.......................................................................... ........................... w x . . . o.sa.0 ....

Aboveground Storage Tank Regulations

Market demand for aboveground tanks is increasing rapidly. Specific regulations apply to this method of storage. ........................................... by Wayne Geyer ......................................

There are critical differences between the potential for environmental impact of above- ground and underground oil storage. For example, while leaks from underground stor- age tanks (USTs) seep into soil or aquifers, the

concern with aboveground storage tanks (ASTs) is that an overfill or tank rupture can cause product to escape into a navigable stream and immediately create an oil spill pollu- tion incident.

The US. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) has very distinct programs outlining regulation parameters for each type of storage, including source of authority, regula- tory cutoffs and exclusions, definitions, prevention and response requirements, and penalties, etc. Engineers con-

sidering changing or recommending a change in type of storage, particularly from a UST to an AST, need to be aware of existing federal regulations.

UST regulation, administered primarily by the states, falls under EPA Regulation 40 CFR 280. EPA’s under- ground storage tank program, which began in 1988, and the individual state programs that have evolved since then, pro- vide generally accepted benchmarks for safe, reliable under- ground storage of petroleum and hazardous liquid products.

Since the federal UST program began, remediation costs have skyrocketed as a result of the need to clean up leaking tank and piping sites, backfill and surrounding soil or groundwater. Compliance with federal and state UST regulations has not been cheap, and is expected to top

Engineers considering use of aboveground storage tanks need to be aware of the federal regulations that apply to ASTs.

42 POLLUTION ENGINEERING APRIL 15, 1993

$23 billion, according tb some estimates.

Partly as a result, market demand has shifted toward use of aboveground storage tanks, a trend that is expected to continue. Industry figures show a 100 percent increase in factory fabricated above- ground tank activity during the last four years.

ASTs have been regulated by EPA since 1973 under 40 CFR Part 112, the Oil Pollu- tion Prevention regulation. This regulation also is known in the industry as the Spill Pre- vention, Control and Counter- measure (SPCC) regulation.

EPA is currently revising and updating the SPCC regu- lation in two phases. The pro- posed Phase I modifications clarify that certain provisions are mandatory, not discre- tionary. Whereas current SPCC language is more of a guideline, mandatory compli- ance with industry standards soon will be the rule for AST construction and management near navigable waterways.

Part 311 of the Clean Water Act directed EPA to

. _ . .

.e . 1. _c___ *”Iy--._LL*I--I- .--. .............................. ..-*_ ...... I_._” ....... . . . . . . . . . . . . ~. . .

......................................................................................................................................................................................................................

promulgate regulations concerning harmful discharges of oil and hazardous substances into waterways by non-trans- portation related onshore and offshore facilities. The Clean Water Act prohibits discharges and can impose civil or criminal penalties. As a result, the SPCC program for reg- ulation of oil storage and discharges was first published in 1973, and subsequently amended in 1976.

Originally, the SPCC plan established procedures, meth- ods and equipment to prevent the discharge of oil from non- transportation related facilities into navigable waters or adjoining shorelines. The regulation applied to single tanks with capacity greater than 660 gallons, or total tank aggregate capacity greater than 1320 gallons.

The new guidelines will strengthen this provision and continue an emphasis on good engineering practice and judgment. One important addition to Phase I is that all tanks must have secondary containment impervious to oil for a minimum of 72 hours.

Some other proposed changes to SPCC include mandating: That a plan be developed prior to beginning operations

and be certified by an independent professional engineer who has visited the site. (Currently, a plan must be prepared within six months of commencing operations and imple- mented within 12 months.)

That storage system integrity testing requirements for tanks, and especially for piping, be added. Proposed require- ments call for piping integrity to be tested annually; tanks with secondary containment to be tested every 10 years; tanks without secondary containment every five years.

That amendments to an SPCC plan be made by a profes- sional engineer prior to reconstruction or movement of tanks, replacement of tanks or piping, and alteration of sec- ondary systems.

Oil Pollution Act The Oil Pollution Act (OPA) of 1990 places on the on-shore facility tank owner or operator the liability for removal costs and damages, if oil or other hazardous substances are dis- charged from the facility into navigable waters and adjoin- ing shorelines. OPA stipulates the type of damages the owner must pay as a result of destruction of natural resources, and establishes a federal fund where cleanup measures are deemed unsuitable, as in the case of delinquent owners. The US. Coast Guard has primary enforcement of OPA.

When combined with the Clean Water Act, OPA is designed to protect the nation’s waters without addressing sei1 or groundwater contamination, unless the groundwater is hydrogeologically connected. Up to 80 percent of ASTs are believed to be impacted by OPA.

In January 1993, EPA published regulations that revise the Oil Pollution Act of 1990 requirements, originally pro- mulgated under the Clean Water Act. Sometimes erro- neously referred to as Phase I1 of the SPCC, these regula- tions can have serious financial repercussions for large AST facility owners and operators who must prepare and file response plans for a worst-case discharge of oil that poses a threat to the nation’s waters. If total aggregate storage is more than 1 million gallons and the facility is near a pub- lic drinking water intake, is near an environmentally sen- sitive area, does not have adequate secondary containment, or has a significant spill history, it must make a submittal to EPA. EPA must approve plans where a facility can cause “significant and substantial harm.” Facilities with storage of 42,000 gallons or more must still file notification for

APRIL 15, 1993 POLLUTION ENGINEERING 43

....

