Curren Environmental Blog

How do you certify that a removed tank did not leak?

Posted by david sulock on Jun 25, 2015 7:44:00 AM


Certify oil tank removalINTRODUCTION:  The Construction Inspection

Obtaining a municipal permit and associated inspection for tank removal is mandated by law.   Many people wrongly presume that this permit and inspection will certify that the tank did not leak.  This is not true; the local permit is for the physical act of removing a tank.  The local inspector, typically the construction or fire sub code inspector, inspects that the permit details were satisfied which is that a tank was removed. The physical act of removal (demolition) is a construction inspection.  Discharges, spills, releases and leaks to the environment fall under the Department of Environmental Protection (NJDEP in New Jersey, DNREC in Delaware and PADEP in Pennsylvania).   Environmental codes and construction codes are entirely DIFFERENT by definition.  When a tank removal receives a local approval for a tank removal, it is approving that the permit to remove a tank was completed, tank removed and excavation backfilled.   It has nothing to do with certifying that the tank did not leak.  So if you had a tank removed and your only documentation is an approval sticker from the municipal inspector you STILL need the other half (more important) of the equation which is testing that the tank did not leak.



The Environmental Site Assessment

If you want to properly document that a tank did not leak, you need to follow regulatory agency technical guidance and regulations.

 As per NJDEP Technical Guidance for Investigation of Underground Storage Tank Systems, dated July 31, 2012.  The following is directly from NJDEP regulations:

Many underground storage tanks (USTs) are managed by the Underground Storage Tank regulations N.J.A.C. 7:14B. This regulation does specifically exempt certain “unregulated” USTs from the regulation. However, these exempted USTs are still required to comply with other Department regulations including but not limited to the “Administrative Requirements for the Remediation of Contaminated Sites” (ARRCs) [N.J.A.C. 7:26C], and the “Technical Requirements for Site Remediation”, [N.J.A.C. 7:26E]. This document may be applied to all USTs when guidance is needed beyond that provided in the above regulations.

 As per NJDEP’s ASSESSMENT of UNDERGROUND STORAGE TANKS (USTs)

An underground storage tank (UST) system is an Area of Concern (AOC). When an UST is suspected of a release, when it is to be closed, removed, or when it is to be temporarily taken out of service pursuant to N.J.A.C. 7:26E and/or N.J.A.C. 7:14B, an investigation may be required. To conduct the appropriate site investigation (SI) activities, an assessment of the UST system is needed.

For tanks containing volatile organic compounds (VOCs) including but not limited to No. 2 fuel oil, diesel fuel, gasoline, kerosene, jet fuel or waste oil, field screen soil from bottom and sidewalls of the excavation as the soil is excavated. The objective of this approach is to bias sampling locations to the areas of highest contamination. If no elevated field screening readings or visual staining is noted, select the sample locations based on professional judgment.

5.2.1.1 For USTs that are removed and no ground water is encountered in the excavation, soil samples should be collected as follows:

Collect one sample from the centerline of the tank footprint for each five feet of tank length or fraction thereof. Distribute sample locations equally along the centerline of the tank footprint, and collect samples in the zone that is from zero to six inches below the bottom of the tank invert. If bedrock is encountered, collect the samples zero to six inches above the bedrock or refer to section 5.1.7 if insufficient soil is present to collect a sample. Samples should be biased to locations of elevated field screening readings and/or visual staining. For tanks that are 5 feet or less in length, one sample collected along the centerline equidistant from each end of the tank is recommended when no elevated field screening reading and/or no visual staining is noted.

Summary: Certifying Removed Tanks

For the certification of removed tanks, i.e., confirmation that the tank did not leak the company or individual providing certification must follow what these four paragraphs summarize. The NJDEP’s Technical Guidance for Investigation of Underground Storage Tank Systems, dated July 31, 2012, are the foundation for investigating a tank removal for contamination and documenting that the tank did not leak.  In short, the NJDEP requires that the tank excavation (once tank is removed) be thoroughly evaluated for a release and soil sampling be performed from the area.  These samples are independently analyzed by NJDEP certified laboratories.  The results of the analysis are then compared to applicable soil standards.

