Yellowstone River oil spill: Exxon claims pipeline buried far below

Last Friday night, when an oil pipeline buried below the Yellowstone River burst, the river was flooded with an estimated 42,000 gallons of oil. This was the exact situation federal regulators were trying to prevent when they questioned Exxon Mobil Corp. in December of last year, and were reassured by Exxon that the pipeline was buried deep enough to avoid accidental ruptures.

A survey by Exxon in December of the pipe’s depth was made, and the company claimed it was buried five to eight feet below the riverbed. Federal regulations require pipeline to buried at least four feet under riverbeds, and most pipelines are buried at about that depth, meeting the minimum requirements.

The cause of the spill is still under investigation, but many are speculating that the raging waters of the flooded river (due to melting snowpack from a snowy winter and heavy spring rains) caused serious erosion of the riverbed, exposing the pipeline to debris and damage. In May, when the river started rising, the pipeline was shut down amid concerns that it was at risk. Exxon reviewed their safety records and determined that the pipeline was safe. The pipeline was only shut down for one day. A month later, in a company email, the company claimed the pipeline was buried 12 feet under the riverbed, much more than the previously stated five to eight feet below. This week, when pressed by local officials and regulators, Exxon president Gary Pruessing was not able to say where that figure came from.

Exxon is coming under even more criticism, as documents with additional details on the spill are coming to light. Publicly, Exxon claimed it took “at most” 30 minutes to shut down the pipeline. Later, they said workers began the process of shutting down the pipeline only six minutes after the rupture began flooding the river with oil. But DOT records indicate otherwise; the pipeline was not fully shut down for 56 minutes–almost twice as long as the public statements claim. Montana Governor Brian Schweitzer said this week, “The best thing they could do at this point is be completely honest. It is clear that their veracity has not been 100 percent to this point.”

Unfortunately, it should also be no surprise that the oil spill has also affected a much larger area than was originally stated. The impact can be seen far beyond the 10-mile stretch that Exxon claimed was most affected, with confirmed reports of oil 80 miles downstream. The bulk of the spill is concentrated in the 25 mile stretch beyond the spill site, but transportation officials have spotted oil as far as 240 miles downstream.

The overall impacts of the spill to the environment are still being calculated. Federal regulators are hoping to prevent a spill like this again; before the pipeline can be restarted, Exxon must make a series of safety upgrades and improvements. Among them, reburying the pipeline at a depth of up to 25 to 30 feet beneath the riverbed. Exxon company spokesman Alan Jeffers says the company intends to comply with the requirements.

Read more about the spill in the Great Falls Tribune.

6 Responses to Yellowstone River oil spill: Exxon claims pipeline buried far below
  1. 7.8.11 Newswire
    July 8, 2011 | 10:27 AM

    [...] More on Yellowstone River Oil Spill [...]

  2. Kathleen Nemec
    July 8, 2011 | 10:31 AM

    I’m against from the very beginning and voted against it on a petitionsite.com I think this is a travisty. This sickens me to no end. 42,000 gallons of oil lost in the river that the wildlife and the rest of this eco system is now destroyed. All over damn greed! We need to do other things why do we allow corporations from other countries come and destroy our National Parks and their eco system. This is wrong absolutely wrong damn oil. We should all ride in a horse drawn carriage but no way we have to have our expensive cars that feed off of this crap.

  3. Adam
    July 8, 2011 | 10:55 AM

    Horse drawn carriages… that for one is absurd, but I agree you’d think that simply putting the pipe over the river would make more sense and make it less susceptible to changing water flow conditions. But it doesn’t surprise me that the quickest, cheapest solution was taken and now the company is lying. Bottom line corporate malfeasance in this country is a joke, even if people are killed the supervisors aren’t held accountable, the company just pays a fine and forgets about it.

  4. Ed
    July 8, 2011 | 12:03 PM

    Horse drawn carriages absurd?…really? Adam, I have no idea how old you are, but a very short 100 yrs or so ago the horse drawn carriage was the mainstay of transportation. The planet is a few BILLION years old and in just 100 years we have managed to make it very sick with our so called modern wonders.
    I wonder how many of the sheeple out there would choose a car over a horse drawn carriage if they had to drill and refine their own oil/fuel everyday versus conveniently driving to the corner for a fill-up.
    The planet should always come first before our conveniences, since without the planet, the rest doesn’t exist.

    • Doug
      July 8, 2011 | 3:56 PM

      Who is the problem here? The electric plug-in car was on the road and working over 170 years ago. Ed, look around you! Do you see electric plug-in cars? Know why? Because people like you don’t get it! Blah blah on the web and full of advice.
      ConocoPhillips and BP and Shell etc. are all the same puppets/mouthpieces for the international banksters. These are the people that stifle and obstruct the competition to keep their poisonous, polluting source of controlled wealth. Listen up now….if the likes of Rupert Murdoch didn’t kill the development of the electric plug-in car, we would only have 1/2 the world-wide pollution we now endure. In the early 1900′s there were more electric cars on the road in the US than internal combustion engines.
      Now look around you again. Do you see any plug-ins? Think Ed….is the answer horse drawn carriages? Or have you been duped so bad you can’t reason any more.

  5. Joseph Schwartz
    August 21, 2011 | 1:09 PM

    Horse and buggies a hundred years ago? yes, when people worked their own land or within walking distance. Watch the Waltons lately? I for one don’t want to go back there.

    Electric cars in the 1915′s? That’s when they had a top speed of 35 mph. I also don’t want to go back there. I’ll take my gas driven car and I would drill and refine my own gas if i could afford it (econimies of scale make it cheaper at the pump) Be reasonable. These accidents are terrible for their impact on the environment but it will recover. I am for more drilling in the US, especially ANWAR, where maybe tweo people visit a year. I have hiked in Eastern Kentucky amidst oil wells and they don’t make that big an impact. I would just like to see the salt water from the top of the well contained so it doesn’t kill all the plantlife downhill of the wellhead. Here is what I would like to do as soon as i can buy another car. Buy a diesel
    powered vehicle and run it on french fry oil from the local fast food establishments. How is that for recycling?

Leave a Reply

Wanting to leave an <em>phasis on your comment?

Trackback URL http://www.dailyhiker.com/news/yellowstone-river-oil-spill-exxon-claims-pipeline-buried-far-below/trackback/