iPhone app iPad app Android phone app Android tablet app More

Halliburton, Other Gas Fracking Companies Violated Safe Drinking Water Act, Congressional Democrats Say

MATTHEW DALY   01/31/11 05:37 PM ET   AP

WASHINGTON — Oil and gas companies have injected more than 32 million gallons of fluids containing diesel fuel underground without first getting government approval, a report by congressional Democrats said Monday.

Lawmakers said the use of diesel fuel by large companies, such as Halliburton and BJ Services Co., appears to violate the Safe Drinking Water Act, because the companies never obtained permission from state or federal authorities to use the diesel fuel.

The probe found no evidence that the use of diesel fuel contaminated water supplies in the 19 states where it was injected. The year-long probe was led by Rep. Henry Waxman, D-Calif., and other two other Democrats on the House Energy and Commerce Committee.

"The industry has been saying they stopped injecting toxic diesel fuel into wells. But our investigation showed this practice has been continuing in secret and in apparent violation" of the Safe Drinking Water Act, said Waxman, the panel's senior Democrat and a former chairman.

The investigation found that 12 of 14 companies hired to perform hydraulic fracturing, also known as "fracking," used diesel alone or in a mixture from 2005 to 2009. Of the 32.2 million gallons reported, most was injected in Texas, followed by Oklahoma, North Dakota, Louisiana and Wyoming.

None of the companies surveyed could provide data on whether they performed hydraulic fracturing in or near underground sources of drinking water, the lawmakers said. In fracking, drillers inject vast quantities of water, sand and chemicals underground so that oil and natural gas will flow.

The technique has been around for decades but has come under increasing scrutiny as drilling crews flock to the Marcellus Shale, a rock bed the size of Greece that lies about 6,000 feet beneath New York, Pennsylvania, West Virginia and Ohio. Fracking also is used in Colorado, Wyoming, New Mexico and other states.

Waxman and Reps. Edward Markey, D-Mass., and Diana DeGette, D-Colo., said they hope to find more information on some of the chemicals used in the drilling process, including benzene, toluene, ethylbenzene and xylene.

A 2005 law exempted all chemicals used in hydraulic fracturing except diesel fuel from federal regulations aimed at protecting drinking water. In 2003, three of the largest drilling companies signed an agreement with the Environmental Protection Agency to eliminate use of diesel fuel in coal bed methane formations in underground sources of drinking water. That agreement, coupled with the 2005 law, led many to assume the industry had stopped using diesel fuel altogether in hydraulic fracturing, the lawmakers wrote in a letter to EPA.

Markey said the committee's investigation, begun last year when Democrats controlled the House, uncovered many potential violations of the Safe Drinking Water Act that warrant further investigation by the EPA.

"Companies should not be able to pump the same fuels that are put into gas tanks into potential sources of drinking water," Markey said.

A Halliburton spokeswoman said the Energy and Commerce report was inaccurate.

"Halliburton does not believe that the company's hydraulic fracturing activities have resulted in a violation of the Safe Drinking Water Act or any other federal environmental law. There are currently no requirements in the federal environmental regulations that require a company to obtain a federal permit prior to undertaking a hydraulic fracturing project using diesel," said spokeswoman Teresa Wong.

Gary Flaharty, a spokesman for Baker Hughes, which owns BJ Services, said the company was no longer using diesel fuel for fracking. The EPA's position has been that the regulations do not expressly address or prohibit the use of fuel in fracturing fluid, Flaharty said, adding that any attempt to retroactively impose a permit "is clearly improper."

Texas-based BJ Services used the most diesel fuel and fluids containing diesel fuel – 11.5 million gallons – followed by Texas-based Halliburton at 7.2 million gallons, the report said

An EPA spokeswoman said they agency is still reviewing the information provided by lawmakers. The EPA is studying whether hydraulic fracturing affects drinking water and the public health.

___

Associated Press writer Dina Cappiello contributed to this story.

FOLLOW HUFFPOST GREEN

WASHINGTON — Oil and gas companies have injected more than 32 million gallons of fluids containing diesel fuel underground without first getting government approval, a report by congressional De...
WASHINGTON — Oil and gas companies have injected more than 32 million gallons of fluids containing diesel fuel underground without first getting government approval, a report by congressional De...
Filed by Joanna Zelman  |  Report Corrections
 
 
  • Comments
  • 284
  • Pending Comments
  • 0
  • View FAQ
Comments are closed for this entry
View All
Favorites
Highlights
Recency  | 
Popularity
Page: 1 2 3  Next ›  Last »  (3 total)
02:44 PM on 02/17/2011
It blows my mind that the companies are allowed to do the work before any studies for public health were done.

