IN THE MATTER OF ALLEGED VIOLATIONS OF THE
CAUSE NO. 1V
RULES AND REGULATIONS OF THE COLORADO OIL
AND GAS CONSERVATION COMMISSION BY
ORDER NO. 1V-217
ELM RIDGE RESOURCES, INC.
LA PLATA COUNTY, COLORADO
ADMINISTRATIVE ORDER BY CONSENT
FINDINGS
1. On April 3, 2001, Colorado Oil and Gas Conservation Commission (COGCC) staff
received a complaint (COGCC Complaint Tracking #200015615) from the landowner of
an adjacent property stating that water and an “oily” substance had overflowed
the drilling pit, flowed down a small drainage, and crossed her property. The
drilling pit was associated with the Harmon A #1-A (API #05-067-08194) well
operated by Elm Ridge Resources, Inc. (Elm Ridge) located in NW¼ SE¼ of Section
17, Township 33 North, Range 8 West, N.M.P.M.
2. On April 3, 2001, Elm Ridge verbally reported the spill to the COGCC
Southwest Colorado field inspector. Elm Ridge stated that the oil had been
placed in the drilling pit by an unknown third party.
3. On April 5, 2001, COGCC field inspector conducted an inspection of the
subject site. At the time of this inspection an oily emulsion was observed on
the pit and oil stained dirt was observed along the pathway of the spill. A
Notice of Unsatisfactory Inspection was issued to Elm Ridge.
4. Elm Ridge attempted to remediate the portion of the spill that had impacted
the adjacent property, but was denied access by the landowner that is also the
person who had made the original complaint.
5. On April 10 and April 11, 2001, COGCC environmental supervisor inspected the
site and met with Elm Ridge’s pumper; met with the owner of the adjacent
property and collected a sample from her water well for chemical analysis;
inspected the pit and the flow pathway of the spill; collected soil and liquid
samples for chemical analysis, photographed site conditions, and used a GPS to
map the impacted area and to record the sample locations. At the time of the
inspections: an oily emulsion and sheen were observed covering the entire
surface of the water remaining in the pit; trash, oily soil, and other refuse
were observed at the well site; the pit had not been reclaimed and the pit liner
was tattered and torn; oily soil and emulsion were observed along the
approximately ½ miles traveled by the spill; and the spill followed the course
of an ephemeral/intermittent drainage.
6. On April 12, 2001, Elm Ridge sampled the contents of the pit that overflowed.
The results of the pit contained total petroleum hydrocarbons (TPH) of 640,000
mg/kg. The closure TPH standard for spill remediation in this area is 1,000
mg/kg.
7. On April 12, 2001, COGCC field inspector issued a Notice of Alleged Violation
(NOAV) to Elm Ridge for the unauthorized release of liquids due to pit overflow
and for conditions observed during the April 5, 2001 inspection. The NOAV cited
violation of: Rule 324A.a., failure to prevent the unauthorized discharge of
oil, E&P waste, and chemical substances; Rule 604.c.(3), failure to fence
facility to prevent access by unauthorized persons; and Rule 902.c., failure to
construct and operate a pit in order to provide for a minimum of two (2) feet of
freeboard between the top of the pit wall and the fluid level of the pit. The
NOAV specified an abatement date of April 16, 2001 to remove all of the liquids
from the pit; to characterize and dispose of liquids at a proper facility; to
rebuild berm around the pit to prevent surface water flow into and discharge out
of the pit; and to fence the pit to prevent unauthorized dumping.
8. Per return receipt, Elm Ridge accepted this NOAV on April 17, 2001.
9. On April 12, 2001, Elm Ridge’s contractor built a berm around the pit.
10. On April 16, 2001, Elm Ridge’s contractors erected a fence around the pit
and completed removal of the oily emulsion and water from the pit.
11. The corrective actions specified in the April 12, 2001 NOAV were completed
by the April 16, 2001 abatement date.