If you do not obtain and analyze soil samples from a tank removal, you are not following NJDEP guidance, so technically your case has not foundation.  Therefore, any certification provided on a tank removal without soil samples is at the discretion of the private company performing this work, a very shaky foundation indeed.  While companies can go out of business, regulatory agencies such as the NJDEP do not.  So when your certification from ABC Tank Company (true company and no longer in business) is questioned (by an attorney or an environmental professional) that the company did not follow NJDEP Technical Guidelines, you will be left holding the proverbial bag.

Obtaining soil samples at time of tank removal allows the environmental company to follow NJDEP protocol and to compare the soil sample results to applicable soil standards.  It is that simple and it provides closure to the question that the tank did not leak.  Remember, the laboratory analysis of the soil samples is completed by an independent (third party) licensed laboratory.  While companies and individuals can be licensed to remove tanks, they do not analyze soil samples so you can be sure you are receiving unbiased data.

 

Still have questions?  
 
Call Curren Environmental at 888-301-1050
Monday to Friday 8:00 am to 5:00 pm.

 

 



 

What do my mold test results mean?

Posted by david sulock on Feb 26, 2015 8:53:00 AM

What do my mold test results mean?

A Mold Survey involves mold sampling for the presence or type of mold. Mold sampling is completed in two ways, mold surface sampling and mold air sampling. Mold surface sampling is completed on a surface that is suspected to contain a mold like substance, this type of sampling can be completed by performing acquiring a mold tape lift sample or a mold swab sample. Both methods involve acquiring a sample of the mold like substance and having the sample analyzed by a laboratory. Your results should determine the type and quantity of mold. The interpretation of sample results pertaining to mold concentration has to be evaluated objectively, when mold is found by the analysis as you are sampling an area that has a mold like substance, which can typically represent the suspected highest concentration (worst area), otherwise why would you sample that particular area. The other type of mold sampling is mold air sampling. Mold air sampling is accomplished by running air through a laboratory containing that captures microscopic airborne particle (fungi). The sample container is then analyzed by a laboratory for mold type and mold quantity. The analysis can be studied for both viable molds, meaning the sample is studied to see if the mold spores grow or by non-viable meaning, it what is the overall type and quantity of mold found. Mold non-viable air sampling is more common as it has been established that mold spores alive or dead can be an irritant.

Learn the Facts about Mold

Once you have the laboratory analysis completed, you now have to discuss the results and what they mean. Unlike soil and groundwater samples that all states have specific government established standards, with mold there are No Federal or State Agency established concentration standards (Maximum Exposure Limits- MEL) or threshold level values for airborne indoor mold or for surface sample analysis of mold. Therefore, if you suspect there is a mold problem and have air testing or surface sampling performed, there is no regulatory standard to compare your results against. Without government standards, there is no common industry standards standard. The reason that there are no standards is that setting exposure limits or MELs would be difficult for a variety of technical reasons, which include limitations in both mold surface sampling and mold air sampling techniques, individual variability in sensitivity to microbial exposure among the human population, occurrence of different types of biological and chemical pollutants in indoor environment and limited data on the exposure-response relationship in humans. In essence, it is difficult to say who will be affected by mold spores and at what concentrations it would take to affect different people.
mold testing
Due to the lack of set government standards, the environmental consulting industry follows general principals when evaluating mold test results. On a basic level when evaluating mold air sampling data, the mold levels should be higher outside than inside. The idea behind this approach is that there are always more molds outside in the soil, mulch, plants, decomposition of organic matter, ect. outside. Aside from an indoor and outdoor comparative evaluation, you evaluate the test results for specific types of mold. This evaluation includes looking for common outdoor molds as well as molds that are more commonly found on moist building materials. Evaluation of these molds goes a step deeper by looking for so-called opportunistic molds (marker fungi), which are frequently found on long-term water damaged building materials. The presence of these molds can point to a long-term moisture issue. These opportunistic fungi include Aspergillus and Penicillium species, Acremonium spp., Sporobolomyces spp., Stachybotrys, chartarum, Memnoniella echinata, Tritirachium oryzae, Ulocladium botrytis, U. chartarum, Cladosporium spp., and Chaetomium spp. These are molds that are not typically recovered in the outside air, so when they are found outside, they are in generally low levels. Conversely when they are found indoors these molds typically point to an indoor water issue. The higher the indoor concentration of these fungi the more likely a long term water issue is present.

In summary mold testing and the interpretation of the analytical results involves the evaluation of individual types of mold you find and determining why they are present.

