Bill writes:
On Sat, 28 May 2005 08:11:09 -0500, JimL wrote:

I agree with the 'keep quiet' and destroy the evidence advice above.
It could easily cost you over $ 10,000 if the EPA and the local
authorities fing out and then have their way with you.

if the EPA was able to do that to American homeowners there would be a
revolt in this country and the EPA would be disbanded permanently!

That's one of those old wives tales told by retail gas station
operators who have cried the blues over the EPA objecting to their
massive spills of gasoline into water supplies...those clean up
requirements have absolutely nothing to do with a homeowner who simply
has a fuel oil storage tank at his house used for heating oil at his
house that is not sold in retail commerce.

The United States Environmental Protection Agency does not care if you
have a fuel oil tank in your backyard...there are some municipal
governments in the "rust belt" states who have stupid ordinances
regarding backyard tanks along with outrageous property taxes...I
guess thats why most folks are moving out of those areas into the
"red" states...

Bill

I don't know whether it is EPA or local government, but the
Authorities here in the Northeast are equally strict.

We lived in a 25 unit condo and for years properties changed hands
without anybody even suspecting an underground tank. Then one buyer
had an inspector that followed some old pipes and claimed there was an
underground tank centered our backyard parking lot (which is about 100
ft x 400 feet)

Now this tank had not been used for probably 50 years and it was
surrounded by a sea of asphalt parking lot. Also, nobody in our town
has wells.

Yet, we ended up being forced to bring in some EPA-certified abatement
contractor who dug a huge hole in our parking lot. He was required to
keep removing dirt until his test kit could no longer detect any
traces of hydrocarbons.

Total cost was about $25K. All because of a nosy buyer/inspector. The
heartache of it all is that it is not even clear that the
"environment" is any better off for this...