Paul McWhorter is CEO of SPC Corporation and has been processing and certifying SPCC/FR Plans since 1992.

Since the introduction of the UST deadline in 1984 which created a ten year compliance period beginning in 1988 and ending December 22, 1998, there have been numerous questions about the need to comply with 40 CFR 112, the Oil Pollution Act which addresses both underground and aboveground storage of fuel and related materials. Part of the confusion is based upon the complex series of federal, regional, state and local guidelines. The focus of this information is to report on federal jurisdiction, interpretation and current enforcement activities.

40 CFR 112 generally suggests the need to compose and certify either an SPCC (Spill Control and Countermeasure) or FR (Facility Response) Plan based upon the amount of fuel or related-material stored on a given site. If an owner/operator has 660 gallons in a single container or an aggregate (combined from several tanks) of over 1320 gallons, he MIGHT be considered a candidate for an SPCC or FR plan. The Regional Administrator for US EPA in each specific region also considers whether the storage might impact "navigable waterways" as a secondary consideration in determining the necessity for a certified Plan.

In practice, this regional interpretation has been one of the largest sources of confusion in the national marketing of fuel storage. One region may apply a literal interpretation while another region may apply a "liberal" interpretation. The only safeguard in this compliance objective is to constantly maintain an understanding of what is required within your jurisdiction.

For instance, in Philadelphia enforcement activity included a $34,000 fine for an AST owner/operator who failed to compose and certify a plan for his 10,000 gallon tank. However, several key facts bear investigation in what ultimately ended up as an administrative hearing by US EPA which reduced the fine to $33,000. The owner/operator had a history of spill and leakage on site and thought that by upgrading the tank this would totally alleviate the matter. The Agency did not agree and imposed the modified fine as a final order.

In California, a bellweather state for environmental regulatory activity, two owner/operators who composed and certified Plans were still fined $110,000 each because it was proven that the Plans were intended to mislead the regulators from serious operational deficiencies. The current upper limit for non-compliance for SPCC/FR Plans is $125,000 per site. Please note that this is limited to failure to provide the Plan - additional liabilities can be generated by knowingly operating a fuel storage site with serious deficiencies and attempting to misrepresent these deficiencies. The worst-case scenario for this violation can be $75,000/day per tank plus up to two years incarceration in federal prison for each conviction.

Although having a certified Plan is not a carte blanch guarantee for fine prevention, the reduction of liabilities by compliance and a certified SPCC/FR Plan becomes well worth the cost. The safe versus sorry method has normally been the benchmark for SPCC/FR Plans.