Dear Board Members,

Please consider the follow request at your discretion.

DPOR Justification

This also allows the Board to take disciplinary action, if necessary, against the licensee actually performing the regulated activity as, currently, the Board cannot take disciplinary action against an individual who is performing the work but is not a licensee of the Board. July 12, 2016

As per the public interest, failure by DPOR to enforce existing rules and policies when allegations are made against employees of the Virginia Department of Health(VDH) have established an enforcement bias among industry professionals.  The very purpose of of having a responsible party/person is to avoid such controversial topics.  While this Board has attempted to hold the newly created "unsupervised" person accountable, the superior providing oversight will be equally responsible for any disciplinary action.  

The proposed repeal of the existing regulation has less to do with protecting public safety, welfare, and health; more protection of sovereign authority of another state agency.  Public record clearly marks the boundaries of our current dilemma.  On September 27, 2011- The Virginia Department of Health embarked on a mission to alter the course of commerce and trade in Virginia.  Let the public record be shown, DPOR collusion with Virginia Department of Health commenced with a request from Mr. Allen Knapp (VDH official) and Mr. Dan Richardson (VDH official).

Sept 27, 2011
Mr. Allen Knapp and Mr. Dan Richardson of the Virginia Department of Health (VDH) addressed the Board concerning the adverse impact on VDH of the following interpretation made by the Board during its June 21, 2011 meeting:  "The Board agreed, without dissent, that a licensed conventional or alternative onsite soil evaluator, as appropriate, shall be present and shall provide direct supervision to unlicensed individuals engaged in activities requiring an evaluator license." 

Mr. Knapp and Mr. Richardson stated the VDH employees licensed as onsite soil evaluators by the Board relied on unlicensed VDH employees to do field work.  The unlicensed employees have completed the VDH onsite soil evaluator training but do not yet have sufficient experience to qualify for a license from the Board.  The licensed employees supervise the activities of the unlicensed employees and assign only field work that the unlicensed employee is competent to perform.  The licensed employee is responsible for compliance with all pertinent regulations by the unlicensed employee.  The Board's interpretation that the licensed employee be present and directly supervise all work performed by the unlicensed employee has added VDH travel costs and will require additional staff to be hired and trained.

Mr. Knapp suggested that an interpretation requiring an employer-employee relationship or a contract between the licensed onsite soil evaluator and the unlicensed individual performing the onsite soil evaluator tasks at the licensed onsite soil evaluator's discretion would address public health and safety concerns.  The licensed onsite soil evaluator would be responsible for full compliance with the Board's regulations. ( WWWOOSSP Board Minutes, 2011)

 Did the Board alter existing guidance document(s) for VDH as being sovereign or as a market participant?

The regulatory scheme warrants further investigation to determine if; (1) "routine" meetings between DPOR and VDH violated any applicable sections of Federal or State law and (2) actions have influenced any anti-competitive behaviors and (3) the resolve allegations of monopolization by VDH while following this request to WWWOOSSP Board.

Respectfully,

James B Slusser