Oil Spill in the Yellowstone

Thats a sad deal,hate to see it.

Whatever gets there won't be too potent by the time it does. No worries!

So who is responsible?   Do we blame ExxonMobil or do we blame whatever agency said it is ok to bury the pipeline only X number of feet below the river bottom?  

Not a good deal nor does it really surprise me.

It will just mix in with the crude that got away from ND companies this spring.  Carp will gobble it up like mustard.

At least is wasn't as much as the earth spews from the oceans everyday.

Documents detail Exxon's Yellowstone response
LAUREL, Montana — Federal documents show it took Exxon Mobil nearly twice as long as it publicly disclosed to fully seal a pipeline that spilled roughly 1,000 barrels of crude oil into the Yellowstone River.
By: Associated Press, INFORUM

LAUREL, Montana — Federal documents show it took Exxon Mobil nearly twice as long as it publicly disclosed to fully seal a pipeline that spilled roughly 1,000 barrels of crude oil into the Yellowstone River.


Details about the company's response to the Montana pipeline burst emerged late Tuesday as the Department of Transportation ordered the company bury the duct deeper beneath the riverbed, where it is buried 5 to 8 feet underground to deliver 40,000 barrels of oil a day to a refinery in Billings.


The federal agency's records indicate the pipeline was not fully shut down for 56 minutes after the break occurred Friday near Laurel. That's longer than the 30 minutes that company officials claimed Tuesday in a briefing with federal officials and Gov. Brian Schweitzer.


An Exxon Mobil spokesman said the longer time span was based on information provided to the agency by the company and the discrepancy might have come about because Exxon Mobil Pipeline Co. President Gary Pruessing was speaking without any notes in front of him when he addressed Schweitzer.


"Clearly our communication with the regulator (DOT) is the one that we've got precision on," spokesman Alan Jeffers said.


It was not the first time the company offered clarification of its response and assessment of the spill. A day earlier, the company acknowledged under political pressure that the leak's impact could extend far beyond a 10-mile stretch of the river it initially said was the most affected area. The company had earlier downplayed government officials' assertions that damage was spread over dozens of miles.


The governor toured the area Tuesday as the waterway rose above flood stage and stoked fears that surging currents could push crude into undamaged areas and back channels vital to the river's prized fishery. Conditions have hampered efforts to find the cause of the break.


The river has been flowing too swiftly for crews to reach some oiled areas, and forecasters said mountain snowmelt was adding to high water levels. Officials speculated that the surge may push oil into areas that haven't yet been damaged.


Most observations have been made through aerial flights.


A few miles downriver from the broken pipe, homeowner Robert Castleberry said he had been out of his house since Saturday because of dangerous fumes from oil that the river pushed across his yard and into the crawlspace beneath his house.


Castleberry's wife suffers from heart disease and the fumes gave her difficulty breathing, he said. While he appreciated the company promising to cover the couple's immediate expenses, the retired fuel truck driver was doubtful workers would be able to clean up the black, gooey film that laced through the underbrush along the river.


"Exxon's been nothing but 100 percent with us," he said. "But when you get into brush that thick, that's going to be virtually impossible to clean."


Company and federal officials said they have only seen oil about 25 miles downstream from the site of the break near Laurel. But Schweitzer said he believes some has traveled hundreds of miles to North Dakota.


"At seven miles per hour, some oil is already in North Dakota. That's a given," Schweitzer said. "I'm asking everyone to get out there and report what you see on the river."


Representatives of Exxon Mobil and the Environmental Protection Agency said they had no reports of oil beyond the town of Huntley.


Transportation officials said Tuesday that oil was observed as far downstream as 240 miles in Terry, Mont. The agency said that information was provided by Exxon Mobil, but company spokesman Alan Jeffers said he was not aware of any such sighting.


Exxon planned to test the river's conditions with a jet boat, with eight more on standby if the launch is successful, Glass said.


Federal regulators have ordered Exxon to make safety improvements to the 20-year-old pipeline. Among them was an order to re-bury the line to protect against external damage and assess risk where it crosses a waterway, which the company intended to comply with, Jeffers said.


"We will follow their requirements," he said.


The company also will have to submit a restart plan to the Department of Transportation before crude can again flow through the line.


Schweitzer also ordered a review of pipelines that cross major and minor rivers in the state. Officials will look at the pipes' age, location of shut-off valves and whether they are similar to the ruptured pipe. He said the state has 88 such crossings.


Modern pipelines can be buried as much as 25 feet beneath bodies of water; Exxon Mobil's Silvertip line was 5 to 8 feet below the bottom of the Yellowstone.


The line was temporarily shut down in May after Laurel officials raised concerns that it could be at risk as the Yellowstone started to rise. The company restarted the line after a day, following a review of its safety record.


