Tank Tour ~ Your Guide to the Federal Underground Storage Tank Program U.S. Environmental Protection Agency Office of Underground Storage Tanks March 1989 ------- ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS This document was prepared under the direction of Sandra Strauss and Steve Vineski of EPA's Office of Underground Storage Tanks (OUST) under contract No. 68-01-7385 with ICF Incorporated. The ICF Project Director was Tom Ingersoll and the Project Manager was Tony Bansal. The principal author was Ken Rock. Portions of the report were written by Bill Finan, Ed Meyer, and Susan Hughes. Graphics were prepared by Vernon Dunning and Walter Taylor, and Trish Conroy assisted in the cover design. Camera-ready copy was prepared by Marina Miguele. Additional technical review and comments were provided by Ron Brand, Helga Butler, Sammy Ng, Pam McClellan, and JetTy Parker of OUST. Many of the publications referred to in this document can be ordered by calling the U.S. EPA Region-10 Public Information Center ' at 206/553-4973 or 800/424-4EPA within Region 10 ------- Page 1 CHAPTER 1 INTRODUCTION If you are working in an underground storage tank program and would like to broaden your perspective, this manual is for you. It is an introduction to the world of underground storage tanks, known as USTs, and the Federal program that guides them. The manual explains why tanks leak and why they are a potential threat to human health and the environment. It addresses the following questions: ~ Who owns and operates USTs? ~ What is stored in the tanks and where are they commonly found? ~ Why regulate USTs? ~ Whq is being affected by UST regulations? ~ What do the regulations require and how are they being implemented? The manual also examines the development of the Federal UST program and explains the roles State and local governments and the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) play in solving the problems posed by leaking underground storage tanks. We suggest that you read one or two chapters at a time, then discuss the information with people who work on related issues. This will bring some "real life" perspective and experience to the information presented in this manual. ------- Page 2 CHAPTER 2 OVERVIEW OF LEAKING UNDERGROUND STORAGE TANKS WHAT IS THE PROBLEM? During the 1970s, Federal and State environmental regulations focused on the problems of air and surface water pollution. In the 1980s, however, there has been a growing recognition that the nation's ground water is also being contaminated and needs to be protected as well. This is particularly important because more than 116 million people-half the population of the United States-rely on ground water as a source of drinking water. Since the early 1900s, petroleum and chemicals have been stored in bare steel underground tank systems that are very vulnerable to corrosion. Until recently, little has been done to protect these tanks from corrosion, or to emphasize the use of methods to detect leaks as early as possible. Leaking underground storage tanks (USTs) pose a major threat to ground water. Releases from USTs into water supplies used for drinking and other household purposes may pose risks to public health. Even small quantities of released petroleum are sufficient to contaminate drinking water. Two components of gasoline, benzene and ethyl dibromide, are suspected cancer causing agents. The threat from leaking tanks is not limited to ground water. Leaking petroleum and chemicals can contaminate surface waters, cause fires and explosions, and generate toxic fumes that can seep into homes and businesses. This problem is described in greater detail in the brochure "Here Lies the Problem". HOW SERIOUS IS THE PROBLEM? EPA estimates that there are approximately two million USTs in the U.S. subject to the new Federal regulations. According to recent (1988) EPA estimates, 84 percent of USTs at gasoline service stations are made of bare (unprotected) steel and are highly susceptible to corrosion and leaks. Of the remaining "protected" tanks, 5 percent are steel tanks that are cathodically protected from corrosion, and the remaining 11 percent are constructed of fiberglass reinforced plastic (see Exhibit 2). According to recent EPA estimates, as many as Fifteen to twenty percent of petroleum USTs may be leaking. If this percentage holds true for all regulated mderground storage tanks, hundreds of thousands of underground storage tank systems nationwide may be leaking. One study, based on information compiled by States, identifies more than twelve-thousand documented reports of releases from underground storage tanks. WHY DO RELEASES OCCUR? Piping failure, spills and overfills, and tank corrosion are the three main causes of releases from underground storage tank systems. Piping Failure EPA studies estimate that eighty percent of all releases from underground storage tanks are the result of failures in the piping system that connects the tanks to the gasoline dispensers or in the fittings on the top of the tank. Many of these failures occur because of improper installation. As Exhibit 3 illustrates, service stations with several dispensers and several blends of gasoline have extensive piping systems. There are two types of piping systems; pressure and suction. Pressure systems rely on a pressure pump in the tank to push petroleum through the piping, whereas suction systems use a suction pump at the dispenser to pull the petroleum through the piping. ------- Page 3 Exhibit 2 Distribution of Tank Types at Gasoline Service Stations Cathodically Protected Bare Steel, (84%) NOT PROTECTED AGAINST LEAKS PROTECTED AGAINST LEAKS Fiberglass-Reinforced Plastic (11%) Source: Regulatory Impact Analysis. August 24,1988. f91020-2 ------- Exhibit 3 Piping Configuration at a Typical Four-Tank Station Tank Truck Delivery Hose Submerged Pump Assembly Vent Pipes Line Leak Detector Submerged Pump Assembly Product Dispensers Product Delivery Line ------- Page 5 Pressure systems pose the greater threat of uncontrolled releases. When a leak occurs in a pressure system, the pump continues to push petroleum through the hole in the pipe and into the ground (see Exhibit 4). With a suction system, however, the vacuum necessary for suction is destroyed once a leak occurs, the system starts pulling air through the hole, and petroleum in the piping flows back into the tank. Spills and Overfills Spills and overfills are the most common cause of underground storage tank releases into the environment; however, most incidents probably go unreported because of the small volume of petroleum lost, less than twenty gallons in most instances. Spills often occur when a delivery hose is disconnected from the tank fill tube, when a delivery hose has not been drained properly, or when the disconnect stop valve on the 'delivery truck's fill tube has not been completely closed. Overfills occur when more petroleum is pumped into the tank than the tank can hold and the petroleum overflows into the surrounding soil through the vent pipe or loose fittings on