Health (the Department) identification card to the on-site
                       representative in charge of the facility and she explains that she
                       would like to discuss her inspection with him or her. Ask the on-
                       site representative to identify the owner(s) of the facility, and their
                       address and phone numbers; this will allow the inspector to contact
                       the proper person in the event a violation is discovered. In the
                       retail gasoline business, an owner is generally not on site, but a
                       station manager or operator is. While the inspector will probably
                       conduct most inspections with facility operators, it is extremely
                       important for Departmental records and potential enforcement
                       action to determine accurately the O/O of each facility.

    Explain authority to inspect facility, records and equipment, and
                       to collect samples. If the on-site representative at the opening
                       conference is not the person who provided the inspector entry,
                       repeat the procedures discussed in Section 9 for gaining
                       consensual entry.

    Explain general purpose and scope of inspection. In general
                       terms, the inspector explains to the on-site representative the
                       purpose and scope of the inspection. For example, the inspector
                       discusses what type of inspection she will be performing, and
                       what parts of the facility (and its equipment and documents) she
                       will need to see. The inspector discusses with the on-site
                       representative where these items are located, and in what order it
                       would be most efficient to inspect them. Also, the inspector tells
                       the representative approximately how long she expects the
                       inspection to take.

    The inspector asks the on-site representative on which part or
                        parts of the inspection he or she will accompany the inspector.
                        If the on-site representative is not going to accompany the
                        inspector for the entire inspection, the inspector makes sure she
                        knows where on-site representative will be and how to reach him
                        or her in case the inspector has any questions or encounters any
                        problems during the inspection.

     The inspector informs the on-site representative of her right to
                        take duplicates of any samples she will be collecting. However,
                        do not agree to provide any sample collection containers for the
                        on-site representative. Although many facilities may not have
                        sample collection equipment available, the Department has
                        neither the obligation or the budget to hand out these items, and
                        to do so could compromise evidence later.

     List potential or suspected violations. The inspector explains to
                        the on-site representative if suspected violations prompted the
                        inspection. Additionally, the inspector discusses what types of
                        violations could be discovered (based on the type of inspection
                        she plans to conduct). If the on-site representative asks about the
                        consequences of violations, or the appeals process, the inspector
                        explains these areas only briefly, and points out that, if necessary,
                        the inspector will cover them thoroughly in the closing
                        conference.

The inspector may learn information during the opening conference that will require her to adjust her inspection plans. For example, if the inspector learns that the facility had a "minor" release since the last Department inspection, she may decide to inspect the inventory records, even though she had not originally planned to do so. The inspector should only change her inspection plan if she has the time, resources, and equipment available. Otherwise, the inspector should note in the file specific areas that should be checked either on the next regular inspection, or during a special "extra" inspection later. The exception to this rule is, of course, anything that indicates the presence of a serious threat to public health which must be investigated immediately.

11.3    Recognizing and Responding to Serious Environmental Problems
 When the inspector's primary mission is to evaluate whether a facility is in compliance with the "preventive" UST regulations (installation, operation, and closure inspections), she is less likely to encounter serious emergency environmental situations. However, the inspector may still discover such situations during the course of her inspection activities.

 Clues indicating a serious or potentially serious environmental situation include:

             Large inventory losses

             Indications of a release from the release detection equipment

             Tank tests indicating a significant release

             Strong petroleum odors in nearby wells, excavations, etc. and

             Large volumes of saturated soil below tanks after removal.

 The inspector indicates to the O/O that she believes there is a serious environmental problem if she observes any of these situations during her inspection. If the inspector detects an immediate fire or health problem, such as explosive or toxic levels of vapors, she immediately notifies either her emergency response group or a Departmental contractor, so that abatement and corrective action work can start as soon as possible. The inspector should also notify local fire officials of potential fire hazards. If the situation is less serious, the inspector requests that the O/O hire a contractor to investigate the site.

 11.4     Establishing Evidence and Gathering Documentation
 In conducting an inspection, the inspector's job is to establish evidence and to gather documentation that will be used to help establish evidence. What level of enforcement might eventually be conducted after an inspection cannot be predicted. Therefore, an inspector must establish evidence as if she were going before a court judge. The three elements of establishing evidence are:

 Foundation. This is the argument that one piece of evidence leads to the
                  next in a logical sequence, like a pyramid of information; one piece
                  building upon the other. For example, "Joe Doe works at Acme Gas Station
                  as the operator. Mr. Doe stated that on March 3rd he was on duty at the
                  station when Apex Contractor removed tank no. 2 and took soil samples
                  from the excavated area".

 Authenticity. This means that the evidence must be demonstrated to be
                  what it is claimed to be. For example, is this really a representative
                  sample taken from the excavated area of tank no. 2 at Acme Gas Station.

 Relevance. The evidence must pertain to the fact in question, tending to
                  make the existence of the fact either more or less probable than would
                  be the case without the evidence.

 All three elements must be present to establish evidence. The elements are supported by establishing what, when, where, why, who and how.

 As she documents evidence, the inspector must always think how the defense would attack the three evidentiary criteria. The judge or hearing officer has the final say regarding the admissibility of evidence.

 Documentation is anything which helps establish the foundation, authenticity, or relevance of evidence, as well as the 5-w's.	Documentation may be evidence itself, but not all evidence is documentation. Examples of documentation are photos, notes, samples, and the inspection report itself.

 Chain of custody is imperative for all evidence and documentation of that evidence. Notes, photographs, diagrams, sketches, samples, and copies of documents all require unbroken custody to ensure that they have not been compromised. The inspector is usually responsible for the security of the original case documentation. It is likely that parts of the original file become separated as other parties become involved with the case. For this reason the inspector should consider maintaining custody of all originals and forward copies of those originals with the case file until the case approaches final resolution. A secure place for evidence must be provided for the inspector.

