Skip to main content

Hoping no one would notice, Obama picked noon on Christmas Eve to release the Inspector General (IG) report that justified the EPA's Imminent and Substantial Endangerment Order in the Range Resources' Parker County water contamination case.

The IG's in-depth investigation findings:

  • EPA was right to issue the order.
  • Withdrawal reasons are unclear and questionable.
  • Recommends monitoring of Range Resources' testing because the quality is questionable.

I just want to gloat for a moment and say: I told you so!

Inspector General: EPA justified in intervention to protect drinking water from fracking-enabled pollution

December 24, 2013
Response to Senator Inhofe accusation raises new questions as to why EPA withdrew its protection

December 24th 2014, Washington, D.C. & Parker County, TX – Today the EPA Inspector General found EPA Region 6 was justified in legally intervening to protect Parker County residents’ drinking water from drilling impacts. At Senator James Inhofe’s request, the Inspector General investigated to determine if Region 6’s intervention against Range Resources was due to political influence by the Obama administration.

“The EPA’s internal watchdog has confirmed that the EPA was justified in stepping in to protect residents who were and still are in imminent danger,” said Sharon Wilson, Gulf Regional Organizer of Earthworks. She continued, “Now we need an investigation as to whether political corruption caused EPA to withdraw that protection.”

EPA invoked its power to protect drinking water in 2010, prompting Oklahoma Senator James Inhofe to request the Inspector General’s investigation in 2011. EPA withdrew its legal complaint against Range Resources in 2012 despite having a report from an independent scientist showing that a gas well drilled by Range likely polluted nearby water supplies.

EPA’s withdrawal from Parker County appears to be part of a larger pattern, in which the Obama administration has blocked or abandoned investigations of whether drilling or hydraulic fracturing polluted drinking water.  In addition to the case in Parker County, reports in major news outlets indicate that the Obama administration caused the EPA to abandon studies of potential drilling or fracking pollution in Pavillion, WY and Dimock, PA despite evidence of drilling-related harm.

“The Obama administration appears to be more concerned about protecting corporate interests, not the public interest,” said Steve Lipsky. He continued, “President Obama promised that hydraulic fracturing would occur safely. With this IG report, it now seems clear that he is determined to squash any evidence to the contrary.”

Just prior to the release of the IG report, the Texas Railroad Commission (regulator of oil and gas, not railroads) opened an investigation into the case.  EPA intervened in 2010 to protect area drinking water only after the commission refused to do so. The Commission’s new investigation prevents the EPA from legally intervening now as it did in 2010.

“Regulators shouldn’t have to be pressured into doing their job to protect people like me from drilling impacts,” said Shelly Perdue, a Parker County resident with drilling-polluted drinking water. She continued, “if what has happened to me is happening to others, I completely understand why communities across the country are voting to ban fracking and drilling.”

“Releasing this report at noon on Christmas Eve shows the Obama administration is obviously embarrassed by its findings,” said Earthworks energy program director Bruce Baizel.  He continued, “As they should be. The withdrawal of Obama’s EPA is an abject failure of its mission to protect Americans’ health and environment.”

The question of the day is: Who pressured the EPA to back off this case? From Amy Mall's blog post:
  • Senior officials from EPA and a senior attorney from the U.S. Department of Justice agreed that there was enough evidence to enforce the EPA order and EPA’s case to address the emergency. EPA, however, also apparently at the same time told the IG that it believed “its prospects in this case were uncertain” and, because they would have to gather additional evidence, it “was not an efficient use of agency resources.”
  • EPA apparently stated that, because a homeowner with contaminated water could afford to purchase water from an alternative source, the risks had lessened.
  • Range Resources agreed to participate in EPA’s research study on the impacts of fracking on drinking water “once the EPA withdrew the order.” Although Range made this commitment in March 2012, Range has apparently not yet agreed to allow EPA access to its facilities or provide information to EPA.
  • The IG found that EPA’s withdrawal from the case did not violate any regulations or policy.
When asked if he felt vindicated, landowner Steve Lipsky answered, "Hell no! I'm just getting started."