the top of the tank. Overfills can result from an incorrect estimate of how much petroleum is needed to fill a tank or from simple carelessness. Tank Corrosion The rapid population expansion that began during the 1950s led to the growth of suburban communities across the United States. This growth, in turn, led to the proliferation of retail gasoline stations to serve the growing number of suburban automobiles. Hundreds of thousands of USTs were installed from the 1950s to the present, but until recently, little was done to protect the tanks from corrosion, a natural decay process that occurs in steel tanks unless protective measures are taken. Little attention was paid to the potential damage that could result from leaks. As a result, many tanks currently in the ground are corroded and leaking. WHAT HAPPENS WHEN A RELEASE OCCURS? Once a leak occurs, petroleum can — under certain circumstances — seep through the surrounding soil into ground water (see Exhibit 5). Because petroleum does not easily mix with water, most of the leaking petroleum forms a plume that floats on top of the water, table. Some of the petroleum, however, dissolves in the ground water and may be discharged into wells or surface water. WHO OWNS AND OPERATES UNDERGROUND STORAGE TANKS? Underground storage tanks are owned and operated by businesses to store retail motor fuels, non-retail motor fuels, used oil, and chemicals (see Exhibit 6). The retail motor fuel sector accounts for the largest group, comprising thirty-nine percent of the regulated USTs. From 600,000 to 700,000 underground storage tanks are located at more than 200,000 retail gasoline stations across the nation. About one-quarter of these tanks are owned by major oil companies; the rest are part of smaller operations. It is unusual for facilities in the latter group to be owned and operated by a single company or individual. For example, one company or person may lease a tract of land from another on a long-term basis for use as a retail gasoline facility. A third party, a wholesaler, may own the tanks at the facility, and a fourth party may lease the concession and manage the day-to-day operations. The second largest user of underground storage tanks, thirty-eight percent, is the non-retail motor fuel sector, which includes petroleum wholesalers, agriculture, manufacturing, government, and transportation. Non-retail users of USTs include automobile and truck rental companies; truck and taxi fleets; the Federal Government (military bases, U.S. Postal Service facilities, and a variety of Federal buildings); State, county, and local governments (police, fire, highway, and transportation departments); public and municipal authorities (airports and shipyards); and hospitals. ------- Exhibit 4 Typical UST Configuration with Pressure Piping Delivery System Gas Pump Gas Pump mL. •D era m o\ ------- Page 7 Exhibit 5 Schematic of Subsurface Environment Water Table Aquifer Impermeable Boundary Source: ICF Incorporated. f91020-6 ------- Page 8 Exhibit 6 Uses of Regulated USTs Used Oil (20%) Chemical Storage Non-Retail Motor Fuels (38%) Retail Motor Fuels (39%) Source: Regulatory Impact Analysis of Technical Standards Rule for USTs. f91020-1 ------- Page 9 Businesses in the non-retail sector own an average of two underground storage tanks per facility, in comparison with retail motor fuel companies, which own an average of three or four tanks per facility. Twenty percent of regulated USTs are used to store used oil, and three percent contain chemicals. Exhibit 7 illustrates ownership of USTs used to store petroleum. More than three-fourths of the petroleum USTs are owned by gas stations and industry, paralleling the retail and non-retail uses shown in Exhibit 6. Government and farmers each own about half of the remaining petroleum USTs. ------- Page 10 Exhibit 7 Ownership of USTs Used to Store Petroleum Government (11%) Industry (39%) Farmers (11%) Gas Stations (39%) Source: US. Conference of Mayors Report on Underground Storage Tanks (Draft), August, 1988. (91020-3 ------- Page 11 CHAPTER 3 THE HISTORY OF UNDERGROUND STORAGE TANK REGULATION THE HOLE IN FEDERAL ENVIRONMENTAL REGULATIONS Except in a few instances, Federal regulation prior to 1984 did not address USTs. The Resource Conservation and Recovery Act of 1976 (RCRA) only regulated tanks containing hazardous wastes, not tanks storing petroleum or hazardous products. The Clean Water Act of 1972 required owners of very large underground tanks (those with a capacity greater than 42,000 gallons) to take certain measures to prevent corrosion and to test tanks periodically. However, these requirements applied only to those tanks that were potentially direct sources of pollution into navigable waters. Because underground tanks generally damage only ground water and usuklly affect surface water only indirectly, the Clean Water Act could not be used as a general basis for regulating most underground storage tanks. The Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation, and Liability Act of 1980 (CERCLA), commonly known as Superfund, authorizes EPA to respond whenever a hazardous substance is released into the environment. However, Superfund cannot be used to respond to leaks from petroleum tanks because petroleum is specifically excluded from the list of hazardous substances defined under the AcL CLOSING THE GAP: FEDERAL REGULATION OF USTs In 1984, Congress was preparing to pass environmental legislation pertaining to management of hazardous substances. The UST problem, which was already a subject of political debate, became more visible because television news shows, such as "60 Minutes" and "Good Morning America", featured stories that highlighted the dangers of leaking USTs. In February 1984, Senator David Durenberger of Minnesota'(a State in which ground water is an important resource) and Congressman Don Ritter of Pennsylvania (in whose district an UST leak had contaminated wells for over three years) each introduced a bill to address the problem of leaking USTs. Both bills sought to establish a comprehensive Federal regulatory program requiring registration of all tanks, technical standards for new tanks, reporting and cleanup of releases, and some mechanism for owners and operators to demonstrate financial responsibility for damages in the event of a leak. In Octoher 1984, a final version of the Hazardous and Solid Waste Amendments to RCRA (HSWA) was passed by both houses of Congress. In November 1984, President Reagan signed the amendments into law. Title VI of the Amendments added Subtitle I (sections 9001 to 9010) which specifically provided for regulation of underground storage tanks. At the request of Congress, EPA is also studying the threat posed by underground tanks used to store products other than those covered by . current UST regulations, such as heating-oil tank systems, to determine if additional regulations are needed. This study is now underway and a report is expected to be completed in 1989. Key Provisions of HSWA Subtitle I • Subtitle I includes requirements for tank