The latest development in the years-long controversy over poor drinking water quality outside Pavillion will play out on Tuesday when state regulators will hold a public meeting to discuss a new strategy.

The Wyoming Department of Environmental Quality and Wyoming Oil and Gas Conservation Commission will hold a public “working group” meeting from 9 a.m. to 3:30 p.m. Tuesday, March 1, at the Pavillion Recreation Center in Pavillion.

“The purpose of this meeting, is to allow the working groups to share and gather information that will hopefully lead to a solution of these water quality issues,” DEQ administrator John Corra said in a prepared statement this week.

In recent months, the state agencies have formed two new working groups. One will focus on the integrity of active and inactive well bores in the area as a potential source of hydrocarbons and other contaminants found in several domestic water wells in recent years. The other group will focus on “mud pits” — which are used to hold mud and drilling fluids while an oil or natural gas well is drilled — as a potential source.

Corra said that initially only two among some 27 known mud pits in the area were thought to be polluted. But the agency is going to take a closer look.

“There was some question of, well, could there have been some seepage from those 25 (mud pits) that could be a source? So we’re going to take a look at that,” Corra told WyoFile in January.

This new emphasis on pits and well bores may please local residents as well as industry. Residents say it’s essential to understand the source of the pollution to avoid long-term health dangers. And the oil and gas industry claims that the drinking water contamination has been unfairly pinned on hydraulic fracturing, or “fracking.”

Neighbors suspect the contamination does has something to do with industrial wells interspersed throughout the area where oil and gas has been developed over several decades. Most recently, EnCana Oil & Gas USA bought the field from Tom Brown Inc. in 2004 and performed several frack treatments on the wells.

However, some residents say fracking may not be the single cause of the water problem, or even a contributor.

“There is no clear picture of what happens underneath here. That’s the problem,” said Jeffrey Locker, who has relied on bottled water since August when EPA recommended his family not drink from their domestic water well.

Locker said there are many potential sources of contamination, from “mud pits,” to drilling and fracking.

“We weren’t pointing fingers at (the oil gas industry). We were just saying ‘There’s something wrong with our water. These wells are going bad. What’s going on?’” said Locker.

EPA became involved in the investigation in 2009 after the Pavillion neighbors complained that the Wyoming DEQ and other state agencies were dragging their feet in finding answers. EPA has conducted several rounds of water testing and groundwater analysis in the past two years. EPA claims to remain a key partner in the investigation, and says it has made no certain determination as to the source of petroleum compounds found in several wells, nor has it ruled out fracking as a potential source.

“EPA has made no determinations about the sources of contaminants found in domestic wells,” EPA Region 8 spokesman Richard Mylott told WyoFile via email.

But Pavillion neighbors are getting mixed signals on the matter.

Corra has said he believes analysis derived from EPA’s work indeed rules out fracking as a source.

And, Corra added, “It’s in the state’s interest to take the lead going forward on this.”

A major concern among residents in the area, according to Locker and others, is whether the state will stop short of determining the source of contamination.

“I’m not sure we will be able to find a source. That’s the intent; either find a source or rule out potential sources,” said Corra.

Contact Dustin Bleizeffer at 307-577-6069 or dustin@wyofile.com.

Dustin Bleizeffer covers energy and climate at WyoFile. He has worked as a coal miner, an oilfield mechanic, and for more than 25 years as a statewide reporter and editor primarily covering the energy...

Leave a comment

WyoFile's goal is to provide readers with information and ideas that foster constructive conversations about the issues and opportunities our communities face. One small piece of how we do that is by offering a space below each story for readers to share perspectives, experiences and insights. For this to work, we need your help.

What we're looking for: 

  • Your real name — first and last. 
  • Direct responses to the article. Tell us how your experience relates to the story.
  • The truth. Share factual information that adds context to the reporting.
  • Thoughtful answers to questions raised by the reporting or other commenters.
  • Tips that could advance our reporting on the topic.
  • No more than three comments per story, including replies. 

What we block from our comments section, when we see it:

  • Pseudonyms. WyoFile stands behind everything we publish, and we expect commenters to do the same by using their real name.
  • Comments that are not directly relevant to the article. 
  • Demonstrably false claims, what-about-isms, references to debunked lines of rhetoric, professional political talking points or links to sites trafficking in misinformation.
  • Personal attacks, profanity, discriminatory language or threats.
  • Arguments with other commenters.

Other important things to know: 

  • Appearing in WyoFile’s comments section is a privilege, not a right or entitlement. 
  • We’re a small team and our first priority is reporting. Depending on what’s going on, comments may be moderated 24 to 48 hours from when they’re submitted — or even later. If you comment in the evening or on the weekend, please be patient. We’ll get to it when we’re back in the office.
  • We’re not interested in managing squeaky wheels, and even if we wanted to, we don't have time to address every single commenter’s grievance. 
  • Try as we might, we will make mistakes. We’ll fail to catch aliases, mistakenly allow folks to exceed the comment limit and occasionally miss false statements. If that’s going to upset you, it’s probably best to just stick with our journalism and avoid the comments section.
  • We don’t mediate disputes between commenters. If you have concerns about another commenter, please don’t bring them to us.

The bottom line:

If you repeatedly push the boundaries, make unreasonable demands, get caught lying or generally cause trouble, we will stop approving your comments — maybe forever. Such moderation decisions are not negotiable or subject to explanation. If civil and constructive conversation is not your goal, then our comments section is not for you. 

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *