Well finally something good to report about gas drilling. Case dismissed! This is good news for all North Texas Towns. This was one of the suits filed by Red Oak and Riverwalk. When a town puts together an Oil and Gas ordinance, they should have every right to enforce it without the threat of being sued by big money oil and gas.
Remember the bills introduced last legislative session trying to take this right away from local government to rule where and how drilling is done in their towns? Oil and Gas spent "mucho money" lobbying for the bills to be passed. The lawyer for this development spoke in favor of the bills. Thankfully the bills died on the floor. It is known for a fact that many letters where sent from numerous North Texas Towns pleading not to let these bills go through. Maybe our elected officials are finally realizing that something is terribly wrong with the way Oil and Gas conduct business and production in the Barnett Shale.
Red Oak and the Riverwalk Developers knew all along what Flower Mound's O & G Ordinance stated. After all the ordinance was already in place when they signed a lease between the two of them. Knowing they would need many variances for this site.
It is in the middle of a densely populated area of Flower Mound. They want to put gas wells a few hundred feet from the hospital, future office buildings, a park, shops, condos and apartments.
There is a similar situation going on in Denton right now. I hope their town protects them like Flower Mound protected their residents.
http://www.dentonrc.com/sharedcontent/dws/drc/specialprojects/drilling/stories/DRC_Rayzor-drilling_0721.5ea82b9a.html
http://www.flowermoundleader.com/articles/2009/08/31/news_update/401.txt#blogcomments
Judge dismisses Red Oak lawsuit against town
By Chris Roark, Staff Writer
Published: Monday, August 31, 2009 11:21 AM CDT
Less than a month before the start of the trial involving Red Oak Gas and its subsidiaries against the town of Flower Mound and its Oil and Gas Board of Appeals over denial of gas drilling variances in June of 2008, the case has been dismissed by Judge Carmen Rivera-Worley of the 16th Judicial District Court of Denton County.
The court issued its order Friday finding that the Oil and Gas Board of Appeals' actions were legal. This followed the town and the board's motion with the trial court to dismiss the case. A court hearing took place Aug. 20.Red Oak has 30 days to file an appeal.
“The Town is pleased with the trial court’s opinion. It is our hope that this will conclude the litigation between Flower Mound and Red Oak,” said Town Manager Harlan Jefferson. “We were confident that the actions of the Oil and Gas Board of Appeals were legal and are gratified by the trial court’s decision.”
Red Oak Sabine, Red Oak Gas, Red Oak Gas Operating Company and Red Oak Gas II filed a suit against the town and the board June 18, 2008, after the Oil and Gas Board of Appeals denied 15 variance requests for drilling setbacks.According to a copy of the lawsuit, Red Oak Gas was claiming the denial was made “without reference to applicable criteria and standards, is illegal in whole or in part, constitutes an abuse of discretion, was arbitrary and capricious, causes Red Oak Gas an unnecessary hardship, is otherwise wrongful, invalid and unenforceable and should be reversed.”
Red Oak Gas was seeking variance requests for a pad site on a 134-acre tract of land located east of FM 2499, west of Morriss Road, north of FM 1171 and south of Timber Trails Park. The surface owner, Cole McDowell, is seeking to build The River Walk at Central Park on the land. The requested pad site was located on the northeast portion of the property. Because the pad site did not meet some of the distance requirements outlined in the town’s gas drilling ordinance, the applicant was required to request a variety of setback variances, including distance from a public building that includes a school, hospital or religious institution.
Of course only a few of the variance requests are listed below. It was crazy how many were requested for this site.
The request would have put a well 779 feet from First Baptist Church, located at 1901 Timber Creek Road, and a tank battery 885 feet from the church. The ordinance requires a setback of 1,000 feet for both, or down to 500 feet with a variance.
The requested variance also would have put a well 695 feet from Applewood Daycare, located at 2011 Timber Creek Road, and a tank battery 827 feet from the daycare. The variance would have allowed for a setback down to 500 feet.According to the lawsuit, Red Oak Gas had received a letter from the owner of the daycare, the landowner of the property the daycare is located on and the church’s pastor saying they did not object to the variances.
The lawsuit stated the only opposition came from public residents who did not live within 1,000 feet of the proposed site.
