No, Sir, They Don't Like It
From NATA:
Last week, the
Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) met with key industry groups,
including NATA, to discuss several outstanding Spill Prevention,
Control and Countermeasure (SPCC) rule issues. Among them was
recent inspections within Region V of mobile refueler operations at
airports. In October, an NATA member-company received a letter from
EPA Region V requiring containment for mobile refuelers parked at
the end of the day, a judgment that EPA headquarters had approved
that runs contrary to what EPA officials had told industry
leaders.
The EPA and industry disagree on whether mobile refuelers are
covered by this extension because the agency's interpretation is
that mobile refuelers have always been covered under the "old" rule
and, therefore, are not eligible for these extensions. The EPA has
verbally recognized that clarification of these rules as they apply
to mobile refuelers must be made. However, the letter sent by
Region V clearly demonstrates the EPA does not actually intend to
clarify or revise its position on applicability of the rule to
parked mobile refuelers.
The agency, while
realizing the difference in opinions over the applicability of the
SPCC regulation, maintains that when a fuel truck is "parked at the
end of the day" it is subject to the original 1974 regulation,
requiring secondary containment. The EPA, while acknowledging that
this is not practicable, also stated that whether containment is
necessary for the daily operation of these trucks remains open for
interpretation by the EPA, most likely by way of guidance rather
than a regulatory solution.
When pressed for an answer on what fuel providers should be
doing in the short term in response to the recent inspection
increase, the EPA did not give a clear answer, but rather focused
on a projected guidance release date in the summer of 2005, and a
December 2004 response to aviation industry white papers that were
submitted in May 2003.
"We are disappointed in the agency's unwillingness to work on
this complex issue with the industry," stated Eric R. Byer, vice
president of government and industry affairs. "A more assured
solution to spill prevention would be to mandate a daily or
periodic inspection procedure to ensure the integrity of tanks,
piping and pumping systems, much like the industry does to ensure
fuel quality. To require companies to install or construct large
secondary containment areas for extremely low (and some might say
non-existent) risk events is both unnecessary and misdirected."