United States
Environmental Protect-on
OMice of
Solid Waste and
Emergency Responj»
SEPA
DIRECTIVE NUMBER: 9610.8-1
TITLE: LIST Program Regional Priorities and Enforcement
Priorities for FY 1990
APPROVAL DATE: JU_ 21 1939
EFFECTIVE DATE: JUL 2|
ORIGINATING G.-FICE: OUST
S FINAL
O DRAFT
STATUS:
REFERENCE (other documents):
FY 1990 Agency Operating Guidance
FY 1989-FY 1990 Transition Strategy for the UST Program.
OSUER Directive 9610.5
FY 1989-FY 1990 Compliance and Enforcement Strategy for the
UST Program, OSWER Directive 9610.8
OSWER OSWER OSWER
DIRECTIVE DIRECTIVE D
-------
United Stales
Environmental Protection
Agency
Office of
Solid Waste and
Emergency Response
x> EPA
DIRECTIVE NUMBER: 9610.8-1
TITLE: UST Program Regional Priorities and Enforcement
Priorities for FY 1990
JUL 21 1933
APPROVAL DATE:
EFFECTIVE DATE: ju. 2
ORIGINATING OFFICE: OUST
S FINAL
D DRAFT
STATUS:
REFERENCE (other documents):
FY 1990 Agency Operating Guidance
FY 1989-FY 1990 Transition Strategy for the UST Program.
OSWER Directive 9610.5
FY 1989-FY 1990 Compliance and Enforconent Strategy for the
UST Program, OSWER Directive 9610.8
OSWER OSWER OSWER
DIRECTIVE DIRECTIVE
-------
United States Environmental Protection Agency
Washington. DC 20460
OSWER Directive Initiation Request
1 Directive Number
9610.8-1
2. Originator Information
Jarne of Contact Person
Josh Baylson
Mail Code
OS-420
Office
2108C
Telephone Code
475-9725
3 Tule
UST Program Regional Priorities and Ehforcargit Priorities for FY 1990
4 Summary of Directive (include brief statement of purpose)
Reaffirms UST Program Regional priorities and articulates enforcement priorities for
FY 1990.
5 Keywords
USTs, compliance, enforcement, program priorities
6a Does this Directive Supersede Previous Directive(s)''
b. Does It Supplement Previous Directive(s)?
X No
No
Yes What directive (number, title)
Yes What directive (number, title) 9610.8
FT 1989 - FY 1990 Compliance and Enforcement Strategy for the UST Program
7 Draft Level
A - Signed by AA/DAA
B - Signed by Office Director
C - For Review & Comment
D - In Development
8. Document to be distributed to States by Headquarters?
Yes
X
No
This Request Meets OSWER Directives System Format Standards.
9. Signature of Lead Office Directives Coordinator . <\T~fl ~)
f$-£/U"£"'-&">1 T^-W-SH^^'
Beverly Thomas. OUST Directives Coordinator
10 Name and Title ol Approving Official
Ronald Brand, Director, OUST /\r*^/^ &~+~^~
Date .
7i i / C*"O*
/ ^"1 0 f
Dale
EPA Form 1315-17 (Rev. 5-87) Previous editions are obsolete.
OSWER OSWER OSWER O
VE DIRECTIVE DIRECTIVE DIRECTIVE
-------
UNITED STATES ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
WASHINGTON. D.C. 20460
JUL 21 'SW OFFICE OF
SOLID WASTE AND EMERGENCY RESPONSE
OSWER Directive 9610.8-1
MEMORANDUM
SUBJECT: UST Program Regional Priorities and Enforcement
Priorities for FY 1990
*> jg -
FROM: Ron Brand, Director Jf/'**' ^* • — • -^ •
Office of Underground Storage Tanks
TO: Hazardous Waste Division Directors
Regions I-III, V-IX
Water Division Directors
Regions IV and X
I appreciate the work you have done to date to help make the
national UST Program a genuinely State-run program. During the
next six months we will reach four important milestones in
implementing the program. They are the beginning of the formal
State Program Approval process, the prospect of a significantly
increased Trust Fund budget for FY 1990, and the upcoming
compliance deadlines for financial responsibility and leak
detection. In light of these milestones, I want to reaffirm our
UST Program Regional priorities and articulate enforcement
priorities for FY 1990.