The opposition came from those who the Riverwalk will depend on for business. Those that will ultimately determine how successful this venture will be. They would need the residents to feel safe to use the hospital, visit the doctors in the office buildings, shop in the stores, play at the park, buy the condos and rent the apartments. With wells a few hundred feet away, many feel that is a danger.
The lawsuit also stated that during the meeting, “more than one board member expressed objections to any drilling on the Red Oak property generally, not just the June site, and at least one board member expressed the desire to have a ‘hole’ in central Flower Mound so that ‘there’s nothing there.’” It went on to state “some board members effectively based their decisions on the goal of banning drilling altogether within central Flower Mound, including the Red Oak property, thereby preventing Red Oak from extracting its minerals.”
The lawsuit stated that the board failed to apply applicable law. It noted that according to Texas Local Government Code Section 211.009(a)(3), a variance can be granted if it’s not contrary to public interest and if a literal enforcement of the ordinance would result in unnecessary hardship. It also referenced a portion of the Flower Mound Code of Ordinances that states “all property owners, mineral and otherwise, have the right to enjoy their property and its benefits and revenues.”
Well the town is allowing this developer to build and develop all he wanted and asked for but the gas wells. This is the same developer that brought Flower Mound Parker Square and Frisco their Frisco Square which was dubbed "Fiasco Square".
http://www.ascendantsolutions.com/dbj_frisco_article_4_1_05.pdf
Five Star began work on the first phase of the planned 4 million-square-foot complex in the spring of 2002. It built three buildings totaling 250,000 square feet -- two 57-unit multifamily buildings with ground-floor retail, and one 80,000-square-foot office facility, of which 20,000 square feet is retail space -- but then had trouble leasing the space. After that the project stalled, leading some local commercial real estate brokers to begin referring to it as "Fiasco Square."
He is getting another chance to build a huge development and do it right. He is still receiving his "right to enjoy the property and its benefits and revenues" from the hospital, shops, condos, and apartments!
THE COMMENTS IN BLACK ARE FROM STOPTHEDRILLING AND NOT A PART OF THE ARTICLES IN RED.
Monday, August 31, 2009
Red Oak Lawsuit Dismissed
On Friday, the Red Oak lawsuit against the Town of Flower Mound and the Oil and Gas Board of Appeals was dismissed.
Chris Roark has a good summary in the "Leader". Here's the link:
http://www.flowermoundleader.com/articles/2009/08/31/flower_mound_leader/news/4.txt
Chris Roark has a good summary in the "Leader". Here's the link:
http://www.flowermoundleader.com/articles/2009/08/31/flower_mound_leader/news/4.txt
Friday, August 28, 2009
Honesty isn't in Gas and Oil Industry's Vocabulary!
Many have signed leases right here in North Texas and all through the United States. Believing that if it is put in writing, the gas and oil companies will stick to the agreement. Recently DFW accused Chesapeake of not reporting some production amounts.
http://www.wfaa.com/sharedcontent/dws/wfaa/latestnews/stories/wfaa090113_lj_hawes.42acce1.html
The airport notified Chesapeake Energy that Chesapeake is in "monetary default."
"I think we should all be concerned," said Burnam.
The airport's received $37 million in royalty payments to date but contends in these letters it's not being paid correctly, citing concerns with both the way Chesapeake is calculating royalties and the amount of gas the company reports it's producing and selling.
Burnam's district includes Fort Worth, a part owner of D/FW airport.
"Any public official is going to be, should be concerned... Certainly D/FW is big enough to stand up for its own interest but that fact that they're having these legal letters back and forth over so many issues really disturbs me," he said.
Royalties, however, aren't the only controversy involved in D/FW gas drilling.
Big problem, who is watching them to make sure they do what the lease states? If you believe the Texas Railroad Commission here is Texas is regulating and protecting us, think again.
http://www.houstontriallawyerblog.com/tags/oil-and-gas-royalty/
Landowners in Texas who lease their lands for drilling have very few options when they are denied the royalty payments that are rightfully theirs. That is because, in Texas there is no single authority in in charge of ensuring that landowners receive their dues. Due to the lack of such authority, owners are often at the mercy of oil and gas companies who may delay and deny royalty payments. In such cases, owners may have no other option but to consult with an oil and gas attorney to receive the royalties due to them.
