United States
Environmental Protection
Agency
Office of
Solid Waste and
Emergency Response
&EPA
DIRECTIVE NUMBER:
TITLE:
DATE:
ORIGINATING OFFICE:
9630.9
State UST Program Grant Guidance
May 5, 1993
OSWER
OSWER
OSWER
OSWER
DIRECTIVE
DIRECTIVE
DIRECTIVE
-------
Table of Contents
TRANSMITTAL MEMO 1
I. PURPOSE OF GRANT GUIDANCE 2
II. PURPOSE OF STATE UST PROGRAM GRANTS 2
III. NATIONAL PRIORITIES, GOALS, AND FUND ABLE TASKS 3
A. National Priorities 3
B. Goals 3
C. Fundable Tasks 4
Other Tasks 5
IV. ALLOCATION OF STATE GRANT FUNDS 5
V. STATE MATCH 6
VI. GRANT ADMINISTRATION 6
Grant Application 6
Grant Negotiations 6
Grant Awards 6
Suggested Grant Award Schedule 7
OO
Grant Oversight 7
State Reporting Requirements and Schedule 7
QUARTERLY ACTIVITIES REPORT 9
LEAK DETECTION COMPLIANCE AND ENFORCEMENT REPORTING 9
EXCEPTION SITE REPORT 11
OSWER Directive 9630.9
-------
MAY 4, 1993
OFFICE OF
SOLID WASTE AND EMERGENCY
RESPONSE
MEMORANDUM
SUBJECT: STATE UST PROGRAM GRANT GUIDANCE
FROM: David W. Ziegele, Director
Office of Underground Storage Tanks
TO: UST Regional Program Managers
Thank you for your input and comments on the draft UST Program
Grant Guidance. Several editorial changes were made to the draft
based on your comments. Attached is a copy of the final guidance,
which is OSWER Directive 9630.9.
As stated in my transmittal memorandum of the draft guidance, this
guidance will serve for all future UST grant awards in lieu of
issuing grant guidance each fiscal year. However, if we amend the
guidance in the future, it will be reissued (including all
attachments) as an OSWER Directive with a new number. The changes to
the guidance will be highlighted on the required forms that accompany
the package and detailed in my transmittal memorandum.
If you have any questions or comments concerning the guidance,
please contact Dana Tulis at 703 308-8891.
Attachments
cc: Regional Branch Chiefs
OUST Management Team
David Hamnett, OUST
OUST Desk Officers
OSWER Directive 9630.9
-------
I. PURPOSE OF GRANT GUIDANCE
This guidance provides the criteria and procedures for allocation of grant funds for State Underground
Storage Tank (UST) program activities. Instead of sending out guidance every year, this guidance will
serve for all future UST Grant awards, unless it is superseded by an amendment or another document. As
a supplement to the grant regulations under 40 CFR Sections 31 and 35, this guidance is to be used in
developing and reviewing grant applications, awarding grants, and monitoring grant activities.
Regional offices are responsible for negotiating grant agreements with States in accordance with national
guidance adapted to individual State situations in order to stimulate and assist State program development
(if needed) and implementation, monitor progress, and evaluate grant fund expenditures. In the interest of
streamlining, the Regions are encouraged to award multi-year grants to the States by setting up two to
three year performance periods and amending budget periods annually.
Additional implementation guidance may be found in: 1) OSWER Directive 9650.13 "Streamlined
Implementation of UST Corrective Action Requirements," 2) "UST/LUST Program Draft Strategic
Framework" (March 1993), 3) OSWER Directive 9610.5 "FY 1989-1990 Transition Strategy for the UST
Program," and 4) OSWER Directive 9610.5-1 "Transition Tasks List."
II. PURPOSE OF STATE UST PROGRAM GRANTS
The purpose of the UST grant program is to assist States in implementing effective State-run UST
regulatory programs for the prevention, detection, and correction of leaking underground storage tanks
containing petroleum and hazardous substances.
It should be noted that Congress intended that Federal grant funds in the UST program be used as 'seed'
money to assist States with the development and implementation of State programs. Many States have
already developed or are developing alternative or supplemental funding mechanisms; e.g., tank fees, gas
taxes, to provide a consistent funding base for their prevention programs.