Finding the type of mold, while interesting it does not explain why it is present. Therefore, every mold survey and mold inspection should not just confirm the presence of mold but also why the mold present is, what created the environment for the mold to grow. The backend of mold testing and mold sampling project include an inspection for the physical presence of mold as well as for water damage.

More common mold questions and answerts can be found at: /Mold-Frequently-Asked-Questions

Tags: mold remediation, mold cleanup, Mold Testing

Buying a house with an underground oil tank (UST) an as is purchase.

Posted by david sulock on Apr 1, 2014 2:21:00 PM

“As Is” Real Estate with an Oil Tank.

 

As the term implies “As Is” real estate means that you are purchasing the property in the current condition the property is in.    When purchasing As Is real estate, the seller is not expected to undertake any repairs or improvements.   To enter into a as is real estate purchase the buyer must complete their due diligence and evaluate the property for defects and repairs, the cost of which needs to be accounted for in the purchase price.  Many properties that are listed for sale as is may already have a reduced market price or at least that maybe the perception of the seller.  The price reduction on the asking price typically accounts for the condition of the real estate (structure, HVAC, roof, ect).  The problem with As Is real estate is that any price reductions rarely if ever account for environmental costs.

Typically due diligence of a property involves two primary areas, one being property condition assessment (on residential sites this is accomplished by a Home Inspection) and environmental assessment (on commercial sites this is completed by performing a Phase I Environmental Site Assessment -ESA).   For residential sites, an environmental assessment can consist of inspection and testing for past and present Underground Storage Tanks (USTs), mold inspections & testing, asbestos surveys, radon testing, and well water testing.

Of all these issues, heating oil underground storage tanks create the largest financial environmental liability.  Unlike a home inspection which can range between $400.00 and $1,000.00.  The cost to determine if a tank is leaking AND when a tank is found to be leaking to determine to what extent the oil has leaked (delineation) can cost in the thousands of dollars.  The investigation to evaluate the extent of leaking oil tanks can be compared to a doctor performing diagnostic tests such as x-rays, cat scans, blood work to diagnosis a patents ailments.  In both situations a problem exists (health or environmental), which simple cannot be determined by a simple physical evaluation but testing must be performed to define the issue.  These testing costs are typically a major hurdle to a buyer.Leaking oil tank

 

Regulations in New Jersey place the responsibility of the remediation of a leaking oil tank on the property owner.   Most buyers mistakenly believe that if they find a tank leaking on a property they are purchasing they are responsible for the cleanup.

Residential UST Leak

 

Curren’s experience in successful As Is real estate transactions with heating oil Underground Storage Tanks (USTs), is that once a tank is found to be leaking, the cleanup is eventually performed by the seller or a substantial discount is given to the buyer that is in excess of the cost of remediation. This premium reduction is meant to address the management of the remediating the problem as well as the financing of paying for the problem. To actually get to this point in a real estate transaction, thousands of dollars in investigative borings and laboratory analysis is incurred so that the cost of cleanup can be developed.  Without this investigative step, the two parties cannot determine the extent of the contamination (diagnosis the problem), hence the problem with As Is real estate, it is costly to determine the future environmental cleanup expense.    Obviously, the As Is real estate sale is to the benefit of the seller as they avoid the management and cost of making repairs to a site.  Whereas a Home Inspection report can be used to obtain estimates from various construction trades (these estimates are usually provided at no cost and only require the contractor to visit the site), environmental cleanup to be scientifically accurate must be based on soil sampling that define the vertical and horizontal extent of the contamination.  This delineation provides a 3D model of the length, height and width of the area requiring remediation.     Unfortunately, environmental professions cannot simple visit a site to determine remediation cost, as the contamination is buried below ground and invisible to the naked eye.   Remediation costs can range from several thousand dollars or can be in excess of $100,000.00.   What is the difference in the expense?  Location of the discharge, the extent of the plume, duration of leak, geology, ect.  Simple put bigger areas of contamination are more costly to remediate than smaller areas. Oil tank leak 

The real estate landscape is littered with lawsuits on property transfers where tanks were not previously disclosed.  The new owner finds the tank, discovers contamination and is now saddled with the financial responsibility of the cleanup.  Lawsuits typically name prior property owners, insurance companies and parties involved in the real estate transaction.   These suits attempt to uncover if the prior owner knew of the tank and concealed or failed to disclose the existence of the tank.  Other instances are more complex where the prior owner had also bought the property without knowledge of the tank.