12. On April 19, 2001, COGCC environmental supervisor issued a NOAV to Elm Ridge
for the unauthorized release of water and oily emulsion from the drilling pit
into an ephemeral/intermittent drainage and for conditions observed during the
April 10 and April 11, 2001, field inspections. The liquids had traveled
approximately ½ miles downstream. A map and photographs of the impacted area
were included with the NOAV. Oily soil and emulsion were observed along the
course traveled by the spill. The spill was not properly reported to the COGCC
or Colorado Department of Public Health and Environment (CDPHE) - Water Quality
Control Division (WQCD). An oily emulsion and sheen covered the entire surface
of the pit. Trash, oily soil, and other refuse were observed at the well site.
The pit had not been reclaimed and the pit liner was tattered and torn. The NOAV
cited violation of: Rule 324A.a., failure to prevent the unauthorized discharge
of oil, E&P waste, and chemical substances; Rule 902.d., failure to remove any
accumulation of oil in a pit within twenty-four (24) hours of discovery; Rule
906.b., failure to report the spill/release; Rule 907.a.(1), failure to ensure
that E&P waste is properly managed so as to prevent significant adverse
environmental impacts to water, soil, or biological resources and to ensure
compliance with allowable concentrations and levels in Table 910-1; Rule
907.a.(2), failure to manage, operate, and construct E&P waste management
facilities to protect waters of the state from significant adverse environmental
impacts.
The NOAV specified an abatement date of April 30, 2001 to submit a Form 19
Spill/Release Report; to remove the remaining oil and water from the pit; to
Submit a Form 27 Site Investigation Remediation Workplan for determining the
areal and vertical extent of the impacts at the pit and along the path traveled
by the spill; for remediating oil stained soils and vegetation; for collecting
confirmation soil samples to verify compliance with Table 910-1; for removing
and disposing of pit liner; for collecting soil samples below liner to verify
compliance; consulting with surface owners prior to commencing remediation
activities; and submitting waste manifests for any materials removed from the
affected areas.
13. The return receipt for this NOAV was received by the COGCC on May 15, 2001.
14. On May 1, 2001, the COGCC received a Form 19 and a Form 27 from Elm Ridge,
which was one day later than the date specified in the April 19, 2001 NOAV. The
other corrective actions required by the April 19, 2001 NOAV were not met by the
April 30, 2001 abatement date. Elm Ridge had not removed or disposed of the pit
liner; had not collected soil samples from below the pit liner to confirm
compliance with Table 910-1 cleanup standards; had not notified or consulted
with surface owners; and had not submitted waste manifests for the materials
that had been removed from the site.
15. On May 4, 2001, the analytical results for the soil, water, and liquid
samples collected on April 10 and April 11, 2001 by the COGCC environmental
supervisor were received from the laboratory. The results indicated that the
water in the pit had low concentrations of benzene, toluene, ethylbenzene, and
xylenes (BTEX), high concentrations of diesel and gasoline range hydrocarbons,
and very high concentrations of motor oil range hydrocarbons. The oily emulsion
was a mixture of motor oil range hydrocarbons (approximately 50%), water, and
probably drilling mud. The soils in many areas along the path of the spill
exceeded the Table 910-1 standard of 1,000 milligrams per kilogram (mg/kg) for
total petroleum hydrocarbon (TPH) in Sensitive Areas and accumulations of the
oily emulsion were also observed. A concentration of 35,000 mg/kg TPH was
detected in a soil sample and 590,000 mg/kg TPH was detected in a sample of the
oily emulsion collected on the adjacent property. Motor oil range hydrocarbons
were the primary constituent of the TPH in the soils and oily emulsion. These
concentrations are representative of concentrations in and around the pit, and
along the entire ½ mile pathway of the spill and constitute a significant
adverse environmental impact to soil and surface water and posed a potential
threat to wildlife. The adjacent landowner’s water well had not been impacted by
the spill.
16. On May 7, 2001, COGCC staff sent copies of the laboratory reports for the
samples collected on April 10 and April 11, 2001 and a letter summarizing the
results to Elm Ridge. In addition the letter approved Elm Ridge’s Form 27 (COGCC
Remediation Tracking Number 686), but specified additional corrective actions
that were not addressed in the Form 27. The additional corrective actions
included, removal and disposal of the pit liner, all other trash in and around
the pit, and soils exceeding COGCC standards, and confirmation soil sampling
below the pit liner; submitting manifests documenting the transportation and
disposal of liquids, soil, and pit liner to COGCC; using laboratory analysis to
confirm results obtained by field screening soil sample headspace with an
organic vapor analyzer (OVA); providing a written plan describing how erosion
would be prevented; obtaining permission from landowners to access impacted
areas and reaching agreement with landowners regarding remediation method to be
used by May 28, 2001; providing a written explanation of how the oily emulsion
on the adjacent property would be removed. The letter specified that Elm Ridge
had to agree to this additional work and submit a written workplan to the COGCC
by May 15, 2001.
