Tag Archives: pipeline

Oil Pipeline Ruptures – Landowners Evacuate

21 Friday Jul 2017

Posted by in Pipelines, Property Rights, texas condemnation, texas condemnation lawyer, texas eminent domain, Texas Eminent Domain Attorney, Texas Eminent Domain Lawyer, Texas Railroad Commission, Uncategorized

≈ Leave a comment

Tags

, , , , , , , , , , , , , ,

The Longhorn pipeline, a crude oil pipeline operated by Magellan Midstream Partners (“Magellan”), ruptured approximately 4 miles southwest of Bastrop, Texas on July 13, 2017. The pipeline transports crude oil from Crane, Texas to Houston, Texas, a distance of roughly 500 miles. A contractor was performing maintenance on the pipeline, which was operating when it ruptured. As a result, an estimated 1,200 barrels (50,400 gallons) of crude oil spilled into the surrounding area.

Residents within a 1-mile radius of the rupture were asked to evacuate while residents within a 2-mile radius were given the option to either evacuate or take shelter in their homes. FM 520, the nearby thoroughfare, was shut down in both directions.

When it ruptured, the Longhorn pipeline was running at or near its full capacity. The Longhorn pipeline is a large capacity pipeline capable of transporting upwards of 200,000 barrels of crude oil per day. A prolonged shutdown could potentially mean that suppliers would have to look elsewhere to get their crude oil transported to the Gulf Coast.

This is not the first spill involving a Magellan operated pipeline. In January, a pipeline transporting diesel fuel spilled roughly 45,000 gallons of diesel in Northern Iowa.

A significant portion of property takings in Texas are the result of oil and gas pipeline projects. Incidents such as this serve as a reminder that even after condemnation proceedings have concluded, pipelines can still carry risks and create health and safety concerns. Due to the hazardous nature of the products pipelines transport, the potential for accidents poses an enduring threat to crops, livestock, water supplies, and property values. Landowners would do well to keep these considerations in mind when approached by oil and gas companies seeking to obtain an easement across their land.

Written by Graham Taylor

Legislature Bails Out Railroad Commission- Helps Landowners

07 Friday Jul 2017

Posted by in Pipelines, texas condemnation, texas eminent domain, Texas Eminent Domain Attorney, Texas Eminent Domain Lawyer, Texas Railroad Commission, Uncategorized

≈ Leave a comment

Tags

, , , , , , , , , , , , ,

The Texas Railroad Commission (“TRC”), an agency that has suffered financial difficulties due to budget cuts and reduced revenues, recently received a budget increase of 46 percent ($79.6 million) in the recently ended legislative session. These budgetary increases will hopefully allow the TRC to improve upon their ability to be an effective resource for landowners and make pipeline data readily available to the everyday Texan. Pipeline construction often requires pipeline companies to use the power of eminent domain to condemn property, commonly referred to as a “taking.” Public access to information collected by the TRC is vital to keeping landowners aware of activities that could affect their property.

The budget increase follows a year that saw monthly budget cuts of over a million dollars, a hiring freeze, and the postponing of desperately needed technological updates. In light of these financial difficulties, the TRC was forced to limit their operations to two core functions, the permitting and inspection of wells. Another one of the TRC’s functions is the issuance of T-4 permits which grants pipeline constructors the common carrier status required to exercise the power of eminent domain. A vital component of fulfilling this function is to maintain a public database of pipeline easements in the State of Texas.

The increased funding is intended, in part, to improve programs for well plugging, oil field clean up, and pipeline safety by financing the hiring of additional staff. The TRC’s staff is capped at 827 employees. Presently, the TRC is roughly 150 employees short of that maximum number. Additionally, the TRC was granted one-time authorization to retain nearly $40 million in revenue collected through its administration of the Natural Gas Utility Pipeline Tax. Roughly $27.6 million of that money will also be used to hire additional employees. The remainder will be used to provide salary increases.

An additional purpose of the budget increase is to continue, and hopefully expedite, the drawn-out process of updating the TRC’s computers and digitizing decades of oil and gas records which include pipelines constructed with and without the power of eminent-domain in the State.

