Grab your headphones and tune into our insightful discussion with expert guest, Shannon Oelkers, who discusses the essential subject of record keeping. She helps us unravel the relevance of context in record keeping, using anexample of secondary containment area drainage. Get ready, as she reveals how missing details could have significant implications in the future.
As we venture deeper, Shannon uncovers the tell-tale signs of a context problem in record keeping. She walks us through the red flags, ranging from the too-good-to-be-true perfect facilities to the overly detailed records and even the complete absence of certain records due to fear of messing up. Listen in and gain valuable insights from Shannon on how to improve your record keeping process. So gear up - this episode is set to be an absolute eye-opener!
This podcast is for informational purposes only and should not be considered legal or regulatory advice. We are not responsible for any losses, damages, or liabilities that may occur from using this podcast. This podcast is not intended to replace professional regulatory or legal advice, and the views expressed in this podcast may not be those of the host, which would be me or Integrity Environmental. Thank you very much for listening. We would be happy to provide professional regulatory advice as part of our consulting services if you need professional regulatory advice.
Grab your headphones and tune into our insightful discussion with expert guest, Shannon Oelkers, who discusses the essential subject of record keeping. She helps us unravel the relevance of context in record keeping, using anexample of secondary containment area drainage. Get ready, as she reveals how missing details could have significant implications in the future.
As we venture deeper, Shannon uncovers the tell-tale signs of a context problem in record keeping. She walks us through the red flags, ranging from the too-good-to-be-true perfect facilities to the overly detailed records and even the complete absence of certain records due to fear of messing up. Listen in and gain valuable insights from Shannon on how to improve your record keeping process. So gear up - this episode is set to be an absolute eye-opener!
This podcast is for informational purposes only and should not be considered legal or regulatory advice. We are not responsible for any losses, damages, or liabilities that may occur from using this podcast. This podcast is not intended to replace professional regulatory or legal advice, and the views expressed in this podcast may not be those of the host, which would be me or Integrity Environmental. Thank you very much for listening. We would be happy to provide professional regulatory advice as part of our consulting services if you need professional regulatory advice.
All right, we're back with Shannon to continue record keeping. Moving on to the next leg, context.
Speaker 2:
Tell us a little bit about context with record keeping, shannon, so context for us is when the person who is actually filling out the record and documenting a facility inspection or something like that, that person doesn't have the knowledge or the training to understand what that record is supposed to be doing. And a classic example of this is secondary containment area drainage. People fill them out all the time. It's a big requirement of a lot of these different records that we are supposed to do, but the main intent is to document one that there was nothing in the secondary containment water before it was discharged no sheen or obvious science espils right. But it's also to document how much water was discharged at any given time over the life of a tank farm. And what we see a lot of is the check for sheen is there and then was there a discharge event, yes or no? But it's missing the volume and there's a few other reasons for that.
Speaker 2:
It can be difficult to calculate the volume of a drainage. But if you've got somebody with the right knowledge and training, they're going to notice that there's a volume missing and say I need to be calculating how much is being discharged, because if there is a leak or a problem that is discovered at a later date, you can theoretically go back in time and see how much drainage water was discharged, and you can from our end. You can limit potential violations based on knowledge of how much was discharged over a certain time, instead of assuming maximum volume or some other placeholder. That's a little deep for most people. But with the right training and context like if you tell a terminal manager that the volume is important, they're going to A record a better volume and B they're going to notice if the form is missing, that piece right. And so for us, the leg of the stool for making records better is that whoever's filling that record out has to have the knowledge and the training to have good context and be able to help you identify when there's problems.
Speaker 1:
What signs and symptoms are we looking out for to notice that there is a context problem?
Speaker 2:
This one is. It goes straight to the records, and we do see this quite a bit. There's a couple of signs that we see. The first is that, when you review the records, it is the most perfect facility on the face of the planet. There has never been a problem, there has never been an issue, there has never been a maintenance item. It's perfect. It is a perfect facility and every record is filled out and there is nothing wrong.
Speaker 2:
And to a state agency or federal agency investigator, that is the biggest red flag of all, because there are no perfect facilities in real life. Right, and so they're creating this perfect record, but what they're really doing is telling everybody at the agency level that they're not writing anything real down and they're not actually documenting anything. And in some ways, a perfect record is as bad as a record that never got done, because there's clearly nothing being monitored there, and so that's one of the signs we see. We also see overly detailed records, and this is where the terminal manager has decided that he will never go to jail for this company and everything from every bandaid handed out right down to every sin imaginable, is recorded on every single record that he provides or she provides, I should say.
Speaker 2:
So we've got the overly detailed records. Another one that we see is that records aren't being done at all because they're afraid of doing them wrong. And so they're doing some records really thoroughly, but there's a new one for something like P, a, e, l, pre-approved air limit, and they didn't get very good training and they're really worried about doing it wrong, and so they just wait and don't really do it. And so when you see a dichotomy, when someone who's a good employee and doing their best effort is filling out some records but not others, that tells me that they don't have the training and the knowledge and context to feel comfortable filling out those other records. And then the last one we see is I understand why people do this, but it is kind of funny to me when I do see it.
Speaker 2:
But you'll go through a record and you'll ask a terminal manager and you'll be like I see that you marked your. I'll see that you marked your liquid level gauges as functional, and they're like mm-hmm. And I'm like your tanks don't have liquid level gauges. Your hand dipping and they're like oh well, I meant the hand dip and I'm like, okay, but when you mark off like liquid level gauge and it's functioning, that means something different. Right, and really the record needs to be changed to is hand gauging being performed, yes or no?