Even if the TRC was in charge of monitoring the reporting of production for royalties to make sure landowners are paid correctly, it is physically and mathematically impossible for them to do so. Like previously posted, a total of over 377,000 oil and gas wells, over 76,000 of them being gas wells and only 80 something inspectors!
About 1,546 oil and gas wells and other production facilities operate in Terrebonne Parish, on the Gulf of Mexico. Below the surface of the Gulf and in the coastal lowlands lie some of the major oil and gas fields in the United States. The inshore and offshore fields have been extensively developed and minerals have been extracted from them for decades.
Oil and gas production companies must pay severance taxes to the state on all minerals and gas extracted and removed from Louisiana. Taxes are based on the volume of minerals and gas that pass through valves that measure and control the flow. Oil and gas companies periodically report the volume to the Louisiana Department of Natural Resources.
The state's lawsuits say that before 2008, gas and mineral reporting was done on a well-by-well basis. Since then, to make things less complicated, the reporting is done by land - operators file a single report for all wells operating on a parcel of land.
Under the new system, the state has no way of determining whether production from a particular field is comprised of production from all, some, or only one well within that field and - the state says - visible inspection by assessors is generally not feasible, as assessors have "neither the manpower nor the resources to conduct visual inspections of the thousands of wells and other facilities located in the fields." For that reason, the Louisiana Tax Commission developed "a system of self-reporting" where "the assessed value of oil and gas property is determined solely on the basis of reports filed under oath."
The state says the many defendants substantially under reported the fair market value of the oil and gas extracted from 1998 to 2008. Often, the state says, the defendants did not report production from some wells at all. Sometimes they reported they their wells were "shut in" and not producing, and yet they reported to other sources that those very wells were "producing" during the same times.
The state demands back taxes and damages for RICO violations and mail fraud.
http://www.wfaa.com/sharedcontent/dws/wfaa/latestnews/stories/wfaa090113_lj_hawes.42acce1.html
The airport notified Chesapeake Energy that Chesapeake is in "monetary default."
"I think we should all be concerned," said Burnam.
The airport's received $37 million in royalty payments to date but contends in these letters it's not being paid correctly, citing concerns with both the way Chesapeake is calculating royalties and the amount of gas the company reports it's producing and selling.
Burnam's district includes Fort Worth, a part owner of D/FW airport.
"Any public official is going to be, should be concerned... Certainly D/FW is big enough to stand up for its own interest but that fact that they're having these legal letters back and forth over so many issues really disturbs me," he said.
Royalties, however, aren't the only controversy involved in D/FW gas drilling.
Big problem, who is watching them to make sure they do what the lease states? If you believe the Texas Railroad Commission here is Texas is regulating and protecting us, think again.
http://www.houstontriallawyerblog.com/tags/oil-and-gas-royalty/
Landowners in Texas who lease their lands for drilling have very few options when they are denied the royalty payments that are rightfully theirs. That is because, in Texas there is no single authority in in charge of ensuring that landowners receive their dues. Due to the lack of such authority, owners are often at the mercy of oil and gas companies who may delay and deny royalty payments. In such cases, owners may have no other option but to consult with an oil and gas attorney to receive the royalties due to them.
Even if the TRC was in charge of monitoring the reporting of production for royalties to make sure landowners are paid correctly, it is physically and mathematically impossible for them to do so. Like previously posted, a total of over 377,000 oil and gas wells, over 76,000 of them being gas wells and only 80 something inspectors!
http://stopthedrilling.blogspot.com/2009/07/how-many-gas-wells-in-state-of-texas.html
'Honor System' Doesn't Work for Oil and Gas Companies, Louisiana Says
By SABRINA CANFIELD
NEW ORLEANS (CN) - Louisiana has filed 30 federal lawsuits seeking millions of dollars from oil and gas companies it accuses of grossly under reporting oil and gas production. It claims the oil industry has cheated the state by lying in a tax reporting system that relies upon an honor code.
About 1,546 oil and gas wells and other production facilities operate in Terrebonne Parish, on the Gulf of Mexico. Below the surface of the Gulf and in the coastal lowlands lie some of the major oil and gas fields in the United States. The inshore and offshore fields have been extensively developed and minerals have been extracted from them for decades.