notification, interim prohibition, new tank standards, monitoring and reporting standards for existing tanks, corrective action, financial responsibility, compliance monitoring and enforcement, and approval of State programs. (Refer to HSWA Subtitle I for specific requirements in each of these areas outlined in the legislation.) The law also requires EPA to develop a comprehensive program for the regulation of USTs "as may be necessary to protect human health and the environment" ------- Page 12 (section 9003(a)). More specifically, the law requires EPA to develop regulations for USTs in the areas of: ~ Technical standards for tanks (e.g., construction materials, required methods of detecting leaks); ~ Financial responsibility, and ~ State program approval (i.e., requirements for approving States to run the program). Developing effective regulations to implement this legislative mandate was a top priority for EPA's Office of Underground Storage Tanks (OUST). On April 17, 1987, the Agency promulgated proposed regulations, along with an invitation'for public comments. Over the next ninety days, EPA received comments and new information on the proposed regulations. A Supplemental Notice to Proposed Rulemaking was published in the Federal Register on December 23, 1987 and OUST received comments on the changes. After considering all completed research and carefully reviewing all comments, EPA published the final UST technical regulations on September 23, 1988. The technical standards regulations are summarized in a brochure called "Musts for USTs" Shortly afterward, on October 26, 1988, EPA published its financial responsibility regulations, indicating minimum levels of insurance UST owners and operators need to ensure they can take "corrective action" in response to any leaks that occur from their tanks and compensate anyone who is harmed by a leak. Corrective action includes assessing the leak and the extent of damage or danger to human health and the environment, determining what action is needed to repair any damage and remove contaminants, and taking the necessary action. CORRECTIVE ACTION FOR LEAKS: THE LEAKING UST TRUST FUND Although the 1984 Hazardous and Solid Waste Amendments amended the Resource Conservation and Recovery Act to regulate USTs, there were no provisions for taking corrective action on releases from leaking underground storage tanks in cases where tank owners or operators (1) were either not willing or not able to conduct the corrective action, or (2) could not be found (e.g., abandoned tanks). Many owners and operators simply may not be able to conduct corrective actions, and may not have environmental impairment liability insurance for USTs. If a leaking tank was abandoned or if a tank leaked and the owner or operator could not or would not take the necessary steps to correct the situation, the only recourse left was for the injured party to sue the responsible party. These cases often resulted in lengthy court delays which achieved no reduction in the threat to human health and ground water. In 1986, Congress responded to public concerns a"bout the need to take action on releases from leaking USTs by passing into law the Superfund Amendments and Reauthorization Act (SARA). Section 205 of SARA amended Subtitle I of the Resource Conservation and Recovery Act (RCRA) to provide Federal funds for corrective actions on petroleum leaks and spills from USTs. This amendment to RCRA established a $500 million "Leaking Underground Storage Tank Trust Fund," paid for over five years by a tax on each gallon of gasoline sold. According to these amendments, priority for corrective actions is to be given to those USTs that present the greatest threat to human health and the environment. KEY UST REQUIREMENTS UNDER THE SARA AMENDMENTS TO RCRA Congress authorized EPA to use the Trust Fund for corrective actions on petroleum leaks and spills and to make these funds available to the States (which include U.S. territories) as soon as possible. States are expected to play a key role in Trust Fund corrective actions because State officials are generally closer to the scene and know more about tanks in their States and about local site conditions than Federal officials. Consequently, using the Trust Fund quickly and effectively is one of OUST's top priorities. This was to be accomplished through cooperative agreements with the States. Cooperative agreements are signed contracts between States and EPA that allow them to use the LUST Trust Fund to pay for corrective actions on releases from underground storage tank systems. ------- Page 13 EPA is encouraging States to enter into cooperative agreements that specify how the States will use the funds. Until cooperative agreements are in place, States cannot use the Trust Fund to cleanup leaking USTs. Financial Responsibility The Trust Fund for leaking USTs was never intended to fund cleanups for all, or even most, releases. In most cases, the State will order the tank owner or operator (the responsible party) to undertake the cleanup. Under the SARA Amendments to RCRA, the State can compel the tank owners and operators to undertake, or pay for, any of the following actions: ~ Tank tests for suspected leaks; ~ Site excavation to investigate the extent of contamination; ~ Assessments of how many individuals may have been exposed to petroleum contaminants and the severity of the exposure; ~ Removal of contaminants from soil and water; ~ Provision of safe drinking water to residents whose supplies have been contaminated by a tank leak; and ~ If necessary, temporary or permanent relocation of residents affected by a release. Because of concerns that tank owners and operators would not have the financial resources to cover the cost of these activities, Congress required that tank owners and operators be able to demonstrate financial responsibility. This means that tank owners and operators must be able to pay for cleanups and, if necessary, to compensate people or businesses for damages resulting from leaks. Cleanup costs and compensation can be very expensive; therefore, Congress set the minimum coverage for financial responsibility at $1 million per occurrence for tanks at facilities that produce, refine, or market petroleum ("per occurrence" means the amount of money that must be available to pay the costs of one leak). If necessary, EPA may temporarily suspend the enforcement of financial responsibility requirements if insurance or other types of financial assurance are not available to certain groups of tank owners. The brochure on the financial responsibility requirements, "Dollars and Sense," is available from EPA. Priority Trust Fund Uses Congress intended that EPA or the State management agency use the Trust Fund only at sites where; ~ The costs of the cleanup exceed the minimum insurance coverage that an owner or operator is required to maintain, and such expenditures are necessary to ensure an effective corrective action; ~ A solvent owner or operator cannot be found; or. ~ The owner or operator fails to comply with a cleanup