As paraphrased in existing guidance documents, the Regional
priorities for FY 1990 are:
o State program development,
o State program approval,
o improve State performance in addressing existing leaks,
o improve State performance in addressing prevention
program requirements and conducting compliance and
enforcement activities.
-------
OSWER Directive 9610.8-1
More specifically, I would like to see greater emphasis placed
on:
o facilitating and streamlining the award process and
implementation of LUST and UST grants,
o assisting States in developing and implementing
comprehensive LUST and UST programs, including strong
compliance monitoring and enforcement programs,
o mastering in-depth knowledge of State programs to be
able to assist in diagnosing problems and to facilitate
the State Program Approval process,
o assisting States in applying process improvement
techniques to continuously improve their programs and
utilizing similar techniques in the Region as well.
In addition, we must remain careful not to inadvertently create
unnecessary barriers to State program performance, for example in
procurement.
;
Over the last year, I have been considering the application
of these program priorities to Federal enforcement activities,
and the Compliance and Enfprcement Strategy was written to
provide basic guidance in this area. As stated in the strategy,
there are several instances in which formal Federal enforcement
actions may be necessary, including State referrals and releases
on Indian Lands. Limited Federal resources dictate that any EPA
enforcement cases be selected judiciously, targeted carefully,
and pursued efficiently.
In deciding on a case by case basis whether or not Federal
enforcement action will be initiated by the Region, consistent
with the situations outlined in the strategy, preference should
be given to those cases that demonstrate the greatest potential
impact on human health and the environment. I have identified
the following priorities to be used as a guide in selecting which
State referrals, if any, to pursue in those cases that may
warrant Federal enforcement. These priorities apply to the
remainder of FY 1989 and FY 1990. In priority order, they are
violations of the requirements for:
A - Corrective Action
A - Release Detection
B - New Tank Design and Installation
B - Closure
B - Upgrading, Maintenance, and Operation
-------
OSWER Directive 9610.8-1
C - Notifications for Existing Tanks
C - Financial Responsibility
C - Record Keeping (except inventory control records as a
method of release detection)
Remember that with limited Federal resources, it is
important to concentrate our efforts on facilitating voluntary
compliance. Every one percent increase in voluntary compliance
means that we (States and Regions) will have 7,500 fewer
potential enforcement actions to pursue. To this end, we are
conducting the Leak Detection Compliance Campaign to maximize
voluntary compliance with the December 1989 deadline. As part of
the campaign we will provide a package of outreach tools that
can be used by States and groups such as trade associations.
These tools will be available to all States in mid-August.
In addition, I am aware that some members of the regulated
community may find it difficult, despite all practicable efforts,
to meet their financial responsibility compliance deadlines. For
many such low priority violations, alternative, non-punitive
enforcement responses may be the most appropriate initial formal
enforcement response — versus assessing penalties. Such
responses may include requesting that owners and operators
immediately upgrade their tank systems, conduct tightness tests,
or perform a site assessment. Our enforcement responses should
prompt owners and operators to bring their facilities into
compliance and make them insurable.
I am looking forward to working with you during the next six
months, during what, I am sure, will prove to be an exciting and
important period in implementing the i\a .o.-.al UST Program. For
additional information or clarification, please contact Josh
Baylson of my staff (FTS 475-9725). For supplementary
documentation please refer to:
o FY 1990 Agency Operating Guidance;
o FY 1989 - FY 1990 Transition Strategy for the UST
Program, OSWER Directive 9610.5; and
o FY 1989 - FY 1990 Compliance and Enforcement Strategy
for the UST Program, OSWER Directive 9610.8.
cc: UST Regional Program Managers
UST Program Regional Attorneys
Kirsten Engel, OGC
Patricia Mott, OECM
OUST Management Team
------- |