When the EPA backed out, Range filed a $4 million-dollar lawsuit against Lipsky for Conspiracy to Commit Defamation. And they tried to roll me into that lawsuit by calling me the "Orchestrator" of the conspiracy.

For more information:
U.S EPA Office of Inspector General: Response to Congressional Inquiry Regarding the EPA’s Emergency Order to the Range Resources Gas Drilling Company

AP news story: Independent scientist, Geoffrey Thyne confirms thermogenic thumbprint match.

Landowner's scientists say Range Resources' testing is bogus.

Range Wars


Originally posted to TXsharon on Tue Dec 24, 2013 at 11:58 AM PST.

Also republished by DK GreenRoots and Climate Change SOS.

Your Email has been sent.
You must add at least one tag to this diary before publishing it.

Add keywords that describe this diary. Separate multiple keywords with commas.
Tagging tips - Search For Tags - Browse For Tags


More Tagging tips:

A tag is a way to search for this diary. If someone is searching for "Barack Obama," is this a diary they'd be trying to find?

Use a person's full name, without any title. Senator Obama may become President Obama, and Michelle Obama might run for office.

If your diary covers an election or elected official, use election tags, which are generally the state abbreviation followed by the office. CA-01 is the first district House seat. CA-Sen covers both senate races. NY-GOV covers the New York governor's race.

Tags do not compound: that is, "education reform" is a completely different tag from "education". A tag like "reform" alone is probably not meaningful.

Consider if one or more of these tags fits your diary: Civil Rights, Community, Congress, Culture, Economy, Education, Elections, Energy, Environment, Health Care, International, Labor, Law, Media, Meta, National Security, Science, Transportation, or White House. If your diary is specific to a state, consider adding the state (California, Texas, etc). Keep in mind, though, that there are many wonderful and important diaries that don't fit in any of these tags. Don't worry if yours doesn't.

You can add a private note to this diary when hotlisting it:
Are you sure you want to remove this diary from your hotlist?
Are you sure you want to remove your recommendation? You can only recommend a diary once, so you will not be able to re-recommend it afterwards.
Rescue this diary, and add a note:
Are you sure you want to remove this diary from Rescue?
Choose where to republish this diary. The diary will be added to the queue for that group. Publish it from the queue to make it appear.

You must be a member of a group to use this feature.

Add a quick update to your diary without changing the diary itself:
Are you sure you want to remove this diary?
(The diary will be removed from the site and returned to your drafts for further editing.)
(The diary will be removed.)
Are you sure you want to save these changes to the published diary?

Comment Preferences

  •  While I'm glad for the ruling I think that (31+ / 0-)

    it's pretty sad that we need a ruling telling us that the Evironmental Protection Agency is allowed to protect the environment.

    There are lies, damn lies, and statistics but they all pale in comparison to conservative talking points.

    by ontheleftcoast on Tue Dec 24, 2013 at 12:08:39 PM PST

    •  Agreed. (6+ / 0-)

      The EPA should be empowered, fully funded and allowed to do its job!

      Please ignore the troll trying to hijack this diary.

      •  There are no "troll" comments on this diary (0+ / 0-)

        at all.

        •  disingenuous (2+ / 0-)
          Recommended by:
          Barbara, TABadam

          "thou doth protest too much."

          Urban dictionary definition: Overly insistent about something, to the point where the opposite is most likely true.

          •  "Disingenuous" is an appropriate adjective to (0+ / 0-)

            use in describing parts of your diary.

            1.  Without any basis at all, you are propagating a conspiracy theory that President Obama somehow intervened or was involved in the decision to release the EPA IG report on the Parker County matter today.   You don't know that to be fact and you have no basis making that public claim on Daily Kos.

