Q1.  Where can I find the definitions of OPEN/CLOSED LUST sites (what does it mean OPEN, what does it mean CLOSED).

Q2.  I would like to know if your website identifies specific address locations with underground storage tanks. I am appraising a gas station in Detroit and wonder how I can use your site to check what's there; compliance issues, etc.  

Q3.  Who is currently liable under Part 213? 

Q4.   What if free product is discovered as a result of the release? 

Q5.  When is it appropriate to use the Gasoline Range Organics (GRO) and Diesel Range Organics (DRO) methods?

Q6.  Since the GRO and DRO cleanup criteria are not risk-based, what is the appropriate application of this criteria in the RBCA process? 

Q7.  Do I have to test for methyl tertiary-butyl ether (MTBE) where there has been a release of unleaded gasoline at a UST.

Q8.  As new or additional parameters or testing requirements are published by the STD, are the QC’s or O/O’s required to go back to the sites and retest for these new requirements? 

Q9.   At what point can I reclassify a site? 

Q10.   After a Closure Report is submitted, are there any additional responsibilities of the O/O? 

Q11.   How will sites which have commingled releases under Part 201 and Part 213 be handled by the DEQ? 

Q12.   Can the surface water pathway be eliminated if there is no surface water nearby? 

Q13.   Will financial assurance be required by the STD as part of the Corrective Action Plan? 

Q14.   If groundwater contamination has moved off-site, what is the obligation of the O/O to sample off-site potable wells? 

Q15.   What are wellhead protection zones? 

Q16.   In several locations in the Guidance Manual and Report Forms the word "facility" is used. In what context is this word being used? 

Q17.   Do all pathways have to be addressed in the report forms? 

Q18.   What are the requirements for a local ordinance to restrict the use of the groundwater?  

Q19.   How are closures designated? 

Q20.   Is there a way to determine from the website who the owner/operators are for the listed LUST open sites?

Q1. Where can I find the definitions of OPEN/CLOSED LUST sites (what does it mean OPEN, what does it mean CLOSED).

An OPEN LUST site means a location where a release has occurred from an underground storage tank system, and where corrective actions have not been completed to meet the appropriate land use criteria. An OPEN LUST site may have more than one release.
 

A CLOSED LUST site means a location where a release has occurred from an underground storage tank system, and where corrective actions have been completed to meet the appropriate land use criteria.  A site listed as closed, is subject to an audit by the Storage Tank Division, within 6 months of the date of receipt of the closure report. If an audit does not confirm that corrective action has been conducted in compliance with Part 213 or that cleanup criteria have not been met the owner or operator may need to provide additional information or retain a consultant to take additional corrective actions. Until such time as the report indicates that the corrective actions are complete the facility will remain "open"
 

An OPEN RELEASE means the detection of chemicals from an underground storage tank in the groundwater, surface water, or subsurface soils and reported to the Storage Tank Division. An OPEN RELEASE results in an OPEN LUST site.
 

A CLOSED RELEASE means that corrective actions have been completed to meet the appropriate land use criteria for the specific release that was reported

For the most recent status of any given OPEN LUST site, please contact the appropriate district office or request the information by e-mail. 

See Operational Memorandum 4 for the types of closures, and the lookup tables  in Operational Memorandum 4 Attachment 2. Operational Memorandum 12 provides details on the types of institutional controls. 

Q2. I would like to know if your website identifies specific address locations with underground storage tanks. I am appraising a gas station in Detroit and wonder how I can use your site to check what's there; compliance issues, etc.

A The information is available on the DEQ website. You can search the information by city or by county. Alternatively you can look at or download a spreadsheet that has this information.

Q3Who is currently liable under Part 213?

A. The property owner, tank owner and operator of a regulated UST system, at the time of the release and who are liable under Part 201, Environmental Remediation, of the Natural Resources and Environmental Protection Act, 1994 PA 451, as amended, are liable for any release from that system.

Q4.   What if free product is discovered as a result of the release?

A. Section 21307 of Part 213 identifies what initial response actions must be taken if free product is discovered. Section 21308(a)(xviii)(A)-(H) identifies what must be included in the Initial Assessment Report. Operational Memorandum 7, and the Free Product Status Report (Form EQP3850), dealing with free product discovery, removal and reporting were revised on February 26, 2001, and take effect on June 18, 2001. These documents are available from the DEQ web site.

Q5. When is it appropriate to use the Gasoline Range Organics (GRO) and Diesel Range Organics (DRO) methods?

A. The GRO and DRO methods are non-specific methods identified for use in evaluating petroleum products, solvents or aesthetic groundwater impacts arising from stained and/or odorous contaminated soils where the typical petroleum indicator parameters (e.g., BTEX, trimethylbenzenes (TMBs) and PNA’s) are absent. Target MDL criteria or aesthetic criteria are acceptable for demonstrating cleanup of aesthetically impacted soils. The GRO Method is recommended for evaluating various petroleum solvents, such as Stoddard solvents, which do not usually contain measurable quantities of BTEX, TMB and PNA compounds. Refer to Attachment No. 12 Section 7.2.5 of the Guidance Document for a full explanation on this non-specific method. Any free product that is present must be removed in accordance with Section 21307(c) of Part 213. The application of these methods is not associated with any risk-based evaluation but is available as a tool to address aesthetic situations.

Q6. Since the GRO and DRO cleanup criteria are not risk-based, what is the appropriate application of this criteria in the RBCA process?

