Failing an Underground Oil Tank Test
Interpreting, planning the next step, preventing and retaining customers
Fuel traders primarily react to changes by reacting to the market forces of competition. First it was the discounters of the imposed payment, then the gas companies, and we each responded the same. As the topic of underground reservoirs becomes more and more relevant, dealers are once again confronted with the forces affecting our markets. Will we respond as before, or will we advance threat response programs? In New York and New Jersey, the Program to Protect Homeowners From Environmental Damage
set a precedent and become a valuable tool to prevent gas conversion, but additional tools are needed, especially to overcome the uncontrolled leakage of accounts that occurs during the
real estate deal.
As Vice President and Founder of Annis Fuel Oil Service (AFOS), I saw in the early 1980s that underground oil reservoirs were opening up new possibilities. After the New Jersey Hazardous Substances Storage Act was passed and changes to the Spill Act, reservoirs began to intersect with environmental science. Four years of chemistry at the university paid off. When I founded ANCO Environmental in 1991, I stuck to the early days of my oil industry. As a small oil trader, I
the hysteria of THES. Diplomatically, I offer ESM services to local fuel traders who otherwise compete with my family’s oil company. Instincts say: deny or minimize the problem of CTS. But a distant environmental storm is coming, and it must be fought. Our
the client’s financial interests are at stake, and he is looking for leadership. Fuel traders must fix and avoid the damage caused by public relations caused by leaks from underground reservoirs, learn how to choose a suitable tank test, identify the real enemy behind the destruction of the oil tank, and finally find solutions. I hope that the material presented here will help in these areas and prevent the loss of customers due to the heating of oil to other fuels when transferring ownership.
Gas companies are conducting marketing campaigns, suggesting that heat oil is a source of underground pollution. Our observations support the opposite conclusion. Statistically, more rehabilitation projects involve abandoned or poorly closed reservoirs than existing reservoirs. Home insurance policies reject most applications for ESN pollution, so the owner of a leaky tank that switched to gas heating is now in a worse situation than the one who adhered to the oil. But where the gas owner is forced to pay for the clean-up, the oil industry has negative consequences. To win the PR game, the fuel industry must reverse this problem. Shift the focus from “oil heat” to “underground reservoirs” and take an active position.
The oil bill is the most vulnerable in real estate transactions. Tank testing and on-site certification are becoming more common. Based on liability issues and the requirement of a due diligence audit that identifies an innocent buyer, the buyer’s lawyers guarantee the right of their client to inspect the oil tank. This mechanism will be largely caused by public misconceptions and will continue to heat the fuel oil in the future.
Know your opponent
A fuel trader recently told me, “… They’re lawyers. They blew it up.” Others say they are gas companies, gas heating contractors, brokers or oil tankers. All these parts are a tumultuous response to a true silent adversary; Corrosion. Low pH soils associated with high groundwater levels provide a high ion exchange with the reservoir. The heterogeneous complement concentrates the resulting electrochemical reaction at the points with the highest electrical conductivity. Consequently, soil particles with a favorable mineral content or construction waste that touch the reservoir close the corrosion chain. Over time, this reaction will lead to the dissolution of the hole in the reservoir. The laws of chemistry and physics are being accelerated by poor construction practice. This is the main strength of the supply problem.
In June 1993, the ECRA was amended and renamed ISRA, the Industrial Sites Restoration Act. Many positive changes have made the rules more “comfortable” and even allowed the creation of an aid fund. However, a concomitant amendment to the Compensation and Spill Control Act (Spill Act) that introduced a principle that significantly affects all current and potential owners of New Jersey remained almost unnoticed in these changes. The new principle declares that the future owners of contaminated property are responsible for the pollution they did not cause. The potentially destructive wording of this amendment holds buyers responsible for any release of a hazardous substance if they do not meet certain criteria:
That they had inherited property;
That they purchased the property after their release;
Ignorance at the time of detection of leakage of dangerous material;
Lack of involvement in the management of hazardous materials disclosed prior to acquisition;
NJDEP notification of the actual detection of the failure.
To demonstrate that the new owner did not know and had no reason to know that hazardous materials would be dumped on the site, the buyer must ‘” conduct all relevant investigations while taking control. Property. “All relevant investigations” require a preliminary assessment and, if necessary, on-site investigations. In the case of an underground storage tank, anything less than a soil study corresponds to the applicable investigation threshold, classifying the damaged buyer as an ‘innocent buyer’. This concept is the cornerstone of the ‘violation of the innocuous buyer’ used as a responsible or
participation of unscrupulous parties in a real estate transaction. Testing of tanks, conditioned by regulatory requirements and simply out of fashion “let the buyer be careful”, are mandatory.
Choosing the right tank test
The correct test depends on the condition of the tank, the conditions in place and the overall goal. Checkability and timeliness of results – additional selection criteria for testing. The limitations of the analysis, possible false positive and false negative conditions are discussed after the introduction of each method.