 11.5     Inspecting Records
 Different types of inspections will require different types of records inspection. Refer to the inspection checklists in Sections 5, 6, and 7 and the State regulations to determine what records should be reviewed during each kind of UST inspection. Some facilities and records will need only superficial checking, while others demand detailed analysis and calculation. In general, the inspector should decide what types of records are to be studied and in what kind of detail they must be reviewed prior to the inspection, and budget your time accordingly.

 If lengthy records must be reviewed, the inspector considers arranging in advance to have them copied. For example, if the facility inventory records must be analyzed for accuracy, copying them beforehand will allow the inspector to perform calculations in the office. Before the inspector leaves the facility with the records, she makes sure she has discussed them in enough detail with the O/O that she thoroughly understand the O/O's system for keeping the records. Failure to do so may make analysis of the records very difficult.

 The idea is (1) to see if the records required are present and maintained, (2) to substantiate compliance or non-compliance, and (3) to see if they are accurate and authentic. There are many kinds of records that are useful in an UST/LUST inspection. The following is only a partial list:

 Primary records are the best evidence. These are the original records that are the source of other subsequent records. Examples of original records include monitoring data, logs, daily records, work logs, etc.

 At a minimum the inspector must look for the following characteristics in the records she reviews:

    Discrepancies or false reports. The inspector compares current with
                       past reports for possible discrepancies or false reports. For example, is
                       the ink still wet on a report dated five years ago?

    Completeness and accuracy. The inspector checks for completeness
                        and accuracy of required records and reports.

    Retention requirements. The inspector ascertains compliance with
                        record retention requirements.

    Compatible information. The inspector compares information
                        contained in the records with firsthand observations. She compares
                        information in computer files or printouts with other handwritten
                        documents.

 All records observed that are related to compliance must be documented. This documentation must include who is responsible for keeping the record; where the records were located; and if the records were computerized, where the originals were located. It is possible the inspector could end up in cross examination years later, trying to remember where she found the records that are the crux of an enforcement action. The inspector should record the following information for each document:

 Information recorded on the document itself. On the inspector's
                    copy of the document itself record:

            Inspector's initials,
            A code for referencing the document (such as
                                   "Attachment 1"), and
            The date the inspector obtained the document.

 Information recorded in the inspector's notebook or in the
                    report. In the inspector's notebook or in the report record:

            A description of the document,
            The source of the document, and
            The physical location of the original document.

 Whatever method the inspector uses to select and review the available records, she makes sure she makes a note of what that method was. Possible methods include:

              Random sample
              Judgement sample
              Other method
              Took copies of all.

 Would a company cheat on its records? That depends. There are motives which some individuals may feel justify cheating. Chief executive officers have gone to jail and
 received personal penalty judgements as a result of compliance inspections. There are numerous case histories where documents have been lost or altered to avoid compliance violations. The inspector is to gather information showing the complete and accurate conditions as they were at the time of her inspection. The inspector makes no assumptions of guilt or innocence.

 Steps in gathering records are as follows:

 Gain an understanding of the record gathering system at the facility.

        Why do they generate the records?
        What do they do with the records?
        Where do they keep the records?
        Is their recordkeeping method accurate?

  Use a system of checks and cross checks to verify authenticity.

              Go to the site of record generation for some fraction of the record sample to verify the data.
              Go to the site of storage for some fraction of each of the records reviewed. (If the inspector ever has to seek a warrant she may have to state where the records are kept.)
              If the inspector cannot review all records, she should choose a method which gives her the best chance of getting a representative sample. (e.g. random, judgmental targeting, total inventory review, etc.)

 Copy all important records.	Photocopies are usually available at even the smallest businesses. If photocopying is not available, the inspector may choose one of the following methods:

              Photograph the document.
              Make accurate notes on the nature of the document, its location, and then copy the document as accurately as time will allow. If the document is ever destroyed, the inspector's notes become the most accurate remaining record of the document and may still be admissible in court.

        Take copies of related records, such as:

 Records that are generated from other records.	It is usually better to collect copies of the entire chain of information from its original generation to its final form. For example, a facility operator completes a daily inventory worksheet for inventory control. The daily data is then transferred to a monthly record. The monthly record may be the issue for compliance but the daily data that generated it may be more important.
              Records relate to other records. For example, during tank removal, manifests indicate something was shipped (presumed to be sludge). However, there were no records that something was generated. So why is there a manifest that something was shipped? Another example might be purchase records. The amount of fuel recorded as being delivered at a particular time might be different than the amount indicated on the dispenser unit.

 For review of records for other than an inspection, refer to Section 14.5.

 11.6     Taking Field Notes

 Field notes are important tools for documenting inspections and for helping the inspector remember the specific details of an inspection. Because of the large number of inspections, the inspector will be conducting, keeping accurate and thorough notes is essential to recalling the details of a specific inspection. To be useful, the inspector's field notes must be prepared in a consistent manner for each inspection she conducts. Field notes should include the following:

    General information about the facility (e.g., name, location,
                       address, on-site representative, owner name and address, type of
                       facility, registration number)

    Notes on entry activities (e.g., any problems encountered,
                       who gave permission for consensual entry).

    Identification numbers for samples, photographs, records
                       or, other documents

             Sampling procedures used during the inspection

             Interview notes

             Observations of general conditions and practices

             Unusual conditions or problems observed

             Other observations, and

    General procedures or checklists followed, including any
                       changes or deviations and supporting reasons.

 Some tips for keeping accurate and useful field notes include:

    Identify all Department staff and on on-site representatives
                       present.
                       At the beginning of the inspection the inspector should list all the
                       Department staff and on-site representatives in her notes. The
                       inspector may want to include any business cards received during an
                       inspection in her field notes. The inspector makes a notation if any
                       of these people leave for any period of time during the inspection.

     Every sample, document, or other piece of evidence reviewed or
                        collected during an inspection must be recorded in the field
                        notes. Additionally, it is important to include in the notes the
                        procedures and protocols followed in the collection of each
                       sample. The inspector may want to develop some sort of standard
                       notation for routine procedures and protocols, which must be used
                       consistently and explained at the end of each field notebook. Maps,
                       drawings, and logs prepared at the site can be useful methods to
                       record and describe many parts of a facility inspection.