In addition to State program grants, EPA has and continues to develop a variety of implementation tools
for use by States, and hosts an annual national forum for States to share information and experiences
concerning their UST programs. EPA is also providing Leaking Underground Storage Tanks (LUST)
Trust Fund monies to States to assist in the oversight and clean up of contamination caused by leaking
petroleum tanks. States that have not yet applied for State Program Approval are expected to make
reasonable progress toward submitting a completed application to EPA for approval of their UST
prevention, corrective action, and financial responsibility programs under Section 9004 of RCRA. A
State's success in receiving State Program Approval will be rewarded with funds from the LUST Trust
Fund.
The solution to the problem of leaking USTs is for States to implement prevention programs and to
streamline their cleanup programs which, over time, will result in a drastic reduction in the number of
leaking USTs. 'De emphasis of EPA's long-term implementation strategy is to develop strong State and
local programs. EPA's focuses its resources and efforts on building and improving State programs while
providing flexibility in approaches and striving for constant improvement. EPA will work in tandem with
OSWER Directive 9630.9
-------
States to improve performance, streamline procedures, and promote Total Quality Management in
specific program areas such as enforcement, inspections, site assessments, and corrective actions.
III. NATIONAL PRIORITIES, GOALS, AND FUNDABLE TASKS
A. National Priorities
EPA has identified four priority areas that are critical to successful implementation of the national UST
program. These priority areas highlight the activities that States should conduct. The four priorities are:
Corrective Action Streamlining, Leak Detection ' Compliance and Enforcement, State Program Approval,
and 1998 Upgrading/ Replacement Compliance. This fourth priority is primarily a focus for OUST, rather
than States, in FY 94. It is not anticipated that States which have deadlines in accordance with Federal
regulations will be active in this fourth priority area in FY 94. However, OUST will engage in collecting
data from States with earlier deadlines and in developing outreach materials for owners/operators in
preparation for meeting the deadline. Some States may need to include tasks to contribute to or participate
in these efforts. The goals and fundable tasks for each of the priority areas are discussed below.
B. Goals
1) Corrective Action Streamlining
To promote scientifically-sound, rapid, and cost-effective action at all UST release sites requiring
corrective action through the use of streamlined processes, effective technologies, and improved
cross-program coordination.
Note: OUST recognizes that accomplishment of the streamlining corrective action goal will be addressed
primarily under the LUST Trust Fund cooperative agreements because of a greater level of resources
available from the fund. While corrective action quality improvement is an eligible activity under an UST
grant, it will not be addressed specifically in this guidance. Nevertheless, corrective action quality
improvement activities are in concert with prevention program activities and will augment the growth and
effectiveness of State UST prevention programs.
2) Leak Detection Compliance and Enforcement
To assure owners and operators routinely and correctly monitor all regulated tanks and piping for
leaks in accordance with the regulations.
3) State Program Approval
To encourage and ensure that all State programs develop sufficient authorities and enforcement
capabilities (to apply for approval from EPA) to operate in lieu of the Federal program.
4) Preparation for the 1998 Deadline
To ensure owners and operators will upgrade or replace their tanks to meet new tank standards by
the 1998 deadline.
OSWER Directive 9630.9
-------
C. Fundable Tasks
EPA recognizes that completion of many of these tasks is a process requiring a multi-year effort. For each
task, specific outputs for individual States will be determined by negotiations between the States and the
EPA Regional Office, taking into account the nature and extent of program needs in that State and the
national priorities. Required activities are only those actually negotiated between an EPA Region and
State. The following tasks are eligible uses of UST grant funds.
1) Corrective Action Streamlining
• develop adequate statutory and regulatory authorities
• establish cleanup policies and write clear guidance for owners and operators
• streamline corrective action procedures
• establish mechanism to determine high and low-risk sites
• maintain data management base for notification program and STARS reporting
• conduct outreach (e.g., training/technical assistance) for State and local personnel,
consultants, owners and operators
• conduct formal and informal corrective action enforcement
• investigate mechanisms to fund State programs
• track the solvency of State funds (refer to document "Monitoring the Financial Soundness
of Approved State Assurance Funds")
• identify need for streamlining and opportunities for non-traditional technologies
2) Leak Detection Compliance and Enforcement
• develop adequate authorities and procedures
• identify, investigate and enforce State/federal regulations
• establish a well-trained field presence
• develop and use alternative compliance mechanisms (e.g., field citations)
• establish and maintain leak detection compliance tracking system
• develop and use an enforcement targeting scheme
• conduct effective outreach (e.g., training and technical assistance) to local agencies and
owners and operators
• streamline enforcement procedures
3) State Program Approval
• implement transition tasks (for States that have not yet received State program approval)
• develop/revise State authorities and regulations to meet federal standards
• establish enforcement capabilities and procedures
• develop draft State Program Approval application
• complete final State Program Approval application
4) 1998 Upgrading/Replacement Compliance
• develop adequate authorities and regulations
OSWER Directive 9630.9
-------
design programs to implement compliance and enforcement for 1998 deadline
conduct outreach (e.g., technical guidance) to owners and operators, regulators, and
vendors
establish a mechanism to track compliance with the upgrading requirements
investigate State financial assistance and licensing programs for upgrading and
replacement
Other Tasks
The national program supports efforts on the State level to integrate the State groundwater protection
strategy with UST prevention program activities. The primary goal of this plan is to avoid duplication of
effort and identify common information needs.
