Texas Sharon's Bluedaze

Fracking News

Range Resources escalates mafia style tactics

By

This is the kind of hubris that takes down empires and sinks giant ships.

Range is suing Steve Lipsky who has the contaminated water in Parker County and Alisa Rich who initially tested his water and found it was contaminated with methane, benzene and some other toxins.

Get this: Range claims they were already working with the Texas Railroad Commission and they were doing an investigation. FOR FOUR MONTHS the Texas Railroad Commission investigated while the homeowners had water in their home that would light on fire. FOR FOUR MONTHS!

Range claims Lipsky and Rich “conspired” to get the EPA to intervene. Nah!!! Why would they do that when we have the Texas Railroad Commission?

In its counterclaim filed Thursday in state district court in Parker County, Fort Worth-based Range contends that it has spent more than $3 million to defend itself and suffered “significant harm to its well-deserved reputation as a high-quality driller and operator” in the Barnett Shale. LINK

Raise your hand if you think Range Resources has a “well-deserved reputation as a high-quality driller and operator.” Anybody? Oh wait, is that you Ed? Oh, and there’s that certain S-T reporter who does love him some Range. Anybody else? Yeah, that’s what I thought. I laughed like a hyena when I read that. I’m still laughing. Allen Stewart, Lipsky’s attorney “called the countersuit’s claims a ‘far-fetched fairy tale.’”

Here is my favorite email that readers sent to Range Resources’ Sr. VP, David Poole, when he sent me the subponea:

I have been very concerned and a critic of the rush to drill in PA from the beginning and I have noticed that the various companies have their own “personalities”.

If I were standing along the road with an anti fracking sign an Anadarko truck would be careful to avoid hitting me so not to cause a stir. The Chesapeake truck may or may not hit me but wouldn’t notice. Cabot’s truck is being driven by an incompetent so all bets are off. The Range Resource’s truck would drive off the road to hit me and then back up over me to make sure the job was done.

The nastiness and aggressiveness with which Range does its business has not only shown up in law suites in southwest PA but in the dealings with individual lease holders here in northeast PA.  Folks in the country here do business with a handshake and they have grown contemptuous with the tactics of the gas industry in general and Range Resources in particular.

Most of the difficulties you are having, you deserve.

I’d say Range Resources’ reputation matches perfectly with the Texas Railroad Commission’s reputation. They’re two peas…

I would like to volunteer my services to Stewart. I have dozens of videos and hundreds of photos that show how Range Resources likes to cut corners at every opportunity and has total disregard for people who live in the Gas Patch and the rules and laws they are supposed to follow. I bet I can round up dozens of witnesses who will testify under oath that nothing Lipsky or Rich could ever do harmed the reputation of Range Resources. They did that themselves a long time ago.

I know the Texas court system is largely owned by the Big Gas Mafia but I hope they dismiss this case as frivolous.

 

About Sharon Wilson

Sharon Wilson is considered a leading citizen expert on the impacts of shale oil and gas extraction. She is the go-to person whether it’s top EPA officials from D.C., national and international news networks, or residents facing the shock of eminent domain and the devastating environmental effects of natural gas development in their backyards.

Comments

  1. anonymous says

    Things are getting more intense everyday. This industry is getting bolder and bolder.

  2. anonymous says

    http://www.scribd.com/doc/60284845/Lipsky-vs-Range-2011

    that’s the actual suit that was filed. The deposition of Rich and an email between her and Lipsky show the action to get the EPA involved was premeditated by Rich. Other evidence shows water wells drilled in the vicinity of Lipsky’s well several years prior to shale drilling were showing high levels of methane. Wells in the area have gas ventiliation systems and natural gas treatment devices for the well water, again, prior to the well for Range being drilled. 2003 well analysis of a well in the area (if not the same well, was not sure on that point) show that the levels of Boron, Manganese and Strontium, 3 of the four metals Rich uses to establish the claim that natural gas well completion and production is responsible, existed in almost similar quantities to the water samples taken from the well in 2010. This information is contained in the administrative record on the EPA’s website concerning this action, approximately on pages 176 for the sample data and p 483 for the 2003 sample data. http://www.epa.gov/region6/region-6/tx/tx005.html . Rich provides no evidence of methods used to consider and eliminate other possible sources of natural gas contamination, despite having a well established shallower source of natural gas in the strata than the Barnett shale. This report is contained the same administrative record as well, around page 168. Sworn testimonies of experienced water well drillers state that wells they have drilled in the area for several years experience natural gas phenomenon. There are several well documented and evidenced items contained in the lawsuit and in the previous hearing, which the Lipsky’s, their attorney, Rich, or representatives of the EPA failed to attend to refute any of these findings. It seems the only legal action involving the EPA and Range at the moment involves the EPA trying to justify the continued use of its emergency powers to continue the order against Range, despite lacking any evidence that Range is responsible for the situation that caused the emergency action. So far, in this situation, the side of Range and the RRC have presented a much more complete and reasonable case as to the source of the well contamination, and the EPA has done little to refute their case or present their own with the same level of certainty and deliberation.