    Write in objective, factual, and simple language. Do not include
                       judgments, personal feelings, or legal conclusions in field notes,
                       as certain legal situations may later require the Department to
                       produce field notes for inspection by the facility or the public. In
                       addition, field notes should be taken in indelible, non-water
                       soluble pen.

   Avoid including confidential data or business information in field
                              notes. Any such data or information should be kept separately and
                              marked as confidential. See Section 14 for the definition of confidential
                              information.

   Keep track of all notes which contribute to an inspection report.
                      Inspection reports must be written "near in time" to the inspection,
                      but the report might not have all of the information which was
                      recorded in contemporaneous notes. The notes must therefore be
                      available for reference to support the report. Do not destroy notes
                      as long as litigation is possible. Imagine the inspector being a
                      witness, when counsel for the defense asks her this question,
                      "Does the file contain all your notes or records related to the
                      inspection?" The inspector would have to answer, "No." Now, how
                      does the inspector prove that there was nothing beneficial to the
                      defense in the notes which the inspector might have destroyed?
                      Well archived inspection notes show how thorough and
                      professional the inspector is.

 Although the inspector's field notes form the core documentation of each inspection, they may be augmented by additional documentation, including photographs, drawings, maps, and diagrams described below. If the inspector uses these additional tools, she must be sure to note details of additional documentation in her field notes, so later inspectors will know of all evidence collected. The type of documentation necessary for an inspection depend on the type of inspection and the type and number of violations detected.

  11.7       Taking Photographs

 To be admissible in court photographs must "fairly and accurately represent" what the inspector saw on-site and the inspector must be prepared to testify to this. Photography is one of the most poorly utilized tools in documentation. Digital photography is now standard. Inspectors must find an alternative place to save digital photography and other important documentation, besides space assigned to UST. Having alternative copies of all digital documentation guarantees greater safety. Some common problems in photography during field inspections are:

               Too few photographs. Inspectors often try to describe an event
                       verbally when a photograph would be far more accurate. Take as many
                       photographs as needed to document every aspect of the potential
                       compliance issue. It is the constant complaint of attorneys that there
                       were not enough photographs.

    Poor quality photographs. A sharp, clearly lit photograph is
                       often only second to the inspector's personal observation of the
                       subject when it comes to case-winning evidence. An inspector is
                       expected to be able to use photography skillfully and
                       professionally and to become as proficient with a camera as they
                       are sampling or using monitoring equipment.

    Lack of identification of the subjects in photographs. The
                       inspector must document photographs in her field notebook, stating
                       the location where the photograph was taken (facility name,
                       position from where the picture was taken and what direction the
                       photographer was facing), date and time the photograph was taken,
                       and briefly what the picture represents (such as "hole in 3,000
                       gallon diesel tank"). Often it is useful to include a common object
                       such as a pen or person in a photograph to show scale and size.

 Photographic documentation should tell the story with as little need for narrative as possible. This is done by shooting series of establishing shots followed by medium and then tight or close-up photographs. The proper terms are the establishing or broad perspective shot; the medium or subject shot: and the tight or close-up shot. Further explanations are as follows:

                     Establishing shot. The establishing shot is a photograph taken from a distance which shows not only the subject but one or several permanent identifiable landmarks which can be used for reference in establishing the exact location. For example, the inspector is trying to document a turbine pump head at a gasoline station that is covered with dirt. The establishing shot would show the station and its name. It would be shot against the nearest side of the building where the pump sump is located and would show the sump at a distance. It may also be important to show the compass orientation of the subject (e.g., the sump is on the south side of the building.)

                     Medium shot. The medium or subject shot will emphasize a specific object or event. Sometimes it will be shot in series to view all sides. "Post-its" may be used to identify the item in the photograph. Numbers or identifiers on the "Post-Its" can be recorded in the field log for reference and easy identification when writing the narrative report. In the above example, the medium shot would highlight the sump itself.

                     Tight shot. The tight or detail shot should show the issue under review and/or enough information to identify the specific item or event in question. In the above example, the tight shot would be the pump head itself with the surrounding dirt.

      Other points (some of which clarify common misconceptions) to keep in mind are:

                     Each photograph does not have to have many burdensome kinds of detailed information about film, camera, lens, photographer, weather information attached to it. This information can be documented in the narrative portion of the inspection report.

                     The facility does not have the right to a copy of each photograph before releasing them to the Department.

                     The right to take photographs is included in the inspector's general inspection authority, and the O/O or authorized agent is considered to have denied entry if she or he denies the inspector the right to take photographs.

                     In some situations, it is useful to photograph an object from several angles or sides; for example, a tank which has collapsed may be most effectively illustrated by photographs taken from several different directions. Arguments will often be raised about what is not shown in the photographs.

 Carefully select your equipment. Each medium has its advantages and disadvantages.

                     Digital Cameras. Most digital cameras have friendly-user standard shutter and flash functions to take adequate pictures under many different lighting circumstances. Make a habit to save digital pictures in more than one place.

                     Prints and Digital copies. Prints can be processed quickly at many processing facilities. Prints are easy to view when reviewing the report. As we move towards a digital filing system, digital pictures will become the norm. However, prints can still be useful.

                     PowerPoint Presentations. Digital pictures can be easily used in a PP presentation should it be necessary to have a presentation shown to large numbers of people at a time.

                     Videos. Video can be used in an enforcement documentation. It is instant, color, has real-time, high-fidelity sound, and is easily viewed. Digital cameras have standard user-friendly video capabilities, with vast digital storage. Used alone or in conjunction with conventional still photography, video has a wide range of potential for compliance documentation. Videos can also be used during public presentations.

 The basic photo-documentation kit for digital camera is:

 Digital camera (in good proven working order)
 Extra battery for camera
 External digital memory, and
 Notebook and pen.

