UST and LUST Performance Measures Definitions As of October 2018

UST and LUST Performance Measures Definitions

As of October 2018

EPA collects data about federally-regulated underground storage tanks (USTs) from state UST
and leaking UST (LUST) programs based on EPA performance measures. The table of contents
below lists the UST and LUST performance measures; indicates the status of the measures -
whether they are added, updated, retired, phasing out, or unchanged - and shows the page
number for each. Nine measures added October 1, 2018 or later are highlighted in yellow; two
measures retired effective October 1, 2018 are grayed out. The performance measures and entire
definitions are provided on subsequent pages.

Contents

Status Page

UST Universe Performance Measures

UST-1. Total Number of Petroleum UST Systems

Updated 10/1/18

UST-2. Number of Closed Petroleum UST Systems

Updated 10/1/18

UST-3. Total Number of Hazardous Substance UST Systems

Updated 10/1//18

UST-3a. Number of Closed Hazardous Substances UST Systems

Added 10/1/18

UST Significant Operational Compliance (SOC) Performance Measures

UST-4. Percentage of UST Facilities in SOC with UST Spill, Overfill,
and Corrosion Protection

Phasing out

UST-5. Percentage of UST Facilities in SOC with UST Leak Detection

Phasing out

UST-6. Percentage of UST Facilities in SOC with UST Release
Prevention and Detection

Phasing out

UST Inspections Performance Measure

UST-7. Number of On-Site Energy Policy Act Inspections Conducted

Unchanged

UST-8. Number of USTs Identified as Being Ineligible for Delivery, Deposit,
or Acceptance of Product

Retired 10/1/18

UST Compliance Performance Measures Included In Technical Compliance Rate (TCR)

UST-9a. Percentage of Facilities in Compliance with 2015 Spill Prevention

Added 10/13/18

UST-9b. Percentage of Facilities in Compliance with 2015 Overfill Prevention

Added 10/13/18

UST-9c. Percentage of Facilities in Compliance with 2015 Corrosion Protection

Added 10/13/18

UST-9d. Percentage of Facilities in Compliance with 2015 Release Detection

Added 10/13/18

UST-9e. Technical Compliance Rate

Added 10/13/18

UST Compliance Performance Measures Not Included In Technical Compliance Rate (TCR)

UST-10. Percentage of Facilities in Compliance with Energy Policy Act
Operator Training

Added 10/13/18

UST-11. Percentage of Facilities in Compliance with Financial Responsibility

Added 10/13/18

UST-12. Percentage of Facilities in Compliance with 2015 Walkthrough

Arlrlerl 10/1 3/18

Requirements

LUST Performance Measures

LUST-1. Number of Confirmed Releases

Unchanged

LUST-2a-d. Number of Cleanups Initiated

Unchanged

LUST-3a-d. Number of Cleanups Completed

Unchanged

-------
UST Universe Performance Measures

UST-l. Total Number of Petroleum UST Systems (Updated: October 1, 2018): The number
of active Subtitle I regulated petroleum UST systems registered with the state added to the
cumulative number of closed petroleum UST systems. This measure does not include exempt or
excluded UST systems. The count should include those systems that were previously deferred
under the 1988 regulation, but are now considered regulated UST systems under the 2015 UST
regulation.

UST-2. Number of Closed Petroleum UST Systems (Updated: October 1, 2018): The

cumulative number of Subtitle I regulated petroleum UST systems that have been reported to the
state as being closed permanently (according to the closure provisions in 40 CFR Part 280,
Subpart G) which are either left in the ground (in-situ closures) or removed from the ground.

This measure includes facilities where UST systems have been replaced. This measure does not
include exempt or excluded UST systems. After October 1, 2018, this measure includes new tank
closures for systems that were previously deferred under the 1988 regulation but are now
considered regulated UST systems under the 2015 UST regulation. Do not report temporary
closures. If petroleum contamination is found during closure, the facility is counted under both
the "Closed Petroleum UST Systems" and "Confirmed Releases" categories.