            2.  As to the EPA's Office of Inspector General report on the matter of the the Safe Drinking Water Act enforcement matter in Parker County, TX and as to EPA Region 6's subsequent withdrawal of that order, you said that the EPA IG report said:

            Withdrawal reasons are unclear and questionable.
            There primary problem with this claim in your diary is that the EPA Office of Inspector General said nothing at all of the sort.  In fact, the EPA IG report did not find any wrongdoing, malfeasance or abuse of discretion on the part of U.S. EPA Region 6.   You claiming that the EPA IG report said that the Region 6 withdrawal of the Range Resources enforcement order was "unclear and questionable" is you propagating an false conflation about what the EPA IG said.

            3.  You claiming this....

            Recommends monitoring of Range Resources' testing because the quality is questionable.

   erroneous and deceptive because absolutely nothing the EPA IG said in its report evaluated the Range Resource testing data accuracy or challenged the accuracy of the data in any manner.  Insisting that sampling protocols and QA/QC requirements be obtained by EPA is not a statement that the underlying data points are wrong and you representing that to be the case in the manner you did is misleading and deceptive.

            •  Okay (2+ / 0-)
              Recommended by:
              Barbara, TABadam

              I am very close to this case so I actually do know some things for a fact that I am not going to put in this diary. However, doing a news dump on a holiday is a well known trick used to bury news that a presidential administration wants buried.

              In my world, it is questionable to say that the risk/harm is reduced because homeowners are now paying for water.

              an EPA official indicated that the EPA believed that the risk faced by the residents at the well where contamination had first been found was reduced because the residents had obtained water from a separate source and were no longer using the well
              That is the worst solution ever! All you need to do folks is pay about $100k for tanks, a foundation for the tanks, plumbing and water deliveries and the water contamination risk is magically diminished. Now, that's questionable.

              Not to mention this from the report: Withdrawal of the Emergency Order Was Within the EPA’s Discretion, but Questions Remain. So the IG actually said there are questions.

              And, one more time I want to remind you that I never claimed or inferred there was "any wrongdoing, malfeasance or abuse of discretion on the part of U.S. EPA Region 6" those are YOUR words NOT mine.

              Also, Range Resources has been testing the neighbors' wells but they have not been conducting water testing of Steve Lipsky's well. That registers some pretty big question marks for me as it should other water drinkers.

              The report implies there is potential lack of integrity in Range Resources' testing and recommended more oversight. Maybe this is due to the FACT that using the same equipment used by Range, scientists have found alarming levels of methane in several wells in the area. And Duke has found very high levels of methane.

              Here is the text of a letter Steve and Shyla Lipsky sent the EPA in October:

              October 7, 2013

              To Whom It May Concern:

              The purpose of this letter is to ask the Environmental Protection Agency to assist in water and air testing.  In 2011 approximately 30 families in our area were told in a letter from Range Resources that our water was safe to drink and use in our homes.  Recently Duke University produced test results that were vastly different from the results Range gave us.  So either the initial results were inaccurate or the contamination has greatly increased.  While Range Resources testing of approximately 30 homes showed that there was no danger, Duke University testing of 10 homes showed over half of those homes had methane concentration over 20 mg/L in their well water.  The Texas Railroad Commission is only testing for isotopes and not gas concentration in the water.  Isotech is the lab that the TRC uses to do their testing.  Isotech confirmed that the TRC bottle testing method is only good for isotopes testing and they recommend doing a bag test to collect total combustible gases.  This method is comparable to the testing Duke used.  The TRC will not do this test.  Several homeowners are willing to pay for their own tests.  Our first request is that the EPA supervises this testing of our water for total gas concentrations.

              While previous air testing from Range Resources using the Thermo Scientific MIRAN SapphiRe XL Model 205B Ambient Analyzer (MIRAN) showed miniscule amounts of gas, the fact that the water is flammable led us to do our own testing.  We attempted to use the same company and equipment used in testing presented to the Texas Railroad Commission but were told they only worked for the industry.  The manufacturer of the MIRAN we contacted told us to contact Stacy Systems.  They own six of these instruments and are certified to do testing in Texas.  Their test results showed explosive levels of combustible gases.  While this equipment is reliable, it has a low threshold and our levels exceeded that threshold.  The Bascom Turner is another common industry standard instrument used to measure total combustible gas in ambient air, which is ethane, methane and propane gas and it is accurate up to 100%, which equals 1,000,000 ppm.  Our water well headspace gas vent was over 900,000 ppm or 90%.  Using a filter with this instrument to test only methane gas levels a reading of over 70% methane was taken on this water well headspace gas vent. Both results clearly show explosive situations.   Most importantly, there are water well holding tanks in the area that show up to 500,000 ppm and some are located in unvented garages. Even though we have videos showing that these water tanks are explosive with The Texas Railroad Commission present and admitting the tanks are explosive, they still will not test air.  Therefore our second request is that the EPA tests the air for combustible gases.

