Fracking Victim Steve Lipsky's Flaming Water is No Joke

Julie-Dermansky-022
on

Weatherford, Texas,ย homeownerย Steve Lipsky has nothing to hide. He is not trying to take down Rangeย Resources, a large oil and gas company with aย reputation for bullying its critics, nor is he trying to defame the company as it has accused him of in a defamation lawsuit demanding over $3ย million.

Lipsky, a private, conservative man who made his nest egg in theย banking industry, now finds himself playing the role of David against aย modern day Goliath in a battle fraught withย Kafkaesque moments. After whatย looked at first like an open and shutย case of industrial negligence turned into a lengthy legal battle, he must eitherย fight or accept financial ruin.

In 2011, the Environmental Protection Agencyย determined thatย Rangeย Resourceโ€™s drilling activities atย a nearbyย fracking project had contaminated Lipskyโ€™sย well.

Lipsky can light the water coming out of his wellย onย fire.

He discovered this when Peck’s Well Service, theย company that drilled the water well in 2005, cameย toย figure out why it wasn’t working properly in July 2010. Peck’s found that gas building up inside the well was lowering the water pressure and causingย aย gas lock.ย 

Peck’s lit Lipsky’s water on fire while explaining to him why it wasn’tย functioning normally, showing Lipsky it was full of gas. Theyย installed aย vent to allow some of the gas to escape for safety reasons.ย ย 

Lipsky decided to shut off the wellย toย the house and has sinceย trucked water inย at an average cost of $1,000 a month to keep his family safe. Since then, Lipskyย only turns on the well for testing and to demonstrate the phenomenon to journalists, EPA, theย Texas Commission on Environmental Quality, the Parker County Fire Marshal’sย Office, the Texas Railroad Commission, Department of Justice andย representatives of Range Resources.

On October 10, 2013, theย Fortย Worth Court of Appeals ruled that Range Resources could move forward withย their defamation suit against Lipsky, based in part on accusations that Lipskyย is misleading the public about being able to set his water on fire.


Steve Lipsky ignites water coming out of his well on Oct. 13, 2013.ย ยฉ2013 Julie Dermansky

A point of contention is a piece of garden hose thatย Lipsky attached to the vent coming out of his water well headspace. In a video he released online and provided to regulatory agencies, Lipsky sets fire to gas flowing through the hose that he attached to the vent. Range Resources claims the use of the hose made it seem like Lipsky was setting his water on fire.

โ€œThe hose was used in the interest of safety,ย not to deceive anyone,โ€ Lipsky counters.ย The first time he lit the vent on fire theย whole well ignited. Lipsky attached the hose to direct the venting gas downwindย of the well before lighting it again.ย 

In the video,ย Lispky never claims to beย setting hisย water ablaze. Why would he make gas seem like flammable water, when he hasย water he can set on fire too?

Lipsky’s dream houseย hasย become a nightmare. ย He is not alone. Several of his neighbors have theย same problem he does, but after witnessing what has happened to the Lipskys forย fighting back, they’re reluctant to speak out.

Shelly Purdue recentlyย went onย camera with local TV anchor Brett Shipp, showing that she too can lightย her water well vent on fire. ย She too installed a vent to alleviate theย problem but is still living in a volatile situation.

Other neighbors haveย installed expensive water filtration systems so they can drink their water butย that doesn’t eliminateย theย danger.ย Independent testing hasย shown that several residentsโ€™ water well holding tanks are well aboveย explosive limits.

Aย team from Duke University is conducting a study in the area and released information to the homeownersย alerting them to the hazardous conditions. The final results of the study willย be releasedย in the coming months.


Lipskyโ€™s home, greatly devalued since his well was contaminated.ย ยฉ2013 Julie Dermansky

The EPA‘s findings also established that there areย dangerous levels of gas escaping from Lipsky’s well. They named Range Resourcesย as the party responsible for the contamination and issued an Administrative Emergency Order against the company in December 2010. ย 

This didn’t stop the Railroad Commission – a regulatory agency that governs allย things oil and gas related in Texas – from holding their own hearings that cleared Rangeย Resources, based on evidence provided by the company. The EPA choseย not to participateย nor did the Lipskys since both were only given ten days toย prepare, making a fair hearing improbable.

