Considering purchase of house near "gravel pit" that the EPA has just begun investigating...

Factual Questions
1

My husband and I have been considering the purchase of a 1750’s farmhouse in Eliot, Maine. It’s a bank-owned property, fixer-upper, that we were ready to make an offer on until I went to the town hall today to see if there were any concerns with the property. Turns out there is a rather major concern, we think.

The property (6.7 acres) abuts a gravel pit that has come under investigation of the “Federal Government.” The feds are apparently not telling the town why they’re investigating the pit, though. This started Feb 27th, and no charges have been filed. Here is a pic of the letter. And here is a news story about the situation. That’s pretty much all the information the Town was able to give me.

Now, on the one hand, this seems very bad. On the other hand, this could be a chance to pick this really cool property up VERY cheaply.

The house is on well water, and city water is not available. There is a brand-new high-end subdivision right next to this property. This would be a cash purchase, so mortgage concerns do not apply. I’m trying to work out the worst case scenario with this. EPA finds…something? Could they condemn the land somehow? Would there be any compensation for land owners? Anyone have an idea how long this investigation could take?

Anyone gone through something like this?

Thanks for any input.

2

Do you know for sure that it is an EPA investigation? Gravel pits fall under MHSA jurisdiction, so if it is still in operation it could be a worker safety issue or a bunch of other things being investigated.

I’m not aware of any chemical use in gravel pits, so unless they were running a side business disposing of hazardous waste or had a Diesel tank barf its contents, I wouldn’t automatically assume a contamination issue.

3

Actually, no. The letter just says the “federal government” is investigating it. However, the town hall guy referred to the gravel pit as a pit and landfill, which is odd. Here is a google map image of the pit in question. Google Maps We’re looking at the house with the pool on the right side of the pit.

4

If you’re on a well, you really want to be sure of the direction of water tables and flows. You can’t really trace where things go from the property, but you can see if things end up there.

Here’s what you do. You go down to the open pit where they removed all the rock (there’s some word for it that’s failing me now) and throw a nontoxic, detectable dye (or something) in. Then you go to the library or county extension, log on to the Internet, and post the shit out of that thing here. Be sure to be as contrived as possible.
That, by the way, was a real answer. Learn what you can about the water table so if there is something you’ll know if it would be headed your way.

5

I don’t like the sound of this.

Is the gravel “fill” covering something else?

Have you looked up “super fund” sites?

What used to be there?

Did the former owners die of Leukemia or something? (Hard to figure out I know.)

I especially don’t get the secrecy.

Test the water.

I dunno–but there’s a saying 'if it’s too good to be true…"

Then again, maybe Jimmy Hoffa is in there. :wink:

6

The issue of contamination is a real one that can’t be readily eliminated as a long term problem.

Dig sites have caused many issues around the country because the use of explosives. TNT is manufactured with carcinogenic chemicals such as dinitrotoluene which is not consumed in the explosion and readily distributes itself through the water supplies.

There is no realistic way to be sure of the water flow tables for drilled wells. Travel from point A to point B can be a factor measured in decades not hours.

Good thing is testing the water will show contamination. If I were to consider living there I’d calculate the price of a yearly of bi-yearly comprehensive test into my calculations(something most people on wells should be doing anyway but never do) for the cost of ownership. A comprehensive test costs about 300 bucks these days.

Test the water regularly, if it shows contamination sue the gravel company to compensate you for the fact you’ll never be able to sell the property and need to drink bottled water while living there.

7

What or who alerted the Feds to the site?

8

Yeah, until they go out of business. Thanks for the info on the TNT, that makes sense.

No idea. The town doesn’t seem to have any idea why the pit is being investigated. Neighbors so far have not reported any problems with testing their well water.

9

I would ask for groundwater well testing before I purchased anything like this. I’d also be concerned about the ‘landfill’ aspect of the federal investigation. What were they taking in this ‘landfill’? Toxic waste? Yikes.

If it were me, I’d run far, far away.

10

It’s a gamble. You risk paying very little for a house that skyrockets in value once you fix it up, or paying very little for a house that you couldn’t give away no matter how much you sink into it (depending what they find). It’s up to you, really… I wouldn’t take that bet, as I’m not a gamblin’ man. But I’m not you.

11

Huh. It’s almost like someone’s been going down to the quarry and throwing shit in there.

Ok, joking aside if your house is deemed uninhabitable you would take a total loss. There’s this Michigan case we read in law school, after purchase the city inspected the septic field and condemned the whole property. The homeowners got zilch. When property is purchased as-is, risk of loss is normally on the buyer.

If you cannot get a pretty good idea of the habitability of the property, or a buy-back /refund agreement from the bank, you are taking a mighty big gamble. I don’t know what sort of information you need precisely to find out if that is a likely occurance, but I’d start with whatever office in your municipality has the authority to condemn property when it’s a health and safety hazard, and find out under what conditions that can occur.

