Oil & Gas Spill of the Day - Garfield County 2BBLS (>82 Gallons Reportedly Not Recovered)

ENCANA OIL & GAS (USA) INC RECEIVES THE SPILL OF THE DAY SPOT.

Date Rec'd:	7/19/2011	Report taken by:	CHRIS CANFIELD
DocNum:	2215062	API number:	05-045 -10553	Facility ID:	276924

Operator Information

Operator:	ENCANA OIL & GAS (USA) INC	Oper. No.	100185
Address:	370 17TH ST STE 1700 ATTN: DIANE BILESZNER DENVER , CO 80202-5632
Phone:	(303 )623-2300	Fax:	(303 )623-2400
Operator Contact:	DAN PROKOP

Description of Spill:

Date of Incident:	7/15/2011
Type of Facility:	WELL
Well Name/No.	N.PARACHUTE WF06D J22 596	Fac. Name/No.
County Name:	GARFIELD
qtrqtr: NWSE section: 22 township: 5S range: 96W meridian: 6

Volumes spilled and recovered (bbls)
Oil spilled:	Recvrd:
Water spilled: 5	Recvrd: 3  *(that leaves 2 bbls NOT RECOVERED) 1 BBL = 42 GALLONS according to COGCC
Other spilled:	Recved:
GW Impact? N Surface water impact? N Contained within berm? Y
Area and vertical extent of spill: 200-SQ FT X -
Current land use: RANGELAND
Weather conditions: CLEAR, SUNNY
Soil/Geology description NIHILL CHANNERY LOAM, 6-25% SLOPES
Distance in feet to nearest surface water: 250
Depth to shallowest GW: 15
Wetlands:	Buildings:
Livestock:	Water Wells:
Cause of spill:
EQUIPMENT FAILURE
Immediate Response:
PUMP WAS IMMEDIATELY SHUT DOWN BY PERSONNEL ON LOCATION. A WATER TRUCK WAS CALLED OUT TO REMOVE PORTION OF THE RELEASE WHICH WAS CAUGHT WITHIN PORTABLE POP UP CONTAINMENTS SURROUNDING THE EQUIPMENT AND THE ADJACENT WORKING SURFACE.
Emergency Pits:
NO EMERGENCY PITS WERE CONSTRUCTED.
How extent determined:
THE REPORTED VOLUME WAS ESTIMATED BY LOOKING AT THE VOLUME CAPTURED AND REMOVED FROM SECONDARY CONTAINMENT AND COMPAIRED WITH THAT WHICH WAS REMAINING ON THE WORKING SURFACE. THE LATERAL EXTENT OF IMPACT WAS VISUALLY ESTIMATED.
Further Remediation
DURING INTERIM RECLAMATION THE WORKING SURFACE WILL BE REMOVED AND STOCKPILED TO ALLOW FOR SUBSURFACE REGRADING AND TO ACCOMMODATE THE REDUCED INTERIM PAD FOOTPRINT. IF ELEVATED SALT LEVELS ARE PRESENT, AS A RESULT OF THIS INCIDENT, THOSE LEVELS WOULD BE REDUCED THROUGH BLENDING DURING REMOVAL, STOCKPILING, AND REAPPLICATION OF THE MATERIAL TO THE RESTRICTED WORKING SURFACE.
Prevent Problem:
THE FRAC PUMP IN QUESTION WAS TAKEN OUT OF SERVICE FOR REPAIR, REMAINING FRAC PUPMPS BEING UTILIZED ON LOCATION ARE TO BE ROTATED OUT, INSPECTED AND RE-WELDED ALONG THE MANIFOLD END CAPS IF NEEDED PRIOR TO BEING RETURNED TO SERVICE.
Detailed Description:
WHILE CONDUCTING FRAC OPERATIONS ON THE J22 PAD, AN END CAP WELD LOCATED ON THE FRAC PUMP`S LOW SUCTION MANIFOLD FAILED AT ~3:15 PM ON 7/15/11 ALLOWING FOR THE RELEASE TO OCCUR.

-------------------------

Simple math tells me that *2 BBLS, or TWO 42 gallon drums, or 84 gallons of 'toxic' produced water were not recovered from the spill.  Now looking at the information that was provided by the person who took the report, an un-named Encana employee, or land owner, I see that the amount that was reported was purely based on guess work.  This then leads me to conclude that the amount of  'toxic' produced water listed on the FORM 19 (Spill/Incident Report) is inaccurate and not scientific thus not lending credibility to any realized reclamation, if you 'guess' one is necessary.

Let's run a complimentary guess for Encana and the COGCC and say that 10 BBLS of 'toxic' water were released but only 3 BBLS were recovered. That would leave 294 gallons of 'toxic' water un-recovered.   If you've got a scientific explanation for 'guessing', I'd like to hear about it to see how it fits in with the scientific community. Visual estimations are not accurate.  It's like a policeman stopping you for speeding and guessing how fast you were going with no factual recording of it.  I am amazed how simple technologies are not employed in the Oi l & Gas Industry.

What chemical 'materials' are being used during the 'blending' process? BTW, where did the recovered 'toxic' water go?

I 'guess' I'll conclude here.

-------------------------