order. Tank owners and operators will be liable to EPA or the State for the costs incurred in cleaning up leaks or spills from their tanks. EPA or the State can take action against the owner or operator to recover these costs, a process referred to as "cost recovery." ------- Page 14 CHAPTER 4 PARTIES AFFECTED BY UST REGULATIONS AND CLEANUPS The UST legislation and regulatory program to cleanup currently leaking USTs and prevent new leaks directly affects several groups, including small businesses, major oil companies, and the insurance industry. SMALL BUSINESSES Every effort has been made in the regulations to provide tank owners and operators with choices about how to satisfy the requirements. Nonetheless, the cost of ensuring that their tank systems do not leak will be a burden to some owners and operators. Small businesses are deeply concerned about the costs of complying with the UST regulations as well as their ability to understand what exactly they are required to do. To assist owner? and operators of USTs, EPA is preparing a variety of brochures and other materials that address some of the concerns expressed by small businesses. "Leak Lookout," and "Oh No!," are examples of brochures, designed primarily for small businesses which describe specific actions that need to be taken by UST owners and operators with regard to leak detection and in responding to a leak or spilL Many small businesses feel they may have difficulty raising the capital needed to comply with new regulations. For example, some leak detection systems are expensive, required tank testing could close a business for one or two days, and new tank standards could require upgrading or replacing tanks—all at a significant cost Yet the financial impact and potential liability associated with a corrective action could be far more burdensome than complying with the regulations for USTs. MAJOR OIL COMPANIES Major oil companies have already begun to voluntarily upgrade their underground tank systems. Motivated by the need to avoid product loss and cleanup costs and by the fear of liability suits, many oil companies have begun programs to replace old bare steel tanks with new corrosion-protected tanks and to install monitoring devices to determine if a tank is leaking. INSURANCE INDUSTRY Insurers have been reluctant to provide policies for USTs for several reasons. One reason is the unpredictability of the risks associated with unprotected steel tanks that have not been subject to regular leak detection. Another reason is court decisions about liability that make it difficult to relate the risk associated with a policyholder's operation to the potential damages a policyholder will face in court. In addition, it is unclear to insurers how the new UST technical requirements, especially for corrective action, may change the number and cost of claims. This uncertainty also affects the amount of reinsurance that is available for insurance policies written for USTs and therefore limits the number of policies that insurers are able to issue. As a result, pollution liability insurance continues to be offered only by a limited number of specialized providers. As old, unprotected tanks are removed or are fitted with leak detection systems, many leaks will be detected and corrected. These actions, coupled with increased monitoring, should significantly reduce both the occurrence of leaks and their duration prior to detection. Over the long term, implementation of the UST technical standards should make UST risks more predictable and, therefore, more insurers should be more willing to provide coverage. ------- Page 15 CHAPTER 5 EPA'S UNDERGROUND STORAGE TANK PROGRAM THE OFFICE OF UNDERGROUND STORAGE TANKS The Office of Underground Storage Tanks (OUST) was created in the summer of 1985 as a part of EPA's Office of Solid Waste and Emergency Response (OSWER). Also within OSWER is the Office of Emergency and Remedial Response, the Office of Solid Waste, the Office of Waste Programs Enforcement, and a separate Emergency Preparedness staff. OUST was created because EPA officials believed that in order to carry out the Congressional mandate to develop and implement a new regulatory program for underground storage tanks, a new organizational unit within the Agency would be required. OUST is organized into two divisions: the Policy and Standards Division, and the Implementation Division. The Policy and Standards Division has three primary functions: (1) developing regulations and guidance materials for EPA Regions and States; (2) initiating and conducting studies to help resolve technical and policy issues; and (3) establishing standards and procedures to ensure that UST programs are implemented according to established objectives. The Division is composed of two Branches: the Standards Branch and the Regulatory Analysis Branch. The Standards Branch is responsible for proposing and promulgating technical regulations for tank systems and cleanups of releases, conducting or coordinating EPA's UST technical studies and research, and developing policy guidance in these areas for EPA Regions and States. The Regulatory Analysis Branch is responsible for conducting regulatory impact analyses, developing regulations for financial responsibility, formulating policy for Trust Fund utilization, and developing guidance in these areas for EPA Regions and States. The Implementation Division is also composed of two Branches: the Operations Branch and the Planning ^nd Communications Branch. The Operations Branch is responsible for maintaining regular contact with EPA Regions to monitor the status of UST program activities throughout the country. The Branch also conducts Regional support visits and reviews, coordinates activities with EPA's Emergency Response Division, prepares financial reports, and provides a variety of additional grant management and strategic planning services. The Planning and Communications Branch produces outreach materials (videos, brochures, and handbooks aimed at improving tank management practices), plans and implements communication activities, develops training and technical support programs, develops program implementation plans, and designs enforcement strategies and tools. In addition to Headquarters, EPA has ten Regional offices in major cities throughout the country. Each of these Regional Offices have UST staffs of four to seven people, including a Regional UST Program Manager (see Appendix A). THE FRANCHISE APPROACH TO IMPLEMENTING THE UST PROGRAM EPA managers recognized early in the program planning process that the UST program must be managed differently than EPA's other regulatory programs. Traditionally, EPA "delegated" program responsibilities to States that had program authorities and staffing comparable to the Federal program. In this approach, EPA offered grants to States as an incentive for them to run the Federal program. Once delegated, EPA would "oversee" the State's implementation of the program and intervene when it did not satisfy EPA's standards. In the absence of a comparable delegated State