UST-3. Total Number of Hazardous Substance UST Systems (Updated: October 1, 2018):

The cumulative number of active and closed (according to the closure provisions in 40 CFR Part
280, Subpart G) combined Subtitle I regulated hazardous substance UST systems. This measure
does not include exempt or excluded UST systems. The count should include those systems that
were previously deferred under the 1988 regulation but are now considered regulated UST
systems under the 2015 UST regulation.

UST-3a. Number of Closed Hazardous Substance UST Systems (Added: October 1, 2018):

The cumulative number of Subtitle I regulated hazardous substance UST systems that have been
reported to the state as being closed permanently (according to the closure provisions in 40 CFR
Part 280, Subpart G) which are either left in the ground (in-situ closures) or removed from the
ground. This measure includes facilities where UST systems have been replaced. This measure
does not include exempt or excluded UST systems. Do not report temporary closures.

UST Significant Operational Compliance (SOC)

Performance Measures

UST-4. Percentage of UST Facilities in Significant Operational Compliance with UST Spill,
Overfill, and Corrosion Protection Requirements (Updated: March 26, 2003; Phasing out
as states implement 2015 UST regulation): The percentage of UST facilities deemed to be in
significant operational compliance with the UST spill, overfill, and corrosion protection
requirements.

Clarification: Report either the SOC measures or the technical compliance rate measures in
UST-9a-e, not both. When states reach all the applicable implementation dates for 2015
requirements, report using the technical compliance rate measures instead of SOC. This is a
percentage, rather than a number, based on initial inspections at facilities daring the last 12

-------
months. This measure applies to the spill, overfill, and corrosion protection requirements that
were phased in through 12/22/1998. Reports should reflect the operational instead of equipped
compliance. Compliance is reported on a facility basis rather than per tank; based on
inspections conducted within the past 12 months; and based on an initial, instead of follow-up,
inspection at a facility. Significant operational compliance generally means that UST systems at
a facility have the proper equipment or procedures in place and are being properly operated and
maintained in order to detect a release.

UST-5. Percentage of UST Facilities in Significant Operational Compliance with UST Leak
Detection Requirements (Updated: March 26, 2003; Phasing out as states implement 2015
UST regulation): The percentage of UST facilities deemed to be in significant operational
compliance with the UST leak detection requirements.

Clarification: Report either the SOC measures or the technical compliance rate measures in
UST-9a-e, not both. When states reach all the applicable implementation dates for the 2015
requirements, report using the technical compliance rate measures instead of SOC. This is a
percentage, rather than a number, based on initial inspections at facilities during the last 12
months. This measure applies to the leak detection requirements that were phased in through
1993. Reports should reflect the operational instead of equipped compliance. Compliance is
reported on a facility basis rather than per tank; based on inspections conducted within the past
12 months; and based on an initial, instead offollow-up, inspection at a facility. Significant
operational compliance generally means that UST systems at a facility have the proper
equipment or procedures in place and are being properly operated and maintained in order to
detect a release.

UST-6. Percentage of UST Facilities in Significant Operational Compliance with UST
Release Prevention (spill, overfill, and corrosion) and Detection Requirements (Updated:
September 30, 2003; Phasing out as states implement 2015 UST regulation): The percentage
of UST facilities deemed to be in significant operational compliance with both the UST spill,
overfill, and corrosion protection requirements (UST-4) and the UST leak detection requirements
(UST-5).

UST Inspections Performance Measure

UST-7. Number of On-Site Energy Policy Act Inspections Conducted (Added: January 18,
2008): This is the number of on-site compliance inspections conducted at federally regulated
UST facilities during the last six months. Each inspection must determine compliance with
Subtitle I and 40 CFR Part 280 or the requirements of a state program approved under section
9004 of Subtitle I. At a minimum, each inspection must assess compliance with the core areas

-------
outlined in EPA's inspection grant guideline at https://www.epa.gov/ust/inspecting-underground-
storage-tanks-2005-energy-policv-act. An on-site inspection includes a review of all applicable
records. However, the records review may be conducted off-site.