Oil and gas production companies must pay severance taxes to the state on all minerals and gas extracted and removed from Louisiana. Taxes are based on the volume of minerals and gas that pass through valves that measure and control the flow. Oil and gas companies periodically report the volume to the Louisiana Department of Natural Resources.
The state's lawsuits say that before 2008, gas and mineral reporting was done on a well-by-well basis. Since then, to make things less complicated, the reporting is done by land - operators file a single report for all wells operating on a parcel of land.
Under the new system, the state has no way of determining whether production from a particular field is comprised of production from all, some, or only one well within that field and - the state says - visible inspection by assessors is generally not feasible, as assessors have "neither the manpower nor the resources to conduct visual inspections of the thousands of wells and other facilities located in the fields." For that reason, the Louisiana Tax Commission developed "a system of self-reporting" where "the assessed value of oil and gas property is determined solely on the basis of reports filed under oath."
The state says the many defendants substantially under reported the fair market value of the oil and gas extracted from 1998 to 2008. Often, the state says, the defendants did not report production from some wells at all. Sometimes they reported they their wells were "shut in" and not producing, and yet they reported to other sources that those very wells were "producing" during the same times.
The state demands back taxes and damages for RICO violations and mail fraud.
Thursday, August 27, 2009
Another case of dirty drilling!
Here is another case of water well contamination. This is near the Colorado town of Silt. Many people have reported illnesses since drilling started. The first 2 phases of the testing showed the amount of methane is increasing at an alarming rate. Part of the money for the study was paid for out of a $371,200 Colorado Oil and Gas Conservation Commission fine against EnCana Oil and Gas in 2004. Encana was found at fault after gas and benzene seeped to the surface in the Divide Creek area.
It seems every time you turn around there is proof that gas drilling is dangerous to humans and the environment.
There is currently 1700 wells in the area and the potential of 7000 in the years to come.
As of a year ago, there were over 76,000 gas wells in the state of Texas!! Over 377,000 oil and gas wells combined. The Texas Railroad Commission had only had 84 inspectors in 2008.
Tests will determine the extent of methane gas contamination in domestic water wells in the area
County commissioners this week approved a $199,879 contract for GeoTrans, Inc. to complete the Phase III Hydrogeological Study of the Mamm Creek area southwest of Silt.
The first two phases of the study were paid for out of a $371,200 Colorado Oil and Gas Conservation Commission fine against EnCana Oil and Gas in 2004, after gas and benzene seeped to the surface in the Divide Creek area.
Since 2004, the county has been conducting a study that finds that there is methane showing up in local domestic wells in the Mamm Creek area that may be the result of gas drilling in the area. More than 1,700 natural gas wells are currently operating in the area, with the potential for up to 7,000 wells in the coming years.
The study indicates that “thermagenic” methane and chloride have been infiltrating wells in the area at an increasing rate over the last seven years, a period that coincides with stepped up intensity in drilling activities around the county.
The presence of such gases could be an indication that drilling activities are in some way the cause, although she said the COGCC may not agree with that interpretation.
Neither gas has been found at levels that would trigger regulatory action, the study states, although indications are that the levels are rising and that the chloride could soon reach a threshold that warrants government intervention.
The main hazard from the methane, Jordan said, is that it could accumulate in water tanks or, if it is being vented into the atmosphere, in low-lying areas close to the ground, and be ignited by an errant spark.
Jordan has recommended more detailed study and monitoring than what is now planned, however funds are not available at this time.
It seems every time you turn around there is proof that gas drilling is dangerous to humans and the environment.
There is currently 1700 wells in the area and the potential of 7000 in the years to come.
As of a year ago, there were over 76,000 gas wells in the state of Texas!! Over 377,000 oil and gas wells combined. The Texas Railroad Commission had only had 84 inspectors in 2008.
http://stopthedrilling.blogspot.com/2009/07/how-many-gas-wells-in-state-of-texas.html
Here are a few articles we have posted in the last 30 days.
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/32477588/
http://www.nbcdfw.com/news/local-beat/Mysterious-Substance-Rains-Down-on-Keller-Neighborhood.html
http://www.krld.com/pages/4867184.php
http://stopthedrilling.blogspot.com/2009/07/citizens-complain-about-bad-odor.html
Clean Burning Gas. What a joke!