17. On May 11, 2001, COGCC received a written supplement to the Elm Ridge Form
27. This addressed the use of clean topsoil to backfill all excavated areas, use
of straw matting to prevent erosion after seeding, and control of noxious weeds
on and adjacent to disturbed areas. It did not address removal of pit liner and
trash, laboratory analysis of confirmation samples, providing copies of
manifests documenting the transportation and disposal of liquids, soil, and pit
liner, or obtaining landowner agreements.
18. From approximately May 30 through June 5, 2001 Elm Ridge’s contractor
removed the oily soils, emulsion, and vegetation from the adjacent property
owners’ land. Excavated material was taken to the well pad for temporary
storage. Elm Ridge’s contractor collected five composite soil samples from areas
where the impacted soils had been removed, and submitted them to a laboratory
for TPH analysis. The analytical results for these samples were all below the
Table 910-1 TPH cleanup standard of 1,000 mg/kg for Sensitive Areas.
19. During approximately June 18 through June 20, 2001 Elm Ridge’s contractor
removed the pit contents and placed this oily, muddy material on one area of the
well pad.
20. On June 19, 2001, COGCC environmental supervisor inspected the landfarm. On
June 20, 2001, COGCC environmental supervisor contacted COGCC Elm Ridge’s
contractor to require that a fence and berm be placed around the landfarm to
prevent access to the area by wildlife and to prevent surface water from coming
in contact with the oily material.
21. On June 26, 2001, COGCC environmental supervisor inspected the site and met
with an Elm Ridge representative and contractor. The contents of the pit had
been completely removed and placed on the well pad to be landfarmed, the
landfarm was fenced and bermed, but there was still fragments of the pit liner
and other oily trash around the perimeter of the pit.
22. On July 20, 2001, COGCC environmental supervisor called and left a message
with Elm Ridge, telling them that the pit liner and other oily refuse still had
not been removed from the site and this had to be done before August 1, 2001.
23. On August 1, 2001, COGCC environmental supervisor inspected the site. The
pit liner and most of the oily trash had been removed from the site. Clean
topsoil had been placed along the path of the spill where impacted soil and
vegetation had been removed. Most of the landfarm had been tilled; however there
were still areas that had not been tilled and that still had a strong
hydrocarbon odor.
24. On August 17, 2001, COGCC environmental supervisor spoke with an Elm Ridge
representative and informed him that overall the landfarm was not being
adequately maintained and that additional tilling and turning of the oily
material was needed to expedite bioremediation and natural attenuation.
25. On August 23, 2001, COGCC environmental supervisor received a complaint from
the owner of the land on which the well, pit, and landfarm are located. She
stated that Elm Ridge had not contacted her or obtained her permission for the
landfarming activities.
26. On August 24, 2001, COGCC environmental supervisor issued a NOAV to Elm
Ridge for not notifying, consulting with, or obtaining landowner approval prior
to constructing and operating a landfarm. The NOAV cited violation of Rule
906.c. Surface owner notification and consultation. The NOAV specified an
abatement date of September 24, 2001 either to consult with and to receive
written approval from the landowner to continue the landfarming operations, and
to provide a copy of the written approval to the COGCC; or to remove all of the
non-native material from the landfarm, to dispose of this material at an
appropriate disposal facility, to provide copies of the manifests documenting
removal and disposal within seven (7) days of conducting these activities, to
collect samples of the soil underlying the landfarm for laboratory analysis of
TPH (gasoline, diesel, and motor oil range) to verify that impacted material has
been removed, to reclaim pit and landfarm area in accordance with COGCC 1000
Series Rules, and to provide COGCC with a written report documenting activities
associated with the removal and disposal of pit contents and confirmation
sampling.
