WALLAGRASS, Maine — It’s been more than a year since a tanker truck overturned on Route 11, spilling 5,000 gallons of gasoline. After months of work, the Department of Environmental Protection has declared well water in the area safe.

But local residents Roger and Juanita Belanger say their home remains uninhabitable. And, worse, they can’t sell it.

“Would you buy a house that had a gas spill that close to it?” he asked. “Would you buy a place that was impacted and maybe could be again if more gas seeps in?”

On May 31, 2011, a fuel truck owned by John T. Noble of Caribou, hauling gas for Daigle Oil Co. in Fort Kent, overturned on Route 11 traveling south about five miles outside of Fort Kent.

DEP workers were on the scene quickly to contain the gas spill, which directly affected several residences in the immediate area.

Over the next several months DEP worked with Stantec, an environmental consultant hired by the trucking company’s insurance company to handle site remediation.

By September, roughly 1,200 gallons of gas had been recovered, monitoring wells had been dug, and a vapor extraction system and a double carbon filtration system were installed in the Belanger home, in which crews found the presence of petroleum compounds above maximum exposure guidelines.

Filters also were installed in eight other nearby homes as a precautionary measure and, at the time, DEP spokesperson Samantha Depoy-Warren said, “The water coming from that well is safe [and] we also put those carbon filtration systems at eight other homes just to be as protective as possible. The water supply is very safe.”

The DEP is holding what is expected to be the final public hearing on the cleanup efforts next week. The agency is partnering with Wallagrass town officials to host the meeting at 6 p.m. on Thursday, July 12, at the Wallagrass Elementary School.

‘I am not willing to take a chance’

DEP may have declared the water safe last year, but Roger Belanger is unconvinced and continues to wait for action from the parties he feels are responsible for the fact that he can no longer live in his home.

He and his wife, both retirees, moved into their new Route 11 home in 2007. Now he claims that, despite heroic efforts on the parts of Stantec and DEP, his home is not only unlivable, it is unsellable.

“They tell me the water is safe to drink and they put in those filtration systems,” Belanger said. “But I had esophageal cancer and I am not willing to take a chance drinking it.”

Immediately after the spill, the Belangers and their neighbors moved into temporary housing, staying with friends or family or at local hotels.

By the end the summer, after environmental cleanup efforts, all were back home. But Belanger claims he and his wife could only live in their home a short time before Juanita became ill and they had to move out again.

While still in the house, the couple worried continually about fumes and air quality.

“We didn’t know if gas fumes were getting in during the night,” Belanger said. “Imagine how it feels to sleep in a house and not know if you are going to wake up.”

Despite the presence of the filters and bottled water, he said they believed conditions were not safe.

“We still had to shower with that water and my wife is bothered by allergies,” Belanger said. “It was making her sick so we had to get out of there.

The house now stands empty and the Belangers are living in a recently purchased home in Fort Kent.

Financial stress

That move, Belanger said, coupled with ongoing medical issues and related expenses stemming from the spill, has put the couple in a precarious financial situation. They are now paying mortgages, taxes and maintenance costs on two residences.

“We put the [Wallagrass] house up for sale a month before the spill,” Belanger said. “No one wants to buy that place now.”

According to Belanger, any interested buyers back off the moment they learn of the spill. The issue, he said, is one of perception, as he is confident DEP’s efforts have made the water safe to drink — for now.

In fact, the most recent DEP data Belanger received found the well “near low contamination, if any,” he said.

Last year, Belanger said he got lucky and was able to rent the entire house for two months to a crew of engineers working on a project at nearby University of Maine at Fort Kent.

“They were not worried about the spill,” he said. “They were engineers and understood how the filtration worked but not everybody does.”

Belanger recognizes the DEP data has declared the water safe, but said he does not feel like rolling the dice given his cancer history.

“You drink water and where does it go?” he said. “Right past the esophagus, where I had the cancer. I almost died once and I’m not willing to risk it now.”

It was Belanger’s hope that the owners of John T. Noble Trucking would come forward and offer to purchase the property.

“To date we have heard nothing from Noble Trucking,” Belanger said.

Reached Monday by phone, John Noble declined to comment on Belanger’s situation.

Regarding the overall spill, Belanger agrees with Depoy-Warren’s assessment that John Noble took immediate responsibility for the spill in addition to taking quick action to begin cleanup.

