Update on the spill near Parachute: Containment and removal in process, source still vexing Williams Energy

From The Grand Junction Daily Sentinel (Dennis Webb):

Gary Aldersea walks daily along Parachute Creek next to his home, enjoying sights from fish in the water to herons that feed on them. He also pulls irrigation water from the creek, and is paying close attention to the water quality since word broke about a subsurface leak upstream involving some 5,400 gallons of a liquid hydrocarbon, only 60 feet from the water’s edge. He hasn’t seen any sign of contamination in the creek, and neither, say authorities, have they. Still, “it would be nice if they found the source of where it’s coming from,” he said.

Authorities are frantically trying to do just that, but meanwhile the estimated amount of the fluid that’s been removed more than doubled in the 24 hours ending at 6 a.m. Monday. Todd Hartman, a spokesman for the state Department of Natural Resources, said another 72 barrels of oil—more than 3,000 gallons—had been pulled out during that timeframe from the site some four miles north of Parachute. Before 6 a.m. Sunday, about 2,400 gallons of the fluid had been recovered.

The leak is in a pipeline right of way adjacent to a natural gas plant owned by Williams. The plant site and right of way are on property owned by WPX Energy.

This is the first time the substance has been referred to as oil. Hartman and industry representatives previously have described it as being an unidentified natural gas liquid lighter than oil. Hartman said he’s hearing the words condensate, natural gas liquids or hydrocarbons all used to describe the fluid, “and any of those are roughly accurate at this point as we continue to investigate this.”

Williams spokeswoman Donna Gray said it’s inaccurate to call the liquid oil, and its identity remains unknown.

Industry officials over the weekend had said the leak seemed to be subsiding, which might seem to be at odds with the latest statistics on recovered fluids. Said Hartman, “We’re not prepared to say the situation is slowing down, or increasing. I’d say the volumetric numbers suggest the effort to contain and capture the oil continues and there could be reasons we don’t fully understand yet why the numbers are not necessarily trending down.”

Gray said the flow has diminished, but the increased volume appears to have resulted from an increased area of excavation, including the digging of an interceptor trench to keep the fluid from the creek.

The fluid is seeping from an undetermined source in an area containing a number of pipelines and tanks belonging to Williams and WPX. Contaminated ground was discovered March 8 when crews were digging to locate pipelines as Williams prepares for construction of a new gas plant on the property. Williams first detected the liquid on Wednesday.

Through Monday morning, the amount of contaminated groundwater also removed had grown to more than 60,000 gallons.

The contamination site sits beneath cottonwood trees perhaps a half-mile from Garfield County Road 215. Williams and WPX officials aren’t allowing media access to it, but orange construction fencing, yellow tape, excavation equipment and environmental response workers were visible Monday from the road. The area of contamination identified so far runs about 200 feet along the right of way paralleling the creek, 170 feet wide and 14 feet deep, but further work is ongoing to determine the full extent of the leak plume. In some areas the contamination is reaching groundwater. The depth to the shallowest groundwater in the area is about 10.5 feet, according to a spill/release form Williams has filed with the state. The nearest water wells are an estimated 3,000 to 5,000 feet away.

Aldersea gets his domestic water from the town of Parachute, but his neighbor, Howard Orona, has a shallow well probably 20 feet from the creek. “We’re definitely concerned, but they’ve kept us abreast of what’s been going on. At this point we’re not really too worried because we don’t think anything’s in the creek, but as somebody downstream you’re always concerned about it,” said Orona, who also is a citizen representative on the Garfield County Energy Advisory Board.

Another neighbor, Ruth Lindauer, notes that a rancher grazes cattle just across the creek from her home. “The calves are just being born and you worry about them,” she said. Ruth and her husband Sid pull irrigation water from the creek, but the irrigation season hasn’t started yet.

Colorado Parks and Wildlife officials have visited the contamination site. “We remain very concerned about the release of substances potentially harmful to wildlife, and Colorado Parks and Wildlife will remain engaged as details of this event become available,” said spokesman Mike Porras.

