encana

Wyoming regulators OK Encana aquifer waste well

2013-03-12T21:00:00Z 2013-04-10T20:52:40Z Wyoming regulators OK Encana aquifer waste wellBy ADAM VOGE Star-Tribune energy reporter Casper Star-Tribune Online

Wyoming's oil and natural gas commission approved a plan Tuesday to dispose of wastewater into an aquifer used in some parts of the state for drinking water, overruling no votes from the two geologists on the commission.

The Wyoming Oil and Gas Conservation Commission approved an Encana Oil and Gas request for permission to inject water produced from the company's operations into the Madison formation at a rate around 25,000 barrels -- or about 750,000 gallons -- per day for 50 years. The well would serve existing operations in a small field about 60 miles west of Casper.

The commission, which includes Gov. Matt Mead, voted to approve the plan after a lengthy discussion about the proposal at a Tuesday hearing in Casper. The commission approved the plan largely on the grounds that it would be too expensive to pump and treat water from the 15,000 foot-deep aquifer.

Two commissioners -- State Geologist Tom Drean and the recently-appointed Mark Doelger, also a geologist -- voted against the plan.

Drean, who as state geologist oversees geological data about Wyoming, told representatives of the company that he had concerns about company modeling used to project the well's effect on the water-bearing formation.

He told the company that he thought its modeling didn't put enough weight on the possibility that the formation is more porous than Encana believes and exists in varying thicknesses. Both factors could mean the company's projected 4.5-mile wide impact zone around the well is too narrow.

"I am in no way faulting the work that Encana has done," he said late in the hearing. "What I do have questions about is, when they're representing the 4.5-mile impact area, I don't think that's accurate."

Encana first proposed drilling the well, used to dispose of water produced in the oil and gas drilling and production process, in late 2011. The commission initially approved the plan in 2012, contingent on water in the formation hosting a measure of total dissolved solids -- a metric of suspended organic and inorganic matter used to gauge quality -- greater than 5,000 milligrams per liter. The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency recommends drinking only water with a TDS below 500.

Company testing showed the water had a TDS content nearer to 1,000, so the approval wasn't granted.

Encana then resubmitted its proposal. It said because the water is deep and far from civilization, it would be economically and technologically impractical to drill into the formation for drinking water. It would cost about $20 million to purify the water for drinking, according to company estimates.

The commission initially approved the request in January and asked for input from the Wyoming Department of Environmental Quality and EPA. The DEQ originally objected to the plan, but backed off the objection after Encana answered a series of concerns raised in February.

The EPA first submitted a series of questions without a judgment, and is now reviewing the matter and is expected to comment soon.

The plan drew opposition from the Powder River Basin Resource Council, a landowner group based in Wyoming. The council opposed the plan in a formal letter to the commission.

"We are increasingly concerned about future sources of drinking water in Wyoming and in the Wind River and Big Horn Basin," wrote John Fenton, the council's chair. "We believe that a decision to allow a potential drinking water aquifer to be exempted and removed from the potential for future use would be shortsighted."

Commissioner Bruce Williams questioned on Tuesday why the size of the impact zone was significant. Company projections showed that the well would have only a minor effect on water quality on the outskirts of the area affected by injection.

"I agree that the (impacted) area could be larger," he said. "My question is, 'So what?'"

Reach energy reporter Adam Voge at 307-266-0561, or at adam.voge@trib.com. Read his blog at http://trib.com/news/opinion/blogs/boom or follow him on Twitter @vogeCST.

Copyright 2015 Casper Star-Tribune Online. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten or redistributed.