“I feel sorry for [Noble Trucking] that they had that accident,” Belanger said, “but who is feeling sorry for us? We did nothing wrong.”

Belanger hopes he may get some direct answers at the upcoming public meeting, which he said he and his attorney will attend.

According to a press release from DEP, the meeting will cover air and water monitoring data that demonstrates their progress and discuss how risks from contamination have greatly decreased across the site. Officials also will talk about changes to the remediation plan that residents can expect to see in the coming weeks and months.

Speakers will include the project manager, DEP’s regional director and municipal officials.

For more information about the Wallagrass spill and the ongoing remediation efforts in response, visit maine.gov/dep/spills and click on “Wallagrass Spill” under “Sites.”

Julia Bayly is a Homestead columnist and a reporter at the Bangor Daily News.

Join the Conversation

43 Comments

  1. Stressful events can cause feelings like the couple is having. The owner should buy the property and be thankful they didn’t sue. Or maybe a firm should pick up this case to show owners to step up in the future!

  2. The water supply is safe yet they have to put filters on the houses surrounding the crash site. If it was truly  safe would they need the filters? The DEP is a joke

      1.  How does gas evaporate underground? If that was so why bother to clean up any site, wait a few days and it would be gone. What might evaporate is the volatile compounds but gas isn’t all volatile compounds so some would remain even if it did evaporate

      2.  Brilliant comment! Gasoline (in liquid form) has high concentrations of benzine and other highly toxic, cancer causing solvents. Once in the ground, gasoline is no longer explosive or flammable due to the lack of vapors. It just seeps everywhere and contaminates everything it comes into contact with.

    1. I see the filters as being a means of providing an “extra level of comfort” to the home owner… I am very sorry for the unfortunate situation this has placed the home owners in, but obviously a lot has been done to remedy it.  Much of what he complains about in the article seem to be more “would be want to take the chance?” comments, not actual proof that there are still issues there.  He says his wife has problems with allergies, but no where does he have medical proof to link those directly to the spill.  The esophageal cancer was a problem he had before this spill, not something caused by the spill.  I understand that since having dealt with that, he would be a little more cautious.  But, I don’t see any real proof that the company owes him anything… if they wanted to make a “good faith” purchase, that is one thing, but to hold the company responsible, when there is no clear evidence they should be is another thing.

        1. Honestly – I don’t know how I would feel, as I am not in his shoes… But neither are you.

          I can (and you can) say what we want here, that is one of the great things about the freedom of speech that we have here in this country, and the ability to open the lines of dialog about situations like this.  But when I do comment I don’t do it to incite a riot or get a lot of comments or likes; I say what I do because I feel like it is something that needs to be said.

          With that being said, I am sorry if you disagree with my previous comment, but I do stand by it.  In the article itself (and if you follow the DEP link you can read more in detail – which I did) that it is safe and that he is choosing not to live there or drink the water… that is his choice.  

          But, just because he is not living there does not mean that the trucking company should be forced to buy his house because he thinks they should.  The company has been held responsible, they have insurance for these types of accidents, and that insurance is still being used to ensure that this is taken care of properly.

    2. From the DEP website….

      “Is my water safe to drink?
      Private drinking water supply wells have been regularly sampled for contamination since the spill. As the Department gains more understanding of the concentration and distribution of contamination over time, it may change the sampling frequency and/or make decisions regarding which drinking water supplies are provided temporary treatment filters. If water sampling results indicate that contaminant concentrations remain below health and safety guidelines and applicable drinking water standards for a sufficient amount of time to make a determination (typically a year), and evidence supports the conclusion that contamination is not expected to migrate to the well, the temporary treatment filters will be removed. Water quality sampling of untreated wells may continue as part of the overall site monitoring plan. The Department will not make the decision to remove temporary treatment filters lightly and will not put your health at risk. If the Department concludes that temporary treatment filters are no longer needed at your home, you should be confident that your drinking water supply is safe for you and your family. Even after the Department decides that filters are no longer needed, homeowners have the option of taking over the ownership, operation, and maintenance of the filters if they wish to continue using them.  If concentrations of contaminants remain above drinking water standards, the Department will seek to either replace your water supply with a new water supply that is not affected by the spill or install a long-term treatment system.”