The Colorado Oil and Gas Conservation Commission and Colorado Department of Public Health and Environment have been investigating the incident.

The incident is sure to enter into the ongoing statewide debate over whether oil and gas regulations are strong enough. Leslie Robinson, chair of the Grand Valley Citizens Alliance, was at the state Capitol building in Denver Monday to lobby on some oil and gas bills. “I’ll make sure it is” brought up, she said of the incident.

“One bill calls for more COGCC inspectors and obviously the plume in Parachute is a good example why we need more inspectors on the ground.” She said she’s concerned about the potential impact on water quality from the leak.

“They say it hasn’t gone into Parachute Creek but that’s probably wishful thinking,” she said.

From The Denver Post (Bruce Finley):

An underground plume of toxic hydrocarbons from an oil spill north of the Colorado River near Parachute has been spreading for 10 days, threatening to contaminate spring runoff. Vacuum trucks have sucked up more than 60,000 gallons, but an unknown amount remains in the ground by Parachute Creek.

The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency on Monday was in the process of formally ordering the Williams energy company — which runs a gas-processing plant on the creek — to do all in its power to protect surface water. State regulators who on Friday ordered the same now are preparing to issue Williams a “Notice of Alleged Violation” and demand a long-term cleanup plan…

Industry response crews have dug two interceptor trenches at the scene, north of Parachute, and found that spilled material has mixed into shallow groundwater. No cause was reported. No source of the spill has been identified, Williams spokeswoman Donna Gray said. Chemicals present in the plume were not revealed. “Everyone wants to know that,” Gray said. “There is free-flowing hydrocarbon underground. It’s coming from something. There’s pipes underground. There’s tanks in the ground. We really do not know yet.”

The second trench along Parachute Creek — between the creek and an earlier trench 60 feet from surface water — “was done with the consent and blessing of the Colorado Oil and Gas Conservation Commission to serve as a buffer,” she said. “We’ve been pulling fluid out of that.”[…]

Parachute Mayor Judy Beasley and town officials planned to meet Tuesday with Williams environmental specialists. They’ve conveyed displeasure about not being informed soon enough.
A headgate used to divert creek water into a town reservoir has been closed. “We haven’t opened that up and obviously won’t until we have this figured out. We don’t want to have any contamination,” town administrator Bob Knight said. About 1,083 people live in Parachute.

Irrigators also rely on the creek, which flows into the Colorado River.

From The Grand Junction Daily Sentinel (Dennis Webb):

About 2,400 gallons of an unidentified liquid produced during natural gas development had been recovered from a subsurface leak site four miles north of Parachute as of early Sunday morning. Todd Hartman, a spokesman for the state Department of Natural Resources, said about 57 barrels (2,394 gallons) of the fluid had been removed as of 6 a.m. Sunday. That’s up from 37 barrels Friday. A total of 846 barrels of contaminated groundwater also has been removed. “Clearly there continues to be a lot of groundwater that’s been impacted by the hydrocarbons,” Hartman said.

The leak is occurring on a pipeline right of way on WPX Energy property that’s also home to a natural gas processing plant owned by Williams. Williams first discovered a problem when it detected soil contamination March 8. It first discovered the liquid, described as a hydrocarbon lighter than oil, on Wednesday.

Some 21 barrels of an emulsified hydrocarbon/water mix also have been recovered from the site.

Spokeswomen Donna Gray of Williams and Susan Alvillar of WPX both said Sunday that it’s their understanding the rate of flow is diminishing — “quite a bit,” in Gray’s words. Hartman said he couldn’t confirm that. He said there is no indication of any impact to nearby Parachute Creek.

The cause remains undetermined. Colorado Oil and Gas Conservation Commission and Department of Public Health and Environment staff have been involved in the cleanup effort. Alvillar said Colorado Parks and Wildlife officials also visited the site Sunday and appeared pleased by the work they saw being done.

More oil and gas coverage here and here.