b.
Delivery prohibition eligibility criteria. A delivery
prohibition response action may be initiated upon a finding that the
UST system
is out of compliance with
department rules and meets the eligibility criteria
as specified below. Reinstatement criteria define the standards and process for
owners and operators to document that they have taken
corrective action
sufficient to authorize resumption of fuel to the USTs. Prior to initiation of
the delivery prohibition, owners and operators are afforded a minimum level of
procedural due process such as prior notice and the opportunity to present
facts to dispute the finding. Where notice and the opportunity to take
corrective action prior to initiation of a delivery prohibition response action
are required, notice by the
department or by a certified compliance inspector
as provided in rule
567-135.20 (455B) shall be
sufficient.
If the department finds that any one of the following
criteria has been satisfied, the department may initiate a delivery prohibition
response action following the notice procedures outlined in
paragraph"e" of this subrule. After initiation of the delivery
prohibition response action, the department will offer the owner or operator an
opportunity to establish reinstatement criteria by written documentation and,
if requested, an in-person meeting.
(1) An approved
release detection method for
USTs or
UST piping is not installed, such as automatic
tank gauging,
groundwater monitoring wells and line leak detectors, and there is no record
that an approved method such as inventory control, statistical inventory
reconciliation, or interstitial space monitoring has been employed during the
previous three months. If the owner or
operator claims to have documentation
that an approved
release detection method has been conducted, the owner or
operator will be given two business days to produce the documentation.
REINSTATEMENT CRITERIA: The owner or operator must submit
results of a passing UST system precision tightness test at the 0.1
gallon-per-hour leak rate in paragraphs 135.5(4)"c" and
135.5(5)"b." The owner or operator must also document
installation and operation of an approved release detection system. This may
include proof that a contract has been signed with a qualified statistical
inventory reconciliation provider or that a qualified inventory control method
has been implemented and training has been provided to onsite supervisory
personnel.
(2) No
documentation of a required annual line tightness test or line leak detector
test has been provided, and the owner or
operator has failed to conduct the
required testing within 14 days of written notice by the
department or a
certified compliance inspector as provided in rule
567-135.20 (455B).
REINSTATEMENT CRITERIA: The owner or operator must provide
documentation of a passing line precision tightness test at the 0.1
gallon-per-hour leak rate in paragraph 135.5(5)"b" and a line
leak detector test as provided in paragraph 135.5(5)"a."
(3) Overfill and spill
protection is not installed.
REINSTATEMENT CRITERION: The owner or operator must provide
documentation that overfill and spill protection equipment has been
installed.
(4) A corrosion
protection system is not installed or there is no record that an impressed
current corrosion protection system has been in operation for the prior six
months.
REINSTATEMENT CRITERIA: A manned entry tank integrity
inspection must be completed prior to installation of a corrosion protection
system, and the owner or operator must submit results of a passing UST system
precision tightness test at the 0.1 gallon-per-hour leak rate in paragraphs
135.5(4)"c" and 135.5(5)"b." A corrosion
protection analysis must be completed and approved by the department.
(5) The owner or
operator has
failed to provide proof of financial responsibility in accordance with
567-Chapter 136.
REINSTATEMENT CRITERION: The owner or operator must submit
acceptable proof of financial responsibility in accordance with 567-Chapter
136.
(6) A qualified
UST
system release detection method is installed and is being used but the
documentation or the absence of documentation is sufficient to question the
reliability of the
release detection over the past 12-month period. The owner
or
operator shall be notified of the deficiencies, shall be given at least two
business days to produce documentation of compliance and, if necessary, shall
be required to conduct a leak detection system analysis and a system tightness
test within 14 days. If the owner or
operator fails to produce documentation of
compliance or to conduct the system analysis and the
UST system precision
tightness test at the 0.1 gallon-per-hour leak rate in paragraphs
135.5(4)
"c" and 135.5(5)
"b," the
department
may initiate a delivery prohibition response action. Notice by the
department
or a compliance inspector as provided in rule
567-135.20 (455B) shall be
sufficient to initiate a delivery prohibition response action.
REINSTATEMENT CRITERIA: The owner or operator must submit
documentation that the leak detection method analysis sufficiently documents
compliance and explains the reasons for the accuracy and reliability concerns.
If necessary, the owner or operator must submit passing results of a UST system
precision tightness test at the 0.1 gallon-per-hour leak rate in paragraphs
135.5(4)"c" and 135.5(5)"b."
(7) The owner or
operator has
failed to document completion of a three-year corrosion protection test or to
repair defective corrosion protection equipment within 30 days after notice of
the violation by the
department or a certified compliance inspector as provided
in rule
567-135.20 (455B).
REINSTATEMENT CRITERION: The owner or operator must submit
documentation of a three-year corrosion protection test as provided in rule
567-135.3 (455B).
(8) The
owner or
operator has failed to complete a compliance inspection required by
rule
567-135.20 (455B) within 60 days
after written notice of the violation by the
department.
REINSTATEMENT CRITERION: The owner or operator must submit a
compliance inspection report as provided in rule
567-135.20 (455B).
(9) The owner or
operator has
failed to take necessary abatement action in response to a confirmed
release as
provided in subrules 135.7(2) and 135.7(3).
