The Saga of the Oil Tanks
by Sister Jolene
In 1970 the Nuns of New Skete broke ground for their new home—Our Lady of the Sign monastery. Among many decisions to be made was the basic one of how to heat the monastery. The Sisters opted for fuel oil, and installed an in-ground oil tank in an area off the kitchen which was eventually to become a brick-paved patio. Another in-ground tank was installed when the community built the “new wing” of the monastery in 1992-93, this one in the area that is currently behind the access ramp at the front of the monastery.
Fast forward a few years to 2014 when the still-functioning “old faithful” oil furnace in the original wing of the house gave warning of imminent demise. After much discussion, the Sisters decided to change to a natural gas heating system, and the old oil tank was retired.
Meanwhile the brick patio had suffered the ups and downs of New York winters, responding to the alternate freezing and thawing of the ground beneath the patio. Water collected in the low points, while the high points became a hazard for anyone crossing the patio to the yard beyond. As is often true, the discussion of one small concern—the danger of someone tripping and falling—led to larger and larger issues. The concern about the bricks took us to the issue of faulty drainage of the yard area and eventually to the problem of the retired oil tank.
As it turned out, the tank was neither a simple nor a straight-forward problem. In the years since the installation of the tank, awareness of environmental issues had grown, with the consequent development of new regulations around tank installation and decommissioning. We learned that it was no longer legal to even install underground tanks, and the community decided to disconnect the tank at the front of the monastery and install above-ground tanks in the basement as was recommended.
This left us with two in-ground tanks that needed to be dealt with in a manner that was environmentally appropriate and could address our own peculiar circumstances. After research and discussion with the experts and authorities (Sister Patricia was front and center with this task) we were presented with two possible options for decommissioning an oil tank. Each option was feasible and ecologically sound, and the choice of treatment was determined by the placement and condition of the tanks. If a tank was intact (no leaking of fuel oil into the ground around the tank) it could be emptied of any residual oil, scrubbed clean, and filled with pea stone and sealed. This was the choice for the tank in the front of the monastery. It was newer, stronger, and when examined was found to have no leaking or any indication of pollution of the soil. A large entry was cut in the top of the tank, a member of the crew doing the work climbed into the tank and cleaned it with special absorbent pads (this was the youngest member of the crew!) and the tank was filled with pea stone and sealed.
The older tank under the patio presented an entirely different challenge. The Sisters were aware that by beginning this project they were committing themselves to a process with an unknown level of expense, complication, and time. If the tank were intact it could simply be removed, the hole filled in, and the patio rebuilt. If, however, the tank had leaked, any contaminated soil would have to be removed along with the tank. There was also the potential for an oil leakage to have reached and contaminated the ground water, and that possibility entailed enormous clean-up costs and difficulties.
It was with a great deal of discussion and some trepidation that the community made the decision to remove the tank and address any pollution issues fully. In the end, it seemed the only ethical decision to make, and the only way to care for God’s creation as we are charged to do.
Work began on May 9th with the removal of the bricks of the patio. It was hoped that they could be removed, cleaned, and reused to rebuild the patio when all the work was completed. Judging from the condition of the bricks, this looks to be a feasible possibility.
The oil tank was carefully exposed by crew member Frank deftly using a backhoe with impressive delicacy. Several old bushes were also removed to provide access to the tank area—installing an improved drainage system for the yard and landscaping with new plants will be part of the “finishing touches” after the oil tank is decommissioned. We were initially hopeful that the tank would be in good condition but it soon became obvious that age and time had worked their wonders. The tank was rusted, constructed of thin metal, and clearly not in a condition that would allow simple filling with pea stone as had been the case with the front area tank. At about half-way down the side of the tank we began to see dark soil, a good indication of oil leakage. The soil at that level was tested and found to contain contaminants at 5.2 ppm. The allowable limit is 10 ppm, so we had a brief moment of hope, but beneath the tank the soil tested at 164 ppm. Holes were visible in the bottom of the tank when it was opened, and water could be seen leaking into the tank.
With a great deal of care the tank was cleaned (by the same lucky young man) and then hoisted out of the ground and onto a truck for transport. The crew had spread a large plastic sheet on the lawn, and any contaminated soil removed in the process of digging out the tank was carefully placed on this sheet to prevent any further contamination. Further soil samples were taken to be sent to the DEC for more extensive testing, and then the contaminated soil was replaced in the hole and covered with clean soil to await the next steps.
At this time we are also awaiting “the next steps.” The DEC has been notified and informed of the conditions found, and their testing will help establish the exact type and extent of contamination as well as define the clean-up procedure. Obviously we are hoping that the contamination is limited to the area immediately around the tank and has not spread into the ground water. Whatever the outcome however it is comforting to know that we are addressing this environmental issue in a way that benefits the earth and all of us on it.