I recommend Gasland, the movie, to everyone!!!!!! Please! Let's get mad at this!!! Before it's too late.
07:50 PM on 02/08/2011
So, there are no violations because there are no regulations. Gee, I feel so much better.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
Chris Salmon
Geologist and Computer Scientist
11:11 AM on 02/08/2011
Here are some new facts about this: Tisha Schuller, president and CEO of the Colorado Oil & Gas Association (COGA), says the EPA never set up any rules for regulating the use of diesel in the overall process of hydraulic fracturing. Schuller, an environmental scientist and geologist, said the congressional report — spearheaded in part by Colorado Congresswoman Diana DeGette — was mostly focused on coal-bed methane deposits, which are much shallower.

“In regards to the report from the Energy and Commerce minority members, first, the memorandum of agreement was focused on the shallowest of hydraulic activities, in coal-bed methane,” Schuller said in an email to The Colorado Independent. “Second, use of diesel for hydraulic fracturing was placed under the Safe Drinking Water Act in 2005. However, EPA never went through the public rulemaking process, or even provided guidance to the states in this regard; thus, there was not a regulatory framework for permitting or reporting hydraulic fracturing with diesel through EPA.

“As a result, there wasn’t a regulation to be broken. Finally, the confirmed use of diesel fuels in [hydraulic fracturing] does not infer that groundwater resources have been contaminated.”

Source: http://www.realaspen.com/article/454/Oil-and-gas-group-says-EPA-never-set-rules-for-diesel-fuel-in-fracking
09:00 PM on 02/03/2011
Enough is enough! How many times can companies like Halliburton conduct environmental genocide before their business license is pulled and their CEO's are prosecuted? http://workingforgreen.com/blog/169-stand-united-against-the-environmental-mubareks-medvedevs-a-ben-alis
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
Chris Salmon
Geologist and Computer Scientist
10:18 AM on 02/04/2011
Environmental genocide, huh? A committee led by three democrat congressmen tried for a year to find pollution, but were unable to find any - that's what it says in the article:

"The probe found no evidence that the use of diesel fuel contaminated water supplies in the 19 states where it was injected. The year-long probe was led by Rep. Henry Waxman, D-Calif., and other two other Democrats on the House Energy and Commerce Committee."

Also I'm just dying to know what "business license" Halliburton has that can be "pulled" ??
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
angusmciver
Feels Empty
10:55 AM on 02/04/2011
You didn't go take your nap, did you?
photo
HUFFPOST COMMUNITY MODERATOR
MAX1
Climate and Peace Advocate
12:06 PM on 02/03/2011
.

R E M E M B E R:
Smoking does not cause cancer?
.
12:41 AM on 02/03/2011
This short video should help those drinking carcinogens tonight better understand the history:
http://www.youtube.com/v/z_t4NsXgnmw&autoplay=1

WARNING! Not safe for drillers
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
Chris Salmon
Geologist and Computer Scientist
10:45 AM on 02/03/2011
Yes, let's all get our evidence from a children's cartoon. That's a great way to make decisions!
12:15 PM on 02/03/2011
Wow...better than taking advice from someone in Texas trying to sell contracts...
12:19 PM on 02/03/2011
If you really care and are really working on contracts, REQUIRE that all contracts you work on contain fingerprint tracers. If the companies refuse, please let us know. Perhaps you can redeem yourself.
09:24 PM on 02/02/2011
http://www.postindependent.com/article/20110201/VALLEYNEWS/110139969/1083
....an excerpt from this Garfield County Colorado article....negative effects that drilling has on communitie­s:

" Pfeifer said she was approached by Antero about five years ago about leasing the mineral rights underneath her land, which comprises roughly 250 acres surroundin­g the high school site.

The company would not agree to her contract demands, however, and abandoned the effort until about a year ago, Pfeifer said. At that time, she explained, Antero once again attempted to lease her minerals, to no avail.

“Then they just disappeare­d until they drilled a well up Slaughter Gulch,” she recalled, referring to an area north of her property where Antero built a drilling platform and drilled a well last summer.

She refuses to lease her mineral rights to the company, she said, because, “I think it's just a bunch of crap; everything they [gas drilling companies] do and say is a bunch of bull.”

She accused the companies of hiring workers from out of state, or from Canada, while claiming to offer jobs to the Garfield County workforce.

“They're doing nothing but destroying the water and the land values,” she added.

Antero Resources officials did not respond to requests for comments.

The news of the school district's agreement with Antero also aroused some ire from another nearby landowner, Jim Birney, who lives in Slaughter Gulch.

“I think that these guys are up to no good,” said Birney..."
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
Chris Salmon
Geologist and Computer Scientist
10:41 AM on 02/03/2011
There's nothing in your post about negative effects that drilling has on communities? Also, from what I read here, Pfeifer didn't want to lease her mineral rights and successfully kept Antero from drilling on her land. Apparently, she's griping because someone else leased their mineral rights to Antero and Antero drilled there?