program, EPA assumed full responsibility for the implementation of the national program. ------- Page 16 EPA managers realized that this traditional EPA approach would not work for the UST program because: ~ There are too many tanks to regulate with too few Federal resources; EPA would simply never have the capacity to address directly tanks at 750,000 sites; ~ In many programs grant levels have not kept pace with the States' costs and no longer provide an incentive; ~ EPA's traditional claim of program primacy is being matched by strong State and local environmental agencies; and ~ The technologies and techniques of tank management are evolving. EPA managers wanted to keep the program requirements flexible to encourage innovation and voluntary compliance. In this way tank owners and operators have the latitude to experiment with new, low cost alternatives that meet the regulatory requirements. These needs led OUST managers to look for new approaches to implementing the Federal UST program. One model that has captured the attention of OUST managers is the franchise approach. APPLYING THE FRANCHISE APPROACH The franchise approach, in the world of commerce, is simply a model for organizing and administering a service organization. A local business meeting certain criteria (capital, management skills, and experience) is authorized to operate a specific activity under a national or regional brand name. The contract between the local business, or franchisee, and the franchisor sets out the rules that govern this business relationship. As incentives to franchisees to join the franchise and pay the franchise fees, the franchisor provides a tested franchise system, training programs, national advertising, and its reputation to franchisees. These products and services reduce both the cost and the risk to the franchisee of entering the business. To ensure that each franchisee adheres to national standards of quality, the franchisor devotes substantial resources to training, communication, and inspection. A franchisor works closely with each individual owner to ensure there is a focus on quality and to continuously improve their operations. The franchise system also encourages a balance between maintaining uniformity and encouraging innovation. Uniform standards and services of the "chain* are supported and supplied by the franchisor. Services and products creatively tailored to a locality can be developed by an innovative franchisee. In many cases, products that become national standards are developed by entrepreneurial franchisees. MAKING THE APPROACH WORK OUST has adopted the franchise model as its implementation approach in managing the national UST program. While the main goal of businesses is to make a profit, EPA's goal is to protect human health and the environment. This difference is reflected in how the model is used. State and Local Governments The State and/or local regulatory agency is the "franchisee" in the UST franchise, operates independently, under a signed agreement with EPA, to operate the UST program. For the national program to work, these State and local franchisees must convince their customers to prevent and undertake corrective actions in response to releases from underground storage tanks. The methods used by the franchisees to stimulate the customer to comply with the regulations will vary. Some customers may need a hard sell (e.g^ the threat of enforcement), whereas others may simply need to know what the product and service is and how it will benefit them. For the national franchise system to continue to improve, franchisees need to develop and test new tank management practices and technologies, and share their experiences with others. The Regions The role of the Regional Offices is analogous to that of the field representatives in the franchise model. The Regions serve as liaisons between EPA Headquarters and the State and local franchisees to relay ideas, needs, and information ------- Page 17 as efficiently as possible. The Regjons' primary role is to help State and local governments build and improve their UST programs. They do this by: ~ Promoting the Federal program with State and local officials; ~ Understanding the work performed by franchisees; ~ Identifying the support services franchisees need to improve their programs; ~ Providing assistance, training, funding, and expertise to franchisees; and ~ Identifying emerging trends and needs that require the attention of the national programs (e.g., research, improved systems, new guidelines to ensure quality). EPA Headquarters Under the franchise approach, the role of EPA Headquarters is to provide general operating guidelines to ensure that all of the State and local agencies are achieving the same basic objectives in managing underground storage tanks. OUST accomplishes its objective by providing Regional staff with the resources needed to understand and improve State and local programs. Activities include: ~ Working with the Regions to learn about franchisee UST programs; ~ Obtaining grant and travel funding needed by the Regions; ~ Setting realistic national policies and standards; ~ Funding and managing research directed specifically to solving problems in field performance; ~ Obtaining contractor and other technical expertise required by the franchisees; ~ Providing training, handbooks, videos, and other tools that enable franchisees to assist tank owners and operators in managing their tanks; and ~ Performing a clearinghouse function, including transferring technology and expertise, holding workshops to deal with critical operations issues, and encouraging frequpnt and continual dialogue between State and Regional UST officials. In an effort to assist the Regional offices in helping States build their UST program capabilities, OUST is promoting a management system to identify waste and inefficiency in program procedures (e.g., obtaining program approval from EPA, issuing permits, conducting corrective actions), eliminate it, and keep it out. Eliminating this waste will help States and local agencies run their programs in a way that is tailored to meet the specific needs and demands of their own regulated communities. ------- Page 18 CHAPTER 6 PROGRESS MADE TOWARD IMPLEMENTATION STATUS OF UST PROGRAMS IN 1984 A 1984 survey of underground tank regulations at the State level provided an indication of the amount of State involvement in underground storage tank programs. The survey found only one State with a comprehensive program to clean up and prevent leaks from tanks containing either petroleum or chemical products. Nine States had regulations that covered petroleum tanks, but not chemical tanks. Many States regulated tanks through nationally established fire codes, such as those published by the National Fire Protection Association (NFPA 30) and the Uniform Fire Code (UFC 79), although these codes are designed to prevent fires rather than to prevent releases. PROGRESS SINCE 1984 Since the passage of the Hazardous and Solid Waste Amendments (HSWA) to RCRA in 1584, many States and localities have