      Based on this… they are keeping the filters on more as a precaution than a necessity, which in this case, I think is the right decision. This is definitely a “better safe than sorry” situation. Any one that knows me knows I do not just side with most government agencies on a whim… They do seem to be doing everything they can to right the situation, and the trucking company seems to be doing the same based on this comment… “Quoting a previous comment which fits with one as well…

      “the trucking company has a 3 million dollar policy which is 1 million more than the state requires. the insurance company has spent just under the 3 million to date to clean up the spill and put in all the monitoring equipment. the nobles are good people and are elderly ( in their 80’s) and would have like to retire soon but they will not be able to. because they will probably end up having to sell their other trucks and equipment and their shop to cover the remaining cost.

      these are the same people that have donated all the land for the veteran’s cemetary in caribou and donated countless dollars in the past to charities in the caribou area and are very humble about their donations,. they are doing the best they can.” (Quoting topofmaine)

      1.  Who determines what is safe to drink? How many PPM is safe, do you want to drink gas in your water? How about bathe in it?  Notice they don’t say their is no gas in the water, they say its safe. Who determines safe?

        1. To be honest with you – I don’t know!  I don’t work for the DEP… I am just quoting what part of their website said.  If you are really interested in finding out the answer to that, do a little research yourself.  You can follow the link in the article and go look it up plus all sorts of information or go Google it.  I am sure there are certain regulations that need to be met…. and I would imagine that you can find those regulations if you really wanted to. 

          In regards to your question about being able to take showers – I would think that if something is safe enough to be consumed it would be safe enough to bathe in.  But, again, I don’t work for the DEP… and I don’t see anything directly on the site.  Again, Google is a wonderful tool….

          I am willing to admit I do not know all the answers, I am going based on the information provided to me to make my “best educated guess”.  If you want to take the time to go do research, and you can prove me wrong; go for it…. Happy researching!

        2. Piqued my interest – a real quick Google search and I found this (from 
          http://www.dhs.wisconsin.gov/eh/chemfs/fs/gasoline.htm)… I am sure there is more out there, so feel free to keep looking!

          WHAT IS GASOLINE?Gasoline is a mixture of about 150 chemicals refined from crude oil. It’s usually a colorless, light brown or pink liquid. Gasoline is used in cars, boats, motorcycles, lawn mowers and other engines. Gasoline usually contains additives affecting the way it burns (A separate chemical fact sheet is available for MTBE, an additive used to reduce air pollution). Gasoline is a powerful fuel for engines and a dangerous explosive!Gasoline evaporates quickly when exposed to air. Most gasoline spilled in lakes, streams or soil evaporates. Some spilled gasoline can seep into groundwater and remain unchanged for years. Private wells located near a spill or a buried leaking tank may become contaminated. Scientists refer to gasoline components that mix with water as gasoline range organics (GRO).HOW ARE PEOPLE EXPOSED TO GASOLINE?Breathing: Exposure occurs when people breathe gasoline vapors while filling gas tanks. Exposure may also occur when using contaminated water to bathe or do laundry. Some people intentionally inhale gasoline vapors to get “high.”Drinking/Eating: Low level exposure can occur when contaminated water is used for drinking or preparing food.Touching: Some ingredients in gasoline can pass through the skin when used as a cleaner or accidentally spilled on skin or clothing. People can also be exposed when handling contaminated soil or water.DO STANDARDS EXIST FOR REGULATING GASOLINE?Water: Although no standard exists for gasoline in drinking water, there are standards for some of the chemicals that make up gasoline’s mixture. The standard for benzene (2% of the gasoline mixture) is 5 parts per billion (ppb), ethyl benzene is 700 ppb, toluene is 1.0 part per million (ppm), and xylene is 10 ppm. We suggest you stop drinking or cooking with water containing any chemical above the standard, if you can smell a gasoline odor or see a oily sheen. If the chemicals occur at very high levels in your drinking water, you should avoid washing, bathing or using the water for other purposes.Air: Most people can smell gasoline at levels as low as 0.25 ppm. No standards exist for the amount of gasoline-related chemicals allowed in the air of homes. We use a formula to convert established workplace limits to suggested home limits. Based on the formula, we recommend levels of gasoline in air be no higher than 6 ppm. To prevent irritation and health effects to the nervous system, we suggest you store gasoline outside of your home. This also reduces fire hazards and the amount of vapors entering your home.

  3. Sorry, but tons of real estate in this area doesn’t sell – near a spill or not.  Houses stay on the market for years around here, and Route 11 isn’t a great location since not many people want to live on a high-speed route with trucks jake-braking near their bedroom window at 3 in the morning.  They can say all they want about safety, but they can’t blame their entire situation (including the real estate market) on a gas spill.  Lots of home sellers are stuck in the same can’t-unload-it situation without such a convenient scapegoat.