27. On September 26, 2001, Elm Ridge obtained verbal approval from the surface
owner to operate the landfarm.
28. A monetary penalty of Ten Thousand dollars ($10,000.00) for violation of
Rules 324A.a., 604.c.(3), 902.c., 906.b.(1), 906.c., 907.a.(1), and 907.a.(2)
should be assessed against Elm Ridge for these violations in accordance with
Rule 523.a. An aggravating factor is that the violations had a significant
negative impact , or threat of significant negative impact on the environment or
on public health, safety, or welfare.
ORDER
NOW, THEREFORE IT IS ORDERED, that Elm Ridge shall be found in violation Rule
324A.a., Rule 604.c.(3), Rule 902.c., Rule 906.b.(1), Rule 906.c., Rule
907.a.(1), and Rule 907.a.(2), for failure to ensure that E&P waste, water, and
chemical substances are properly managed, for failure to prevent access by
unauthorized persons, for failure to maintain two feet of freeboard in the pit,
for failure to remove oil from pit within twenty-four hours of discovery, for
failure to report the release, for failure to notify, consult with, and obtain
approval from landowner prior to conducting land treatment activities, and for
failure to prevent the unauthorized discharge of an emulsion of motor oil and
water into adjacent surface waters, which resulted in a significant adverse
environmental impact at the Harmon A #1-A well located in the NW¼ SE¼ of Section
17, Township 33 North, Range 8 West, N.M.P.M., and on adjacent and nearby
properties.
IT IS FURTHER ORDERED, that Elm Ridge shall be assessed a total fine of Ten
Thousand dollars ($10,000.00) for violation of Rules 324A.a., 604.c.(3), 902.c.,
906.b.(1), 906.c., 907.a.(1), and 907.a.(2), payable within thirty (30) days of
the date the order is approved by the Commission.
IT IS FURTHER ORDERED, that Elm Ridge shall collect samples of the soil
underlying the landfarm for analysis of TPH to verify that impacted material has
been removed, reclaim pit and landfarm area in accordance with COGCC 1000 Series
Rules, provide COGCC with a written report documenting activities associated
with the removal and disposal of pit contents and confirmation sampling.
IT IS FURTHER ORDERED, that Elm Ridge shall submit and agree to in writing a
schedule for operating and maintaining the landfarm, including but not limited
to, tilling and turning the former contents of the pit at least two times per
month; adding soil amendments such as manure, peat, or other organic material to
aid in the biodegradation of the oily material, as well as to improve the
texture of this extremely clayey material; collecting samples of the former pit
contents for chemical analysis of TPH (gasoline, diesel, and motor oil range)
once per month to demonstrate the success of the landfarm; conducting any other
activities that might be required to enhance the remediation of the former pit
contents so as to attempt to reach Table 910-1 cleanup standards by November 31,
2001 so that surface reclamation of the site can be completed before December
15, 2001.
IT IS FURTHER ORDERED, that Elm Ridge shall submit copies of the laboratory
results for all sampling conducted to date in response to this matter, maps
showing the locations of the samples, and a written description of how and where
the samples were collected to COGCC staff.
IT IS FURTHER ORDERED, that Elm Ridge shall submit copies of the laboratory
results for all subsequent sampling and the waste manifests documenting disposal
of any additional material removed from this site within two weeks of their
receipt of these documents.
IT IS FURTHER ORDERED, that Elm Ridge shall backfill the pit and complete site
restoration and recontouring within two weeks of the time that the former pit
contents reach the Table 910-1 cleanup standards or are removed. Site
reclamation must be conducted in accordance with the 900 and 1000 Series Rules.
IT IS FURTHER ORDERED, that the provisions contained in the above order shall
become effective forthwith.
IT IS FURTHER ORDERED, that the Commission expressly reserves its right after
notice and hearing, to alter, amend, or repeal any and/or all of the above
orders.
RECOMMENDED this 26th day of October 26, 2001.
OIL AND GAS CONSERVATION COMMISSION OF THE STATE OF COLORADO
By Dated at Suite 801 Morris Bell, Hearing Officer 1120 Lincoln Street Denver, Colorado 80203 October 26, 2001.
(1V#217)