IV. ALLOCATION OF STATE GRANT FUNDS
The total State grant allocations are expected to remain at $9 million a year. If this changes in this year or
in future years, a memorandum regarding Regional UST grant allocations will be sent to the Regional
Program Managers.
The grant funds will be allocated to the Regions at the rate of $162.5 thousand per State (plus Puerto Rico
and the District of Columbia) and $137.5 thousand for the Virgin Islands and Pacific Trust Territories.
Regions have the ability to move funds among their States and territories.
Regional Allotments for State UST Program Grants
Region 1
Region 2
Region 3
Region 4
Region 5
Region 6
Region 7
Region 8
Region 9
Region 10
Total
$975k
625k
975k
1300k
975k
812.5k
650k
975k
1062.5k
650k
$9000k
OSWER Directive 9630.9
-------
V. STATE MATCH
State UST program grants will continue to require a minimum of 25% grant match from the States. Of
course, the State match may include in-kind contributions. States are encouraged to provide information
on the size of their commitment of total resources to the program, even when this exceeds 25%.
VI. GRANT ADMINISTRATION
Grant Application
The State or Region may initiate the grant process. A State may submit a draft grant application to the
Region, or the Region may provide a draft work plan to its States for consideration.
Grant Negotiations
Specific activities funded under each State's grant work plan will be determined through negotiations with
the Region. In accordance with the Agency's policy on performance-based grants, each State will be
expected to make specific task and resource commitments as part of its grant agreement. Commitments
should reflect the priorities stated in this guidance.
Designated State agencies may enter into intergovernmental agreements with substate or local
government agencies and thereby provide funds for the performance of specific tasks (40 CFR Section
31.36). The designated State agency retains the ultimate responsibility for ensuring that such funds are
expended property, in accordance with Federal requirements. Substate agencies that intend to contract out
for services must comply with applicable procurement requirements (40 CFR Part 31).
Grant Awards
All available grant funds should be obligated to the State in the fiscal year in which the grant is awarded.
States should make every effort to use grant monies during the allotted period. Otherwise, carryover funds
may be awarded at the Regional Administrator's discretion, but only for the purposes specified in this
guidance.
UST program grant funds may be used only for eligible activities, e.g., those which are: (1) necessary to
develop and implement an approvable State UST program, and (2) activities which are allowable for
funding (see OMB circular A-87 and CFR 31.22).
When a State does not seek program approval or make sufficient progress toward State Program
Approval, the Regional Administrator may use funds not awarded or committed to that State to
supplement awards to other States or to support a Federal program conducted in the absence of an
acceptable State program.
OSWER Directive 9630.9
-------
Suggested Grant Award Schedule
(may vary by Region)
April-June
July
August
By Sept. 30
October
Develop draft grant applications (Regions and States)
Regions begin grant negotiations with States
States submit final grant applications
Regions have processed grant up to point of award
Regions begin to award grants
Grant Oversight
In accordance with Agency policy, the Region must conduct at least one on-site review. Regions should
plan a mid-year and/or end-of-year review with each State, and forward to OUST/HQ a copy of each
State's performance evaluation final report. Regions may arrange with States for more frequent reviews.
The comprehensive program review for each State should discuss progress toward completion of funded
tasks. Reviews should identify:
1. areas of success including approaches that could be shared with other States;
2. areas for improvement in the UST program;
3. areas where EPA assistance could be helpful, including a plan for action;
4. areas where EPA or other Federal agencies are a barrier or create problems for the State program,
creating a need for EPA to address such areas.
Copies of all State program evaluation reports and end-of-year grant reports should be sent to Dana Tulis,
Chief, Operations Branch, OUST, within 30 days of completion of the report.
State Reporting Requirements and Schedule
States must report required program activities to the Regions (see attachments). In addition, all states are
to report in a timely and accurate fashion the data needed for quarterly activities reports and the STARS
reports for the EPA UST program. Regions will need to relay this data to OUST/HQ within 10 working
days of the end of each fiscal quarter. Regions and States must develop reporting schedules that allow
them to meet these deadlines. Regions shall request that States add annual data concerning total number
of petroleum tanks and number of hazardous substance tanks (existing and closed) to the quarterly
activities report. States only need to report the information concerning the number of tanks (G-4) once a
year on the second quarter report.
OSWER Directive 9630.9
-------
OUST is requesting that Regions validate that States are updating their UST database information prior to
submittal of STARS data, including the total number of federally regulated tanks and the number of
hazardous substance USTs. Please refer to February 19, 1993. memorandum: "Follow-up to the IG Audit
on the National Tank Inventory" for further details.
OSWER Directive 9630.9
-------
QUARTERLY ACTIVITIES REPORT
Fiscal Quarter: Region: State:
OUST
G-l
G-2
STARS
UST-
1A
UST-1B
DEFINITION
Has State submitted a
complete application for State
Program Approval?
Does the State have an
Authorized Program?
LAST
QUARTER
CUMULATIVE
ACTIONS
THIS
QUARTER
CORRECTIONS
TO PREVIOUS
DATA
CUMULATIVE
TOTAL
G-4
G-4
G-4
G-4
A. Existing Registered
Petroleum Tanks
B. Number of Closed
Petroleum Tanks (in place
and removed)
C. Total Number of
Petroleum Tanks (A+B)
D. Number of Hazardous
Substance Tanks (existing
and closed)
TF-1
TF-2
TF-3
TF-3
TF-3
TF-5
TF-5
TF-5
TF-6
UST-3
UST-
2A1
UST-
2A2
UST-
2A3
UST-
2B1
UST-
2B2
UST-
2B3
Reported Confirmed Releases
Emergency Responses Taken
LUST Cleanups Initiated:
petroleum (RP lead)
LUST Cleanups Initiated:
petroleum (State lead with TF
money)
LUST Cleanups Initiated:
petroleum (State lead with
State money)
LUST Cleanups completed:
petroleum (RP lead)
LUST Cleanups completed:
petroleum (State lead with TF
money)
LUST Cleanups completed:
petroleum (State lead with
State money)
Sites with enforcement
actions
LEAK DETECTION COMPLIANCE AND ENFORCEMENT REPORTING
Fiscal Quarter: Region: State:
OSWER Directive 9630.9
-------
MEASURE
LD-1 Has the State attempted to provide leak
detection compliance information to most
facilities?
LD-2A How many facilities were required to
submit verification of leak detection compliance
(e.g., self certification on permit applications,
submission of evidence of compliance such as
tank/piping test results, tank tagging, distributor
activities, etc.)?
LD-2B Of the facilities counted in the measure
LD-2A, how many were in significant compliance
as determined by the State or EPA?
LD-3 A How many leak detection compliance
inspections has the State or EPA made?
LD-3B How many inspected facilities were in
significant compliance with Federal and State
requirements?
LD-4 How many facilities received informal
enforcement actions (e.g., warning letters, show
cause meetings, etc.).
LD-5 How many formal enforcement actions has
the State or EPA taken against non-complying
facilities?
Cumulative
Last Quarter
Actions
this
Quarter
Corrections
to last
Quarter
Cumulative
this Quarter
OSWER Directive 9630.9
10
-------
Exception Site Report
Please list cumulative activity and corrections to previous quarters' information for any site where more
than $100,000 of LUST Trust Fund Money is planned to be spent.
Fiscal Quarter: Region: State:
Site Name or
Description
When was
expenditure
planned?
Amount
Planned
Amount
Obligated
Amount
Outlayed
Judgments/
Settlements
Cost
Recovered
For all LUST Trust Fund sites, give total dollar amount of all judgments and settlements:
For all LUST Trust Fund sites, give total costs recovered from all judgments and settlements:
OSWER Directive 9630.9
11
------- |