At Curren Environmental, we consult on environmental issues pertaining to real estate.

Extention to LSRP May 2014 Deadline Signed by Governor

Posted by david sulock on Jan 28, 2014 3:44:00 PM

Governor Christie has signed legislation allowing for a two year extension to the statutory requirement in the Site Remediation Reform Act (SRRA) for the person responsible for conducting the remediation of certain sites to complete the remedial investigation by May 7, 2014.  In order to qualify for this extension, the person responsible for conducting the remediation must submit to the Department by March 7, 2014 a certification acknowledging that the following criteria have been met at the time of the certification:

(1) the person responsible for conducting the remediation has retained a licensed site remediation professional to conduct the remediation of the site; (2) the person responsible for conducting the remediation has met the remediation requirements included in all applicable mandatory remediation timeframes; (3) the person responsible for conducting the remediation has made technically complete submissions in compliance with all regulations for site remediation, as applicable, for the (a) initial receptor evaluation, (b) immediate environmental concern source control report, (c) light non-aqueous phase liquid interim remedial measure report, (d) preliminary assessment report, and (e) site investigation report; (4) the person responsible for conducting the remediation has established a remediation funding source if required by the Brownfield Act (see N.J.A.C. 58:10B-3); (5) if a remediation funding source is not required to be established, then the person responsible for conducting the remediation must establish a remediation trust fund for the estimated cost of the remedial investigation of the entire site; (6) the person responsible for conducting the remediation has paid to the Department all oversight costs known at the time of the certification and for which the person responsible for conducting the remediation has not filed a dispute with the Department; and (7) the person responsible for conducting the remediation has paid to the Department all annual remediation fees and remediation funding source surcharges, as applicable.

The Department strongly recommends that action be initiated promptly to establish a remediation trust fund, if needed, due to the timing to secure this financial instrument and the statutory requirement to submit the extension request by March 7, 2014.

There are also provisions for receiving an extension to the May 7, 2014 deadline if remediation is delayed due to obtaining state funding.

Tags: LSRP, NJDEP LSRP, LSRP Program, New Jersey LSRP, NJ LSRP Program, Finding an LSRP, LSRP in New Jersey, LSRP in NJ, LSRP costs, NJDEP LSRP Program, LSRP Deadline

When Would I Want a Tank Scan?

Posted by david sulock on Jun 20, 2013 9:29:00 AM

If you are buying a home, you will want to know for certain if there is or has been a tank buried on the property, and if it has leaked into the ground.  Many current owners often do not have knowledge if there is a tank or not, if they did not have a tank survey when they bought the house.  Often a visual inspection of the property is not sufficient to determine the presence of a tank.  It may yield clues, but a GPR survey will give you a definitive evaluation.

 The GPR is a sophisticated piece of equipment that sends a radar signal into the ground and will tell you where an underground tank is located.  A metal detector cannot always find the tank and is not as reliable as the GPR.  Additionally, the GPR can tell you where a former underground tank was located so the soil can be tested for past leaks.

Because the costs associated with removing the tank and any related cleanup are the responsibility of the current owner of the property, have the GPR scan before you purchase the home.  Otherwise, you run the risk of buying the property and moving in, only to discover at a later date you have an underground tank.  At that point, the removal is your responsibility and may end up costing you thousands of dollars.

 

Mold: Frequently Asked Questions

Posted by david sulock on Jun 20, 2013 9:24:00 AM

Q1. Why is mold a concern?

Mold is potentially hazardous to your health.  It causes a number of health concerns, including allergic reactions and respiratory problems. Persons especially susceptible to irritations from mold include the elderly, newborns, those with asthma, or a compromised immune system.  Additionally, mold breaks down organic material such as drywall and wood that can cause structural damage to a home if left to grow and spread. 

Q2. How do I know if a house I am buying has mold?

The best way to be sure if a house has mold is to have it inspected by a professional.  Often there are signs of water damage or a musty odor.  These are indications you may have mold.  Obtain the services of an environmental mold professional, who will perform an inspection of the property using sophisticated equipment to confirm the presence of mold.

Q3. Can I find the mold and just fix the problem myself?