              We are requesting that the EPA test several homes in the area that are in immediate danger.  The levels of combustible gases in area holding tanks are creating explosive life-threatening situations.

              For additional information see these three WFAA news reports: February 13, 2013, July 11, 2013, and  September 24, 2013,


              Steven P. Lipsky

              But hey, today

              • the IG report showed that fracking-enabled drilling does contaminate drinking water.
              • it's pretty clear the gas in Lipsky's water well matches the gas in Range's gas well, which is what Geoffrey Thyne also found
              • Dr. Al Armendariz has been vindicatedated.
              • Steve Lipsky has been vindicated.
              • I have been vindicated.

              So, keep trying but you ain't going to rain on this parade.


              •  You said: (0+ / 0-)
                the IG report showed that fracking-enabled drilling does contaminate drinking water.
                Nothing in the EPA IG report is a scientific confirmation of the causality of the Parker County methane problems that confirmed that it was hydraulic fracturing operations that caused the claimed methane intrusion.   Nothing in the EPA IG report conclusively addressed the disputed claims between EPA Region 6 and Range Resources on the causation/pathway issues and strata gas identification issues.
                it's pretty clear the gas in Lipsky's water well matches the gas in Range's gas well, which is what Geoffrey Thyne also found
                What is your response to the Range Resources claim that dissolved nitrogen gas found in Lifsky's well distinguishes that thermogenic methane from thermogenic methane found in the Barnett Shale foundation which will typically not contain dissolved nitrogen?   This seems to be the issue which EPA Region 6 was not able to successfully counter Range Resources in the enforcement order matter.  
                Dr. Al Armendariz has been vindicatedated.
                Yes, the EPA IG report indicates that EPA Region 6 had sufficient basis to issue the enforcement order.   Unfortunately, this vindication is not of much practical benefit to Dr. Armendartz given his resignation after the "crucifixion" comments.   If Dr. Armendartz had not publicly said those comments about crucifixion and environmental enforcement, he would still be EPA Region 6 Regional Administrator today.
              •  They should be grateful (2+ / 0-)
                Recommended by:
                TXsharon, TABadam

                Range resources isn't charging them for the methane  :P

                Just shows there should be no corporate money allowed in government except taxes.  Or, hmm, if corporations are people, do they pay OASDI?

                ''The guarding of military and diplomatic secrets at the expense of informed representative government provides no real security for our Republic.'' - Justice Hugo L. Black of the Supreme Court

                by geekydee on Wed Dec 25, 2013 at 09:31:04 AM PST

                [ Parent ]

              •  Thank you Mr. Lipsky for not signing a gag order! (1+ / 0-)
                Recommended by:

                I was standing beside Representative Lon Burnam several years ago at the FTW EPA Hearing on Fracking when you showed him the bottle of water that came from your well. He took you to the RR Commission. Citizens should not be subjected to the endangerment that you and your family and your neighbors have endured because a "for profit enterprise" contaminates your water.  Taxes supporting Regulatory Agencies  should make it unnecessary for homeowners (and bloggers) to defend themselves in court for telling the truth! Gag orders should be banned in cases involving environmental contamination! Just having access to bottled water or an alternate municipal water system does not diminish the damage to your property value. Water is absorbed through the skin. Just having bottled drinking water is only part of the solution. How do you bathe and wash clothes in bottled water!