increased their efforts to address the ground-water contamination threat and cleanup problems posed by leaking USTs. At least thirty-five States have developed UST programs that, at a minimum, regulate the basic elements of proper UST system management. Other States have enacted legislation and are developing regulatory programs. Exhibit 14 shows the increase in State UST regulatory activity from 1984 to 1988. The high level of UST activity at the State level has taken many routes. Before the Federal program requirements were issued, some State programs had established stringent release detection requirements for existing USTs (California and Florida), while others emphasize state-of-the-art prevention technologies for new USTs (New York, California, and New Hampshire). Some arc phasing in the requirement for upgrading or replacement of existing substandard systems (Florida, Connecticut, and Delaware). Others have attempted to tailor their standard-setting based on proximity to sensitive ground-water locations (Maine and South Carolina). Three State programs—New York, Florida, and California-have begun to develop strong working relationships with local UST programs, a policy they feel is critical to the success of their State programs. In New York, the State has delegated UST program authority to several of the eastern urban county governments, allowing the State agency to focus its efforts on implementing the UST program in the less urban counties where local UST programs are less developed. In Florida, county governments regulate approximately half of the State's tank population. California has delegated primary responsibility for administering and enforcing the State UST program to more than one-hundred local county and city agencies. THE STATE PROGRAM APPROVAL PROCESS As an important step toward achieving the long- range goal of developing a network of effective State and local programs, EPA is encouraging States to apply for formal approval of their UST programs to operate in lieu of the Federal program. EPA plans to approve acceptable State UST programs as quickly as possible, and follow up with activities that provide continual assistance to States and localities for improving their capabilities and performance. A list of State UST Program Offices is provided in Appendix B. EPA approval of a State program means that the requirements in the State's laws and regulations will be in effect rather than the Federal requirements. Program approval ensures that a single set of requirements (the State's) will be enforced in that State, thus eliminating the duplication and confusion that would result from having separate State and Federal requirements. Once a State program is ------- Exhibit 14 States with Underground Storage Tank Statutes or Regulations 1984 1988 ------- Page 20 approved, the State program will operate under a Memorandum of Agreement that clearly delineates EPA's limited role in an approved State and assures the State of its lead role in administering and enforcing the UST program. Approval of a State program also means that the basic environmental protection afforded by the Federal program is contained in the State program as welL The primary focus of EPA's approval review is to ensure that the State's program will achieve the objectives of the Federal regulations pertaining to the prevention,' detection, and cleanup of UST releases and provide for adequate enforcement of compliance. EPA has encouraged the development of comprehensive State UST programs and believes that States must continue to have the flexibility to develop and carry out their own initiatives. While there is wide diversity in State UST programs, the Federal regulations require that several common elements be part of each State program. These elements must be no less stringent than corresponding Federal requirements, based on a comparison of the State's technical requirements to the Federal objectives for each of these program elements. States must also provide for adequate enforcement of the requirements. EPA has designed its approval criteria to result in as little unnecessary disruption to ongoing State initiatives as is possible. Federal objectives, contained in the Federal-State Program Approval Standards (published in December 1988), have been identified for the following program elements: ~ New UST system design, construction, installation, and notification; ~ Upgrading of existing UST systems; ~ General operating requirements; ~ Release detection; ~ Corrective action; ~ Out-of-service or closed UST systems; and ~ Financial responsibility. To meet the "no less stringent" requirements using this approach, the State must have requirements that meet the Federal objectives in each of these areas. EPA's criteria for adequate enforcement of compliance require that a State have in place adequate legal authorities for inspection and compliance monitoring, enforcement, and public participation, plus appropriate written procedures for implementing those authorities. EPA seeks to maintain its flexibiltiy to approve a variety of State programs and to encourage States to use innovative as well as traditional approaches in achieving compliance. THE ROLE OF LOCAL GOVERNMENTS In addition, more than one hundred major cities in the U.S. have already developed local UST ordinances and programs. Some programs are operated independently of the State; others are part of a wider State regulatory program. The implementation role of local agencies in the UST regulatory effort is being encouraged in many States in order to use local support (e.g., Ore marshals and building code officials) as much as possible in order to improve overall administrative and enforcement capabilities. In Maryland, some counties have their own UST regulations or enforce building and fire codes regulating USTs generally focusing on permits and inspections of tank installations. Massachusetts delegates its regulatory program, including inspections and permitting, through the State Fire Marshal's Office to local fire departments. California requires counties to implement and enforce the technical requirements of the UST program, although cities may choose to develop their own programs and override county authority within the city limits. ~ Release reporting, investigation, and confirmation; ------- Page 21 CHAPTER 7 OTHER SOURCES OF INFORMATION ON THE UST PROGRAM In addition to the materials in this manual, the UST program also has developed handbooks, slide shows, and video tapes on a wide range of topics to inform States and localities, tank owners and operators, and individuals in related industries about the regulations and program requirements. Many of these materials may be of interest to you. Exhibit 15 is an order form for OUST publications. Exhibit 16 provides information about obtaining OUSTs video programs. In addition to these materials, the EPA RCRA/Su^perfund Hotline (1-800-424-9346) can assist you with specific questions about the UST regulatory requirements. ------- Exhibit 15 U.S. ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY Page 22 OFFICE OF UNDERGROUND STORAGE TANKS PUBLICATIONS LIST General Information order no. Notification for Underground Storage Tanks: EPA Form 7530-1 (Revised 9-68) 5 Hazardous Substance List 7 LUSTUNE Bulletin ' 10 Normas y Procedimierrtos para T.S.A.-(The Spanish version of Musts for USTs, an overview of Federal Tecnr.ical UST standards) 26S Volumetric Tanx Testing (Summary of Edison Study on Internal Leak Cetfr^ors) 34B Managing Underground Storage Tanks (fcrocriuie to order a slide show) 40 "Oh No! Leaks and Spills!" - First Response ^tKocnure) 73 Leak Lookout (External Leak Detectors) . 74 Introducing REG-IN-A-BOX (ordering flier) Regulations Notification of Requirements for Owners of Underground Storage Tanks; Final Rule 40 CFR Part 280 (Federal Register 11/8/85) 3 Underground Storage Tanks: Technical Requirements and State Program Approval; Final Rules 40 CFR Pans 280 & 281 (Federal Register Part II 9/23/88) 4A Underground Storage Tanks Containing Petroleum; Financial Responsibility Requirements and State Program Approval Objective: Final Rule 40 CFR Parts 280 & 281 (Federal Register Part I110/26/88), Underground Storage Tanks Containing Petroleum; Financial Responsibility Requirements; Interim Final Rule 40 CFR Part 280 (Federal Register 11/9/89, 5/2/90) 4B Hazardous Waste: Interim Prohibition Against installation of Unprotected Underground Storage Tanks; Interpretive Rule 40 CFR Pan 280 (Federal Register 6/4/86) 17 Subtitle I. Hazardous and Solid Waste Amendments of 1984; RCRA 21 Technical Reports Causes of Release From UST Systems 32 Tank Corrosion Study 42 Estimating Air Emissions from Petroleum UST Cleanups 88 Detecting Leaks. Successful Methods Step-by-Step 92 Order Form Name: Title: Organization: Street: City: State: Zip: Telephone: ( ) Please send me the following publications: 3 4A 4B 5 7 10 17 21 26S 32 348 40 42 73 74 84 88 92 Please return this order form to: U.S. Environmental Protection Agency Office of Underground Storage Tan*s P.O. Box 6044 Rockville, MD 20850 UST25 6/90 ------- Exhibit 16 AVAILABLE FROM SOURCES OTHER THAN EPA Publications Page 23 Musts for USTs: A Summary of the New Regulations for Underground Storage Tank Systems Stock No. 055-000-00294-1 $2.50 Dollars and Sense: A Summary of the Financial Responsibility Regulations for Underground Storage Tank Systems Stock No. 055-000-00293-2 $1.25 Cleanup of Releases from Petroleum USTs: Selected Technologies Stock No. 055-000-00272-0 S7.50 Petroleum Tank Releases Under Control: A Compendium of Current Practices for State UST Inspectors Stock No. 055-000-00295-9 S8.50 Processes Affecting Subsurface Transport of Leaking Underground Tank Fluids Stock No. 055-000-00269-0 S3 25 Survey of Vendors of External Petroleum Leak Monitoring Devices for Use with USTs Stock No. 055-000-00277-1 S4 25 Purcha*« Superintendent of Documents From: US Government Printing Office Washington, D C. 20402 (202) 783-3238 Evaluation of Volumetric Leak Detection Methods for Underground Fuel Storage Tanks Volume 1. No. PB89-124333 $39.95 Volume 2. No. PB89-124341 $76.95 Purchase National Technical Information Service From: 5265 Port Royal Road Springfield, VA 22161 (703) 457-4600 Soil Gas Sensing for Detection and Mapping of Volatile Organlcs Catalog No. 49 $38.00/member; $46.75/non-member Purchase National Water Well Association From: P.O. Box 182039, Dept. 017 Columbus, OH 43218 (614) 761-1711 Computer Software Reg-ln-A-Box software aid* understanding/working with Federal UST regulations. Easy to use and available for Macintosh or PC- companbles with hard disk drives. Not copy protected Purchase PC-Comp«tlbl«* From: Public Brand Software, $5.00 plus shipping and handling, l -800-426-3475 (24 hours a day). (317) 856-7571 (in Indiana), Visa and MasterCard accepted Purchasa Apple Macintosh From: Budgetbytes Software, $5.99 plus shipping and handling. 1 -800-356-3551 (8 a.m. to 6 p.m., CST). Visa and MasterCard accepted Audiovisual Programs VIDEOS 'Tank Closure Without Tears: An Inspector's Safety Guide" (Focuses on problem of explosive vapors and safe tank removal.) Video and booklet $30.00 prepaid Booklet only $5 00 prepaid "What Do We Have Here? An Inspector's Guide to Site Assessment at Tank Closure." (A three part video on inspecting sites for contamination where tanks have been removed; provides a site assessment overview [30 minules], an overview of field instruments [14 minutes], and a brief discussion of soil and water sampling [7 minutes].) Video $40 00 prepaid Booklet $5 00 prepaid Purchasa - New England Interstate Water Pollution From: Control Comm ssion Attn VIDEOS 85 Memmac Street Boston, MA 02114 Borrow Clo- ture Video* and Booklet* From: Video and booklet $5.00 prepaid New England Regional Wastewater Institute 2 Fort Road South Portland. ME 04106 "Doing It Right" (Proper installation of underground tanks and piping for installation crews ) Vtaeo $16 00 prepaid Purchase American Petroleum Institute From Either: 1220 I. Street, N.'.V, Washington, D C. 20005 or: Petroleum Equipment Institute Box 2380 Tulsa, OK 74101 "A Question of When: Tank Installation for Inspectors" (Tank and pipe installation w.lh a checklist for inspectors.) "In Your Own Backyard" (What tank owners should require from installation contractors.) Videos $22 85 each prepaid Purchase National Fire Protection Association From: Attn' Jim Smalley Battery march Park Quincy, MA 02269 SLIDES "Managing Underground Storage Tanks" (Segments on all phases cf tank management from inventory and installation to leak detection and clean up.) 185 Slides, 27 page script, $120.00 and 103 pages of graphics Purchase National Audiovisual Center From: Customer Services SectiorVWD 8700 Edgeworth Drive Capitol Heights. MD 20743-3701 (301) 763-1891 UST25 6/90 ------- Appendix A How Can You Get More Information? Page 24 You can call the RCRA/Superfund Hotline (1-800-424-9346) or contact one of the EPA Regional UST Program Managers listed below. EPA Regional UST Program Managers WA OR 1 ID CA MT WY Ml NV NE IA UT IL CO IN OH KS AZ NM OK MO AR KY MS LA TX TN AL r~*Y ¦ PA VA NC SC GA HAWAII c GUAM AM. SAMOA CNMI Ft Rl -0E -MO VIRGIN IS PUERTO RICO U.S. EPA, Rag Ion 1 JFK Federal Bldg. Mailcode: HPU-1 Boston, MA 02203-2211 617-573-9604 FTS 833-1604 U.S. EPA, Region 4 345 Courtland St, N.E. Mailcode: 4WM-GP Atlanta. GA 30365 404-347-3866 FTS 257-3866 U.S. EPA, Region 7 RCRA Branch 726 Minnesota Ave. Kansas City, KS 66101 913-551-7651 FTS 276-7651 U.S.EPA Region 9 75 Hawthorn St. ffeiloocte: H-2-1 San Francisco, CA 94105 415-744-1500 FIS 484-2063 U.S. EPA, Region 2 Hazardous Waste Programs Branch 26 Federal Plaza Mailcode: 2AWM-HWPB New York, NY 10278 212-264-1369 FTS 264-1369 U.S. EPA, Region 3 841 Chestnut Building Mailcode: 3HW31 Philadelphia, PA 19107 215-597-7354 FTS 597-7354 U.S. EPA, Region 5 230 S. Dearborn St. Mailcode: 5HFKJCK-13 Chicago, IL 60604 312-886-6159 FTS 886-6159 U.S. EPA, Region 6 1445 Ross Avenue Mailcode: 6H-A Dallas, TX 75202-2733 214-655-6755 FTS 255-6755 U.S. EPA, Region 8 999 18th Street Mailcode: 8-HWM-RM Denver, CO 80202-2405 