Range Resources spent millions ofย dollars putting on a one-sided case for the Railroad Commission, attacking all of the EPA‘s findings. Dr. Geoffreyย Thyne, who conducted the testing for theย EPA, reviewed the Railroad Commissions’ findings that cleared Range Resources.ย Heย wrote: ย โ€œMy conclusion, that the gas well could be the source ofย methane in the (Lipsky) water well, was based on the chemical andย isotopicย data. After reviewing the Range presentation to the Texas RRC my opinionย is unchanged.โ€

The Lipskys sued Range Resources after theย EPA named the company the party responsible for contaminating the well. The family was promptly counter-sued by Range Resources for defamation.

The presiding judge,ย Trey Loftin, dismissed the Lipskys’ claims, citingย lack of jurisdiction, butย allowed Rangeโ€™s defamation suit to proceed.ย 

The Lipskys’ lawyer, Allen M.ย Stewart, argued that the libel suit went against the Texas Citizensย Participation Act, also known as the Texas Anti-SLAPP Act, which was passed inย order to allowย citizens sued in retaliation for the exercise of theirย constitutional and common law rights of freedom of expression to avoid theย expense and burden of defending meritless suits for defamation, businessย disparagement, and similar torts based on the exercise ofย those rights. The actย achieves its purpose by allowing defendants in such suits to seek and obtainย early dismissal before being forced to participate in costly discovery. But theย Lipskys’ request to dismiss the case was denied.

The initial rulings against the Lipskys by Judge Loftin are problematic. Loftin found merit in Range Resources’ claim thatย Lipsky was purposely misleading the public by using the garden hoseย demonstration, a key element in the libel suit. Butย Loftinย later recused himself from the case. Loftin’s bias emerged when one ofย his campaign fliers in his recent bid for reelection stated, โ€œThe EPA, usingย falsified evidence provided by a liberal activist environmental consultant,ย accused andย fined a local gas driller of contaminating wells,โ€ andย โ€œPresident Barack Obamaโ€™s EPA backed down only after Judge Trey Loftinย ruled that the evidence was โ€˜deceptive’.โ€


ยฉ2013 Julie Dermansky

Range Resources didn’t stop at suing the Lipskys. Theyย also went after the EPA. After over a year of litigation, the EPAย withdrewย theirย emergency order requiring the company to provide drinking water to the Lipskys.

In a statement to the press, the EPA said,ย โ€œResolving theย lawsuits with Range allows EPA to shift the Agency in this particular case awayย from litigation and toward a joint effort on the science and safety of energyย extraction. EPA and Range will share scientific data and conduct further wellย monitoringย in the area, and Range will also provide useful information andย access to EPA in support of EPA‘s inquiry into the potential impacts of energyย extraction on drinking water.โ€

The EPA‘s move hurt the Lipskys since itย gave the appearance that the EPA had madeย a mistake. Why else would aย regulatory agency back down when lives are at risk? However the EPA has neverย retracted their findings that proved Range Resources had contaminated Lipsky’sย well.

Lipsky is still baffled by Range Resources’ testย results and the letter they sent him and his neighbors on February 2, 2011,ย assuring them their air and water were safe. One set of results the company produced shows zeroย gas in his well. ย 

Either Range Resources’ tests were done incorrectly andย are not credible, or based on the zero reading for gas in his well, Rangeย Resources has provided Lipsky with a baseline he canย use to show how muchย worse things have gotten since 2010.

The numbers for gas contamination areย rising to the highest levels recorded nationwide, and Lipsky has the documentationย to prove it, provided by Duke University and private testing conducted with the same equipment the industry uses.

In September 2013, tests showed gasย coming out of Lipsky’s water well measuring 162,000 parts per million (ppm). 50,000ย ppm is considered a level for potential explosion. Air samples taken directlyย from the water wellย headspace vent showed levels exceeding 900,000 parts perย million. Several residents alerted the Railroad Commission of new high-testย levels, prompting the agency to reopen its investigation.

The Lipskys were not the only ones left bewildered whenย the EPA withdrew the administrative emergency order. Six Republicanย senators – James M. Inhofe (R-OK), David Vitter (R-LA), John Boozman (R-AK), Tomย Coburn (R-OK), John Cornyn (R-TX), and Kayย Bailey Hutchison (R-TX) – also felt aย need to question the EPA‘s actions, sending a letter requesting the Attorneyย General investigateย the matter. Theย Senators hope to prove the EPA isย an activist branch of the government.

In aย statement from the Republican minority of the Senate Environment and Public Works committee, Senator Cornyn said, โ€œFor tooย long the Obama EPA has sought headlines instead of facts, as was the case here.ย Texans deserve to know if this action was carried out inย aย politically-motivated way, in an attempt to demonize the entire industry andย purposely mislead the public.โ€ย 

The government shutdown has held up the Attorney General’s report but Lipsky isย hopeful the truth will emerge.

Documents uncovered by ABC Dallas affiliateย WFAAย Channel 8 show Range Resources failed to cement theirย drilling operation despite being required to do so by the industry’s ownย standards. Doug Allmand, an engineering specialist for the Railroad Commission, is aware of this. He sent Range a violation letter on August 10, 2010. According toย Dr. Payne,ย a scientist hired by Lipsky from Pennsylvania, where fracking operations have contaminated wells in similar cases, this probably led to the contamination of Lipsky’s and his neighbors’ wells.

Steve Lipsky is now working with attorney Brent M.ย Rosenthal, who is preparing to petition forย aย writย of mandamus in the Texas Supreme Court asking to dismissย Range’s remaining claims for defamation and business disparagement againstย Steven Lipsky.

โ€œI will assert,โ€ Rosenthal says,ย โ€ย as I have before the Fort Worth Court of Appeals, that Range’s claims areย meritless and threaten the exercise of First Amendment rights by Steve Lipskyย and anyone else who speaks out on issues of publicย concern. ย I hope thatย organizations fighting for first amendment rights and social justice, as wellย as those involved in the environmental movement, will be concerned about theย case and will work to persuade the courts to reject claims like Range’s claim against the Lipskys.

Lipsky is saddled with legal bills and the expense of trucking in drinking water from a nearby town. He worries about his future, since his dreamย house hasย been devalued. He also worries about his neighbors living underย the threat of aย catastrophic gas explosion.

The stress is taking its toll onย Lipsky’s health, as his spiking blood pressure attests. But Lipsky doesnโ€™tย have to worry about his property exploding, since his well remains turnedย off as a precaution. ย 

In a culture where the oil andย gas industry spends millions on PR campaigns and hires representatives withย militaryย backgrounds in psychological operations to intimidate private citizens, where regulatory agenciesย and scientists risk harassment when their results are notย ‘industry friendly’, whereย lawyers don’t want to take on clients who have casesย against industry for fear of losing business with energy producers, and whereย industry campaign contributions taint politicians and judges all the way up theย ladder, how many people will fight back asย staunchly as Steve Lipskyย has?

Lipskyโ€™s warning to those in areas where there is fracking:

Lipsky ignites water coming out of his well on Oct. 14, 2013:

Julie-Dermansky-022
Julie Dermansky is a multimedia reporter and artist based in New Orleans. She is an affiliate scholar at Rutgers Universityโ€™s Center for the Study of Genocide and Human Rights. Visit her website at www.jsdart.com.

Related Posts

The EU and many member states have set limits for how much manure farmers are allowed to apply in their fields, but crucial oversight is lacking.

The EU and many member states have set limits for how much manure farmers are allowed to apply in their fields, but crucial oversight is lacking.
on

Robert Wilkie was speaking at a conference co-hosted by the group behind the radical Project 2025 agenda.

Robert Wilkie was speaking at a conference co-hosted by the group behind the radical Project 2025 agenda.
on

Scope of corporate influence underscores concerns the technology will be used to prolong demand for planet-heating natural gas.

Scope of corporate influence underscores concerns the technology will be used to prolong demand for planet-heating natural gas.
on

A 1961 oil and gas well is the suspected source of a geyser eruption in the region where Permian wastewater disposal is causing a flurry of earthquakes.

A 1961 oil and gas well is the suspected source of a geyser eruption in the region where Permian wastewater disposal is causing a flurry of earthquakes.