                I remember when Methane contaminated a water well on the farm where my mother's family settled in 1850. My aunt lives there and the tanks from a gas station nearby leaked. That well water was the best tasting beverage I've ever drank. As a small child I used to take bottles to the farm when we'd go and bring some home to drink instead of soda. Then the well was contaminated. She was eventually able to connect to a public water system. That system is high in iron and stains everything. It tastes funny. It does not compare to the water my family drank for generations out of that well. Once it is gone, it is gone forever. Those who profit put the money in their pocket and those who suffer are supposed to shut up and not say anything about it!

      •  Empowering the EPA to DO IT'S JOB ... (0+ / 0-)

        is precisely why I'm working as Chief of Staff for Cozad for Congress! When Joe Barton MISUSED his Chairmanship of the House Energy Committee to wage war on the EPA and to chase off the best EPA Regional Director most of us have ever seen in action, I knew that I needed to do whatever I can with anyone who will work with us to get Regulatory Agencies to DO THEIR JOB!  This last EPA hearing I attended (Dallas Public Library on Regulation for Existing Coal Power Plants) showed how far the EPA has slid since Dr. Al lef the EPAt.

        This hearing was unlike any EPA hearing I've ever attended. We were notified in advance that speakers would be given 5 minutes to comment. When we arrived we were told that time was limited to 2 minutes. Some people traveled  over 500 miles to be given only 2 minutes to speak!

         Unlike previous hearings when time-slots were allocated from the on-line registration, we were told to pre-register but that it would be "first come, first serve" for speaking slots. They HAD TO HAVE GIVEN SPECIAL  ACCOMMODATION to ELECTED OFFICIALS and REPRESENTATIVES OF THE COAL INDUSTRY ove "ordinary citizens" and environmentalist. Hearings were conducted in two meeting rooms. In the room where I spoke NOT ONE opponent of lax regulation of the coal industry was scheduled to speak for the FIRST TWO HOURS yet many reported standing in line OUTSIDE for hours before the doors opened.

        The agency had to have allowed elected officials and coal industry representatives special access to the sign-up sheets! They seemed to have been allowed inside earlier than the rest of us!

        Without Congressional and White House support for the Agency, they lack the backbone to enforce the law and to protect the people. In the past we knew that they were listening, weighing what was said, and investigation. This time they were not there to listen. They did not even go through the motions to try to appear fair!

        I'm working to get David Cozad elected to the U.S. Congress instead of Joe Barton because Cozad understands that we can be energy self-sufficient WITHOUT DESTROYING THE ECONOMY!  Donate to kick Joe Barton out of Congress:

  •  i'm confused. are you saying this is a bad thing? (2+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    jan4insight, LakeSuperior

    the way the opening reads is that obama tried to pull something over on someone.  it sounds like a GOOD thing, from what i'm reading.

    EdriesShop Is it kind? is it true? is it necessary?

    by edrie on Tue Dec 24, 2013 at 12:09:00 PM PST

  •  Destroying clean drinking water sources (17+ / 0-)

    at this particular point in history is the most foolish thing we could be doing. The climate crisis is going to dry up natural sources of fresh water around the world, and here we are polluting what alternatives we have? The EPA should be up in everyone's business on this. The administration is acting in the most short-sighted and politically cynical fashion, it makes me sick.

    There's a difference between a responsible gun owner and one that's been lucky so far.

    by BeerNotWar on Tue Dec 24, 2013 at 12:35:33 PM PST

  •  thanks for keeping us up to date (4+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    CenPhx, TXsharon, YucatanMan, TABadam

    at this point is there any active lawsuit against Range?

  •  I think you missed the most significant (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    Alan Arizona

    finding of the EPA IG report.....That U.S. EPA Region 6
    used the Federal Safe Drinking Water Act to authorize its enforcement order to address both hydraulic fracturing and the oil and gas industry.

    Remember that environmental-fear-preacher Josh Fox told us all in Gasland and in numerous other public appearances that hydraulic fracturing and the oil and gas industry were exempt from the Safe Drinking Water Act.   When Fox did that, he was conflating the fact that hydraulic fracturing was exempt from Safe Drinking Water underground injection permits into a false claim that hydraulic fracturing and the oil/gas industry were exempt from the entire Safe Drinking Water Act.