Here are a few paragraphs from the article about the Colorado Study
http://www.postindependent.com/article/20090822/VALLEYNEWS/908219993/1001/NONE&parentprofile=1074
Tests will determine the extent of methane gas contamination in domestic water wells in the area
County commissioners this week approved a $199,879 contract for GeoTrans, Inc. to complete the Phase III Hydrogeological Study of the Mamm Creek area southwest of Silt.
The first two phases of the study were paid for out of a $371,200 Colorado Oil and Gas Conservation Commission fine against EnCana Oil and Gas in 2004, after gas and benzene seeped to the surface in the Divide Creek area.
Since 2004, the county has been conducting a study that finds that there is methane showing up in local domestic wells in the Mamm Creek area that may be the result of gas drilling in the area. More than 1,700 natural gas wells are currently operating in the area, with the potential for up to 7,000 wells in the coming years.
The study indicates that “thermagenic” methane and chloride have been infiltrating wells in the area at an increasing rate over the last seven years, a period that coincides with stepped up intensity in drilling activities around the county.
The presence of such gases could be an indication that drilling activities are in some way the cause, although she said the COGCC may not agree with that interpretation.
Neither gas has been found at levels that would trigger regulatory action, the study states, although indications are that the levels are rising and that the chloride could soon reach a threshold that warrants government intervention.
The main hazard from the methane, Jordan said, is that it could accumulate in water tanks or, if it is being vented into the atmosphere, in low-lying areas close to the ground, and be ignited by an errant spark.
Jordan has recommended more detailed study and monitoring than what is now planned, however funds are not available at this time.
Tuesday, August 25, 2009
EPA preliminary findings of fracking chemicals in drinking water
This is a great article about the EPA preliminary findings in Pavillion, Wyoming. If it is so, this would be the first, and certainly not the last, where science proves water contamination from oil and gas chemicals.
It is about time the gas and oil industry be accountable and this study could be the one thing that forces them to follow the rules of all other industries. There is a flicker of hope now that the EPA has become involved in the testing. Too bad they didn't wake up sooner.
But the Oil & Gas industry free ticket to contaminate our precious resources could end soon. It is important that you let your member of Congress or Senator know how important it is to co-sponsor the Frac Act bills below.
They are currently pending in legislation.
S. 1215 - Fracturing Responsibility and Awareness of Chemicals (FRAC) Act
A bill to amend the Safe Drinking Water Act to repeal a certain exemption for hydraulic fracturing, and for other purposes.
H.R. 2766 - Fracturing Responsibility and Awareness of Chemicals Act of 2009
http://www.propublica.org/feature/epa-chemicals-found-in-wyo.-drinking-water-might-be-from-fracking-825
Here are a few paragraphs from the article. Go the the above link to read the complete story.
Federal environment officials investigating drinking water contamination [1] near the ranching town of Pavillion, Wyo., have found that at least three water wells contain a chemical used in the natural gas drilling process of hydraulic fracturing. Scientists also found traces of other contaminants, including oil, gas or metals, in 11 of 39 wells tested there since March.
The study, which is being conducted under the Environmental Protection Agency’s Superfund program, is the first time the EPA has undertaken its own water analysis in response to complaints of contamination in drilling areas, and it could be pivotal in the national debate [2] over the role of natural gas in America’s energy policy.
Abundant gas reserves are being aggressively developed in 31 states, including New York [3] and Pennsylvania [4]. Congress is mulling a bill [5] that aims to protect those water resources from hydraulic fracturing, the process in which fluids and sand are injected under high pressure to break up rock and release gas. But the industry says environmental regulation is unnecessary [6] because it is impossible for fracturing fluids to reach underground water supplies and no such case has ever been proven.
Scientists in Wyoming will continue testing this fall to determine the level of chemicals in the water and exactly where they came from. If they find that the contamination did result from drilling, the placid plains arching up to the Wind River Range would become the first site where fracturing fluids have been scientifically linked to groundwater contamination.
EPA officials also said they had found no pesticides – a signature of agricultural contamination – and no indication that any industry or activity besides drilling could be to blame. Other than farming, there is no industry in the immediate area.