A. As stated above, the GRO and DRO scans are appropriate when there are aesthetic impacts (stained or odorous soils, groundwater with a sheen, objectionable taste and/or odor) but no contaminants are present above the Tier I RBSLs. The facility owner and his/her consultant has the option of conducting a toxicological study to develop risk-based criteria for GRO and DRO, subject to the approval of the DEQ.

Q7. Do I have to test for methyl tertiary-butyl ether (MTBE) where there has been a release of unleaded gasoline at a UST.

A. MTBE is now listed as one of the parameters to analyze for at unleaded gasoline releases. Testing is required unless the Owner/Operator (O/O) provides proof that MTBE was not used in the product released or initial testing demonstrates that MTBE is not present as a site contaminant. Please be aware, however, that gasoline product testing conducted by the Michigan Department of Agriculture has found MTBE to be present in gasoline that should not contain MTBE, probably as the result of cross-contamination at the refinery or in transport between the refinery and the gas station.

Q8. As new or additional parameters or testing requirements are published by the STD, are the QCs or O/Os required to go back to the sites and retest for these new requirements?

A. If all field activities have been completed or the closure reports have been submitted, additional sampling at the site is not required unless there is evidence that not sampling under the new requirements would pose a significant risk to the public health or the environment.

Q9. At what point can I reclassify a site?

A. Upon completion of the Initial Response Actions the site can be reclassified, or whenever conditions at the site have changed such that the site is no longer accurately classified. This means in the case of a Class 1 free product site, that all the free product must be removed and be absent for six consecutive months (after June 18, 2001, this requirement is being changed to twelve months) before the site can be reclassified.

Q10. After a Closure Report is submitted, are there any additional responsibilities of the O/O?

A. The conditions of closure may be very site specific, therefore, if contaminants in excess of the unrestricted residential concentrations remain on-site (or if the potable groundwater ingestion exposure pathway was eliminated), the O/O must prevent any exacerbation of the contamination and exercise due care consistent with the conditions of closure. If not followed, the conditions of closure may be violated. This is particularly of concern when the potential exists for contaminated soils to be moved off-site and placed in an area that may pose an unacceptable risk to public health and the environment. Part 213 (Section 21304b) was amended to address this issue. The improper installation of water supply wells in areas with shallow groundwater contamination may cross-contaminate deeper aquifers. All closure letters now contain a provision advising of this concern.

Q11. How will sites which have commingled releases under Part 201 and Part 213 be handled by the DEQ?

A. Documentation must be provided that the contamination is commingled. The O/O can determine under which environmental program (Part 201 or Part 213) remedial activities will be performed. A written request must be provided to the department indicating under which authority corrective action activities will be conducted.

Q12. Can the surface water pathway be eliminated if there is no surface water nearby?

A. Yes, provided there are no conduits (e.g., storm sewers and utility trench backfill) or other transport mechanisms that could convey the contaminants from the site to a surface water body.

Q13. Will financial assurance be required by the STD as part of the Corrective Action Plan?

A. A financial assurance mechanism in accordance with Section 21309a(2)(f) may be required as necessary to assure the effectiveness and integrity of the corrective action. Sites will be reviewed on a site-specific basis to determine if financial assurance is appropriate. This should not be confused with the financial responsibility (FR) requirements for UST systems in Part 5 of the Michigan Underground Storage Tank Rules.

Q14. If groundwater contamination has moved off-site, what is the obligation of the O/O to sample off-site potable wells?

A. In order to determine if off-site receptors are impacted, selected potable wells that potentially could be impacted should be sampled by the O/O. Non-potable water supply wells that may intercept the groundwater contaminant plume should also be sampled. These results should be reported to the STD project manager. If contamination is detected in the potable and non-potable wells the STD project manager and local health department should be notified immediately.

Q15. What are wellhead protection zones?

A. Wellhead protection zones are areas within the influence of the municipal well(s) that are protected from environmental impacts. Currently there are several municipalities that utilize groundwater that have defined wellhead protection zones. When conducting the initial assessment, the QC should identify whether the municipality has a designated wellhead protection zone. The DEQ web site has a list of communities with wellhead protection zones.

Q16. In several locations in the Guidance Manual and Report Forms the word "facility" is used. In what context is this word being used?

A. Part 213 uses the same definition of facility as Part 201. Its use in the manual and reports should be synonymous with the Part 213 definition of "site."

Q17. Do all pathways have to be addressed in the report forms?

A. Yes. Some statement must be made regarding each pathway and the reason or justification for not considering the pathway as an exposure route.

Q18. What are the requirements for a local ordinance to restrict the use of the groundwater?

A. Section 21310a (3) (a) and (b) are required in an ordinance in addition to the provisions to reliably restrict the use of the groundwater for drinking. It is unlikely that any existing ordinance meets all these conditions presently.

Q19. How are closures designated?

A.Closures are either Restricted or Unrestricted. The closure is based upon a Tier 1, II, or III RBCA evaluation and the land use, residential, commercial or industrial.

Q20. Is there a way to determine from the website who the owner/operators are for the listed LUST open sites?

A. The LUST owner information is not available on the website. The database will only provide the last owner of record, and this person may not be the liable party. As users are often interested in the identify of the liable party, rather than the current owner, there is a concern that posting the current owner's name will lead to confusion.

The property may have been contaminated during the operation of a past owner, or due to contamination that has migrated from an off site source, or due to contamination having commingled and liability being apportioned to the multiple parties. Therefore, if you need this information, you may review the district files