    1. Do you think the spill makes the property more appealing to potential buyers? Do you think the spill has had a net neutral effect on the marketability of the property? Of course you don’t.

      Whether or not the house is not selling due to the effects of the spill is largely irrelevant. This couple lucked out, though – filing a suit would likely net them the value of the house (or more) in the end.

      This couple is sitting on a lottery ticket they could cash in at any time by filing a lawsuit. I suspect that, as is often the case in rural areas, those who benefit financially are demonized and criticized out of envy.

      The worst thing one can be in rural Maine is well-off. If you can rub more than two dimes together you can be sure that you’ll be the topic of conversation often at the local coffee shop and municipal office.

  4. I know when I ride by and see the for sale sign I always wonder who would buy this house knowing what happen…I know I wouldn’t..instead of putting that trailer up in work site they should have brought the house.  This guy had cancer I would fear the same things he does.  Sorry but I feel this oil company should just buy the house and be done with it…let the oil company sell it.

      1. would you be willing to live there and drink the water? Many people wouldn’t. I know that I wouldn’t be willing to take any chances like that with my family, especially having a young child and pets who are much more sensitive to something like this. 

        1. Then there is always bottled water – and it is not that expensive.  Yes, it is a little more inconvenient, but we had a problem with our well back in the spring and decided for the time being (until we can get full testing done on the water) that we are just going to keep bottled water in the house for drinking purposes.  

          1. still have to take showers, brush your teeth, cook, laundry etc….bottled water won’t cover that. 

          2. For cooking purposes, we just make sure we boil our water before we add any food to it.  As far as brushing teeth, using bottled water is easy enough.  I will admit the laundry and the showers are not as easy to manage… for us, we were more concerned with the consumption of large quantities of water, so showers and laundry are not an issue.

          3. You most likely think you already know the answer to that question, or you would not be asking it… Of course, the answer is no.  But, I would imagine that if something is deemed safe enough to consumed it would also be safe enough to do laundry or bathe in.  But, again, I am not a representative for the DEP…

  5. This is the exact type of situation where someone should actually sue. I am not at all in favor of these sue happy people who “slip and fall” in stores but this is the type of situation that our court system was intended to handle. 

    1. There is both physical damage to the property as well as financial loss, and emotional stress (which by the way is considered physical injury).

    2. The trucking company is clearly negligent for the truck rolling over, there were no other parties involved who contributed to the accident.

    3.  The responsible party has done nothing to compensate these folks.

    4.  Instead of waiting around for the trucking company ( and their insurance provider) to step up and offer relief the Belanger’s need to be proactive and get the ball rolling. These types of claims (cases) take a while to settle so you need to start soon.  No one is going to come up and say hey I will give you $100,000 for your troubles, sorry just doesn’t work that way.  Now if the trucking company is faced with a lawsuit they may change their tune.

    I worked as a liability insurance claims administrator overseeing these types of claims for many years and can tell you from experience the Belanger’s simply need to file a lawsuit and they will get some relief.  It may not be everything that they think they should get but it will be something to compensate them for their troubles. The trucking company has at least a $1 million policy limit for this type of incident so if the insurance provider has to pay out $100-$200k this will be a small claim and a mere drop in the bucket.  The Belanger’s have a clear cut case of liability the only hard part will be to put an exact monetary value on the damages. 

    1. the trucking company has a 3 million dollar policy which is 1 million more than the state requires. the insurance company has spent just under the 3 million to date to clean up the spill and put in all the monitoring equipment. the nobles are good people and are elderly ( in their 80’s) and would have like to retire soon but they will not be able to. because they will probably end up having to sell their other trucks and equipment and their shop to cover the remaining cost.
      these are the same people that have donated all the land for the veteran’s cemetary in caribou  and donated countless dollars in the past to charities in the caribou area and are very humble about their donations,. they are doing the best they can.

    2. Was this an advertisement for a lawsuit or a story? “The water tested fine but  everybody is suffering adverse health effects. My house is dangerous but I rented it and the people stayed two months” . Compensation for an actual, documented loss is one thing stretching it for more money is another. If the driver had a health issue and that caused the accident there is no negligence. Read the definition before you declare  “clear” negligence.  A slip and fall on a rotted stairwayor leaving spilled oil in a store aisle is far more “clear” than this. As for nothing being done, do you have any idea what it cost to clean it up and put in filters? Where did you get the information on the policy? There are environmental exclusions on many trucking policies. You know what they say about assumptions made without the all the facts.