Clarification: States should report inspections conducted by the state underground storage tank
(UST) agency; other state agency, local agency, or contractor duly designated by the state to
conduct UST inspections; or private inspectors as part of a third party inspection program that
meets the requirements in EPA's Inspection Grant Guidelines. Regions should report inspections
conducted by the region, contractors, or credentialed inspectors. Follow-ap visits related to the
initial on-site compliance inspection should not be counted as an additional compliance
inspection; installation or closure inspections that do not assess compliance according to the
Inspection Grant Guidelines should not be counted. An inspection is considered to take place on
the date of the on-site inspection, even if it takes additional time after the on-site inspection to
request and review records. Only report the number of inspections conducted during the
reporting period.

UST-8. Number of USTs (or UST Facilities) Identified as Being Ineligible for Delivery,
Deposit, or Acceptance of Product (Retired: October 1, 2018).

UST Compliance Performance Measures Included In
Technical Compliance Rate (TCR)

Note: When determining compliance for technical compliance rate performance measures, states
and regions should refer to Technical Compliance Rate (TCR) Performance Measures at
https://www.epa.gov/ust/technical-compliance-rate-tcr-performance-measures.

UST-9a. Percentage of UST Facilities in Compliance with 2015 Spill Prevention
Requirements (Added: October 13, 2018): The percentage of UST facilities deemed to be in
compliance with the UST spill bucket requirements in the 2015 UST regulation.

Clarification: This is a percentage, rather than a number, based on initial inspections at
facilities during the last 12 months. This measure applies to the spill prevention requirements in
the 2015 UST regulation, including the testing requirement for spill prevention equipment. States
should report this measure on a facility basis rather than per tank; it is based on an initial,
instead offollow-up, inspection at a facility.

UST-9b. Percentage of UST Facilities in Compliance with 2015 Overfill Prevention
Requirements (Added: October 13, 2018): The percentage of UST facilities deemed to be in
compliance with the UST overfill requirements in the 2015 UST regulation.

Clarification: This is a percentage, rather than a number, based on initial inspections at
facilities during the last 12 months. This measure applies to the overfill prevention requirements
in the 2015 UST regulation, including the testing requirement for overfill prevention equipment.
States should report this measure on a facility basis rather than per tank; it is based on an
initial, instead offollow-up, inspection at a facility.

-------
UST-9c. Percentage of UST Facilities in Compliance with 2015 Corrosion Protection
Requirements (Added: October 13, 2018): The percentage of UST facilities deemed to be in
compliance with the UST corrosion protection requirements in the 2015 UST regulation.

Clarification: This is a percentage, rather than a number, based on initial inspections at
facilities daring the last 12 months. This measure covers the corrosion protection requirements
in the 2015 UST regulation. States should report this measure on a facility basis rather than per
tank; it is based on an initial, instead offollow-up, inspection at a facility.

UST-9d. Percentage of UST Facilities in Compliance with 2015 Release Detection
Requirements (Added: October 13, 2018): The percentage of UST facilities deemed to be in
compliance with the UST release detection requirements in the 2015 UST regulation.

Clarification: This is a percentage, rather than a number, based on initial inspections at
facilities during the last 12 months. This measure applies to the release detection requirements,
including testing requirements in the 2015 UST regulation. States should report this measure on
a facility basis rather than per tank; it is based on an initial, instead offollow-up, inspection at a
facility.

UST-9e. Technical Compliance Rate (Added: October 13, 2018): The percentage of UST
facilities deemed to be in compliance with the spill prevention requirements (UST-9a), overfill
prevention requirements (UST-9b), corrosion protection requirements (UST-9c) and the release
detection requirements (UST-9d).

Clarification: This is a percentage, rather than a number, of facilities in compliance with
components of the 2015 UST regulation covered in the measures above; it is based on initial
inspections at facilities during the last 12 months. In order to be in compliance with this
combined measure, a facility must be in compliance with all of the measures listed in the
definition.

UST Compliance Performance Measures Not Included
In Technical Compliance Rate (TCR)

Note: When determining compliance for the remaining UST compliance performance measures,
states and regions should refer to Technical Compliance Rate (TCR) Performance Measures at
https://www.epa.gov/ust/technical-compliance-rate-tcr-performance-measures.

UST-10. Percentage of UST Facilities in Compliance with Energy Policy Act Operator
Training Requirements (Added: October 13, 2018): The percentage of UST facilities deemed
to be in compliance with class A and B designated operator training requirements.

Clarification: This measure is a percentage, rather than a number, offacilities in compliance
with training requirements for class A and B designated operators over the past 12 months. This
measure includes initial training and any retraining requirements set by a state. The measure is
evaluated during UST compliance inspections and is determined based on status at time of the
initial inspection. At the time of inspection, if a state determines that retraining is warranted or

-------
required, this is not considered a failure to meet operator training requirements or this
performance measure.

UST-11. Percentage of UST Facilities in Compliance with Financial Responsibility
Requirements (Added: October 13, 2018): The percentage of UST facilities deemed to be in
compliance with financial responsibility (FR) requirements.

Clarification: This measure is a percentage, rather than a number, of the facilities evaluatedfor
compliance with financial responsibility requirements over the past 12 months and are deemed
to be in compliance with FR requirements. Determination must cover both third party liability
and cleanup. Unlike other compliance measures, compliance may be determined either at the
time of inspection, even when submitted to a state in follow up to an inspection, or according to
generally annually scheduled FR submissions required by a state. Inspectors should determine
compliance based on FR status at the time of inspection, if evaluated on-site, or based on the
first submission received by a state. If a state works with an owner and owner to come into
compliance with FR later, this facility is still out of compliance for purposes of reporting the FR
measure.

UST-12. Percentage of UST Facilities in Compliance with 2015 Walkthrough Requirements
(Added: October 13, 2018): The percentage of UST facilities deemed to be in compliance with
the walkthrough requirements in the 2015 regulation.

Clarification: This measure is a percentage, rather than a number, offacilities in compliance
with 2015 UST regulation walkthrough requirements over the last 12 months. This measure
covers required monthly and annual walkthrough requirements, as well as record retention.
States should report this measure on a facility basis rather than per tank; it is based on an
initial, instead offollow-up, inspection at a facility.

LUST Performance Measures

LUST-l. Number of Confirmed Releases (Updated: March 26, 2003): The cumulative
number of incidents, not UST systems, where an owner or operator identified a release from a
Subtitle I regulated petroleum UST system; reported the release to the state, local, or other
designated implementing agency; and the state or local implementing agency verified the release.
Verification must be according to state procedures such as a site visit, including state contractors;
phone call; follow-up letter; or other reasonable mechanism that confirmed the release.

Clarification: "Confirmed Releases " is a cumulative category; releases should never be deleted
fi'om this category. Even when a cleanup is initiated and completed, the release remains in the
"Confirmed Releases " category. For a site undergoing UST closure activities, a confirmed
release is counted only if petroleum contamination is discovered and verified. In that case, the
release is counted under both the ''Confirmed Releases" and "Closed Petroleum UST Systems"
categories. Even if a release achieves no further action as determined by the implementing
agency, you should still count it as a confirmed release, as well as a cleanup initiated and
cleanup completed.

-------
Example: A confirmed release is identified by the incident, not by the receptors. For example, 10
contaminated residential wells are considered one release if the contamination was caused by a
leaking tank at a single gasoline station. This accounting is true even if it is discovered that more
than one tank at that station was leaking. If tanks at three gasoline stations are found to be
leaking, then three confirmed releases are recorded, regardless of the number of receptors.
Additionally, the initiation of a new cleanup response indicates a separate confirmed release.
The discovery of a leaking tank at a gasoline station, for example, two years after completion of
the original cleanup is classified as a new confirmed release.

LUST-2(a-d). Number of Cleanups Initiated (Updated: March 26, 2003): The cumulative
number of confirmed releases where a state, region or responsible party under supervision as
designated by a state or region has evaluated the site and initiated:

• management of petroleum-contaminated soil,

• removal of free product from the surface or subsurface environment,

• management or treatment of dissolved petroleum contamination,

• monitoring of the groundwater or soil being remediated by natural attenuation, or

• a state has determined that no further actions are currently necessary to protect human
health and the environment.

This is a subset of the LUST-1 measure and is subdivided into four different measures based on
funding/lead for the cleanup. States only see LUST-2a and 2b in the database because LUST-2c
and 2d are for EPA regions only.

• LUST-2a: Number of Cleanups Initiated (RP lead or state lead with state money)

• LUST-2b: Number of Cleanups Initiated (state lead with LUST Trust Fund money)

• LUST-2c: Number of Cleanups Initiated (region lead with LUST Trust Fund money)

• LUST-2d: Number of Cleanups Initiated (tribal lead with LUST Trust Fund money)

The number of cleanups initiated using any LUST Trust Fund money must be reported separately
under LUST-2b, 2c, and 2d, depending on the lead. For example, if a state conducts cleanup
activities using both state money and LUST Trust Fund money, report the cleanup initiated under
LUST-2b.

Clarification: "Cleanups Initiated" is a cumulative category; releases should never be deleted
from this category. Even when a cleanup is progressing and completed, it remains in the
"Cleanups Initiated" category. "Cleanups Initiated" indicates that physical activity, such as
pumping, soil removal, recovery well installation, has begun at the site, unless a state has
evaluated the site and determined that physical activity is currently unnecessary to protect
human health and the environment, and the release achieves no further action. Site
investigations and emergency responses do not qualify as a cleanup initiated unless one of the
five actions listed in the definition has occurred. Releases being remediated by natural
attenuation can be counted in this category when site characterization, monitoring plans, and
site-specific cleanup goals are establishedfor these releases. For cleanups completed under
LUST-3a-d, there must have been a corresponding cleanup initiated under LUST-2a-d.

LUST-3(a-d). Number of Cleanups Completed (Updated: March 26, 2003): The cumulative
number of confirmed releases where cleanup has been initiated and where a state has determined
that no further actions are currently necessary to protect human health and the environment. This

-------
number includes releases in post-closure monitoring, as long as site-specific, that is risk-based,
cleanup goals have been met. Releases using monitored natural attenuation must have completed
site characterization, monitoring plans, and have established and met site-specific cleanup goals
to be counted in this category.

This is a subset of the LUST-2 measure and is subdivided into four different measures based on
funding/lead for the cleanup. States only see LUST-3a and 3b in the database because LUST-3c
and 3d are for EPA regions only.

• LUST-3a: Number of Cleanups Completed (RP lead or state lead with state money)

• LUST-3b: Number of Cleanups Completed (state lead with LUST Trust Fund money)

• LUST-3c: Number of Cleanups Completed (region lead with LUST Trust Fund money)

• LUST-3d: Number of Cleanups Completed (tribal lead with LUST Trust Fund money).

The number of cleanups completed using any LUST Trust Fund money must be reported
separately under LUST-3b, 3c, and 3d, depending on the lead. For example, if a state completes
a cleanup using state money but also used LUST Trust Fund money during the course of the
cleanup, report the cleanup completed under LUST-3b.

Clarification: "Cleanups Completed" is a cumulative category; releases should never be deleted
from this category. A state's no further action determination that satisfies the "Cleanups
Initiated" measure above, also satisfies this "Cleanups Completed" measure. This determination
allows a confirmed release that does not require further action to meet the definition of both an
initiated and completed cleanup

LUST-4. Number of Emergency Responses (Retired: October 1, 2018).

-------