While installing a French drain (id you know it was named for a person and not a country?), I dicovered a heating oil tank that was supposed to have been decommissioned before I bought my duplex. I called the company that was to have done the work and they came out and checked and said, “indeed, we only did one of the tanks when we should have done two. We will take care of this for no charge of course.”
Then they called and said, so sorry there has been a leak in one end of the tank. We think it is minor, but we need to auger out a couple more holes to check how extensive it it. We think we can just do that and replace the soil with bentonite and all will be well.
This duplex sits on a courner lot and the ground slopes down from the back yard to the house. It is located on the rainy side of Oregon. The yard is on a gradual slope but I had begun to have probelms with leakage in the basement which is why I dug the French drain. The fuel tanks are between the back yard and the house. So I am worried that the water will come downhill, wash through this soil and leach into the basement.
The contractor says that it could be more dangerous to remove the tank than to do this other method because disturbing the dirt might cause the pollutants to enter the basement at a faster speed.
As a landlord for whom this property is a significant part of my retirement plans, I am nervous about loss of value and potential liability in the future if someone were to say they contracted cancer from the benzene, etc and that I knew there was a problem.
Can anyone advise–quickly–the work is going on now. Thanks much.
Replies
Advice about liability can only properly come from an attorney. They are trained in this very thing. (About $150/hour+) Good luck.
An attorney can not answer my questions.
I want to know whether the slope of this lot should affect the decision about whether to leave the tank in, whether the company's assertion about removing the tank making things more dangerous is correct, or whether they are taking a cheap alternative. I want to know what way is best to deal with an oil tank that has some leakage that is close to the foundation of a full basement of a house.
The state DEQ refuses to answer any questions about specific ways to deal with the problem or about a specific company.
Typically in Massachusetts and many other states, unless a underground tank removal would impact the foundation structurally, the removal of the tank is required. The real problem is that if there is material in the tank and in the surrounding soil, it could well continue to leach into the building area. I still maintain that you need a good lawyer and an environmental consultant.
Ron
You need to find a good lawyer. If the oil tanks were to be removed before you purchased the house, and who the contract with the tank removal company was with becomes key issues. I would suggest that you want the property restored to a condition that you thought it was in.
What about the local city or building inspectors? Would they be able to give you an on site opinion on your next move?
I have a friend who does this here in Conn. If a tank is to be left in the ground, a hole is cut in top of the tank after it is pumped out and a guy climbs inside and cleans out the sludge and swabs it clean. It is then filled with a lightweight concrete which presumably renders the tank totally safe in terms of being a source of further pollution. If the surrounding soil is only minimally contaminated, you probably don't have a problem. If there is extensive contamination, you probably will be required to remove the tank and the contaminated soil. Note: this stuff is highly regulated and what needs to be done is not up to the contractor(who is also regulated), but the local authority with jurisdiction.
I recommend getting local expertise: the rules and considerations for underground tanks vary from state to state and even property to property.
Keep in mind that you need to be concerned with bank and insurance company ubnderwriting polcies (noe and future.)
5-6 years ago in Massachusetts the banks wouldn't take a mortgage on a residence with a buried tank; you had to pull it. I've heard of some insurnace companies that are starting to refuse to write policies on properties with underground tanks.
Acceptable practice today (pump and fill) might not be acceptable in the future.
"The contractor says that it could be more dangerous to remove the tank than to do this other method because disturbing the dirt might cause the pollutants to enter the basement at a faster speed."
That sounds like BS to me: if there are pollutants there, they should be dealt with now, before thay can spread at all. How quickly they might spread is immaterial: if they are there, deal with them before they spread.
OK, so I answered your post on another board, but I see that there's consenses! Glory Be!
I would add a couple more things: Make sure you keep documentation of everything surrounding this issue; and UST's were all supposed to be gone by now, if I remember correctly. The removal contractor may have some exposure in this area (leverage for you, anyway).
Also, I think the UST removal issue was a federal mandate, leaving the states to oversee it.
And the bottom line is: The purpose of removing the tanks in the first place is to prevent soil/groundwater contamination!
Edited 8/7/2002 10:14:23 PM ET by Notchman