Schweitzer said he noticed that oil was pooling in areas near banks with slower-moving water, close to islands and cottonwood stands that support the microbes and insects that bring life to the river.


"Those riparian areas are a biological treasure trove. That's the health and wealth of the river," he said.

 While certainly unfortunate, it couldn't have happened at a better time.  Record flows will have the oil diluted as it never could have been in the past.

I wonder if the pipe was run in a casing w/spacers?  I imagine concrete encasement would be rather difficult in a river crossing, but welded steel casing may have prevented this.

Amazing how nearly everybody jumps on the anti ExxonMobil bandwagon while never ever questioning the agency that allowed the pipeline to be placed at the specified depth.
If they are gonna regulate us with an iron fist they should be held accountable when shit hits the fan.

Gg, pipeline casings can help or make corrosion even worse if the cathodic protection system gets an interference. Lots of things can be done right or wrong. It's going to be somebody's a$$

I don't know how long this has been in the ground but today the regs are much more strict I'm sure.  If you bore a water line under a state or federal highway there are very strict rules for the pipe.  Has to be a certain code of pipe that is much stronger than normal pvc and the pipe has to have a solid casing from base of ditch to base of ditch.  And that's for water. 

3x
Who's regulating anything with an iron fist? Everytime i turn on the TV news or read a paper (and i read a lot of them) there is some kind of story about easing regulations on some industry or another to make it easier for them to.....whatever. It has been reported that Exxon makes 5 million dollars an hour in profit (i'm guessing this is blown way out of proportion) and to that I say GOOD FOR THEM! if they have a business model that provides that kind of profits and it is working for them it is a good thing. However, it seems that even with all of the profit they are making they seem to be short on resources available to respond to and maintain their equipment.

If i own equipment and it needs maintenance and repair I maintain and repair it. Why because there is risk involved with any mechanical system. Did they cut corners? Time will tell, however, many things have had that "perfect storm" type of scenario this year like Minot. This happened when the Yellowstone was at peak flood that may very well be a blessing if dilution is actually a plausible solution. It will soon fade from the media spotlight and I'm sure Montana will be strict with Exxon. If it was an accident then so be it. If it turns out that corners were cut then the regulatory agencies involved do need to use that "iron fist".

Montana is in the Big Sky region as far as DOT regs go.  Basically, what I"m saying is there are more regs in that region than in ND.  Inspection records must be kept per every so many days in accordance with DOT regulations.  If they made mistakes, they will be fined without question. 

Bob,  I think you missed my point.   When private industry builds something to code or conforms with all regulations at the time then something happens everybody blames the ExxonMobil's of the world because they have money.   If the govt wants to regulate and be able to scrutinize everything then they should in my opinion be held accountable for things like the pipe depth and approving an emergency cleanup plan. 

3x
Yup I did, i understand and agree.

3x, why not be an even more responsible company and build it ABOVE the required specs to insure this never happens?  Oops..  Silly me.  That'd cut into their profits and their head honcho's massive bonus's each year.  Nevermind......

I don't know if people fully understand just how much infrastructure is out there and just how much calculated risk rests with the oil industry or any industry for that matter.  Heck, we've had something like three wind towers completely malfunction with big blades flying a hundred plus mph smashing into the ground!  Not much mentioned about them.

The oil industry or any industry is a heavy target and easy one.  Profits get brought up all the time.  Anyone looked the the books and expenses they put forth?  McDonald's probably has a better profit return.  It just so happens like bottled water, everyone buys it by the quantity.  When you need a lot at a little you do a pretty good job in the gross and net profit.  But unlike water, there's some big ass risk to the energy industry and especially oil.

Back to my point this incident is not good at all.  None are...ever.  But man, if you look at the big picture there are so many risks out there and so VERY few issues associated that I think oil companies damn near deserve an A for a grade!  Just think about it!  And I'll tell you this, oil companies are borderline nuts with safety regulations on them and the contractors that work for them.  If you do not know, call the EHS for each company and ask them for their run-down on safety procedures, etc.  It is plain amazing.  The cost alone to do it is huge!!!

Minot has a water disaster because they got their butt handed to them because of old pipes, outdated design and a freak of nature weather event (Yellowstone experienced the same).  Accidents or incidents as the oil companies call them happen.  Everything is done to protect as necessary as possible but they can never be eliminated.

The "cover" up witch hunt to me is fair.  Sure, go at it but you best remember every business out there does the best they can to reduce public damage through the media.  I don't care if it is an engineering firm, a grocery store, a development firm, etc.

That's my rant for the day.  Haven't done one in awhile!

That was pretty mild rant??Maybe they should build the lake darling dam higher??

murdock1978 Said:
That was pretty mild rant??Maybe they should build the lake darling dam higher??

I'd be in favor of that.