EPA officials told residents that some of the substances found in their water may have been poured down a sink drain. But according to EPA investigation documents, most of the water wells were flushed three times before they were tested in order to rid them of anything that wasn’t flowing through the aquifer itself. That means the contaminants found in Pavillion would have had to work their way from a sink not only into the well but deep into the aquifer at significant concentrations in order to be detected. An independent drinking water expert with decades of experience in central Wyoming, Doyle Ward, dismissed such an explanations as "less than a one in a million" chance.
It is about time the gas and oil industry be accountable and this study could be the one thing that forces them to follow the rules of all other industries. There is a flicker of hope now that the EPA has become involved in the testing. Too bad they didn't wake up sooner.
But the Oil & Gas industry free ticket to contaminate our precious resources could end soon. It is important that you let your member of Congress or Senator know how important it is to co-sponsor the Frac Act bills below.
They are currently pending in legislation.
S. 1215 - Fracturing Responsibility and Awareness of Chemicals (FRAC) Act
A bill to amend the Safe Drinking Water Act to repeal a certain exemption for hydraulic fracturing, and for other purposes.
H.R. 2766 - Fracturing Responsibility and Awareness of Chemicals Act of 2009
http://www.propublica.org/feature/epa-chemicals-found-in-wyo.-drinking-water-might-be-from-fracking-825
Here are a few paragraphs from the article. Go the the above link to read the complete story.
Federal environment officials investigating drinking water contamination [1] near the ranching town of Pavillion, Wyo., have found that at least three water wells contain a chemical used in the natural gas drilling process of hydraulic fracturing. Scientists also found traces of other contaminants, including oil, gas or metals, in 11 of 39 wells tested there since March.
The study, which is being conducted under the Environmental Protection Agency’s Superfund program, is the first time the EPA has undertaken its own water analysis in response to complaints of contamination in drilling areas, and it could be pivotal in the national debate [2] over the role of natural gas in America’s energy policy.
Abundant gas reserves are being aggressively developed in 31 states, including New York [3] and Pennsylvania [4]. Congress is mulling a bill [5] that aims to protect those water resources from hydraulic fracturing, the process in which fluids and sand are injected under high pressure to break up rock and release gas. But the industry says environmental regulation is unnecessary [6] because it is impossible for fracturing fluids to reach underground water supplies and no such case has ever been proven.
Scientists in Wyoming will continue testing this fall to determine the level of chemicals in the water and exactly where they came from. If they find that the contamination did result from drilling, the placid plains arching up to the Wind River Range would become the first site where fracturing fluids have been scientifically linked to groundwater contamination.
EPA officials also said they had found no pesticides – a signature of agricultural contamination – and no indication that any industry or activity besides drilling could be to blame. Other than farming, there is no industry in the immediate area.
EPA officials told residents that some of the substances found in their water may have been poured down a sink drain. But according to EPA investigation documents, most of the water wells were flushed three times before they were tested in order to rid them of anything that wasn’t flowing through the aquifer itself. That means the contaminants found in Pavillion would have had to work their way from a sink not only into the well but deep into the aquifer at significant concentrations in order to be detected. An independent drinking water expert with decades of experience in central Wyoming, Doyle Ward, dismissed such an explanations as "less than a one in a million" chance.
Some of the EPA’s most cautious scientists are beginning to agree.
"It starts to finger point stronger and stronger to the source being somehow related to the gas development, including, but not necessarily conclusively, hydraulic fracturing itself," said Nathan Wiser, an EPA scientist and hydraulic fracturing expert
The study has already cost $130,000. Many residents living near gas drilling don't have that kind of cash laying around to do their own studies. Which may be one reason the industry has gotten away with it for so long. The passing of the pending bills will make it easier and less expensive to investigate this type of contamination for the EPA.
EPA officials have repeatedly said that disclosure of the fluids used in fracking – something that would be required if the bill being debated in Congress were passed – would enable them to investigate contamination incidents faster, more conclusively and for less money. The current study, which is expected to end next spring, has already cost $130,000.
Precise details about the nature and cause of the contamination, as well as the extent of the plume running in the aquifer beneath this region 150 miles east of Jackson Hole, have been difficult for scientists to collect. That’s in part because the identity of the chemicals used by the gas industry for drilling and fracturing are protected as trade secrets [1], and because the EPA, based on an exemption passed under the 2005 Energy Policy Act, does not have authority to investigate the fracturing process under the Safe Drinking Water Act. Using the Superfund program gave the agency extra authority to investigate the Pavillion reports, including the right to subpoena the secret information if it needs to. It also unlocked funding to pay for the research.