 Photography helps the inspector remember. A year or more after a site visit an inspector may be asked to recall details about what she saw or did at a facility. Nothing will refresh her memory better than having numerous good photographs documenting her activities and the issues in question. At the same time, few forms of documentation convey information as convincingly as photography does.

  11.8      Sampling and Analysis

 Although it is anticipated that sampling and analysis will be an infrequent activity in the UST program, it is nevertheless important that inspectors understand the principles and procedures.	If an inspector cannot maintain quality assurance and quality control (OA\QC), then the sampling is useless. Documentation must prove QA/QC existed so that the foundation, authenticity, and relevance criteria of evidence are established, and the samples may be entered as evidence.

 Samples need to meet the criteria to support evidence (i.e. what, where, when, why, and who and also how). "When to sample" is determined by the best chance to obtain a representative sample. "Why a sample" is taken is more subjective. It is initiated if there is a lack of confidence in available data, or because of incomplete or no data at the facility or at the Department.

 Sample documentation centers around three prime issues: representativeness, tracking, and methodology.

                     Representativeness. Was the sample representative of what the inspector needed to evaluate for compliance? Does it represent a specific waste stream, site, event or activity?

                   Tracking. Can the inspector prove where the sample came from,
                                   where it went, what was done to it, and that there was no opportunity
                                   to compromise the sample along the way through her tracking
                                   documentation?

                Methodology. Was the correct methodology followed to ensure
                      that the inspector's sample was (1) taken properly for the substance
                      in question, and (2) the proper analytical method was used to make
                      an accurate evaluation of its presence? Sampling situations vary
                      widely and thus do sampling procedures also.

 The inspector is accountable for the technical accuracy and legal supportability of the entire inspection package. The Quality Assurance Project Plan is the overall recipe for achieving these goals.

 The UST program, along with the hazardous waste program, has adopted its Quality Assurance Project Plan: RCRA Sampling and Analysis in the State of Hawaii (QAPP) (August 1998) which has been approved by the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) Region 9. The plan includes the following information:

                 Organization and responsibility within the Department

                 Quality assurance objectives for data measurement

                 Development of a sampling and analysis plan

                 Control of samples

                 Calibration of field and lab instruments

                 Data reduction, validation, and reporting

                 Quality control

                 Audits of field sampling systems and lab systems

                 Analytical considerations in the development of data quality objectives

                 Procedures for field documentation

                 Selection of sampling methods and sampling equipment, and

                     Standard operating procedures for decontamination of equipment, soil sampling, groundwater sampling, and other procedures.

 Only trained staff will be allowed to take samples. Training should include chain of custody, decontamination, EPA testing methods, groundwater and soil sampling protocols, preservation of samples during transportation, and coordination with certified labs. Staff should receive on-the-job training and classroom training.

 The general steps for the entire sampling and analysis process are as outlined below. Details can be found in the QAPP.

 Sampling is normally done in pairs while one staff person is appointed as the lead sampling investigator.

 Staff prepares the sampling and analysis plan (SAP) (see the QAPP for the plan). The SAP is also referred to as a field sampling plan (FSP). Sampling requires a plan of action to maximize the safety of sampling personnel, minimize sampling time and cost, reduce errors in sampling, and protect the integrity of the samples after collection.

            Accurate background information about the material to be sampled is important in planning any sampling activity. The information is used to determine the required types of protective equipment, sampling precautions to be observed, as well as the type of samplers, sample containers, container closures, and when needed, preservatives.

             The first step in developing a site-specific sampling plan is to decide what is to be accomplished by the data collected during the sampling program.
             Based on this overall goal, specific sampling requirements can be set. The inspector must decide whether preliminary qualitative or detailed quantitative analysis is needed; what type of equipment should be used; and what type of field measurements are required.

        The UST Section Supervisor and the Branch Manager review the plan.

              The Quality Assurance Officer (QAO) (a staff member at the State lab) reviews the plan and returns it to the Branch Manager.

              Staff gather equipment and supplies. Standard sampling supplies are available through the Solid and Hazardous Waste Branch (SHWB). More specialized equipment can be attained through the Hazard Evaluation and Emergency Response (HEER) office. The type of sampler used will depend upon- The actual material being sampled (e.g. liquid, semi-solid, sludge, or solid); and the container holding the material (e.g. soil, air, groundwater, tanks, etc.)

              Staff implements the plan. Staff must consider the number of samples to take. Collecting one representative sample of a given material is usually adequate to determine the average concentration of the hazardous components. The sample can either be collected from a single sampling point, or several samples can be collected from various points.

             When gathering evidence for possible legal action, multiple samples of a materials are sometimes collected. Two identical samples are desirable: one sample is given to the O/O for their own analysis; the second sample is submitted to the lab utilized by the Department.

             Staff must also consider the volume of the material to be sampled. Sufficient volume of a sample (representative of the main body of the
             material stream) must be collected. The sample must also be adequate in size for all analytical needs. The type of contaminant, the type of analysis, and the sample medium determine the volume requirements.

             Once the sampling media and sampling points have been selected, it is necessary to select the parameters for analysis which will provide the desired information. Those parameters which are known or suspected to be in the material will be the primary focus of the analytical program. Cases where no information about the material is known present the greatest challenge for the inspector who must decide which parameters to request for analysis.

             Staff must consider sampling safety. This is incorporated into the site safety plan described in Section 10.5. Proper safety precautions must always be observed when sampling hazardous materials. In all cases, the person collecting a sample must be aware that the material can be corrosive, flammable, explosive, toxic, and capable of releasing extremely poisonous gases. The background information obtained about the material should be helpful in deciding the extent of sampling safety precautions to be observed and in choosing protective equipment to be used. In some situations obtaining a sample using normal sampling procedures may be too dangerous and should not be attempted.

             The following safety guidelines should be followed whenever sampling:

    Each sample must be treated and handled as though it were
                      extremely toxic. Sample procedures should minimize the risk of
                      personnel exposure.