You may see mold, but it likely is also hiding somewhere you can’t see.  Mold is often found behind dry wall, in ceiling tiles, under carpets, inside walls, around leaky pipes, in ductwork, and in attics and crawlspaces.  Investigation of hidden mold problems is best done by an environmental professional, who has the proper equipment to detect hidden mold.  If there is mold growing in an area of your home, an untrained person is likely to disturb the site and cause mold spores to spread.  Hiring an experienced professional will protect you from this mistake.

Q4. My home inspector found mold, now what?

Once you have discovered mold, you need to locate the moisture problem and correct it promptly.  Call a professional who will carefully contain the area, remove the mold, and treat the area to prevent further mold growth. In some instances they may need to check for possible structural damage.

Q5. How do you check for mold?

There are different ways to detect the presence of mold, including a visual inspection, air sampling, surface sampling, bulk testing, moisture evaluation, and borescope.  There are many different types of mold.  Laboratory testing can identify the species of mold present in your home.

Q6. Are mold levels regulated by the law?

There are no federal laws or standards regulating types or levels of mold found in a residential setting. Mold testing and remediation follows industry guidelines to remediate and test mold.

Mold Questions? Click Here

I’m selling my house & I have mold. Do I need mold remediation?

Posted by david sulock on Jun 20, 2013 9:08:00 AM

When a home inspector finds mold, it’s time to call an environmental mold professional.  Having mold in your home risks damaging your real estate deal. It causes alarm and can deter potential buyers. 

What does finding mold mean?

If you have mold, there is an underlying moisture problem that was fixed and the mold went undetected or you still have a water problem that has to be fixed.  The moisture issue causing the mold growth must be addressed or the mold will grow back.  Trying to fix the mold problem yourself is not advisable.  Mold professionals are trained in the use of proper personal protective equipment, including respirators.  When remediating mold specialized equipment is used to create a containment area and an air filtration system is used during mold cleanup and remediation.  Attempting to remove the mold without training and appropriate equipment risks spreading the mold.  Handling mold without the proper protective gear can cause allergic reactions and adversely influence health.  Many people are under the impression they can simply kill mold using bleach, but that is not enough.  Dead mold spores can still cause allergic reactions. MOLD REMEDIATION

Mold needs an organic surface (food source) to grow.  Homes and buildings are filed with organic material for mold to consume. Mold can grow on the paperbacking of fiberglass insulation, sheetrock, wood, dust, cardboard, pretty much anything organic.   The problem with mold it tends to grow where we won't immediately see it, such as behind walls, basements, attics and in crawlspaces. 

 

Have an environmental professional make certain that all of your mold is removed and help you move forward with your home sale.  Paying for a mold inspection and dealing with a mold problem early on can end up saving thousands of dollars in the long run.

Mold Questions? Click Here

Tags: mold, mold remediation, mold cleanup, mold contractor

New Jersey May 7, 2012 Deadline for Hiring an LSRP

Posted by david sulock on Feb 1, 2012 7:11:00 AM

February 22, 2012 LSRP Deadline Update

The NJDEP has been notifying all commercial property owners that are still listed as active contaminated sites, notices of the LSRP deadline.   (Residentail property owner's with underground heating oil tanks are NOT required to enter into the LSRP program.) The NJDEP realizes that MANY of these sites may only have clerical issues that need to be resolved before they can be removed from the contaminated site list and receive an NFA (No Further Action).   The NJDEP is attempting to process as many of these sites as possible before the May 7, 2012 deadline.    Sites that are more involved, i.e., investigative work and remediation is still ongoing, have a far smaller chance of receiving an NFA before May.

 

LSRP Requirements

 

January 2012 Update

Owners of commercial properties in New Jersey that are known to have some level of contamination (i.e., property has an NJDEP case number) have until May 7, 2012 to hire a NJDEP LSRP.  (Residentail property owner's with underground heating oil tanks are NOT required to enter into the LSRP program.) Hiring an LSRP is akin to hiring an accountant or attorney to handle your respective financial and legal issues.   Property owners have been receiving written notices from the NJDEP informing them that they must engage an LSRP to manage their environmental issues.  The NJDEP was allowing a grace period for properties that had existing NJDEP case numbers (New Jersey spill numbers) to avoid entering the LSRP program.  These older NJDEP cases had to have work completed and submitted to to the NJDEP by March of 2012 to allow the NJDEP time to review the reports prior to the May 2012 deadline.  

