1

Task Order 3003, Technical Directive No. 27

– Task 2, S ubtask e

– State Notification Requirements Summary of State Notification Requirements September 2 8 , 2009 1.0 Background This summary

document reports the current underground storage tank (UST) notif ication requirements for all states and territories. In formation was also gathered on the frequency of UST facility

ownership changes. Two appendi ces are also included (Appendix A: Owner/Operator Organization Contact L ist and Appendix B: Table of State N otification Requirements in MS Excel format). 2.0 State Notification Requirements and Frequency of Ownership Changes Summary Methodology E 2 In c. researched all state and territory UST Program W eb sites to determine state notification requirements for U ST installation and UST facility owner ship changes. E 2 Inc. contacted the six owner/operator organizations 1 provided by the EPA subject matter expert to gather information on the frequency

of UST facility

ownership changes.
Results State Notification Req

uirements In formation on state notification requirements for underground storage tank (UST) installation was available for 55 of the 56 states and territories; information was not available for the U.S. Virgin Islands. All of the 55 states and territories with available information require notification of UST installation, although California’s regulations only imply that notification is required, but do not explicitly

state this requirement. Details of the timeline for required notification are as follow s: 31 states or territories require notification prior to UST installation (Alaska, American Samoa, California, Delaware, Hawaii, Id aho, Iowa, Kansas, Louisiana, Maine, Massachusetts, Michigan, Mississippi, Missouri, Nebraska, New Hampshire, New Jersey , Ne w Mexico, New York, North Carolina, Northern Mariana Islands, Oklahoma, Oregon, Puerto Rico, Rhode I sland, South Carolina, Tennessee, Texas, Vermont, Washington , and Wisconsin). The timeframe for pre

- notification ranges from 90 day s (Washington and New Hampshire) to one day (Oklahoma), with most of the states and territories requiring either 30 day s advance notice, or not specifying a timeframe. Twenty states or territories require notification within 30 day s after UST installation: Alabama, Arizona, Conn ecticut, District of Columbia, Georgia, Guam, Il linois, Indiana, Kentucky , Maryland, Minnesota, Montana, Nevada, North Dakota, Ohio, South Dakota, Utah, Virginia, West Virginia , and Wyoming. T hree states ( Arkansas, Colorado and Florida) require notificati on within 30 day s after addition of regulated substances to the UST. Pennsylvania requires notification simply prior to addition of regulated substances to the UST (Table 1).

1 In order to comply with the Paperwork Reduction Act, no more than nine contractors were contacted.2 Table 1. Timeline for Notification of UST Installation Pre

- notification R equired Number of States Simply prior 10 <16 day s 7 30 day s 11 >30 day s 3 Notification R equired A fter I nstallation Number of States After installation 2 0 Before regulated substance addition 1 After regulated substance addition 3 Notification Timeline U nknown Number of States Unable to find information 1 (U.S. Virgin Is lands) Thirty

- five states or territories (Alabama, Arizona, Colorado, Delaware, District of Columbia, Georgia, Guam, Hawaii, Idaho, Illinois, Indiana, Iowa, Kentu cky, Louisiana, Minnesota, Mississippi, Missouri, Montana, Nevada, New Mexico, North Carolina, North Dakota, Ohio, Oklahoma, Oregon, Puerto Rico, South Carolina, South Dakota, Tennessee, Texas, Utah, Virginia, Washington, West Virginia , and Wyoming) requir e direct notification of UST installation with a form supplied by the area government or through direct communication ( i.e., phone, in person, or e - mail)

. The remaining twenty states or territories require indirect notification of UST installation, meani ng that the notification is issued indirectl y through an application or form that is not solely for the purpose of communicating the intent to install an UST (Table 2)

. The details of the indirect notification are as follows:

 Ten states (Alaska, Arkansas , Florida, Maine, Maryland, Michigan, New Jersey , New York, Pennsylvania and Rhode I sland) require notification indirectly via registration.

 Seven states or territories (American Samoa, California, Kansas, Massachusetts, Nebraska , Northern Mariana Islands , and Wisconsin) require notification of installation indirectly via a permit.