REINSTATEMENT CRITERION: The owner or operator must document
compliance with the abatement provisions in subrules 135.7(2) and
135.7(3).
(10) The owner or
operator has failed to undertake and document
release investigation and
confirmation steps within seven days in response to a suspected
release as
provided in paragraph 135.6(3)
"a."
REINSTATEMENT CRITERION: The owner or operator must document
release confirmation and system check as provided in paragraph
135.6(3)"a."
(11) The owner or
operator has failed to
provide documentation of Class A or B
operator training.
REINSTATEMENT CRITERION: The owner or operator must submit a
copy of the certificates of training for Class A and B operators.
(12) The owner or
operator has
failed to install required
secondary containment.
REINSTATEMENT CRITERION: The owner or operator must document
secondary containment has been installed as provided in subrule
135.3(9).
(13) The owner or
operator has failed to pay the annual
tank management fee.
REINSTATEMENT CRITERION: The owner or operator must pay the
current and any previous unpaid tank management fees in addition to any late
fees as provided in paragraph 135.3(5)"b."
(14) When tanks are no longer in use or in
temporary closure.
REINSTATEMENT CRITERION: The owner or operator must provide a
completed Return to Service form along with required documents.
c.
Provisional
status. The
department may classify a
UST system as operating under a
provisional status when the
department documents a pattern of
UST operation and
maintenance violations under rules
567-135.3 (455B) through
567-135.5 (455B) and suspected
release and confirmed
release response actions under rules
567-135.6 (455B) and
567-135.7 (455B). The
department
shall provide the owner or
operator with a notice specifying the basis for the
proposed classification and a proposed remedial action plan. The objective of
the remedial action plan is to provide the owner and
operator an opportunity to
undertake certain remedial actions sufficient to establish a reasonable
likelihood that future regulatory compliance will be achieved.
The remedial action plan may include but is not limited to
provisions for owner/operator training, development of a facility-specific
compliance manual, more frequent third-party compliance inspections than
otherwise required under rule 567-135.20 (455B), monthly reporting, and
retention of a third-party compliance manager/consultant. If the owner or
operator and the department cannot reach agreement on a remedial action plan,
the department may initiate enforcement action by issuance of an administrative
order pursuant to 567-Chapter 10. This provision does not grant the owner or
operator an entitlement to this procedure, and the department reserves all
discretion to undertake an enforcement action and assess penalties as provided
in Iowa Code sections
455B.476 and
455B.477.
e.
Due process prior to initiation of
a delivery prohibition response action.
(1) Prior to imposing a delivery prohibition
response action under paragraph 135.3(8)
"b" above, the
department will provide notice to the owner or
operator or, if notice to the
owner or
operator cannot be confirmed, to a
person in charge at the
UST
facility of the basis for the finding and the intent to initiate a delivery
prohibition response action. Notice may be by verbal contact, by facsimile, or
by regular or certified mail to the
UST facility address or the owner's or
operator's last-known address. The owner and
operator will be given a minimum
of one business day to provide documentation that the finding is inaccurate or
that reinstatement criteria in subparagraphs 135.3(8)
"b" (1)
through (5) have been satisfied. Additional days and the opportunity for a
telephone or in-
person conference may be provided the owner and
operator to
contest the factual basis for a finding under subparagraphs
135.3(8)
"b" (6) through (14). Additional procedural due
process may be afforded the owner and
operator on a case-by-case basis
sufficient to satisfy Constitutional due process standards.
If insufficient information is submitted to change the
finding, the department will notify the owner or operator and a person in
charge at the UST facility of the final decision to impose the delivery
prohibition response action.
(2) Provisional status. Upon a finding that
an owner or operator under provisional status has failed to comply with the
terms of a remedial action plan as provided above, the department may initiate
a delivery prohibition response action by giving actual notice to the owner or
operator of the basis for the finding of noncompliance and the department's
intent to initiate a delivery prohibition response action. The delivery
prohibition response action shall not be imposed without providing the owner or
operator the opportunity for an evidentiary hearing consistent with the
provisions for suspension and revocation of licenses under 567-Chapter
7.
f.
Delivery
prohibition procedure. Upon oral or written notice that the delivery
prohibition response action has been imposed, the owner or
operator and any
person in charge of the
UST facility shall be notified that they are not
authorized to receive any further delivery of regulated substances until
conditions for reinstatement of eligibility are satisfied. Owners and operators
are required to provide the
department with names and contact information for
all persons who convey or deposit regulated substances to the USTs. The
department will attempt to notify known persons who convey or deposit regulated
substances to the USTs that they are not authorized to deliver to the USTs
until further notice by the
department as provided in paragraph
135.3(3)
"j" and subrule 135.3(5).
The department shall visit the site and affix a "red tag" to
the fill pipes or fill pipe caps of all affected USTs. It is unlawful for any
person to deposit or accept a regulated substance into a UST that has a "red
tag" affixed to the fill pipe or fill pipe cap. The department may allow the
owner and operator to dispense and sell the remainder of existing fuel unless
the department determines there is an immediate risk of a release or other risk
to human health, safety or the environment. The department shall confirm in
writing the basis for the delivery prohibition response action, contacts made
prior to the action, and steps the owner or operator must take to reinstate
fuel delivery.