                       If special handling of a sample would be appropriate, the
                      handler must also warn the laboratory which receives the
                      sample.

                       Approved and appropriate safety equipment, such as eye
                      protection, hard hats, foot protection, and respirators must be
                      worn in areas where hazardous conditions are suspected. In
                      addition, eye protection should be worn when handling acidic,
                      caustic, or other hazardous liquids (including preservative
                      chemicals).

        Staff revises the plan as necessary

        Staff collects samples.

             In conducting sampling, an inspector should keep field notes that document the sampling. Because sampling situations vary, notes should be as descriptive and inclusive as possible. Besides basic log data (see Section 11.6), sampling entries must include at least:

                  Purpose of the sampling
                       Description of the samples and components, if known
                 Number and size of the samples taken
                 Description of the sampling points
                 Date and time of collection
                 Collector's name, and
                  References such as maps and photos of the sampling site.

             After a sample is transferred into the proper sample container, the container must be tightly capped as quickly as possible. Each sample must be labeled and sealed properly immediately after collection. Sample seals (e.g., gummed paper seals) may be used to preserve the integrity of the sample from the time it is collected until it is opened for analysis in the laboratory. This seal should carry such information as: (1) the collector's name; and (2) the date the sample was collected. The seal should be attached in such a way that it is necessary to break it in order to open the sample container.
             The seal should adhere to both the cap and the sample container for the entire 360 degrees around the mouth of the container.

             Chain of custody requires permanent records of all sample handling and shipment. Chain of custody procedures must be used to ensure sample integrity, and legally and technically defensible data. One member of the inspection team should be responsible for initiating chain of custody procedures and documenting the sample source. The sample should be kept in view or within limited access, locked storage until custody is relinquished and formal documentation of the transfer is complete.

              Staff ships the samples to a lab or a lab may pick up the samples on the site. Samples should be delivered to the lab for analysis as soon as possible- usually within one day after sampling. The samples must be accompanied by all chain of custody records and by a sample analysis request sheet. The samples must be delivered to the person in the laboratory authorized to receive samples (often referred to as the sample custodian). When a sample is shipped to the laboratory, it must be packaged in a proper shipping container to avoid release and/or breakage.

             The State of Hawaii laboratory is currently without the necessary equipment or facilities to provide the required lab support for the UST Section. The UST Section may use the EPA Contract Laboratory Program (CLP). The Department also has access to a number of private labs. With these private labs, you are able to get a verbal okay from the lab to use their services rather than having to wait for a purchase order. However, upon returning to the office, you need to assure that a purchase order is issued for the work. Many of these labs will send the sample to their parent facilities on the mainland. In that case, a representative from the lab may actually be in the field with you to receive the sample and to take it immediately to the airport for transport.

             Paperwork for CLP needs to be prepared in advance of the event, so allow sufficient lead time. Instructions for completing EPA's paperwork is found in the QAPP.

              If the samples are not accepted by a lab, staff must revise the sampling plan as necessary and resample.

        The lab analyzes the samples and generates a data package.

        The lab transmits the data package to the QAO at the State lab.

              The QAO reviews and validates the package (i.e. determines if data meets the data quality objectives of the SAP) and transmits a data review and validation report to the Branch Manager.

        Staff reviews the report.

  11.9      Drawings, Sketches, Maps, and Diagrams
 These can be a useful shorthand method to note a lot of information about the layout of a facility. While not usually needed on compliance inspections, these visual tools may help inspectors clarify complex facility layouts. These tools can also include schematic drawings of equipment, or maps showing where samples or photographs were taken. The inspector indicates approximate distances and the relative size of items in drawings and maps, and always identifies on the sketch or other visual diagram who prepared it, where, and when. Again, the inspector notes this information in her field notes as well, to allow positive identification of the materials.

  11.10     Conducting Interviews
 Interviews can provide valuable information necessary to carry out an inspection. To get the most from an interview, the inspector must ensure that the interviewee feels comfortable and that the inspector is really listening to his or her answers. The inspector can create this atmosphere by being courteous, non-threatening and non-adversarial. Additionally, the inspector should avoid asking the interviewee leading questions that suggest a certain answer.
 Leading questions discourage the interviewee from being candid and straight-forward in his or her answers. Interview information should be recorded in your notebook and include:

         Who were you talking to?
         What did you ask them?
                   What did they answer?

  Some additional steps the inspector should take to ensure an effective interview include:

 Plan interviews in advance. Whenever possible, the inspector must plan each interview well in advance (as part of the pre-inspection activities described in Section 3). The inspector must determine who the inspector will want to interview at the facility, and schedule interviews at times convenient to the interviewee well in advance of the inspection. The facility information review should help the inspector determine the specific objectives for each interview.

 Establish a positive climate and rapport with the interviewee. It is best for the inspector to start an interview with basic questions to make the interviewee comfortable and confident, such as asking for the interviewee's name, job title, and job responsibilities. These sorts of questions encourage the interviewee to answer questions more openly later. Usually the inspector asks basic, general questions first and then moves to more specific questions, encouraging the interviewee to tell his or her story as a narrative. The inspector should use as little prompting or leading as possible. Other guidelines for inspectors include:

 Don't emphasize note taking; it can be intimidating
 Give them time to answer and listen
 Don't make promises of confidentiality or protection (stress honesty)
 Try to have privacy for the interview
 Obtain their name, position, and how contact them at a later time, and
 Enforcement should not be mentioned.

              Ask simple and direct questions that require complete answers. Asking "w" questions (what, when, where, why, and who and also how) will help the interviewee give the inspector all of the information needed. The inspector makes sure to repeat and verify with the interviewee any critical responses the inspector receives during the interview, to ensure clarity. The inspector must avoid double negatives and other complex phrases. The inspector must also avoid multiple subjects in her questions.

              Help the interviewee estimate quantities or distances. In some interviews the interviewee will need assistance to describe or estimate quantities or distances. The inspector can help by suggesting comparisons with other items of known, standard quantity or distance for frames of reference. Examples can could include "about two blocks long?" or "farther than we are from that truck?") or referring to commonly observed quantities ("two barrels full?" or "about three quarts"?).