%%I

Environmental groups are seeking a comprehensive regulatory program for ASTs.

exemption or file a response plan. Typically, th_e response plans will incorporate contingency planning requirements, mandating that tank owners have means to contain a leak via accessible equipment and manpower.

NPDES and other regulations The National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) does not govern ASTs specifically, but it does regulate discharge of pollutants into surface waters. For ASTs, this means runoff from diked areas cannot be direct- ed immediately into a storm sewer, unless quality standards are met. To comply, the industry may be forced to use separators or other forms of water treatment prior to dis- charging surface runoff into storm sewers.

In many areas, the petroleum marketing industry is already installing Phase I (vapors recovered from USTs as tanks we loaded) and Phase 11 (vapors recovered/from auto- mobiles as they’re being filled) to comply with specific regional clean air mandates.

Title I of the Clean Air Act concentrates on reducing ozone, carbon monoxide and particulate problems in specific non- attainment areas. In many metropolitan areas, Stage 11 vapor recovery soon will be mandated by Section 182 of the CAA to reduce air quality concerns. This rule can impact both AST and UST sites, particu- larly where large volume hydrocarbon use takes place. The cost to comply is estimat- ed by some groups to run from $2 billion to $4 billion.

The Superfund Amendments and Reau- thorization Act (SARA), Title 11, requires AST non-petro- leum tank owners to report spills of hazardous wastes, mandates liability coverage and cost recovery for cleanups from responsible parties and establishes cleanup require- ments. According to Title 11, for emergency planning meas- ures, public health officials and agencies are required to have access to certain chemical information.

The Occupational Safety and Health Administration (OSHA) has developed national standards (29 CFR, 1910, 106) for handling, storage and use of flammable and com- bustible liquids. The rules apply to liquids with flashpoints below 200°F. Many OSHA requirements are taken from National Fire Protection Association code (NFPA 30) requirements for flammable and combustible liquids and from other standards. OSHA earlier this year also released 29 CFR Section 1910.146, “Permit Required Coiifined Spaces for General Industry.”

Fire and building codes for flammable and combustible liq- uids are normally followed in order for an installation to meet “authority having jurisdiction” requirements; code language is more extensive and restrictive for ASTs than USTs. Obvi- ously, the concern is for public safety from fires rather than environmental concerns. In the summer of 1993, both the NFPA 30A and UFC model codes will be voted on to adopt expanded language for ASTs, where motor fuels will be dis- pensed from ASTs into motor vehicles. This is a very signif- icant change, which reflects the ongoing trend toward ASTs.

Congress has proposed reauthorization of the Resource Conservation and Recovery Act (RCRA), Subtitle C. Some versions have included AST language that parallels UST

44 POLLUTION ENGINEERING APRIL 15. 1993

language. Several bills to regulate ASTs have been intro- duced on Capitol Hill in recent years.

Environmental groups are seeking a comprehensive reg- ulatory program for AST design, construction, operations, maintenance, financial responsibility, and cleanup require- ments that are similar to current UST rules to protect groundwater and soils.

On March 16, 1993, Rep. James Moran (D-Va.) and Sen. Chuck Robb (D-Va.) introduced a bill, in the House of Rep- resentatives (H. R. 1360) and in the Senate (S. 588), respec-

tively, to establish leak detection, cor- rosion protection, registration fees, structural integrity and secondary con- tainment for ASTs. This bill is similar to S. 1761, introduced in September 1991 and reintroduced in March 1993, by Sen. Thomas Daschle (D-S.D.). The MoradRobb bill, however, also will exempt a portion of tanks with less than 12,000-gallon capacity.

Parts 262,264,265 of RCRA, Subti- tle C, also apply to ASTs as standards applicable to generators of hazardous waste and affiliated treatmentktor- age/disposal facilities.

Subtitle I of RCRA orders owners and operators of USTs who install tanks after December 1988 to meet require- ments concerning correct installation, spill and overfill protection, corrosion protection, and leak detection. Similar issues are also regulated for USTs installed before December 1988. Also, Subtitle I addresses corrective action in

response to leaks, closure requirements for tanks temporar- ily or permanently closed, and financial responsibility for the cost of cleaning up a leak and compensating others for bod- ily injury and property damage caused by a leaking UST.

New UST systems installed since the regulations went into effect require certification that the tank and piping are designed, constructed and installed to industry codes; incorporate devices for preventing spills and overfills; and include leak detection for both the tank and piping.

By December 1998, all UST systems (including those installed prior to implementation of the UST regulations in 1988) must have corrosion protection for steel tanks and piping, and incorporate devices that prevent spills and over- fills. Release detection must be phased in by the end of next year or earlier, depending on the age of the tank system.

State a d !mal regulations may differ f ran federal. Ov;n- ers and operators unfamiliar with such regulations should contact the local fire marshal for help.

Wayne Geyer is executive vice president of the Steel Tank Insti- tute, Lake Zurich, Ill. 708-438-8265. Portions of this article are excerpted from the author’s presentation at the 85th Annual Meeting of the Air & Waste Management Association, June 1992.

Reader Interest Review Please circle the appropriate number on the Reader Service Card to indicate the level of interest in the article. High 418 Medium 419 Low 420

..