This Fact Sheet has been developed by the Bureau of Underground Storage Tank Regulations (BUSTR) and the Petroleum Underground Storage Tank Release Compensation Board (Board), which administers the Financial Assurance Fund (Fund), to give owners/operators (O/O) and consultants a clear understanding of the pre-approval requirements for both agencies. BUSTR corrective action pre-approval requirements are set forth in O.A.C. 1301:7-9-13, while the corresponding Board cost pre-approval requirements are found in O.A.C. 3737-1-12.1.
Both BUSTR and the Board pre-approval processes are related in that they are required for specific corrective action activities: Interim Response Actions; Remedial Action Plans; Tier 3 Evaluations; and, Tier Evaluation Monitoring Plans. The emphasis of BUSTR is to evaluate these activities for technical feasibility and to ensure that an appropriate scope of work has been proposed. It is the Board’s focus to evaluate costs (resulting from assured UST systems) associated with these activities to determine if they are typical (based on the Fund’s experience), and to ensure that the least cost alternative has been selected for the site.
PRE-APPROVAL
REQUIREMENTS
Current
BUSTR and Board Rules
Under
current rules, O/O are required to submit to
BUSTR and the Board the following
for pre-approval:
1. Interim Response Actions (IRA) (as required);
? The
volume of soil to be excavated is greater than 800 cubic yards.
? The
time to initiate and complete the IRA is greater than three months.
? More
than one IRA is to be conducted during any tier evaluation.
2. Remedial Action Plans;
3. Tier 3 Evaluations; and,
4. Tier Evaluation Monitoring Plans.
HOW THE PROCESS WORKS
1. Both the same costs estimates and scope of work should be submitted
simultaneously to BUSTR and the Board.
2. RAPs should include a brief description of the remedial alternatives considered, including a discussion of the reliability, effectiveness, cost, and time needed for completion, and the rational for the selected remedial alternative. In addition, a detailed cost and completion schedule for the remedial alternative that is recommended must be submitted with the RAP.
3. If unique site conditions exist which require more complicated
corrective actions, the O/O and consultant are encouraged to contact both
BUSTR and the Board while they are developing their remedial action plan.
4. Following the implementation of a RAP, if the technology approved by
BUSTR has been unable to reduce the concentrations of chemical(s) of concern
to a level at or below action levels or SSTL’s, as outlined in the
completion schedule, then the O/O must re-evaluate the remedial action
alternatives and submit a revised RAP to both
BUSTR and the Board for
approval.
5. Each agency performs an independent review of the submitted documents
to determine if approval is
warranted for the selected remedial technology/monitoring plan. However,
prior to BUSTR approval of a RAP, Public Notice is required. Public
Notice is the process by which the general public may inquire or make comments
regarding the proposed RAP.
6. If any issues exist regarding the proposed scope of work, BUSTR and/or the Board may confer to discuss the issues during the review process.
FAILURE TO SECURE
PRE-APPROVAL
If
any of the activities requiring pre-approval are conducted without prior
approval from both BUSTR and the Board, the following may occur:
1. Lack of compliance with
BUSTR pre-approval requirements may necessitate
additional CA activities. Additionally,
being out of compliance with
BUSTR may jeopardize future reimbursement from
the Fund.
2. Failure to submit costs to the Board when pre-approval is required, may
result in reimbursement being limited to 50% of the usual, customary and
reasonable cost of the least expensive remedial alternative, as determined
from the Fund’s experience.
O/O
may voluntarily submit proposed CA activities (other than those requiring
mandatory pre-approval) along with the associated costs to the Board for
voluntary pre-approval. While
BUSTR does not offer a similar program, it does encourage pro-active
communication between itself and the regulated community and strongly
recommends the use of the Board’s voluntary cost pre-approval program. Please refer to the Board’s
Fund Facts regarding voluntary pre-approval.