Discussionspublic

Environmental Due Diligence

This is a public Forum  publicRSS

Topic

    John M. Prenosil
    Abandoned Oil Well In Allegheny County PA
    Topic posted January 26, 2012 by John M. PrenosilMember, last edited February 1, 2012
    405 Views, 8 Comments
    Title:
    Abandoned Oil Well In Allegheny County PA
    Content:

    There is an abandoned oil well on a parcel of property we are researching in Allegheny County PA. The well does not show up on available PA DEP GIS abandoned/capped well datalayers. I understand the PA DEP will makes a determination if a well is considered orphaned or not. My question is: How do you address this issue if you do not yet own the parcel. I have never dealt with this issue and would apprecaite some guidance. Thanks in advance.

    Our email server is also down. Please respond to jmprenosil@gmail.com in the interim Thank you.

     

    Comment

     

    • Tom Speight
      posted January 26, 2012 by Tom SpeightElite Contributor

      Hi John, there's some info here: http://www.orgsites.com/pa/venangopasec/_pgg2.php3

      I think there's an old thread on this subject.... try searching the older stuff here.

    • Matt Fox
      posted January 27, 2012 by Matt FoxElite Contributor

      Not sure about PA, but we run into these a lot in California.  Typically, unless there is documentation that the well was abandoned in accordance with current regulations it needs to be re-abandoned.  Otherwise, good chance methane, etc. could be seeping out of the well and into buildings, which can make the building go boom.  This would be especially true if you are planning on building a structure on or near the old well.

       

    • Show/Hide Replies
      PWoloszyn
      posted January 27, 2012 by PWoloszynContributor

      Hi John,

      In addition to potential methane gas issues and the likely requirement that the well will need to be reabandoned according to current applicable regulations (which can be a significant cost), other considerations include, but are not limited to:

      1) the potential for the well to act as a conduit for near surface contamination to move far into the subsurface,

      2) the potential for the well to allow cross-contamination of subsurface hydrogeological layers,

      3) the presence of other as yet to be identified on-site wells,

      4) the potential that certain types of structures are not allowed to be built on top of any well,

      5) the potential for covered up on-site unlined pits and sumps used for disposal of drilling mud and other petroleum related wastes, with associated contaminants,

      6) the potential for covered up on-site well cellars (typically concrete lined pits adjacent to completed wells used to store waste brine and oil generated during oil production),

      7) ratholes used to temporarily store drilling rods.

      8) historical aboveground tanks, piping, pipelines, headers and pumping stations.

       

      • John M. Prenosil
        posted January 27, 2012 by John M. PrenosilMember
        Seems like a GPR survey of the vicinity around the well pipe may be in order.
        • PWoloszyn
          posted January 27, 2012 by PWoloszynContributor
          I would certainly agree with you re: the known well. And, without knowing all the details of your research results to date, I am still "nervous" that there could be other as yet to be identified on-site wells and related concerns.
          • PWoloszyn
            posted January 27, 2012 by PWoloszynContributor

            Litigation work I conducted in the past included one project site with over 100 historical oil wells, and all the related concerns referenced above. Some of the wells had been slant drilled to get underneath large buildings on-site at the time. Many years after the wells were "abandoned" methane gas was observed bubbling up to the surface in a nearby waterway. A fascinating project ...

            Another fascinating oil well site that I closely studied at that time was the Belmont High School. Only 16 oil wells (approximately). The new high school, to be known as the Belmont Learning Complex, was planned to be Los Angeles Unified School District's flagship campus. It ended up costing something like $400 million to be built and, at the time, after construction was complete, was determined to be unsafe to use due to concerns generally related to oil wells. It was HUGE news in Los Angeles at the time.

            Eventually, the District Attorney’s Belmont Task Force concluded that "the available evidence fails to establish the existence of any felony violations of California law in the development or construction of the Belmont Learning Complex. Accordingly, prosecution is declined." The complete final investigative report is here: http://da.co.la.ca.us/pdf/BLC_Final_Report.pdf

    • John M. Prenosil
      posted January 27, 2012 by John M. PrenosilMember

       Thank you for the comments, they are insightful and sincerely appreciated.

       

      John

    • John M. Prenosil
      posted February 1, 2012 by John M. PrenosilMember

       Would all the same issues apply to a gas well?