303-293-1489 FTS 564-1489 U.S. EPA, Region 10 1200 Sixth Ave. Mailcode: WD-139 Seattle. WA 98101 206-442-0344 FTS 399-0344 10/88 ------- State UST Program Offices Page 25 Appendix B WA OR 1 MT NO 10 SO WY ME A NV NE IA CA UT IL OH PA m 1 Rl CO •OE -MO KS AZ NM OK 6 MO AR LA KY MS TX TN AL NC 3T SC GA HAWAU c GUAM AM. SAMOA CNMI FL EPA Regional Map VIRGIN IS. PUERTO RICO AL AL DepL of Environmental Mgmt Ground Water Section/Water Division 1751 Congressman W. Dickerson Dr. Montgomery, AL 36130 205-271-7832 AK Dept of Environmental Conservation P.O. Box 0 Juneau. AK 99811-1800 907-465-2653 AR AR Dept. of Pollution Control & EcoL P.O. Box 9583 Little Rock. AR 72219 501-562-7444 AZ AZ Dept. of Environmental Quality Environmental Health Services 2005 N. Central Phoenix, AZ 85004 602-257-6984 CA State Water Resources Control Board OUST P.O. Box 944212 2014 T Street Sacramento, CA 95814 916-322-3133 CO CO Dept. of Health Waste Mgmt Division Underground Tank Program 4210 East 11th Avenue Denver, CO 80220 303-331-4864 CT Hazardous Materials Mgmt Unit Dept of Environmental Protection State Office Building 165 Capitol Avenue Hartford. CT 06106 203-566-4630 DC Dept. at Consumer and Regulatory Affairs Environmental Control Division 516 H Street, N.W. Washington, D.C. 20001 202-783-3205 OE Oivbion of Air and Waste Mgmt. Dept. of Natural Resources & Environmental Control 89 Kings Highway Dover. DE 19903 302-323-4588 FL FL Dept of Environmental Regulation Solid Waste Section Twin Towers Office Building 2600 Blair Stone Road Tallahassee, FL 32399-2400 904-488-0300 GA GA Environmental Protection Division 3420 Norman Berry Drive Hapeville, GA 30334 404-656-7404 HI DepL of Health Hazardous Waste Program P.O. Box 3378 645 Halekauwila Street Honolulu, HI 96801-9984 808-548-5837 IA IA DepL of Natural Resources Henry A. Wallace Building 900 East Grand Des Moines, IA 50319 515-281-3779 ID ID DepL of Health & Welfare Division of Environmental Quality 450 W. State Street Boise, ID 83720 208-334-5347 IL Office of State Fire Marshal 3150 Executive Park Drive Springfield. IL 62703-4599 217-785-5378 IN Underground Storage Tank Program IN Dept. of Environmental Mgmt 105 South Meridian Street Indianapolis, IN 46225 317-243-5055 KS KS Dept of Health & Environment Forbes Held, Building 740 Topeka, KS 66620 913-285-1594 ------- KY Dept erf Environmental Protection Hazardous Waste Branch Fort Boone Plaza, Building *2 18 ReiiJy Road Frankfort KY 40601 502-564-6716 La LA Dept. of Environmental Quality P.O. Box 44274 62S North 4th Street Baton Rouge, LA 70804 504-342-7808 MA Dept. of Public Safety P.O. Box-490 Tewksbury, MA 01876 508-851-9813 ME Underground Tanks Program Bureau of Oil & Hazardous Material Control Dept of Environmental Protection Ray BWg. - Station 17 Augusta, ME 04333 207-289-2651 MD MO Dept. of the Environment Hazard & Solid Waste Mgmt & Admin. OUST and LUST Division 2500 Broening Highway Baltimore, MO 21224 301-631-3442 Ml Fire Marshall Division Ml Dept. of State Police 7150 Harris Drive Lansing, Ml 48913 S17-322-1935 800-MICHUST Underground Storage Tank Program M.N Pollution Control Agency 520 West Lafayette Road SL Paul, MN 55155 612-296-7743 MO MO Dept. of Natural Resources P.O. Box 176 Jefferson City, MO 65102 314-751-7428 MS Dept. of Natural Resources Bureau of Pollution Control UST Section P.O. Box 10385 Jackson. MS 39209 601-961-5171 MT Solid & Hazardous Waste Bureau Dept of Health & Environmental ScL Cogswell Bldg. - Room 8-201 Helena, MT 59620 406-444-2821 NC Div. of Environmental Mgmt. Ground-Water Operations Branch Dept of Natural Resources and Community Development 512 N.- Salisbury, P.O. Box 27687 Raleigh. NC 27611 919-733-3221 NO Division of Waste Mgmt ND Dept. of Health ' '1200 Missouri Avenue Bismarck, ND 58502-5520 701-224-3498 NE NE State Fire Marshal P.O. Box 94677 Lincoln, NE 68509-4677 402-471-9465 NH NH Dept of Environmental Services Water Supply & Pollution Control Div. Hazen Drive, P.O. Box 95 Concord, NH 03301 603-271-3503 NJ Dept of Environmental Protection Div. of Water Resources (CN-029) Trenton. NJ 08625 609-984-3156 NM UST Section (Rm. N. 2150) NM Environmental Improvement Oiv. H. W. Bureau 1190 St Francis Drive Santa Fe, NM 87503 505-827-2894 NV Division of Environmental Protection Dept of Conservation & Natural Res. Capitol Complex 201 S. Fall St Carson City, NV 89710 702-885-5872 NY Bulk Storage Section, Div. of Water Dept of Environmental Conservation 50 Wolf Road, Room 326 Albany, NY 12233-0001 518-457-4351 OH State Fire Marshal's Office Dept of Commerce 8895 E. Main Street Reynoldsburg, OH 43068 614-864-5510 800-282-1927 OK OK Corporation Comm. Jim Thorpe Building Oklahoma City, OK 73105 405-521-3107 OR OR Dept of Environmental Quality 811 SW Sixth Ave. Portland, OR 97204 503-229-5769 PA PA Dept of Environmental Resources Bureau of Water Quality Mgmt Non-point Source & Storage Tank Section 9th Floor Fulton Building Hamburg, PA 17120 717-787-8184 R1 Div. of GW and FW Wetlands Dept of Environmental Management 291 Promenade St. Providence, Rl 02903 401-277-2234 SC Ground-Water Protection Division SC Dept of Health & Environ. Control 2600 Bull Street Columbia, SC 29201 " 803-734-5332 SD Office of Water Quality Dept of Water & Natural Resources Joe Foss Building, mi. 217 Piene, SD 57S01-3181 605-773-3351 TN Division of Ground-Water Protection TN Dept of Health 4 Environmental 150 9th Avenue. North Nashville, TN 37219-5404 615-741-0690 TX UST Program Texas Water Commission P.O.Box 13087; Capital Station Austin, TX 78711 512-463-8180 Page 26 UT Bureau of Solid & Hazardous Waste UT Dept of Environmental Health 288 N. 1460 West Salt Lake City, UT 84116-0700 801-538-6170 VA VA Water Control Board 2111 North Hamilton Street P.O. Box 11143 Richmond, VA 23230-1143 804-367-6350 VT Dept of Environmental Conservation Waste Management Division 103 South Main St. Waterbury, VT 05676 802-244-8702 WA WA Dept. of Ecology, M/S PV-11 Solid & Hazardous Waste Program Olympia, WA 98504-8711 206-459-6272 W1 Dept of Industry, Labor and Human Relations P.O. Box 7979 Madison, Wl 53707 608-266-7605 WV Division of Waste Management WV Dept of Natural Resources 1260 Greenbriar Street Charleston. WV 23505 304-348-5935 WY Water Quality Division Dept of Environmental Quality Herschler Building, 4th Floor West 122 West 25th Street Cheyenne. WY 82002 307-777-7085 AS Environmental Quality Commission Office of the Governor American Samoan Government Pago Pago, American Samoa 96799 684-633-2632 GU GU Environmental Protection Agency P.O. Box 2999 Agana, Guam 96910 671-646-8863 NMI Division of Environmental Quality P.O. Box 1304 Commonwealth of Northern Mariana Islands Saipan, CM 96950 607-234-6984 PR Water Quality Control Area Environmental Quality Board Commonwealth of Puerto Rico Santurce, Puerto Rico 809-725-8410 V! Environmental Protection Division Dept. of Planning and National Resources 179 Altona and Welgunst Charlotte Amlie, St. Thomas, Virgin Islands 00802 809-774-3320 U.S. Environmental Protection Agency Office of Underground Storage Tanks Washington. O.C. 11/88 Biannual Update ------- |