Replies to This Discussion

Permalink Reply by searcherone on September 12, 2013 at 5:00am

H Bale,

Here is link to article stating which wells were affected;  when I read the article I thought is this the reason Gulfport didn't make their production numbers for the quarter.

http://www.theintelligencer.net/page/content.detail/id/589654/Gulfp...

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Kathleen on September 12, 2013 at 8:02am

To us these are high number fines, but IMO to the oil co., it is not.
Gulfport stock has risen and risen over the years from next to nothing. Even if the CEO had to pay this out of his pocket it would just be the change he finds in his couch.
Maybe for each offense should go by a percentage of the co's worth. I bet this would stop leaks and give less ammo to the people who just grab this info and run with it.
I feel 7 leaks is a lot for a co., not here long. Maybe they were minor, since I did not look them up but it still seems high.

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by TM on September 12, 2013 at 9:34am

They have to redo the 7 pads also which would not be cheap either. Yeah seems like a lot of spills for a short period of time.

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by TreeMom on September 12, 2013 at 1:52pm

The fine is small change but stopping operations is costly.

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by catt on September 12, 2013 at 2:24pm

I so agree with you, Cassandra. Not only costly in dollars but bad publicity. I'm sure 

they will be doing everything they can to make this right. But good for the ODNR  being on the ball. I'm all for this exploration....but it must be done safely and without major accidents. I realize there will always be problems to work out but to have so many at once.....makes one think maybe some faulty equipment may be to blame. I  really don't have a lot of knowledge about the industry but it does seem strange for all of this to happen at so many wells at once. Has Gulfport put out any statements on this matter?

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Mark McGrail on September 12, 2013 at 3:21pm

It bothers me when I see articles such as this. The intention is to smear the ODNR.

I have dealt with many of the people at the ODNR and have always found them to be very dedicated to the protection of the environment of the state of Ohio.

The fact here is that the incidences were discovered and dealt with by the ODNR following protocol set out in legislation. To attempt to besmirch the reputation of the ODNR is beneath contempt.

The citizens of Ohio should be proud to have one of the premier Departments of Natural Resources in the nation.

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Philip Brutz on September 13, 2013 at 1:21am

How is this article a smear?  It shows that the ODNR is doing their job.  I agree with you that the ODNR is one of the best in the country.

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by TreeMom on September 13, 2013 at 5:12am

I agree. I think the article is balanced, just facts.

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by catt on September 13, 2013 at 10:10am

Mark....I don't find this article a smear to the ODNR....just passing  information on to the members of the site. The ODNR did their job, as they should have. We need the ODNR watching over all these companies......and I am sure the O&G companies are doing everything they can to keep things in compliance with the ODNR. These companies don't want anything to happen and I'm sure they will take every precaution to see that it is taken care of in the future.

 

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by tater on September 13, 2013 at 10:35am

ALL FINES NEED 1 MORE 0 ON THEM

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by searcherone on September 13, 2013 at 12:30pm

Mark

As newspaper articles go I find this one to be balanced and informative with no disrespect to ODNR.

As I stated before I continue to wonder if this is what caused Gulfport to miss their production numbers. Also I wonder if this problem stems from an engineering design flaw or faulty construction of the design.  I would lean toward the design flaw since it happened at seven sites.  Any engineer want to offer some thoughts.

• ▶ Reply