Date: Fri 18-Dec-1998

Publication: Bee

Author: STEVEB

Quick Words:

oil-tanks-leakers-Lockwood

Full Text:

Leaking Oil Tanks: The Expensive Threat Lurking Underground

(with photos)

BY STEVE BIGHAM

Four years ago, Carlos and Maria Kowarick moved into what they thought was

their dream house. Lately, however, their home at 8 Hawthorne Hill Road has

been more like a nightmare.

Last month, the couple learned their property had become contaminated more

than a decade earlier by a leaking underground oil tank. That tank was removed

by a previous owner in 1984, according to a neighbor. A second tank was then

placed back into the ground and no cleanup was ever done.

The Kowaricks were unaware of the costly mess when they moved to town in 1994.

Their oil tank is now in the garage and tests revealed the newer underground

tank was fine. However, no one ever told the Kowaricks to test the soil around

it.

Nevertheless, this is their home and they are responsible for cleaning up

their yard -- at a cost that may reach $15,000.

"I don't have that kind of money," said Mrs Kowarick, a native of Brazil. "We

work hard, we try to pay the bills and we end up having to pay for something

that, by law 15 years ago, was legal to leave a mess."

The residents had to pay $3,000 for the removal of the soil and may have to

pay an additional $8,000 to $10,000 to have it hauled away and decontaminated.

Without that kind of cash on hand, the Kowaricks are stuck with a huge pile of

contaminated soil on their front lawn. They covered it with plastic, but it

still stinks of petroleum.

"If I knew this was going to happen I wouldn't have purchased the house," said

Mrs Kowarick, who now has doubts about the quality of her drinking water.

Fire Marshal George Lockwood, who discovered the Kowarick's polluted soil,

believes the cleanup job should be covered by either the real estate agency,

the insurance company, or the previous owner.

"She's got an environmental disaster up there and it wasn't her fault," he

said. Making matters worse, the fire marshal expects to find further soil

contamination when he returns for a second inspection.

Mrs Kowarick said the insurance company has refused to help.

Health District Director Mark Cooper said the Kowaricks may need to see an

attorney to determine if they have some recourse. There are Connecticut laws

that protect homeowners who unknowingly buy a home with hidden problems, he

said. There could still be some liability placed on the previous owner.

"You certainly sympathize with them. Our recommendation is that prospective

homeowners do a complete evaluation of the underground oil tank and the

surrounding soil," he said. And always hire an attorney.

In recent years, homeowners have been required to fill out a seller disclosure

form stating all the facts about a house. If a buyer can prove the facts were

misrepresented, then the seller can be liable, according to a local attorney.

More and more banks are now requiring that underground oil tanks be removed

before they will issue a mortgage.

Leakers Around Town

Mr Lockwood has been witness to dozens of leaking oil tanks this year. The

problem appears to be getting worse.

"It used to be you'd have two leakers for every ten tanks pulled. Now it's

just the opposite. We're seeing eight leakers for every ten pulled," he said.

Mr Lockwood said he remains frustrated over the town's unwillingness to

address this serious threat to the environment. He wants the town to write an

ordinance that mandates that all tanks 20-years-old or older be pulled out of

the ground.

Last year, an ordinance was almost passed simply prohibiting any more tanks

from being buried. This frustrated the fire marshal who said a requirement to

dig up certain tanks was the most important part of the ordinance.

Last year, he estimated there could be as many as 800-900 undetected leaking

oil tanks in Newtown.

Former ordinance committee chairman Pierre Rochman stated last year that his

committee opted not to mandate underground oil tank removals simply because of

the economic impact it would impose on residents.

Current ordinance committee chairman Will Rodgers also noted that an ordinance

mandating tank removal would have "require an awful lot of enforcement. This

is a big stakes issue and we don't want to get sued," he said.

Mr Rodgers pointed to the outcry from residents following the creation of last

year's alarm ordinance, which simply added a $15 surcharge for homeowners. He

wondered how residents would react if their were forced to pay for the removal

of their tanks only to discover it was in perfect condition.

Mr Lockwood puts Hawthorne Hill Road in the same category as Ridge Road, Saw

Mill Ridge Road, Budd Drive, and other neighborhood that are filled with

"leakers." Homes on these roads were built during the 1970s when cheap metal

was used for tanks.

"It could be the soil or the average age of the houses in that area," noted

Assistant Fire Marshal Bill Halstead.

Tank removals can be a stressful project for homeowners. Just having the tank

pulled from the ground can be expensive. If it is leaking, the costs begin to

skyrocket.

Mr Lockwood says he can usually determine the condition of the tank the moment

he steps on to the property. If the tank is leaking, there is usually a strong

odor and a discoloration of the soil.

During such inspections, the homeowners usually stand nearby with nervous

looks on their faces.

"Some of them stand outside or watch out the window. They can see the

expression on my face when the tanks comes up," Mr Lockwood said.

According to Rep Julia Wasserman, the state is currently looking into the

underground oil tank issue. However, any investigation would likely deal with

commercial tanks only.