"How in god’s name can the oil industry dump sh*t in our drinking water and not tell us what it is?" shouted Alan Hofer, who lives near the center of the sites being investigated by the EPA.
"If they’d tell us what they were using then you could go out and test for things and it would make it a lot easier right?" asked Jim Van Dorn, who represents Wyoming Rural Water, a non-profit that advises utilities and private well owners on water management.
"Exactly," said Luke Chavez, the EPA’s chief Superfund investigator on the project. "That’s our idea too."
Now that the EPA has found a chemical used in fracturing fluids in Pavillion’s drinking water, Chavez said the next step in the research is to ask Encana for a list of the chemicals it uses and then do more sampling using that list. (An Encana spokesman told ProPublica the company will supply any information that the EPA requires.) The EPA is also working with area health departments, a toxicologist and a representative from the Centers for Disease Control’s Agency for Toxic Substances and Disease Registry to assess health risks, he said.
Depending on what they find, the investigation in Wyoming could have broad implications. Before hydraulic fracturing was exempted from the Safe Drinking Water Act in 2005, the EPA assessed the process and concluded it did not pose a threat to drinking water. That study, however, did not involve field research or water testing and has been criticized as incomplete.
This spring, EPA administrator Lisa Jackson called some of the contamination reports "startling" and told members of Congress [8] that it is time to take another look. The Pavillion investigation, according to Chavez, is just that.
"If there is a problem, maybe we don’t have the tools, or the laws, to deal with it," Chavez said. "That’s one of the things that could come out of this process."
Below are a few more stories previously posted about water contamination from gas drilling.
http://stopthedrilling.blogspot.com/2009/08/radionuclides-close-hudson-oaks.html
http://stopthedrilling.blogspot.com/2009/08/natural-gas-drilling-linked-to-death-of.html
http://splashdownpa.blogspot.com/2009/06/water-leak-from-washington-county-gas.html
http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2009/06/10/earlyshow/main5076625.shtmlhttp://stopthedrilling.blogspot.com/2009/07/hydraulic-fracking-chemicals-suspected.html
Don't think it can happen here. What you don't know may make you sick or even kill you. PLEASE CONTACT YOUR ELECTED OFFICIAL TODAY!!
Radionuclides Close Hudson Oaks Municipal Water Well (Paluxy)
Below is a post from PARCHED@yahoogroups.com.
Municipal water well is taken out of service.
Of course it is stated the "source of contamination is unknown". How many times does this have to happen before it isn't a coincidence anymore? Numerous situations have been reported all over the United States. This particular well had no radionuclides and NORM for 20 years before gas drilling and now high enough readings to close the water well down! 3 gas wells are 1/4 mile away.
How many of you still think gas drilling is okay to have near our water sources, agriculture, neighborhoods, parks and our children's schools? What is it about our society that we just don't get it until it becomes personal and it's too late?
Many put their trust in the gas companies who will say anything because they make billions while they pay out a few dollars, depending on your postage stamp size lot, to royalty owners.
The gas companies get tax incentives and exemptions from rules and regulations and what does the average resident get?
Well like the residents of Hudson Oaks and numerous other towns that have had to deal with gas drilling for the last 5 or 6 years, they get to worry about how long the water was contaminated before it was tested. They get to ask themselves what if the air they breath and soil they plant in is contaminated too. What will the effects be down the road?
Comforting isn't it?
Private water well owners in the Hudson Oaks area might want to have their water wells tested for radionuclides if they are in the Paluxy formation.
Diamond Oaks municipal water well in Hudson Oaks (Parker County) was taken out of service after tests indicated the presence of radionuclides. Radium 226, radium 228 and Alpha radiation at entry point 007 tested in excess of the Maximum Contaminant Levels.
According to Kristi Krieg, Drinking Water Specialist at the TCEQ, the well was closed after an enforcement letter was sent to the city on May 22, 2009. Krieg said that the affected Hudson Oaks water well is 230 feet deep in the Paluxy formation. Hudson Oaks Director of Operations Patrick Lawler estimated that the well, located near the New River Fellowship Church off Interstate 20, had been in service since the 1980s. The source of the contamination is unknown.