12

iLOL

13

Sigh. I really want that house. I think with the info we currently have, though, it isn’t worth the risk. I’ll keep an eye on the situation and hopefully the government is in fact investigating something non-toxic or non-existent.

If anyone has anything else to add, I’m listening.

14

Could you get some information on the investigation through a Freedom of Information request?

(Of course, even if you can, it could take months or years of fighting their stonewalling before it happens.)

15

I agree the house is a risk since you’re dealing with an unknown. If it were me, I guarantee 30 minutes after I closed on the house, they would announce the area is uninhabitable for the next 10,000 years. If I didn’t buy it, it would turn out to be an investigation into why gold is strangely erupting from the ground in the area.

But, surely this isn’t how contamination problems are handled, is it? The US Attorney in Boston called the town in Maine to say the site is under investigation, but would give no other information. I can’t find any real indication that they said it was for contamination, could the local officials be guessing about that? Another story says the U.S. Attorney’s office will now not confirm or deny any investigation. The state doesn’t know anything, the owner of the pit and their attorney don’t know anything, and the town doesn’t know anything except that someone called to say there was an investigation.

Why would the US attorney in Boston call instead of the US Attorney in Maine? Why call the town at all? In my completely naive and uninformed view of the world, it seems like if there were contamination, the appropriate agency would contact the company and have them stop whatever they’re doing, fine or shut them down, publicly inform the town of what precautions to take, have someone clean up, then later involve US Attorneys and take the company to court if necessary.

16

I can’t open your links on this phone, but do they indicate it’s an environmental investigation? It could be another type of ‘federal’ investigation. Financial, fraud, criminal, etc.

17

Here’s my take on it.

Best case. Not a darn thing happens and your property is fine.

Not so best case. Your water is “okay”, now or in the future, but not for drinking or consumption. A minor pain but not a big deal IMO.

Worser case. Your water is bad enough you should not even bath or wash stuff with it. Seems pretty unlikely but is a big deal/pain in the ass IMO.

Worstest case. Land is actually condemed because of gawd knows what toxin they dumped there.
Worstest case seems very unlikely to me. Do some additional research to see the actual reasons WHY and WHO is doing the investigation.

If you are worried about well contamination from the normal quarry operations and its litterally next door I’d suspect that if it isnt showing contamination now it probably not going to later.

Another consideration. If its your dream house and you plan to live there a long time and you get it dirt cheap, is resale value actually an issue? The purchase would be more like long term renting. Assuming things arent so bad you can’t actually live there for some health/legal reasons.

18

**EmAnJ, **the only indication that it’s an environmental investigation is that, according to the letter, “The Town of Eliot, State of Maine Department of Environmental Protection, and the Fed. Gov are working together to resolve any potential issue.” The EPA isn’t actually mentioned.

fubya, I agree it’s weird, and if anyone can shed light on this I’d be greatful.

billfish, I agree that the most likely scenarios are 1 and 2. However, this would be an investment property for us, we would plan to re-sell in 3-5 years. I would say in 3 years, there is still a good chance that this investigation would be ongoing, knowing how slow this sort of thing can move.

I’m going to call around tomorrow, see if I can get any more info. Off to bed right now, thanks everyone for all the input.

19

Can you get the house with the condition that the well passes a water test?

20

My advice is, before you do anything else, call the Maine Department of Environmental Protection EPA’s Region I office in Boston, and ask them if they know anything about this. Try and be friendly and tell them why you want to know. If they seem to know something but are being very guarded in there answers maybe even hint that you don’t need any official word, but any hints they can give you would be appreciated.

Now, it’s kind of strange that the U.S. Attorney’s office is calling. That means it’s a criminal investigation, involving some kind of pretty deliberate and knowing violation of the law, not a routine investigation of contamination, or routine investigation of violations of environmental regulations. If it was just some kind of violation that wasn’t egregious and deliberate, the EPA would just fine them administratively, without the US Attorney getting involved at all. It’s not strange that they’re refusing to comment, since that’s pretty standard practice from them.
But from what we know so far, it’s not even clear it’s an environmental issue. So I’d start with DEP and EPA and see what they can tell you (two hints: if you can’t find someone to return your calls, try the Press Office, who are very good at following up on things. If that doesn’t work, get your (state or federal, as appropriate) congressperson to make a call for you.))

Then, I’d have a talk with your real estate attorney about what kind of outs you can write into the contract. Testing the well water is fine, but generally you need to know what kind of contaminant you’re looking for.

By the way, there’s an even worster-est case scenario: the whole area is turned into a Superfund site, and you, as an owner, are on the hook (along with all the other owners since the contamination happened) for the whole cost of cleanup. This is pretty unlikely, though, especially as EPA hasn’t said anything publicly about contamination.

My best guess is that it’s something that’s not environmental, but again, start with DEP and then EPA to see what they know. At the very least, I hope they can tell you if it’s an environmentally-related investigation.