    • TXsharon says

      So What???

      1. Anytime you drillers contaminate water the only way to get any help is to get the EPA involved. EVERYBODY knows that!!! Have you read the Sunset Advisory Commission report for the Texas Railroad Commission? Have you read the public comments? Go read that and then give me one good reason we shouldn’t try to get some help from somewhere else.
      2. Yeah, wells in the area have methane in them BUT the two wells in the EPA action did not and that was confirmed by the guy who drilled the water well.
      3. The gas was tested and the EPA is “confident” that the gas in these two particular wells matches the gas Range is producing from their well. The gas in the other wells in the area match the Strawn gas but that is not the case in these wells.
      4. The EPA evidence justifies putting the responsibility on Range to find the pathway. This is an important step in setting a precedence to make you gasholes responsible for the burden of proof instead of the citizen.
      5. The EPA has the authority to say that the gasholes have to prove the pathway. YAY!

      Look, you can’t keep contaminating water all over the damn place and think you can continue getting away with it. It may not be this time but there is a time coming. People are at the boiling point with your mafia bull.

      And, I’m still laughing about Range and their reputation. That’s just precious. Maybe if they had not been such gasHOLES, maybe if they have followed some of the ordinances, maybe if they hadn’t dumped their sewage in our backyards, maybe if they actually treated people fairly. maybe… But that’s not the case. Range is just a smidgen about Aruba Petroleum.
      TXsharon recently posted..Range Resources escalates mafia style tacticsMy Profile

  3. Jason Rusch says

    My own research on this case has shown me that John Blevins of the EPA backed off of their own findings when asked specific questions about the pathway the methane took into the water supply. He then went on to say that it was up to the defendant to provide such information. That is not due process. It is up to the prosecutor in any court of law to provide the burden of proof required for a conviction. Even without this burden of proof the EPA issued an endangerment order. When confronted with contrary evidence they then changed their story to they “may” have caused this. If all criminal matters were handled in this way, we would have to hire lawyers to work 24 hours a day to prove we did nothing criminal.

    • TXsharon says

      Jason, have you been reading the Star-Telegram articles written by Jack Smith? “Backed off” is the interpretation of a reporter who is suspiciously favorable to Range. Read it with a more critical eye. Jack is very close to people at Range, he hinted that he has relatives there. He should not be allowed to report on this case.

      Blevins did not back off. He said the EPA has enough evidence to feel Range caused or contributed to the methane and other contaminants in the wells. He said the EPA has the authority and that it is reasonable to make Range determine the pathway.
      TXsharon recently posted..Range Resources escalates mafia style tacticsMy Profile

  4. Tillotson says

    Jason,

    This is a civil suit, not criminal.

    So the plaintiff needs to show that the defendant caused this problem. The EPA has test results that show that the “fingerprint” (if you will) of the gas that is in the well matches that of the Barnett Shale, not the Strawn. THAT is the evidence the EPA is hanging their hat on.

    Range is countering that the EPA needs to show further evidence in defining the pathway that gas took to get to the well.

    It will be up to the courts to decide if the EPA has sufficient evidence.

    • TXsharon says

      Thank you for the comment, Tillotson. I’m sure you are aware that there is much at stake on this case. It’s life and death to the gasholes. If they must bear the burden of proof then the peasants have a great deal more power when–not if–their water is contaminated.
      TXsharon recently posted..Range Resources escalates mafia style tacticsMy Profile

  5. elizabeth burns says

    that is CLASSIC. They want to scare people from reporting things to the EPA by saying that you are responsible for the costs of complying with the EPA.

Trackbacks