              Appropriate documentation of an interview depends on the information received. The best way to document the interview depends in large part on how much useful information was received. Interviews in which a significant amount of useful information is obtained should be documented more extensively than interviews that yielded little new information. The following are presented in order of preference from best to last:

 Let them write, sign, and date the statement.

 The inspector writes an exact transcription and lets them read, sign, and date it. The inspector must make it clear to the interviewee that they should correct anything that misrepresents their statements.

                    Legally obtained tape or video recording (video is better). However, recording interviews tends to inhibit an interviewee. If a recorder is to be used, the inspector notifies the interviewee in advance to obtain their permission.

              The inspector's written narrative of the interview with questions and answers.

              Avoid Hearsay. If it isn't a confession by the one performing the act or a statement of a direct witness made in court, it is probably hearsay. "I know Bob failed to take accurate readings for the monthly monitoring method", is hearsay if the statement was made to the inspector during the inspection. It may be evidence if the witness (Bob) says it in court. "I failed to take accurate readings", is not hearsay because the witness is available. It may even be admissible if the person making the admission is dead or no longer available for trial, if it was properly documented and had additional witnesses.

 Some additional tips for conducting interviews are the following:

        Be flexible. The inspector must be flexible to the situation and personality of the interviewee.

              Ask questions. The inspector asks questions as a friendly demand rather than as a request: "Please, tell me who your work for?" rather than, "Would you tell me who you work for?" The inspector must keep it simple and straightforward.

              Use the team approach. The inspector may use the good guy/bad guy approach where one person is aggressive and the other friendlier. The inspector can have one person ask the questions while the other takes notes. Or one person can lead the questioning and the other injects questions only when they see a line of questioning that need follow up.

              Don't invade the personal space of the individual being questioned. Make them feel comfortable. Emphasize that the inspector is there to find the complete truth and that the inspector does not have a hidden agenda to harm them personally

              Establish a rapport.	Be friendly and don't be overbearing. The inspector can find an honest common interest that is off the subject to defuse the intensity of the experience. (e.g. compliment the decor, share an anecdote of a common interest topic, etc.). Make it a point to show that the inspector is recording their positive statements as well as those which may be at issue.

  11.11      Citing a Violation
 The following paragraphs describe the inspector's role in citing a violation. Two important issues are discussed: how to determine if a violation has occurred and how to detect and respond to criminal violations.

 11.11.1    Determining if a Violation has Occurred
 It is Department policy to cite each and every violation of the law and regulations regarding underground storage tanks. Therefore, an inspector does not have discretion to determine when to cite a violation and when to "let it go." However, part of learning to be an inspector involves learning when an inspector has enough evidence of a violation to be able to withstand a challenge to the citation.

 If the violation is a clear black-and-white issue, citing the O/O will be straightforward. For example, there is a clear violation of the notification requirements if a facility is not registered. However, many regulations enforced are not so clear. For example, closure regulations require that the O/O measure for the presence of a release where contamination is most likely to be present at a UST site. This requires the inspector to determine where contamination is likely to exist and why, and what number and type of soil boring(s) and/or monitoring wells are necessary to properly investigate potential contamination. These factors can be subjective.

 The more inspections she performs, the more an inspector will learn about which violations are clear-cut and which are not. In general, the less clear-cut the violations, the more evidence an inspector will need before she can cite a violation. In our example above concerning the closure regulations, if the inspector learns that the O/O only took one sample from a soil boring 25 feet upgradient from the fuel tanks, the inspector's experience and opinion may be good evidence that O/O did not comply with the regulation. If the inspector takes a soil boring that reveals contamination
 immediately adjacent to the tanks, then the violation is even clearer. However, if the issue seems borderline or could go either way, then try to collect more evidence.

 Likewise, the more serious the violation and the more serious the consequences of a violation, the more evidence the inspector will want to collect. These serious violations are likely to be pursued most vigorously and the stronger your investigation and supporting evidence, the stronger the Department's case. In particular, any violation that could result in ground-water contamination should be carefully checked and verified before you cite a violation.

  11.11.2     Criminal Violations
 Criminal cases may be appropriate under State non-UST statutes or under federal statutes. While an inspector is not expected to analyze whether a criminal violation has occurred at a facility, she may see indicators of criminal activity. These activities should always be referred to the Department of the Attorney General for criminal investigation. The most common types of criminal activity an inspector is likely to encounter are those involving knowing or willful violation of statutes and regulations and fraudulent reporting. Indicators of these types of criminal activity at a UST facility may include: conflicting data (two sets of books or inconsistent monitoring data); conflicting stories (from different employees, or between what employees say and what the books show); unsubstantiated data (such as monitoring data or inventory records that are not supported by accurate documentation); and deliberate actions (for example, an employee tells the inspector he or she was specifically instructed to take some action that violates the regulations). Another clue for criminal activity is a claim of ignorance about requirements when documents exists that indicate knowledge of these requirements.

 11.12     Maintaining a Professional Demeanor

Inspectors are the "frontline" of the UST program. As an official representative of the Department, inspectors must always conduct themselves in a professional manner. This is particularly important because of the possibility that an inspection will result in further enforcement actions if the facility is found to be in violation of the regulations. It is important that the Department inspect and enforce against violators in a consistent and fair manner:

 Always practice professionalism and consistency of treatment. An inspector must document all violations she observes and never "overlooks" even minor violations for any reason. All inspectors must interpret the regulations and cite violations in the same way for each facility. Additionally, different inspectors must conduct inspections with consistency. Inspectors help achieve uniformity and fairness of treatment for the regulated community by discussing cases with other inspectors, especially those that are difficult or unusual.

