Comparison of regulations and life cycle cost analysis pertaining to underground and aboveground storage tanks : options for retail fueling applications at U.S. Army Installation Management Command installations

Abstract

The Army and Air Force Exchange Service Retail Service Station Standard Design and Specifications, and Department of Defense Fuels Facilities Engineering Panel require the use of underground storage tanks (USTs). U.S. Army Installation Management Command garrisons prefer to install aboveground storage tanks (ASTs), and have requested waivers to this standard design. The decision to select either storage tank type must consider a number of factors, including: Federal, state, and local regulatory requirements; capital costs; environmental and safety risks; and added infrastructure. This work was undertaken to provide a decision making tool to help justify granting or denying exemption requests. Considering account installation, annual costs, and tank removal, it is estimated that AST systems are minimally 4% more expensive than USTs over their 30-year lifetime. If recommended AST practices and purchases are made, it is likely that the life cycle cost of an AST will be ~20% more expensive than that of a UST system over 30 years. It is therefore recommended that waiver requests not be given out freely, but it is also recommended that waiver requests be granted in situations where USTs can be proven to be a higher risk for leaks and failures than are ASTs. DISCLAIMER: The contents of this report are not to be used for advertising, publication, or promotional purposes. Citation of trade names does not constitute an official endorsement or approval of the use of such commercial products. All product names and trademarks cited are the property of their respective owners. The findings of this report are not to be construed as an official Department of the Army position unless so designated by other authorized documents.