All pipeline ROW contracts should be stern and many are, but in discussions with landowners, despite the stern language in the contract some jobs after the pipeline is installed the land looks like crap with big errosive water runoff channels, ruts, poor seeding  and a general lacking of engineering measures on slopes and where water running converges.  So despite the contract language, there seems to be some companies, or operators that after they leave it just looks like a bad job.  Despite the contract language it may be difficult in getting the problems fixed.  Problems that should not have occurred, and then not proactively corrected.  There  needs to be a general discussion as to real people's people's experience so we can learn about which companies to watch out for so here it is.   If you've had a bad pipeline experience please lay it out here.  I am all for O&G development and production 100 percent, but that does not mean landowners should accept crap jobs.  Or if you had a good experience feel free to assign kudos here.

Views: 838

Reply to This

Replies to This Discussion

also report on GOOD jobs, too. thanks. 

Yep that the point here.  Who are the operators that don't pay attention to details ensuring good engineering controls  are identified and implemented, and who are the ones that do.  Because aside from the the ROW agreement it comes down good work.  I've seen good ROW agreements but the work still really crappy, and the crappy work not self corrected by the O&G company, this forcing the hand of the landowners.  No land owner wants that.  And then who are the good operators.  Maybe the good operators hire better excavators and use better engineering firms.  That's something landowners never conceptualize no matter how good the contract seems.  There seems to be far bigger issues and landowner discontent with pipeline ROWS than well pads, for sure.

Mark West handled the contract for my parents. The work was sub-contracted out to Frontier Environmental. Nice guys, always willing to chat, especially for answering questions in the field. That said, they had major challenges against them: it was in the spring ('17) and we had something like the 2nd wettest on record, and the good ol' Guernsey Cty. clay (the property is the lowest around the valley here).

Anyone that's played in the dirt knows you can't landscape wet dirt, and wet clay is worse. They did their best (I guess) but they were out of here before we knew what happened as Mark West signed off on it. Include in this the state inspectors (another story on those guys....). To cut to the point, the lay of the hay fields they tore up was nowhere near original. Standing water from low spots and just an overall mess. One area, the ROW was 18" LOWER than the native soil bordering it. It took a year, but my complaining to Mark West got the VP of Ohio involved and they made Frontier come back out & re-work it until we were satisfied.

I must say, the work they did on three adjacent properties were very well done. Yes, the erosion control ditches on slopes are a pain, but required by law.

who is supposed to inspect the gathering line pipelines? State of Ohio ODNR or nobody?  some around that I've seen I cant imagine the state would have cleared if inspected.  I've seen slopes without any engineering controls.  I also have some crazy a$$ never seen before weeds growing in a hayfield they were supposed to replant as a hayfield. 

I think there are different inspectors: one for pipeline, one for land restoration -- which the latter falls to EPA. About the only thing I heard over & over from the EPA guy was "the land should rebound". That was in response to the 'work area' where the wood mats were put down. The ground was so compacted it held water where it never had before.

As for what you mention... I've heard stories, but not seen it for myself. I can also attest to the new weeds in our hay fields.


© 2023   Created by Keith Mauck (Site Publisher).   Powered by

Badges  |  Report an Issue  |  Terms of Service