 Inspectors must be direct, objective, and respectful in discussions with the on-site representative. An inspector must not conclude that she has observed a violation unless she is completely certain. If the inspector has any doubts, she tells the on-site representative what she needs to check or who she must discuss the matter with before she determines whether a violation has occurred. The inspector should not appear to be hiding information from the on-site representative, who is naturally concerned about the results of the inspection. The inspector clearly explains the steps for determining a violation, and tells the on-site representative how and when the inspector will notify him or her of a final decision.

 Avoid promoting an informal relationship with the on-site representative. This may set the wrong sort of tone for the inspection. An inspector doesn't need to be humorless but should present a serious attitude toward the inspection. Inspection violations can have very serious and expensive consequences for the UST O/O and the inspector should treat the inspection and the on-site representative with professionalism.

 Be careful not to give technical advice to the on-site representative. While the inspector should be helpful to the on-site representative and be willing to describe the process of inspection and enforcement, the inspector must not allow the on-site representative to use her as an unpaid consultant. The inspector's advice could compromise her role as an independent inspector, and harm later enforcement efforts.

 Keep communication at a professional level. The inspector communicates herr decisions as determined by consistently-applied Departmental policies rather than as personal choices. With experience the inspector will find that if one method of communication does not work during an inspection, she may try another, such as changing her tone of voice, words, or non-verbal communications. This may improve the inspector's ability to communicate with the on-site representative.

 It is very likely that the inspector may be the first direct contact the on-site representative has had with the UST Section or with any representative from the Department. The on-site representative may take out his or her anger on the supervisor at having to comply with the regulations.

 Conflict between inspectors and on-site representatives is more likely when there are actual or potential violations. It is the inspector's responsibility not to escalate the situation. One method for handling an irate on-site representative is to let him or her ventilate anger and cool down. If this technique does not work, or if the inspector is unable to maintain an objective and calm communication with the on-site representative, she should consider leaving the facility and continuing her inspection at a later time with another staff member.

 The inspector must always immediately terminate the inspection if she is physically threatened. No evidence is worth an inspector risking harm. The inspector must consult with the UST Section Supervisor about whether to return to the facility at another time with additional staff, a search warrant, or a police escort. The UST Section Supervisor may also suggest that the inspector contact the Department of the Attorney General. Inspectors should never take physical threats lightly, nor should inspectors ever respond with similar threats.

                                  SECTION 12

                CLOSING CONFERENCE AND INSPECTION FOLLOW UP FOR OTHER THAN FIELD CITATIONS

  12.1    General Discussion
 This section explains the procedures the inspector should undertake following the completion of an inspection for other than field citations. The major post-inspection activities an inspector will have to complete include:

 Holding a Closing Conference

        Completing an Inspection Report

        Completing Other Inspection Documentation

              Referring Cases for Enforcement

 Notifying other State, Federal, or Local Government Agencies of Obvious Violations and Concerns, and

        Conducting Re-Inspections.

 For information about field citations refer to Section 13.

  12.2      Closing Conference
 The closing conference is a face-to-face meeting between the inspector and the on-site representative immediately after the inspection. It is the last opportunity for the inspector to ask the on-site representative questions, and for the on-site representative to gain information from the inspector about the inspection and its results. The general steps for conducting a closing conference include:

 12.2.1  Summarize Preliminary Field Results and Observations

 The inspector summarizes any performed field tests or measurements for the on-site representative. The on-site representative will be eager to hear whether the inspector discovered any violations. The inspector must be extremely careful not to say anything that could later harm or compromise the Department's ability to take enforcement against the facility. For example, inspectors never tell an on-site representative that "there are no violations", or "everything looks fine." This could be used against the Department in a later enforcement action if in fact a violation did occur.

  12.2.2   Describe Potential Violations Discovered During the Inspection

 First, the inspector follows up on the potential violations she described in the opening conference (if any), and then explains any other issues that came to her attention during the inspection.
 Additionally, the inspector informs the on-site representative if she plans to investigate other potential violations. For example, the inspector may explain to him or her that violations may be discovered after the results of laboratory analyses are received. Whenever possible, the inspector specifies the time frame during which she expects to notify the O/O of a violation (e.g., how long the laboratory usually takes to analyze the samples taken and then how long to complete the inspection paperwork).

 Perhaps the most difficult situation in a closing conference is when an inspector is not sure whether a violation occurred or not. The inspector does not want to jeopardize the enforceability of a violation by telling the on-site representative that she does not "think" there are any violations or "I have to check with my supervisor whether such and such was a violation." Statements such as these may undermine the inspector's credibility and reputation as an inspector and communicate to the regulated community a weak and unsure enforcement posture. It would be much better to state that, for example, "We are continuing to investigate the matter of the inventory records, and we will keep you informed as soon as we determine whether a violation was committed." By describing the delay as general Departmental procedure in cases of uncertainty, the inspector shifts the focus away from herself. Of course, the more inspections she performs and the more she has studied the regulations, the less frequently an inspector will be in this position.

  12.2.3     Explain Follow-up Procedures
 Clearly informing the on-site representative what will happen after the inspection is a very important step because it gives the on-site representative critical information about the upcoming process and a time-frame for when he or she will learn whether the Department will be taking enforcement action. Include the following in the inspector's follow-up explanation:

 Inspection report. Explain whether an inspection report will be prepared, by whom, when, and how the on-site representative can obtain a copy of it.

 Notification of violation. Tell the on-site representative what the process is for determining whether any violations occurred, and how and when he or she will be notified of the violations.

 Facility's right to appeal. Explain how the facility O/O can appeal any violations cited in the notification of violation, including what deadlines apply and where to send appeal information.

 Notification of other officials. Tell the on-site representative if other officials will be notified of matters observed during the inspection.

  12.3       Completing an Inspection Report
 If the inspector discovered any single serious violation that is likely to result in environmental damage, or if many small violations were observed, the inspector may decide to prepare an inspection report. The main purpose of an inspection report is to present a factual record of an inspection. It will be the foundation for most high priority enforcement cases, and thus must be clear, accurate, and convincing. Without a good inspection report, it is hard to successfully prosecute violators. The report will also be the starting point for the next inspection performed at the facility, providing information about problems that must be specifically investigated, areas that may not have been inspected, and situations that demand extra precautions.