Radionuclides can be naturally occurring (NORM) but Skip Ferris of the Texas Commission on Environmental Quality said that if the contamination was from naturally occurring radiation, it would have always been there and "wouldn't just show up after 20 years".
According to Texas Railroad Commission maps, the water well is approximately 1/4 mile from two 'dry holes' and three Devon Energy natural gas wells completed in November of 2007, August and September of 2008. According to the EPA, oil and gas drilling may sometimes produce radioactive waste in the form of produced water, drilling mud, sludge, slimes, or evaporation ponds and pits. Radionuclides in these wastes are primarily radium-226, radium-228, and radon gas. Alpha particles, bone seeking carcinogens, can pose a serious health threat if ingested or inhaled according to the EPA.
http://www.epa.gov/rpdweb00/glossary/index.html#alpha
It is unusual for a water well to be closed due to radionuclides. According to Krieg, the City of East Chico is the only other municipal water well to close for radionuclides in the four county Upper Trinity Groundwater Conservation District area. The East Chico water well in Wise County closed earlier this year.
Municipal water well is taken out of service.
Of course it is stated the "source of contamination is unknown". How many times does this have to happen before it isn't a coincidence anymore? Numerous situations have been reported all over the United States. This particular well had no radionuclides and NORM for 20 years before gas drilling and now high enough readings to close the water well down! 3 gas wells are 1/4 mile away.
How many of you still think gas drilling is okay to have near our water sources, agriculture, neighborhoods, parks and our children's schools? What is it about our society that we just don't get it until it becomes personal and it's too late?
Many put their trust in the gas companies who will say anything because they make billions while they pay out a few dollars, depending on your postage stamp size lot, to royalty owners.
The gas companies get tax incentives and exemptions from rules and regulations and what does the average resident get?
Well like the residents of Hudson Oaks and numerous other towns that have had to deal with gas drilling for the last 5 or 6 years, they get to worry about how long the water was contaminated before it was tested. They get to ask themselves what if the air they breath and soil they plant in is contaminated too. What will the effects be down the road?
Comforting isn't it?
Private water well owners in the Hudson Oaks area might want to have their water wells tested for radionuclides if they are in the Paluxy formation.
Diamond Oaks municipal water well in Hudson Oaks (Parker County) was taken out of service after tests indicated the presence of radionuclides. Radium 226, radium 228 and Alpha radiation at entry point 007 tested in excess of the Maximum Contaminant Levels.
According to Kristi Krieg, Drinking Water Specialist at the TCEQ, the well was closed after an enforcement letter was sent to the city on May 22, 2009. Krieg said that the affected Hudson Oaks water well is 230 feet deep in the Paluxy formation. Hudson Oaks Director of Operations Patrick Lawler estimated that the well, located near the New River Fellowship Church off Interstate 20, had been in service since the 1980s. The source of the contamination is unknown.
Radionuclides can be naturally occurring (NORM) but Skip Ferris of the Texas Commission on Environmental Quality said that if the contamination was from naturally occurring radiation, it would have always been there and "wouldn't just show up after 20 years".
According to Texas Railroad Commission maps, the water well is approximately 1/4 mile from two 'dry holes' and three Devon Energy natural gas wells completed in November of 2007, August and September of 2008. According to the EPA, oil and gas drilling may sometimes produce radioactive waste in the form of produced water, drilling mud, sludge, slimes, or evaporation ponds and pits. Radionuclides in these wastes are primarily radium-226, radium-228, and radon gas. Alpha particles, bone seeking carcinogens, can pose a serious health threat if ingested or inhaled according to the EPA.
http://www.epa.gov/rpdweb00/glossary/index.html#alpha
It is unusual for a water well to be closed due to radionuclides. According to Krieg, the City of East Chico is the only other municipal water well to close for radionuclides in the four county Upper Trinity Groundwater Conservation District area. The East Chico water well in Wise County closed earlier this year.
The deadly effects of gas drilling
In the past, we have posted quite a few articles about gas drilling accidents. Don Young from fwcando.org has compiled many of those articles into one long list. Just a reminder of what a dirty and sometimes deadly industry natural gas drilling can be. If gas drilling has this effect on animals, what is it doing to humans?
http://fwcando.org/node/276
http://fwcando.org/node/276
Subscribe to:
Comments (Atom)