In 1970 the Nuns of New Skete broke ground for their new home—Our Lady of the Sign monastery. Among many decisions to be made was the basic one of how to heat the monastery. The Sisters opted for fuel oil, and installed an in-ground oil tank in an area off the kitchen which was eventually to become a brick-paved patio. Another in-ground tank was installed when the community built the “new wing” of the monastery in 1992-93, this one in the area that is currently behind the access ramp at the front of the monastery.
Fast forward a few years to 2014 when the still-functioning “old faithful” oil furnace in the original wing of the house gave warning of imminent demise. After much discussion, the Sisters decided to change to a natural gas heating system, and the old oil tank was retired.
Meanwhile the brick patio had suffered the ups and downs of New York winters, responding to the alternate freezing and thawing of the ground beneath the patio. Water collected in the low points, while the high points became a hazard for anyone crossing the patio to the yard beyond. As is often true, the discussion of one small concern—the danger of someone tripping and falling—led to larger and larger issues. The concern about the bricks took us to the issue of faulty drainage of the yard area and eventually to the problem of the retired oil tank.
As it turned out, the tank was neither a simple nor a straight-forward problem. In the years since the installation of the tank, awareness of environmental issues had grown, with the consequent development of new regulations around tank installation and decommissioning. We learned that it was no longer legal to even install underground tanks, and the community decided to disconnect the tank at the front of the monastery and install above-ground tanks in the basement as was recommended.
This left us with two in-ground tanks that needed to be dealt with in a manner that was environmentally appropriate and could address our own peculiar circumstances. After research and discussion with the experts and authorities (Sister Patricia was front and center with this task) we were presented with two possible options for decommissioning an oil tank. Each option was feasible and ecologically sound, and the choice of treatment was determined by the placement and condition of the tanks. If a tank was intact (no leaking of fuel oil into the ground around the tank) it could be emptied of any residual oil, scrubbed clean, and filled with pea stone and sealed. This was the choice for the tank in the front of the monastery. It was newer, stronger, and when examined was found to have no leaking or any indication of pollution of the soil. A large entry was cut in the top of the tank, a member of the crew doing the work climbed into the tank and cleaned it with special absorbent pads (this was the youngest member of the crew!) and the tank was filled with pea stone and sealed.
The older tank under the patio presented an entirely different challenge. The Sisters were aware that by beginning this project they were committing themselves to a process with an unknown level of expense, complication, and time. If the tank were intact it could simply be removed, the hole filled in, and the patio rebuilt. If, however, the tank had leaked, any contaminated soil would have to be removed along with the tank. There was also the potential for an oil leakage to have reached and contaminated the ground water, and that possibility entailed enormous clean-up costs and difficulties.
It was with a great deal of discussion and some trepidation that the community made the decision to remove the tank and address any pollution issues fully. In the end, it seemed the only ethical decision to make, and the only way to care for God’s creation as we are charged to do.
Work began on May 9th with the removal of the bricks of the patio. It was hoped that they could be removed, cleaned, and reused to rebuild the patio when all the work was completed. Judging from the condition of the bricks, this looks to be a feasible possibility.
The oil tank was carefully exposed by crew member Frank deftly using a backhoe with impressive delicacy. Several old bushes were also removed to provide access to the tank area—installing an improved drainage system for the yard and landscaping with new plants will be part of the “finishing touches” after the oil tank is decommissioned. We were initially hopeful that the tank would be in good condition but it soon became obvious that age and time had worked their wonders. The tank was rusted, constructed of thin metal, and clearly not in a condition that would allow simple filling with pea stone as had been the case with the front area tank. At about half-way down the side of the tank we began to see dark soil, a good indication of oil leakage. The soil at that level was tested and found to contain contaminants at 5.2 ppm. The allowable limit is 10 ppm, so we had a brief moment of hope, but beneath the tank the soil tested at 164 ppm. Holes were visible in the bottom of the tank when it was opened, and water could be seen leaking into the tank.
With a great deal of care the tank was cleaned (by the same lucky young man) and then hoisted out of the ground and onto a truck for transport. The crew had spread a large plastic sheet on the lawn, and any contaminated soil removed in the process of digging out the tank was carefully placed on this sheet to prevent any further contamination. Further soil samples were taken to be sent to the DEC for more extensive testing, and then the contaminated soil was replaced in the hole and covered with clean soil to await the next steps.
At this time we are also awaiting “the next steps.” The DEC has been notified and informed of the conditions found, and their testing will help establish the exact type and extent of contamination as well as define the clean-up procedure. Obviously we are hoping that the contamination is limited to the area immediately around the tank and has not spread into the ground water. Whatever the outcome however it is comforting to know that we are addressing this environmental issue in a way that benefits the earth and all of us on it.