Speaker 2:
A lot of our clients have multiple systems that are in and out of service, and so if there's a system on a tank and it's out of service, it needs to be marked as not functioning and out of service on the records, and so if they're marking off things that are that don't exist or that are not functional, but they're marking them as functional, oftentimes the culprit is the context.
Speaker 2:
Like they're translating like oh well, our liquid level gauges down, but I'm doing, I'm doing this hand gauging. So, yes, I am doing liquid level gauging, but what the record's really asking is is your liquid level gauge fixed and functioning? And if it's not, then how long is it going to take you to get it fixed and back into service? Or are you going to choose an alternative method and do all of your plans and permits need to be updated to just reflect hand gauging? So those are sort of the four symptoms that we see. The most of that are related to context. We see many other fun things with records when we do audits, but those are the ones where we know the root of the problem is that they don't understand what they you know. They don't have the knowledge of the training to understand what needs to go into that record to meet the requirements of the regulation.
Speaker 1:
So what's a solution for that?
Speaker 2:
Well, the first one is training. I know big shocker, but that training needs to be specific to the record keeping form and the permit itself, because it needs to provide the context, and one of the things I like to talk about here is that knowledge changes over time. I'm of an age now where I've been through an entire generation of regulations, and what was true about a regulation 10 years ago is not necessarily true now, because the regulations have changed and the requirements have changed, and so training is something that can't necessarily happen once. It needs to be ongoing, at least with permit and plan renewals, because things that were allowable 10 years ago are no longer allowable. For example, in the 70s and 80s it was perfectly allowable to take used oil and spray it on a road for dust suppression. We no longer do that.
Speaker 2:
That's sort of an extreme example, but there's a lot of those knowledge gaps in stormwater and in sea plan and spill planning things that used to be okay. They're changing, and if you don't provide training, someone who's been in a position for 15 or 20 years may think that they are fully compliant because what they learned they're still operating under, but if they don't get the new knowledge and the new training, then they're going to become uncompliant without even knowing. The other way to fix it too is to actually review the records that are coming in and watching for those four symptoms that I said. If there's an environmental manager at the company and they're looking and they see overly detailed reports like incredibly detailed that's a sign that somebody's really nervous about what they're doing and they don't have the context and the training you know. And so if you take those four symptoms and you identify some of those and you know you've got a context problem, that review in and of itself will help you fix it and allow you to kind of target your training to help them understand what they're doing I
Speaker 2:
also think some of the solution to the context problem is related to our previous podcast topic of quality and quality out. When you have good record keeping forms, they're stated clearly, they have good information in them. It's pretty obvious what you want. You know like what outcome you need to have and they're designed for that. They're designed to be understood by somebody who's going to be filling them out and they sometimes come with clues or information sheets on how to fill them out and answering FAQs. Right, those are all things that you can put in. You know. Quality in that will give the context later, even if there's not necessarily like a sit-down, one-on-one training. Sometimes we provide trainings to terminal managers but the person that's performing the inspection is actually the one of the yard laborers or a tank from operator or truck operator, and so when we have trainings we need to make sure and allow somebody in the leadership position like the terminal manager, equip them with training that they can take to their staff and perform and be able to train their staff at a level that they can fill the records out and have the context that they need to do their job. Sometimes if you're only giving them the terminal manager level training, then they have to make up their own stuff for their staff to get their staff to do what they're supposed to do, and there may be context or translation issues there as well.
Speaker 2:
All right, one final note on training. I have done a whole career out of adult development. I mean we are writing plans and permits, but essentially what we're doing is training people through a plan or permit to do certain things. And one thing about training is that one time and one delivery method is generally not enough. Most adults need seven. They need to hear something seven times, and generally in two or three different formats, before it really sinks in and becomes something they can easily access and remember in the future. One training every five years is probably not sufficient for somebody to remember how to do a record for the duration of those five years, especially if the record's only annual, so they're not doing it very frequently. We see the best compliance with the dailies because they're doing them daily and they start doing them right away. Right, but when it comes to quarterly or annual stuff, there tends to be a bigger gap between when the training happened and when they have to implement it, and they're not doing it as frequently.
Speaker 2:
And so a good training program has multiple ways of reaching and reminding people about what to do, and so our firm works really hard to have some kind of face-to-face training, whether that's virtual or in person. And then we also try to have written guides with clues and how to do things. And then we also have refreshers that occur on a routine basis. Some regulations require annual refreshers just to combat this problem. And then we also have the review. If you have an environmental manager reviewing the record with the terminal manager, that can be its own training session in and of itself. Like oh, I see you're filling out the secondary containment drainage log. It looks really good. But you're reporting the discharge but not the volume. You really need to make sure to get the volume in there. That's really important, right?
Speaker 2:
Like that's another way to train, and so I just want to make sure that everybody listening to this who's like I need to train my terminal managers. Make sure you're giving them it in different methods and different presentations and at least seven times before you expect them to remember it forever. And then make sure you're updating that training so that something they learned 10 years ago isn't changing how they're filling out records today and causing compliance issues.
Speaker 1:
It does sound like a lot to keep up with and I'm glad that we're reviewing this information. Do we have any resources to help understand context or to point terminal managers into the right direction for training or training their staff?
Speaker 2:
Well, our firm provides training for terminal managers with annual refreshers that are suited to each one of these regulations that apply as to bulk fuel storage. But we also have included some handouts that will attach in the show notes and they kind of show the different record keeping symptoms from a fictional company. Of course that handout, I think, would be really helpful to somebody who is responsible for record keeping compliance. It would help remind them of what they're supposed to be looking for and help them identify a context problem. So we'll go ahead and link that in the show notes.
Speaker 1:
Great, we'll stay tuned for next time. We have one more episode coming up on record keeping and then we should put it into a wrap. Thanks so much, amanda. Thank you.