(7) Comments

  1. Hope57
    Report Abuse
    Hope57 - March 17, 2013 11:17 am
    Some day someone will be looking for that water. Drought conditions in Texas and other areas. You can't drink money!
  2. SMed
    Report Abuse
    SMed - March 14, 2013 7:50 pm
    It should be required of these decision makers, and their families, to live in close proximity to this dump zone for the rest of their lives.
  3. HughKimball
    Report Abuse
    HughKimball - March 14, 2013 7:44 pm
    What is the governor and the commission thinking? I do not know even where to begin to comment. How stupid.
  4. savewyoming
    Report Abuse
    savewyoming - March 14, 2013 8:34 am
    And the State of Wyoming does it again! When are the agencies that are supposed to be protecting Wyoming's most precious resource, our water, wake up? The Madison Aquifer is the last best groundwater we have in this State. As citizens we have to start making the Governor, the WOGCC, the SEO, DEQ, and the WGS more accountable to US and not to the Encana's of the world.
  5. mbudenske
    Report Abuse
    mbudenske - March 14, 2013 3:17 am
    no surprises here.
  6. planters59nuts
    Report Abuse
    planters59nuts - March 13, 2013 7:14 pm
    SO WHAT.............question asked by Bruce Williams of the Oil and Gas Commission. Sounds like the Oil and Gas Commission doesn't really care. So let me get this straight. The Wyoming Oil and Gas Commission is willing to stake lives and livelyhoods beneath the interests of a Canadian corporation whose only concern making money for their investors. I think that really does cover it. Encana wants to save money. They don't care about OUR (Wyoming's) future generations, our crops and cattle our sheep (our livelyhoods). Our Oil and Gas Commission is willing to give that all up for a "song and a dance" to let Oil and Gas companies come in take what they want without any recompense - just like they always have.

    Pavillion has taught us nothing. Before "fracking", Pavillion knew nothing of polluted water from deep water sources. Now they know LOTS. "Oh no", they (the infamous THEY) said, "This is almost all benign". Encana wants everyone to believe that injecting water far below the our aquifers will amount to nothing or very little. That might be true if it were a one time deal, but they are proposing it for 50 YEARS............I'm no rocket scientist, but even constant waste water injecting for even two years is going to adversely affect potable water for us, for Nebraska, for Colorado many years just so Encana can save a few pennies here and there for their investors. Fresh water is a commodity we can ill-afford to gamble with. Let Encana figure out another solution.
  7. WyomingBorn1973
    Report Abuse
    WyomingBorn1973 - March 13, 2013 1:48 pm
    Once again, another limited resource sold off to the highest bidder in the name of "economic development". Problem is, it really only benefits Encana. Fresh water is the most valuable asset on earth - why does Wyoming have such a hard time understanding this!? Even *IF* there was a 90% chance that only the "Impact Area" would be affected, it's not worth the 10% risk to the rest of the water in the formation. It just seems wrong that a few individuals get to decide the fate for a huge resource that potentially effects millions of people for an indefinite period of time. I know... happens all the time, this is a democracy... but it isn't, it's a Republic and the People need to start making themselves heard.
Untitled Document

Civil Dialogue

We provide this community forum for readers to exchange ideas and opinions on the news of the day. Passionate views, pointed criticism and critical thinking are welcome. Name-calling, crude language and personal abuse are not welcome. Moderators will monitor comments with an eye toward maintaining a high level of civility in this forum. Our comment policy explains the rules of the road for registered commenters.

If your comment was not approved, perhaps...

  1. You called someone an idiot, a racist, a dope, a moron, etc. Please, no name-calling or profanity (or veiled profanity -- #$%^&*).

  2. You rambled, failed to stay on topic or exhibited troll-like behavior intended to hijack the discussion at hand.

  3. YOU SHOUTED YOUR COMMENT IN ALL CAPS. This is hard to read and annoys readers.

  4. You have issues with a business. Have a bad meal? Feel you were overcharged at the store? New car is a lemon? Contact the business directly with your customer service concerns.

  5. You believe the newspaper's coverage is unfair. It would be better to write the editor at editors@trib.com, or call Editor Jason Adrians at 266-0545 or Content Director David Mayberry at 266-0633. This is a forum for community discussion, not for media criticism. We'd rather address your concerns directly.

  6. You included an e-mail address or phone number, pretended to be someone you aren't or offered a comment that makes no sense.

  7. You accused someone of a crime or assigned guilt or punishment to someone suspected of a crime.

  8. Your comment is in really poor taste.

Add Comment
You must Login to comment.

Click here to get an account it's free and quick