The rest of what you posted is just unsubstantiated accusations and general griping with no evidence of wrongdoing on anyone's part that I can see?
This user has chosen to opt out of the Badges program
07:56 PM on 02/02/2011
just to show you how much these fossil fuel fas*cists (FFF) cheat and lie....all they have to do is fill out a simple form and they can use all the toxic diesel they want....and they don't even bother to do this !!!! how can they possibly be trusted with our nations drinking water supplies !!!! ban diesel use in drilling completely !!!! repeal the halliburton loophole in our safe drinking water act !!!!
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
Chris Salmon
Geologist and Computer Scientist
10:50 AM on 02/03/2011
"how can they possibly be trusted with our nations drinking water supplies !!!!"

The article itself states:

"The probe found no evidence that the use of diesel fuel contaminated water supplies in the 19 states where it was injected. The year-long probe was led by Rep. Henry Waxman, D-Calif., and other two other Democrats on the House Energy and Commerce Committee."
This user has chosen to opt out of the Badges program
11:29 AM on 02/03/2011
with 50% of the diesel and other toxic chemicals spilling out of the well during the fracking process there are literally thousands of verified contaminaiton events. with respect to the diesel in the fracked wells 5000 feet below the surface there is confirmed "vertical migration" of the chemicals as well as polluting natural gas to the surface....waxman really isn't up on all this.....

anyway do you support the exemption this process now has from the safe drinking water act?
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
Chris Salmon
Geologist and Computer Scientist
11:48 AM on 02/03/2011
"50% of the diesel and other toxic chemicals spilling out of the well during the fracking process there are literally thousands of verified contaminai­ton events"

Evidence, please, not just unverified claims and accusations?

"with respect to the diesel in the fracked wells 5000 feet below the surface there is confirmed "vertical migration" of the chemicals as well as polluting natural gas to the surface"

Again, how about some evidence from real-world events rather than just claiming things are this way and that?

I mean, you may be totally right - but there is no way for anyone to know if you are or if you aren't without even knowing what, EXACTLY you are talking about??

It's very difficult to arrive at the truth, or get closer to the truth, unless we discuss and debate on facts and not mere accusations and innuendo without real world, material evidence that can be examined and discussed.

"do you support the exemption this process now has from the safe drinking water act?"

First off - "NOW" has? Are you indicating that hydraulic fracturing was previously, or EVER, under the purview of the SDWA?

Secondly, of course I don't think that the SDWA covers hydraulic fracturing, because it doesn't, wasn't designed to do so, and hydraulic fracturing has nothing to do with drinking water, as it takes place thousands of feet of solid rock away from drinking water supplies. HOWEVER I do support continued tight regulation of activities that affect drinking water.
12:17 PM on 02/03/2011
Being an Okie...you've probably already seen and heard what these snake oil salesman try and do.
I often did when I was there.
11:14 AM on 02/02/2011
Mr. Fishy...is this you?

"As of January 1, 2011, I am no longer primarily in the internet business but instead working in the oil business for two related independent oil companies in geology, acquisitions and deals. "

Looks like someone is pushing for a better commission!
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
Chris Salmon
Geologist and Computer Scientist
11:33 AM on 02/02/2011
Yes! That is me, and very proud to be! But I thought you said that I was not a geologist and that I had not been in the internet business for 15 years. Now you're saying that I am a geologist and that I have been in the internet business. I don't get it? Which is it, I'm a liar and a fraud, or you're going to post things that prove I'm NOT a liar and a fraud?

Also where do you get this commission idea? I don't work on commission? Also how in the world would you think that engaging people on HuffPo and trying to educate people would .. (?) somehow result in me getting a better commission?

Is this some kind of attempt at a smear? If so, please explain, because I've said all along that this is exactly who I was. It was you, in fact, who said this wasn't who I was, and that I was a liar and a fraud. Now you're proving your own assertions to be lies?
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
Chris Salmon
Geologist and Computer Scientist
11:35 AM on 02/02/2011
By the way, at least I put my real name on things and put my real contact information and have myself exposed to the public. I'm not hiding behind an anonymous internet handle like you are and libeling people, calling them a fraud and a liar and making a whole slew of unsubtantiated accusations and claims with absolutely no proof to back them up.

I have no problem stating clearly who I am and where I come from. Can we get the same from you?
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
Brian Carthey
10:59 AM on 02/02/2011
Haliburton breaking the rules? I am shocked.
photo
INDIVIDUALTERRY
no to the collective!
09:57 AM on 02/02/2011
I MAY have polluted the Ohio !

I once pee...d in it !