    The EPA Region 6 Range Resources order and the EPA IG report's confirmation that the Safe Drinking Water Act was used for the order's authorization conclusively demonstrates Josh Fox and Gasland are absolutely erroneous their lying claims that hydraulic fracturing is exempt from the Safe Drinking Water Act.

  •  You said that the U.S. EPA IG said: (0+ / 0-)
    Withdrawal reasons are unclear and questionable.
    That is NOT what U.S. EPA's Office of Inspector General said.   Here is what the IG said about the withdrawal:
    In addition, since SDWA Section 1431 and the EPA’s guidance do not provide criteria for withdrawing the emergency order, the EPA’s use of discretion in withdraw
    ing the order was allowed. The EPA withdrew the order because an agreement with Range Resources was underway; the costs and risks of litigating this particular case were likely to be very high and the needed short-term benefits would be
    low, if any; and immediate human health risks were believed to have been addressed.
    The IG also noted:
    The EPA reached an agreement whereby Range Resources agreed to test 20 water wells every 3 months for a year to provide information about the presence of more wide spread contamination.  According to the EPA, the sampling that Range Resources has completed indicates no widespread methane contamination of concern in the wells that were sampled in Parker County. However, the EPA lacks quality assurance information for the Range Resources’ sampling program, and questions remain about the contamination.
    •  More Pertinent Emphasis? (1+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      According to the EPA, the sampling that Range Resources has completed indicates no widespread methane contamination of concern in the wells that were sampled in Parker County. However, the EPA lacks quality assurance information for the Range Resources’ sampling program, and questions remain about the contamination.
      Speaks for itself...

      You meet them halfway with love, peace, and persuasion ~ And expect them to rise for the occasion...

      by paz3 on Tue Dec 24, 2013 at 03:17:17 PM PST

      [ Parent ]

      •  And, EPA explicitly committed in the full report (0+ / 0-)

        at PDF page 24-25, they are going to get the suggested information from Range Resources in order to ensure the adequacy of the data.

        One thing to understand here is that EPA backed off of the Safe Drinking Water Act enforcement order during an effort to settle the case short of litigation with Range Resources.      

        There is a dispute between Range Resources and EPA on whether the gas testing record that is available actually demonstrated that Range Resource caused the methane intrusion in the wells tested (notwithstanding the contents and assertions contained in the EPA IG report).   There is a dispute about the presence of nitrogen in water well samples vs. its absence in gas from the Barnett shale.   After you tackle that dispute there is then the matter of identifying a plausible physical pathway basis for a demonstration and documentation of the damage claim.   EPA faced the possibility of having to defend its claims when it did not have much in-house basis or expertise to knock down Range Resources claims, such as on the trace nitrogen gas issue.   EPA would have to do an expensive field research effort of unknown future results in order to conduct any enforcement litigation under the circumstances.  As a result, it is completely understandable that EPA chose to settle rather than fight the issue out in litigation.

    •  Why don't you put a cork in it (4+ / 0-)
  •  I wonder how Lisa Jackson feels about this. (3+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    TXsharon, northsylvania, TABadam

    If Obama wanted to do this nation a huge Christmas gift, he would re-instate her, putting her again at the head of the EPA, and offer her a public apology.

    (I would be more than happy just  to see the reinstatement of the woman.)

  •  Corporatist Obama: "You Can't Handle the TRUTH!" (4+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    chimene, TXsharon, Cofcos, TABadam

    Neither can the corporatist Obama administration so they withdraw EPA reports that make the frackers look like the criminals they are -- there is a pattern, practice, and policy of corporatist Obama covering the frackers' rear ends and hiding the TRUTH from people who have had their drinking water poisoned by frackers and who are potential litigants for having their lives turned upside down by frackers.

    •  Same went on with BP, allowing them to (4+ / 0-)

      direct Coast Guard announcements and restrict reporters' and the public's access to public lands and beaches. The administration has a history of supporting corporate polluting interests over the public's right to know.

      "The law is meant to be my servant and not my master, still less my torturer and my murderer." -- James Baldwin. July 11, 1966.

      by YucatanMan on Tue Dec 24, 2013 at 04:16:29 PM PST

      [ Parent ]

  •  A lot of pedantry going on in the comments... (3+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    TXsharon, YucatanMan, TABadam

    "...So the world might be mended"

    by Cofcos on Tue Dec 24, 2013 at 03:29:18 PM PST

  •  Stinks of OIRA & Cass Sunstein (3+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    TXsharon, reflectionsv37, The Jester

    who have repeatedly kept EPA from doing its job.

    Sharon, thanks for fighting the tough fight to keep the frackers from trashing America. I have seen how damned corrupt they are right here in central North Carolina. What happens in Texas doesn't stay in Texas, so thanks for fighting them in Texas.

    look for my eSci diary series Thursday evening.

    by FishOutofWater on Tue Dec 24, 2013 at 04:00:23 PM PST

  •  No offense to the IG, but, go fk yourselves. (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:

    I think Sharon is right on. Waiting until no one is looking is a cowardly way of hoping to duck notice. Somebody is making a futile effort to coverup a scandal.

    I am a citizen and I want the truth... WHO ORDERED THE EPA TO BACK OFF?

    Ultimately it may not prove to be illegal, but IT SHOULD BE, whatever the justification and whomever the actor.

    Industry is poisoning people's drinking water supply, and to me that is ATTEMPTED MURDER. So those conspiring to coverup industries crimes are accessories to the crime.

    Seriously, Justice can't put a RICO case together with industry and corrupt federal officials in the cross hairs?

    The hilarious irony is, if the Republicans want to use this as the "scandal" they've been looking for, they will have to sell the oil industry down the drain in order to move forward. Oh the agony. :)

    •  Why do you say and insist that EPA's withdrawal (0+ / 0-)

      of the Range Resources Safe Drinking Water Act enforcement order was an act that was ordered by someone other than EPA itself?    

      Nothing in the EPA IG report indicates that EPA Region 6 and EPA Headquarters were acting in any manner at all as a result of an order by an entity external to EPA itself.  

      In fact, the EPA IG report said that EPA withdrew the enforcement order as part of a settlement with Range Resources.   Why exactly do you conflate this all into some kind of poltical control conspiracy?

      •  Because I'm old enough to know... (1+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:

        ... there is no Santa Clause.

        No one, having an independent report clearly showing thousands of American's lives are at risk from poisoned drinking water just up and decides to UN-INTERVENE the EPA from the matter. It is above the pay grade of anyone outside of the Director and up.

    •  The decision to hold the report did not come (2+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      TABadam, The Jester

      from the IG's office. The report has been around a while and has received many massages and lots of H2O. The essence and facts of the report can't change after it leaves the IG's office though.

      You want to know exactly what I want to know because the EPA was ordered to back out AND to stay completely away. Now they have the clearance to get back in there, which is a very good thing.

      I love the irony of Inhofe flamboyantly ordering this investigation and not getting the results he wanted. I wonder how that crow tastes.

    •  I want the truth too. (1+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      The Jester

      Did someone approach Joe Barton and urge him to call for a House Energy Committee investigation of Dr. Al or did he come up with that on his own! Was that action tied to the Range Resources case in Parker County?

      Did one or more officials meet informally with representatives of the Gas Drilling industry tied to Range Resources?

      Did they use the shield of attorney client privilege to shirk transparency of lobby activity? Let's vindicate the Congressman or nail him to the wall....whatever is appropriate. I want the facts. I want to know what really did prompt the assault on Dr Al and the withdraw of the enforcement order on the Parker County water contamination case. The Lipsky's and TxSharon continued to  be tied up in court for a long long time after the withdrawal of the enforcement order. Obviously the withdrawal of the order did not end the case.  Instead it seems to have fueled the assault on the blogger and injured property owner!

Subscribe or Donate to support Daily Kos.

Click here for the mobile view of the site