  6. Look at the comparable properties in Wallagrass, Fort Kent, and the surrounding communities….price is on the high end….. and on a major highway.

    If I was searching for a house and I did not know the history, I probably would skip over this one anyway due to price:

    1174 Aroostook Road

    Wallagrass, ME 04781

    Kickout:
    No

    List Price:
    $95,000

     

    A neat as a pin 3BR cape on 5 acres of woodland. A short drive to UMFK,
    stores, and recreation. Within walking distance of Fish River. Boat landing just
    up the road. Wildlife abounds.

    Directions: Proceed South on Aroostook Road five miles from downtown
    Fort Kent. Subject property is located on the left. Look for Sign.

    MLS#: 1005591

    1. price wise do you find it too expensive, or does the price give away something is wrong with this place? Because that’s what 95k says to me. It’s too good of a deal. I payed 95k for my house in 2001. It’s 1 acre, and a 1975 ranch that needed/s work. 

      1. I am thinking  it may be listed high for the present market in the Valley.  

        Without looking at the actual property and the sales for the area,  the market value  is only an educated guess on my part, and each property is different from the next. But then, even if an appraisal supports the selling price,  the available homes in the area, and their listing price will determine if the seller can get the asking price. 

        Market value is define as “the estimated amount for which a property should exchange on the date of valuation between a willing buyer and a willing seller in an arm’s length transaction after proper marketing wherein the parties had each acted knowledgeably, prudently, and without compulsion.” 

    2. This house was new in 2007 – so is now a mere 5 years old.  I personally know it is as advertised:  NEAT AS A PIN and worth the 95,000, even on Rt. 11 in Wallagrass.

      1. You are right – anything under $100,000 is a good bargain – I went and looked at the realtor.com listing for the house and even though it is a 3BR Cape, it is only 994 sq ft.  That is a small cape. I have a cape that is about 200 sq feet bigger than that, and I admit even my cape is definitely on the small side.

        To build new, most contractors will tell you to budget at least $80 to $100 per square foot to do the “basics”.  So, it does not seem to be over priced, if it was a new house (which it is fairly new).  But, I am sure I do not have to tell you that the market is not that great nowadays… and that is definitely going to make a difference when it comes to selling it.

        1. 2010 tax assessor’s value:
          $56,500,

          Many houses are actually selling below assessment.  there are many factors to consider when pricing a home.

          1. There certainly are a lot of things to consider, and I would imagine if we were going to sell, we would not get our tax assessment value either.

            I was not trying to say that it was or was not over-priced with my comment…. I was once again simply making an observation! 

          2. tax assessment and appraisal value are completely different. Houses are selling for less than appraisals, not tax assessments. 

          3. I know the difference and it wasn’t a typo.  Many houses are selling at less than assessments as well!

      2. I have, and I also know what houses, and properties, are selling for Statewide.  

         “Anything under $100K”  is not necessarily a good deal, a good deal depends on the area, the house, and the market.   Mostly though a good deal is in the eye of the buyer.Houses that would have sold for $350 thousand 5 years ago are now going for around $200K  Houses that would have commanded $150K  are now at $80-$90K.

        I hope Mr. Belanger gets his asking price, and receives a resolution to his satisfaction.  It is too bad he has been put through this.

    1. Quoting a previous comment which fits with one as well… ”
      the trucking company has a 3 million dollar policy which is 1 million more than the state requires. the insurance company has spent just under the 3 million to date to clean up the spill and put in all the monitoring equipment. the nobles are good people and are elderly ( in their 80’s) and would have like to retire soon but they will not be able to. because they will probably end up having to sell their other trucks and equipment and their shop to cover the remaining cost.

      these are the same people that have donated all the land for the veteran’s cemetary in caribou  and donated countless dollars in the past to charities in the caribou area and are very humble about their donations,. they are doing the best they can.”

  7. Yes, the problem with this is for the older homes that do not sell.  This is a very “NEW” home and they should not be penalized for something that was beyond their control.  The truck and driver are responsible – ultimately the company that runs the business ! 
    If the shoe was on the other foot and it was “YOU” it would be different, huh ?

Leave a comment

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *