You are being redirected because this document is part of your ASTM Compass® subscription.
    This document is part of your ASTM Compass® subscription.

    If you are an ASTM Compass Subscriber and this document is part of your subscription, you can access it for free at ASTM Compass

    How Well Do Leak Detection Methods Work?: Preliminary Results from the EPA Test Procedures

    Published: 01 January 1993

      Format Pages Price  
    PDF (172K) 12 $25   ADD TO CART
    Complete Source PDF (4.4M) 233 $55   ADD TO CART

    Cite this document

    X Add email address send
      .RIS For RefWorks, EndNote, ProCite, Reference Manager, Zoteo, and many others.   .DOCX For Microsoft Word


    In 1990, EPA released a series of “Standard Test Procedures for Evaluating Leak Detection Methods” to define consistent, rigorous procedures for determining the performance of underground storage tank leak detection methods. Each test procedure outlines one or more ways to evaluate the performance of a class of leak detection devices. Liquid- and vapor-phase detectors are tested for their ability to detect the presence of petroleum components in controlled laboratory settings. Pipeline leak detectors, tightness testing methods and automatic tank gauging systems are tested for their ability to reliably differentiate between non-leaking systems and systems with simulated leaks of specified sizes. Statistical inventory reconciliation methods are tested using real inventory data from tight tanks, including some simulated leaks. The results of these preliminary evaluations are discussed and compared. The test procedures allow manufacturers to demonstrate the effectiveness of their methods and help tank owners to ensure that the equipment or service they purchase complies with applicable regulatory requirements.


    leak detection, performance evaluation, standard test method, tank testing, groundwater monitors, vapor monitors, automatic tank gauging, pipeline leak detectors

    Author Information:

    Young, TM
    University of Michigan, Ann Arbor, Michigan

    Committee/Subcommittee: E50.01

    DOI: 10.1520/STP25081S