UST Legislation Reintroduced

WASHINGTON -- Senator Lincoln Chafee (R-R.I.) introduced S. 195, a bill dealing with underground storage tanks that is identical to the tank legislation passed by the Senate Environment and Public Works Committee last year as an amendment to the Solid Waste Disposal Act.

The bill has earned widespread praise from marketers and bipartisan support including co-sponsors Sen. Inhofe (R-Okla.), chairman of the committee, Sen. Jeffords (I-Vt.), ranking minority member, plus committee members Sens. Carper (D-De.) and Warner (R-Va.).

SIGMA announced in its weekly newsletter plans to send a letter to Chafee and the co-sponsors indicating its support for the bill, and indicating interest in working with them and the House to make improvements to the legislation before final enactment.

As reported earlier in Convenience Store News, the bill:

- Earmarks $100 million annually through fiscal year 2007 from the leaking underground storage tank (LUST) trust -- $20 million to $30 million more than Congress has typically appropriated.

- Requires all USTs to be inspected every two years. The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) estimates biannual inspection will cost $70 million.

- Directs federal and state agencies with USTs to develop strategies within two years to bring their tanks, as well as tribal tanks, into compliance.

- Orders the EPA to distribute to states at least 80 percent of appropriated LUST funds.

- Allows states to tap LUST funds for enforcement, as well as to underwrite corrective action and administrative costs.

- Allocates a one-time $200-million appropriation for the cleanup of MTBE contamination. Once in the soil, the additive, which reduces air emissions, has been found to leak into groundwater sources.

Financed by a per-gallon gasoline tax of one-tenth of one cent per gallon, the misappropriation of monies from the LUST federal trust fund has been a thorn in the side of fuel marketers since the fund's establishment 15 years ago.

The fund was created to help the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) cover cleanup costs when tank owners and operators could not afford to pay. However, the federal government has spent only about $70 to $80 million of the $1.5 billion fund to finance related activities, and most of that money has gone to pay for administrative costs, not environmental remediation.

It further empowers states to tap LUST to enforce compliance of tank leak detection. "As we looked back at the prior legislation," Chafee told Convenience Store News in an earlier interview, "we wanted to get the money out there for states to fix the problems."

While he acknowledged that additional funding may be needed to remedy contaminated sites, Chafee pointed to political realities: "We just have to do things incrementally to get passage."

The committee plans to mark up and pass S.195 at its first business meeting of the year, probably during the week of Jan. 27, and send it to the Senate floor.