At this point and based on our discussions with various NJDEP Case Managers, there appears to be a slim chance to close out existing NJDEP cases under  the review of the NJDEP.  The stacks of case files pending review at this time appear to be more than the NJDEP can provide responses to by the May 7, 2012 deadline.  Therefore, the NJDEP is currently recommending that future submissions be performed under the direction of an LSRP.  Existing cases must Opt-In to the Site Remediation Reform Act (“SRRA”) Program and retain an LSRP.  All new cases and those cases which initiated remediation or remedial actions after November 3, 2009 need to hire an LSRP immediately. 

Therefore, at this time, it appears that almost all future NJDEP submissions, except where the remediating party has not performed timely actions and where the concern poses a significant threat to human health and the environment, must involve an LSRP.

One of the most significant first submissions for existing cases and cased which initiated remediation prior to November 4, 2009, if it has not been completed at this time is the Receptor Evaluation (“RE”).  The Initial RE should have been submitted to the NJDEP by March 1, 2011 or one (1) year after the initiation of remediating a site after March 1, 2010. 

The Mandatory Timeframe for submission of the Initial RE is March 1, 2012 or two (2) years after the initiation of remediation that occurs after March 1, 2010.

 

Click me

Tags: LSRP, NJDEP LSRP, LSRP Program, New Jersey LSRP, NJ LSRP Program, Finding an LSRP, LSRP in New Jersey, LSRP in NJ, LSRP costs, NJDEP LSRP Program, LSRP Deadline

NJDEP Oil Tank Grant Changes Effective September 2011

Posted by david sulock on Sep 29, 2011 2:14:00 PM

Changes to the NJDEP & EDA Tank Grant Effective September 15, 2011

Grant applications that have already passed NJDEP review and have been submitted to the EDA are now being processed by the EDA with the monies added to the Grant Fund from the 2012 State appropriation.   These applicants who had submitted their grants prior to the May 3, 2011 fund change  will be receiving notification from the EDA over the next few weeks.

Applications that are in-house at the EDA but incomplete will be reviewed and processed in the order that they were received and held until sufficient funds become available.

There is a priority system that is in place pertaining to which applicants get funding first as per NJSA 58:10A-37.4, which is as follows:  

1) Applications indicating a discharge posing a threat to drinking water, human health or sensitive ecological area;

2) Supplemental applications for remediation of discharge from regulated tanks;

3) Applications for remediation of discharge from regulated tanks;

4) Supplemental applications for remediation of discharge from unregulated tanks;

5) Applications for remediation of discharge from unregulated tanks;

6) Non-leaking tank applications

Within each of these categories, priority is based on the application filing date and processing dates that EDA staff adheres to when conducting its review.Click me

Tags: oil tank grants, tank grants, NJDEP oil tank removal grant, tank removal, tank removal grants, tank grant changes

Changes in Oil Tank Grants, what now?

Posted by david sulock on May 23, 2011 10:52:00 PM

As of May 2011, New Jersey's leaking tank grant and non leaking tank grant are not processing new applications.   What this means for anyone who has yet to submit a grant application is that your chances of receiving funding are less than if you had submitted before May 2011.  The sheer popularity of the grant program inundated the NJDEP with applications and depleted the EDA of funds.   Couple this with a lack of cash infusions by New Jersey (funds come from the corporate tax) and it is easy to see why the well is running dry.  No one can argue that the tank grant program has not helped homeowners remove and remediate tank leaks.   The fundamental idea behind the grant was to encourage homeowners to remove buried steel tank, before they leak and to assist homeowners with remediating tanks that did leak.  There is no question that a buried steel oil tank will leak at some point, be it next week, next year or 20 years from now, rust never sleeps.  So all the tanks that were removed that did not leak saved thousand of dollars in future remediation costs.  

If you were planning to remove your tank due to a leaking concern, it is still a good idea to remove the tank because it is a replaceable item just like a roof or a hot water heater.   But since it is a replaceable item, the oil tank program no longer provides monies for removing non leaking grants.Tank Questions? Click Here

If your tank leaked, your next step is to delineate the extent of the contamination so a cost can be developed to remediate the oil contamination.  These costs can then be applied to a leaking tank grant, which New Jersey is still accepting (applications are date stamped and will be processed when monies are available).   If you find that the cost to address the tank leak is within your budget, you can hire a certified (UHOT) company to do the work and submit to the grant (when monies are available) for reimbursement.

tank grant advice

Tags: tank grant changes, EDA tank grants, NJDEP tank grants