This post is a very comprehensive look into the history of one company's well site and its inadequate track record. It appears that a large discharge of produced water occurred in late 2005. Was this spill a concern? It was on State land.
It is 'estimated' that +/- 5,000 barrels of produced water discharged on the ground surface and into Cottonwood Creek. According to COGCC documents, one barrel equals 42 US gallons. Five thousand barrels equates to 210,000 gallons of produced water that was reportedly spilled into Cottonwood Creek. Was this company fined?
Why has this company had so many unsatisfactory inspections/violations and is still being allowed to manage an active well? Of the 9 inspections listed below, the oil & gas operator failed 7, or 78% failure rate. Should they be fined? Should they be shut down for having so many violations?
Do all companies get 'breaks' for their violations? Are O&G violation rules different if a well is located on State land? Where did the produced water go? Does the Community Right-To-Know Act of 1986 apply?
official docx:
-------------------------
***
Date Rec'd: | 12/21/2005 | Report taken by: | BOB CHESSON | ||
DocNum: | 1433324 | API number: | 05-005 -06522 | Facility ID: | 204437 |
Operator Information |
Operator: | RENEGADE OIL & GAS COMPANY LLC | Oper. No. | 74165 |
Address: | P O BOX 460413 ATTN: EDWARD INGVE AURORA , CO 80046-0413 | ||
Phone: | (303 )680-4725 | Fax: | (303 )680-4907 |
Operator Contact: | JB CONDILL |
Description of Spill: |
Date of Incident: | 12/1/2005 | |||||||
Type of Facility: | WELL | |||||||
Well Name/No. | STATE 2 | Fac. Name/No. | ||||||
County Name: | ARAPAHOE | |||||||
|
Volumes spilled and recovered (bbls) | |||||||
Oil spilled: 0 | Recvrd: 0 | ||||||
Water spilled: | Recvrd: 0 | ||||||
Other spilled: | Recved: | ||||||
| |||||||
Area and vertical extent of spill: 20-FT X 800 -FT | |||||||
Current land use: RANGELAND | |||||||
Weather conditions: | |||||||
Soil/Geology description | |||||||
Distance in feet to nearest surface water: | |||||||
Depth to shallowest GW: | |||||||
Wetlands: | Buildings: | ||||||
Livestock: | Water Wells: | ||||||
Cause of spill: | |||||||
EQUIPMENT FAILURE | |||||||
Immediate Response: | |||||||
BACKHOE PLUGGED HOLE IN BERM AND REINFORCED BERM | |||||||
Emergency Pits: | |||||||
NONE | |||||||
How extent determined: | |||||||
VISUAL | |||||||
Further Remediation | |||||||
REMEDIATION UNDERWAY. | |||||||
Prevent Problem: | |||||||
REVIEW OF ALL COMPANY POLICIES WITH EMPLOYEES. | |||||||
Detailed Description: | |||||||
INSPECTION BY COGCC STAFF IN RESPONSE TO SURFACE OWNERS CONCERN IDENTIFIED A BREACH IN THE PRODUCED WATER PIT ALLOWING PIT TO DISCHARGE TO DRAINAGE OF COTTONWOOD CREEK AT A RATE OF APPROX. 3 GPM. RELEASE ONGOING FOR SOME TIME SO ESTIMATES OF RELEASE ARE VERY APPROXIMATE (5,000 BBLS (?).) |
Field Visit/Follow Up | ||
Name | Phone | Date |
---|---|---|
No Field Visit data found. |
Historical field inspections at this specific well
Field Inspections:
Inspection Date: 5/24/1995
Inspection was: No Satisfactory/Unsatisfactory Indicator
Violation: Y
Field Inspection Comments and Observations
Inspection Date: 5/25/1995
Inspection was: No Satisfactory/Unsatisfactory Indicator
Violation:
Field Inspection Comments and Observations
Inspection Date: 12/1/2000
Inspection was: Unsatisfactory
Violation: Y
Field Inspection Comments and Observations
Inspection Date: 7/11/2001
Inspection was: Unsatisfactory
Violation:
Field Inspection Comments and Observations
Inspection Date: 7/25/2001
Inspection was: Satisfactory
Violation: N
Field Inspection Comments and Observations
Inspection Date: 12/1/2005 ***(see reports and images below pertaining to the recorded discharge)
Inspection was: Unsatisfactory
Violation: Y
Field Inspection Comments and Observations
Inspection Date: 9/18/2007
Inspection was: Unsatisfactory
Violation: Y
Field Inspection Comments and Observations
Inspection Date: 11/7/2007
Inspection was: Unsatisfactory
Violation: Y
Field Inspection Comments and Observations
Inspection Date: 11/20/2007
Inspection was: Satisfactory
Field Inspection Comments and Observations
|
No comments:
Post a Comment