Technical Compliance Rate
Technical compliance rate is a set of performance measures developed by the USEPA to evaluate state UST programs. The first four performance measures (9a-9d) evaluate critical components of the UST system, and combined make up TCR.
The CUPA TCR percentage is derived from two parts: the durability of the UST system components, and the ability of the UST Inspector to find those items that are no longer compliant and need repair. The State Water Board gathers TCR data from the Report 6 submitted by the CUPA, and then provides the statewide TCR to the USEPA semiannually.
The UST compliance inspection is required to notate the site condition at the start of the compliance inspection. All violations must be included in the inspection report and entered into CERS, even if corrected during the inspection. The four technical compliance performance measures 9a-9d are labeled in the CERS violation library and shown below:
| UST Performance Measure | Violation Type Number | Description |
|---|---|---|
| USEPATCR 9a (Spill Prevention) |
2060020 | Spill Container |
| USEPATCR 9b (Overfill Prevention) |
2030036 | Overfill Prevention |
| USEPATCR 9c (Corrosion Prevention) |
2030009 | Corrosion Protection - Impressed Current/Sacrificial Anode |
| 2030029 | Lined Tank Requirements | |
| USEPATCR 9d (Release Detection) |
2030001 | Release Detection Monitoring and Maintenance Records |
| 2030002 | Leak Detection Equipment Maintenance | |
| 2030005 | Continuous In-Tank Leak Detection (CITLD) - Single-Walled Tank | |
| 2030006 | Automatic Tank Gauging - Single-Walled Tank | |
| 2030015 | Leak Detection Performance Certification | |
| 2030016 | Double-Walled Tank Monitoring - After January 1, 1984 and Before July 1, 2004 | |
| 2030017 | Double-Walled Pressurized Pipe - Monitoring - In Lieu of 12 Month Line Integrity Test | |
| 2030018 | Double-Walled Pressurized Pipe -Interstitial Monitoring | |
| 2030022 | Groundwater and Vadose Zone Monitoring | |
| 2030025 | Line Leak Detector (LLD)-Double-Walled Pressurized Pipe | |
| 2030027 | Line Leak Detector (LLD) - Single-Walled Pressurized Pipe | |
| 2030040 | Piping Obstruction | |
| 2030042 | Pressurized Double-Walled Pipe - Line Integrity Test | |
| 2030043 | Monitoring Equipment | |
| 2030048 | Secondary Containment Testing | |
| 2030049 | Single-Walled Conventional Suction Monitoring and Record Keeping | |
| 2030050 | Single-Walled Conventional Suction Testing | |
| 2030051 | Single-Walled Gravity Testing | |
| 2030052 | Single-Walled Pressurized Pipe Monitoring/Testing | |
| 2030058 | Statistical Inventory Reconciliation | |
| 2030062 | Tampering with Leak Detection Equipment | |
| 2030065 | Vacuum, Pressure, Hydrostatic (VPH) Monitoring - On or After July 1, 2004 | |
| 2030075 | Emergency Generator Tank Systems Line Leak Detector | |
| 2030077 | Reporting Unauthorized Releases | |
| 2060002 | Automatic Tank Gauge (ATG) / Statistical Inventory Reconciliation / Continuous In-Tank Leak Detection | |
| 2060012 | Line Leak Detector (LLD) - Installed | |
| 2060015 | Improper Monitoring |
If a UST facility is cited with any one of the TCR violations, the facility fails the overall TCR criteria (9e). A failing TCR is not necessarily a negative thing if the UST owner or operator quickly returns to compliance.
Data is additionally collected and provided to the USEPA on three additional performance measures, which are not part of the TCR: designated operator training (USEPATCR 10), financial responsibility (USEPATCR 11), and designated operator inspection requirements (USEPATCR 12).
Note: The CERS violation library links violations to their corresponding compliance measures by including the USEPATCR# identifier in the violation name. For additional information on TCR, refer to LG 164-4.
How TCR data is analyzed
The State Water Board Evaluation staff review the Report 6 TCR data provided during the evaluation timeframe to determine the TCR pass rate for the CUPA. Evaluation staff divide the combined measure (9e) by the number of UST facility inspections performed during the reporting period to calculate the percentage. In the depiction above, the CUPA TCR percentage would be:
65 (9e) / 124 inspections performed = TCR % of 52.4
The percentage is then compared to the California TCR average, historically about 60%, with a standard deviation of ±18. TCR rates consistently higher (outside the standard deviation) than the California average are indicative of a CUPA either not citing or missing violations. Conversely, TCR rates consistently lower than the California average are indicative of a CUPA not applying enforcement consistent with their I&E plan.
The State Water Board performs a wholistic review of a CUPAs inspection and enforcement procedures. Consistently high TCR rates would be considered as part of the CUPA inspection evaluation, whereas consistently low TCR rates would be considered as part of the CUPA enforcement evaluation.