 The following are some rules for preparing a good, thorough inspection report:

 Reports must be factual. All inspection reports should focus on the facts, not on the inspector's opinions or ideas. Conclusions concerning potential violations should not appear in reports, only the facts and data supporting a potential violation. Write the report in such a way that the reader can draw their own conclusion. "Joe was very hostile," is a conclusion. "Joe began swearing and punching holes in the wall," is a statement of events from which the reader can draw her own conclusions.

 Reports must be accurate. Avoid exaggerations, superlatives, and assumptions and be as exact and accurate as possible. The inspector does not draw conclusions or inferences; she writes down only what she personally observed or heard. For example, if the on-site representative tells the inspector that they recently had a pinhole release in a line that did not cause any contamination, the inspector does not write that the facility recently had such a release, but that the on-site representative told her they had such a release. Another example of an assumption is, "I determined that the records were acceptable after a review of several examples." The most an inspector can say is that in her opinion, the specific records reviewed appeared acceptable to her. In most cases the inspector should take example copies of these records and also allow the program to review them and make a determination.

 Reports must be complete. The report should be entirely self-contained, so that the reader need not refer to any other information or ask any further questions about the matters in the report. Completeness includes:

 Thoroughly identifying an individual, the first time he or she is mentioned in a report, including his or her first and last names, and title or position.

 Carefully presenting the chronology of events during an inspection. This includes describing the time at which all important events happened, such as sample collection.

 Identifying the specific location of all-important inspection occurrences, such as where each sample was taken.

 Reports must be written clearly, concisely, and in the active voice. A concise report leaves out unnecessary words without omitting important facts, details, and useful explanations. Write in short sentences and avoid unnecessarily complicated and technical terms. By writing in the active voice the inspector will avoid any unnecessary confusion by identifying clearly the subject of each sentence. For example, instead of saying "A sample was taken of the contents of tank D," a more accurate report would state, "Ms. Staff person took a sample of the contents of tank D." Additionally, avoid the use of "it" whenever possible. For example, the statement, "I inspected the cathodic protection system for Tank A, but it was not operational" does not clearly tell the reader what was not operational: the tank or the cathodic protection system. A clearer explanation would be, "I inspected the cathodic protection system for Tank A. The cathodic protection system was not operational."

             Write the report as if the inspector did the inspection:

 I did this ...
 I asked Joe Dokes ...
              I sampled the ...
              Mary Dokes said ...

             Good reports are not great prose. Good reports are a narrative of what happened during a specific event in time. Clarity is far more important than sounding academic. Avoid unnecessary or "cop talk" jargon. Say "Joe Dokes got out of the GMC truck," rather than, "The perpetrator exited the vehicle".

 Reports Must Identify all Sources. Always include in an inspection report the source of all evidence: who told the inspector information and where the inspector took each sample.

 Reports Must be Timely. If a report is not written near the time of the inspection, it will lose authenticity and therefore credibility as evidence.

 As the inspector writes a report, she keeps in mind who her readers will be: Departmental staff and attorneys, and representatives, including attorneys, of the facility. All readers will have the same goal: to learn all facts and events of the inspection so that they can evaluate whether enforceable violations occurred. The more accurate and complete the inspector's report is, the more quickly and easily the reader can make this evaluation.

 The following is an example of an outline of a report:

                   HEADING:	This would include the type of inspection, site name, and date of the inspection.
 FACILITY
 ADDRESS:                Corporate or head office address.

 SITE
 ADDRESS:                Exact location of site inspected.

 SITE
 CONTACTS:           Name, position or title, and telephone number.

 INSPECTION
 TEAM:                      Leader and all members of the inspection team. Name, position or
                                  title, and telephone number.

 PURPOSE:                 Compliance inspection, audit, sampling, etc. and the authority for
                                     the inspection.

 HISTORY:               This include compliance history and the history of the facility or
                                   site.
 INSPECTION
 TIMES:                     The hour, day and year for the inspection (e.g. 1-1-2019 @ 0800
                                   hours)
 OPENING
 CONFERENCE:           Who did you show your credentials to; all persons present; titles
                                       or positions; what was discussed (i.e., scope and timing of
                                  inspection events); specific arrangements; if entry was granted
                                  or denied.
 FIELD
 INSPECTION:            Narrative of field inspection and observations. Where did you go
                                     or not go if it was relevant? What did you see? Documentation.
 RECORDS
 INSPECTION:           What was reviewed, copied and taken? Where were the records
                                     and who was in charge?
 CLOSING
 CONFERENCE:          Who was there? What was discussed? What was agreed to?

 SAMPLES:              Were samples taken? Of what? Were there splits?

 COMPLIANCE
 CONCERNS:            State as your opinion only. Regulations should not be cited in the
                                   report but may be suggested in an "enforcement confidential" memo
                                to the program chief or attorney.

 ATTACHMENTS:  List and identify all notes, checklists, photos, drawings, and other
                                  documentation

 DATE &
 SIGNATURE: It's your report so sign it.

 Inspection reports are generally transmitted to the facility along with a cover letter. The report and letter should be sent within 45 days of the inspection. Refer to the UST/LUST Enforcement Manual.

  12.4      Completing Other Inspection Documentation
 There are other documents that must be prepared to fully document an inspection. These documents are critical in establishing a written verification of the inspection and could be important pieces of evidence if further enforcement actions are taken.

            12.4.1      Initial Enforcement Action
      For a facility where an inspector has determined that there are violations she must determine what will be the initial enforcement step. If the inspector determines that a field citation is not appropriate, she may decide to proceed with a warning letter or a request for information letter. Refer to the UST/LUST Enforcement Manual for details on preparing these documents. The inspector is sure to mark on her calendar any compliance or response dates set in her initial action, so she will know when the O/O is required to come into compliance.

            12.4.2      Provide Data Base Updates