But they investigated and found nothing , much like this story.
But it did get in a little Halliburton and BP just to keep them in your thoughts.
What the Frac'?
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
Giglawyer
Lions are unconcerned with the opinions of sheep.
09:27 AM on 02/02/2011
With all due respect, they either did it or they didn't. How is it possible that we (1) don't know, or (2) don't monitor this activity to prohibit it. And, most importantly, how is it possible that it was ever legal or even conceivable that we are going to pump diesel fuel into the ground? Water? Yes. Sand? Sure. Mud? OK. BUt there ought to be law clear as day - it is a federal crime to pump diesel fuel into the earth. I don't care if the result would be that gold and cupcakes and scantily clad clones of Sophia Vergara spring from the ground, YOU DON'T PUMP DIESEL FUEL INTO THE EARTH.

Government isn't supposed to provide us with health care. It isn't supposed to make sure we eat more broccoli and less ice cream. It is supposed to provide national defense, sound roads, AND STOP PEOPLE FORM DUMPING TOXIC CHEMICALS INTO THE EARTH AND WATERS.
09:42 AM on 02/02/2011
Perhaps more people need to check their state's law regarding arresting someone when they witness a felony in progress. Local and state laws could be used to detain, try, and through discovery, expose drillers for what they are.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
Chris Salmon
Geologist and Computer Scientist
10:54 AM on 02/02/2011
DesperOde - so far you've accused me of being "paid" by "someone" for, I supposed, messing around on HuffPo and debating this and trying to educate people. Then today you accused me of not being a geologist, and not having also been in the internet business for 15 years. You're telling people that I'm a liar and a fraud, that I've made up my career, experience, education, I guess my whole life. Well I'm calling you out on it - you want to say I'm a liar and a fraud, where is your evidence? Do you have some reason for saying these things about me, or did you just make them up out of thin air? Do you think its OK to libel people with absolutely no evidence to back up your claims? Well it's not. Put up or shut up, if I'm a fraud, let's see one shred of proof that anything I've said about myself is a lie.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
Chris Salmon
Geologist and Computer Scientist
10:14 AM on 02/02/2011
The article directly states that 3 democrat congressmen led an investigative committee trying to find pollution of groundwater from this for a year, and they were unable to find any. Did you miss that part of the article? It's right there in black and white.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
Giglawyer
Lions are unconcerned with the opinions of sheep.
10:25 AM on 02/02/2011
Actually, after re-reading the article, it says that the three Congressman found that "Oil and gas companies have injected more than 32 million gallons of fluids containing diesel fuel underground without first getting government approval."

My question still stands - how is it that the Government would ever approve the pumping of millions of gallons of toxic chemicals into the earth? Now, its one thing if they were pumping millions of gallons of water into the ground that, by the very process of being pumped into the ground, contained trace contaminations of diesel fuel. Its quite another to imagine diesel fuel being pumped straight into the ground.
This user has chosen to opt out of the Badges program
photo
conservicide
I don't play nice.
07:11 AM on 02/02/2011
May have???
What astounds me are those "optimists" out there that DON'T think that oil companies are screwing the american people.

Ignoramouses!
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
GreenKate
02:09 AM on 02/05/2011
AKA stock holders ;-) Anything for a buck...
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
GreenKate
02:29 AM on 02/05/2011
Using your logic, if you're planning to climb down to the floor of the Grand Canyon it would work out equally great if someone just shoved you off the cliff before you started hiking. It's not like anyone is shoving anyone in that wasn't going to be there anyway.
This user has chosen to opt out of the Badges program
photo
01:07 AM on 02/02/2011
There is a technology to "fingerprint" spray paint cans. When a graffiti vandal uses the can, the source/point-of-sale of the can be traced back, and if recorded correctly the purchaser.

A proposal in Australia has been to put "fingerprint" markers in the fracturing fluid to see where it ends up. Not surprisingly the drillers here are screaming "no way".
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
Chris Salmon
Geologist and Computer Scientist
02:35 AM on 02/02/2011
In geological work this is called a tracer and a harmless radioisotope is used. It is actually surprising that anyone doing hydraulic fracturing would scream "no way" as this would protect them from unwarranted accusations.
This user has chosen to opt out of the Badges program
photo
02:40 AM on 02/02/2011
Tracer (of course) an obvious term, I've not heard it used here in Australia. Thanks.

They're screaming because they know they will get pinged for any screw ups.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
Chris Salmon
Geologist and Computer Scientist
03:00 AM on 02/02/2011
Sometimes, when I hear some of these things like these companies don't want to use a tracer even though it could protect them from accusations and liability, it sounds like they're going under the "if we give them an inch they'll take a mile" theory doesn't it? Sort of like, that's far beyond the bounds of what they really want to protect, but by keeping the fight out there and fighting tooth and nail for every inch of regulatory ground, they feel they're keeping the fight at a distance from the things they really consider vital. That's the only thing I can think. It sounds like a strategy a lawyer would think up, not the company geoscientists.
photo
farmilyman
everything is illusion
12:36 AM on 02/02/2011
Simple solution for the GOP is to just attack the EPA.