 Connecticut requires notification via a tank life expectancy report. New Hampshire requires notification indirectly via construction plans and Vermont via a construction permi t.
Table 2. Notification Requirements for UST Installation

Type of Notification Number of States Direct 35 Indirect, via : Registration 10

Permit application 7 Construction permit/plans 2 Tank l ifetime report 1 Unable to find information 1 (U.S. Virgin Is lands)
In formation regarding notification requirements for facility ownership changes was not found for eight states and territories (U.S. Virgin Islands, Arizona, Georgia, Idaho, Nevada, North Carolina, North Dakota , and South Carolina). Based on this review of regulations, it appears that3

these eight states and territories do not require notification of UST facility ownership changes. This could be confirmed by contacting these states and territories and asking about their notification requirements (or lack thereof). All other states and territories require notification of changes in UST ownership/operators, although Nebraska’s regulations imply that notification is required, but do not explicitly state this requirement. Twenty

- eight states require direct notification of the transfer, whereas 20 states require notification by indirect means (e.g., registration, permit application, evidence of financial assurance compliance , and reported results of self inspection conducted within three months of ownership change ) (Table 3).

Table 3. Notification Requirements for UST Facility Ownership Changes Type of Notification Number of States D irect 28 Indirect, via: Registration 13

Permits application 4 Other 2 Uncle ar, implied 1 (Nebraska) No notification requirement identified 8

Frequency

of Ownership Changes E 2 In c. contacted six UST facility owner/operator organizations to assess frequency of ownership changes. Of these, onl y the National Association of Truck S top Operators (NATSO) was able to provide the information requested. NATSO reported that ownership transfers over the last few ye ars were 500 to 600 per year for the 6,200 retail diesel fuel facilities (i.e., could be classified as a “truck stop”) that are tracked nationally by the trucking industry ; this is approximately eight

– ten percent per ye ar. Although onl y 1,100 of the 6,200 are NATSO members, NATSO provided th eir estimate based on the universe of facilities that sell diesel fuel and therefore could be classified as a “truck stop ” (6,200)

. The other organizations could not provide the requested information o n ownership changes because they do not keep statistics of UST facility ownership changes. Service Station Dealers of America (SSDA) was able to provide anecdotal evidence to the effect that UST facility

ownership turnover rates are approximately 20 percent per year. Petroleum Marketers Association of America (PMAA) indicated that after the mergers of th e major oil companies in 2002, nearly all of the major oil companies decided to get out of retail and sell all of their retail outlets. As a result, ownership changes have been extremel y high in the past five ye ars. PMAA roughl y estimated that out of 160,000 gas stations, there have been ownership changes at an averag e of at least 2 , 000 stations per ye ar for the past five ye ars (1.25 percent per ye ar) ; however, these numbers are an educated guess and are not concrete data. The American Petroleum Institute ( API ), National Association of Co nvenience Stores (NACS), and the Society of Independent Gasoline Marketers of America ( SI GMA) could not provide either data or anecdotal estimates for ownership changes. Although onl y three varied and approximate values were obtained for the percentage of UST facilities that change ownership each year ( 1.25 percent, eight

– ten percent , and 20 percent), these percentages were used to calculate a rough extrapolation of ownership changes among UST facilities in the United States. Please note that the estimate generated from the PMAA4

values is an educated guess and is not based on any concrete data. OUST estimates that there are 232,684 UST facilities in the United States. Using the percentages obtained in this study , the national number of UST facilities that will have an ownership change in the next year range s from 2,909 ( educated guess of 1.25 percent) to 18 , 615

– 23,268 (eight

– ten percent) to 46,537 (20 percent) . Because these extrapolations are based on widel y varyi ng percentages that are calculated from very

limited data or are anecdotal, the accuracy of these extrapolations is limited.5

Appendix A. Owner/Operator Organizations Contact List Industry and O/O Associations Contact Phone E

- mail Address
National Association of Convenience Stores (NACS ) John Eichberger (703)518

- 4247 jeichberger@nacsonline.com

National Association of Truck Stop Operators (NATSO) Holly Alfan o Stephen Beaulieu (703) 739

- 8501

(703)739

- 8566 halfano@natso.com

sbeaulieu@natso.com
Petroleum Marketers Assoc. of America (PMAA) Dan Gilligan, Pres. Mark Morgan (703)351

- 8000 dgilligan@pmaa.org mmorgan@pmaa.org
Service Station Dealers of America (SSDA) Paul Fiore (301)390

- 4405, Ext. 102 pfiore@ssda

- at.org

Society of Independent Gasoline Marketers of America (S IG MA) Ken Do yl e

James Barnette (703)709

- 7000 kdoyle@sigma.org jbarnette@steptoe.com

American Petroleum Institute (API) Prentiss Searles (202)682

- 8227 searlesp@api.org