A state district judge has ruled that a Parker County couple lacks legal jurisdiction to sue Fort Worth-based Range Resources in a high-profile case involving methane contamination of the couple's water well at their home in the upscale Silverado subdivision in far south Parker County.
Judge Trey Loftin, of the 43rd State District Court in Weatherford, said in an order issued late Friday that Steve and Shyla Lipsky do not have legal standing for their pending $6.5 million lawsuit against Range in his court because the Texas Railroad Commission already determined last year that two Range natural gas wells drilled into the Barnett Shale were not responsible for contamination of the Lipskys' private water well.Loftin said the proper venue for challenging a March 22 Railroad Commission order is state district court in Austin. However, the deadline for appealing the commission order passed months ago, Range spokesman Matt Pitzarella said Saturday. The commission entered the order after reviewing testimony presented by expert witnesses before commission hearing examiners in January 2011.Lipsky, when contacted by the Star-Telegram on Saturday afternoon, said he declined to participate in the commission hearing in 2011 "because I didn't have a chance.""The gas companies own the Railroad Commission," Lipsky said in reference to Range and other natural gas producers.Lipsky said of Range, "They own the system ... they know they got away with it (water well contamination) and they're laughing about it. ... God help us all."Lipsky said he and his expert consultants did not have sufficient time to prepare for the January 2011 Railroad Commission hearing, which was hastily called after the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency had issued a headline-making Dec. 7, 2010, emergency order against Range, contending that two of its Barnett Shale gas wells "caused or contributed" to the methane contamination of the Lipskys' well and another nearby water well. Methane is the primary component of natural gas.A high-ranking EPA regional official, John Blevins, later backtracked somewhat, saying in a sworn deposition that the Range gas wells "may" have caused or contributed to the water wells' contamination.The three-member Railroad Commission, in its March order last year, exonerated Range and said it agreed with conclusions of commission hearing examiners and expert consultants hired by Range that the methane gas in the water wells likely was naturally occurring and came from the shallow Strawn geological formation, far above the Barnett Shale, which is more than a mile below the surface.Pitzarella, the Range spokesman, said in an e-mail Saturday that there are "countless examples" of methane occurring in fresh-water aquifers in Parker County prior to Barnett Shale drilling and that a neighbor of the Lipskys had "a six-foot flame" of gas coming from a water well being drilled on his property before Range ever began drilling in the area.Pitzarella said the commission, the chief regulator of the state oil and gas industry, held a "thorough" hearing, based on "facts and science" presented by expert witnesses, that "Mr. Lipsky refused to participate in."Loftin's order would dismiss the Lipskys' legal action against Range, unless the Lipskys decide to file an appeal to the 2nd Court of Appeals in Fort Worth and that court overturns Loftin's order. Lipsky declined Saturday to specifically say whether he would appeal. His attorneys could not be reached for comment.The Lipskys' attorneys have contended in previous court filings that the commission's March 22 order should have no impact on the couple's lawsuit against Range.The Lipskys contend in the lawsuit that their water well was infiltrated with methane as a result of Range improperly cementing and casing its gas wells, causing gas from geological formations above the Barnett Shale to seep into their water supply. Range denies that claim, contending the well construction was done properly.While Loftin's order would dismiss the Lipskys' action against Range, other elements of the litigation before the judge remain pending, including the Lipskys' claims against persons and entities involved in development of the Silverado subdivision and Range's counterclaim against the Lipskys and Alisa Rich, an environmental scientist who tested the water in the Lipskys' well and urged Steve Lipsky to contact the EPA, leading to issuance of the agency's emergency order.Range contends in its counterclaim that the Lipskys' contentions are false, have damaged the company's reputation and cost it millions of dollars in legal fees.Range has said from the outset that its gas wells did not cause the contamination. The company and the EPA are still battling in federal courts over the emergency order, with Range arguing in the U.S. 5th Circuit Court of Appeals in New Orleans that the order should be dismissed.Jack Z. Smith, 817-390-7724; Twitter: @startelegram