In addition to updating its computer systems and digitizing historical records, the TRC provides an interactive map, accessible to the public, that tracks existing and operational pipelines throughout the State. The data represented by the interactive map may not always be current. This ambiguity diminishes the capacity of Texans to appreciate the scope of pipeline activity and its effect on their lives and property. One day, perhaps, the TRC will expand the functionality of its interactive map to include planned pipelines. This would allow landowners to determine whether a project under development will impact their property.

Landowners, under both the U.S. and Texas Constitutions, are entitled to just compensation when their land is taken. These database improvements can help begin to level the playing field between landowners and powerful oil and gas interests by keeping landowners current on projects that could impact their property rights.

– Co-Authored by Graham Taylor and Justin Hodge

The Fight Continues for Big Bend Landowners Facing Eminent Domain

17 Friday Jun 2016

Posted by in Pipelines, Uncategorized

≈ Leave a comment

Tags

, , , , ,

Despite a handful of recent victories, regional landowners continue to face an uphill battle.

Please click here to read the Texas Observer’s coverage of this issue.

Transfer of Pipeline Easements Cannot Be For Private Use

10 Friday Jun 2016

Posted by in Pipelines, texas condemnation, texas eminent domain, Uncategorized

≈ Leave a comment

Tags

, , , , , , , , , , ,

In Allen v. Enbridge G & P, L.P., Enbridge G & P brought condemnation action against the Allens for the purpose of securing two easements, one permanent and one temporary, from the landowners. Enbridge required the easements for the installation and maintenance of a pipeline which would carry natural gas products. A permanent easement of 50 feet in width would contain the pipeline and a 25-foot easement would be used as a temporary workspace. At the special commissioners’ hearing, Enbridge was awarded the easements. Mr. and Mrs. Allen filed objections, and the proceeding was brought to the trial court.

On appeal, Mr. and Mrs. Allen brought two issues, the second of which concerned the ability of the easement holder both to maintain the benefits and burdens of the Plaintiff and Defendants, and allow an assignee to do likewise. Paragraph X of Enbridge’s Second Amended Petition contained the following:

“The benefits and burdens of this Permanent Easement shall be binding upon and shall ensure to the benefit of Plaintiff and Defendants, and to their respective successors and assigns.”

Mr. and Mrs. Allen argued that this language allowed Enbridge to assign the property for private use, rather than strictly public use, and was therefore in violation of the constitutional prohibition against private use takings. The Tyler Court of Appeals found that though “certain easements may be assigned to a third party, that third party’s use cannot exceed the rights expressly conveyed to the original easement holder.” Cantu v. Cent. Power & Light co. It also found that “companies possessing the right to condemn private property for a public use cannot do what they please with the land condemned, but only what is reasonably necessary to carry out the purpose for which the land is taken,” and that “anything beyond this is not the taking of private property for public use, but the taking of private property for private use.” Aycock v. Houston Lighting and Power Co.

Because the language in the Second Amended Petition permitted Enbridge to assign the easement without restriction, the Court of Appeals modified the trial court’s final judgment by restricting the easement’s assignment only to an assignee that qualifies as a transporter of natural gas as defined in Texas Utilities Code, Section 121.001(a).”

In summary, landowners should diligently look at the language of the pipeline company’s proposed easement to make sure it cannot be transferred for a private benefit.

To view the case, click here.

Shell’s Ho-Ho Pipeline Ruptures in Jefferson County, Texas

11 Tuesday Mar 2014

Posted by in Pipelines, Property Rights, texas condemnation, texas eminent domain

≈ Leave a comment

Tags

, , , , , , , , , , ,

20140310-210634.jpg

A construction crew “accidentally pierced” Shell’s pipeline on Thursday afternoon, resulting in a 364 barrel oil spill on a property in Port Neches, Texas near the intersection of Highway 136 and Interstate 366 (about 100 miles east of Houston). Emergency crews were deployed to the scene and are using absorbent booms to contain the oil. The scale of environmental damage to the property is not immediately known.

The Houma-to-Houston line transports 360,000-barrels-per-day from Port Neches and terminates in Houma, Louisiana. Last year, Shell completed a reversal of the pipeline’s flows. It now carries oil from Texas to Houma. Shell discovered another leak near one of the pipeline’s pumping stations in Channelview, Texas, in February.

These types of risks must be considered when property is condemned for a pipeline. As the Texas Supreme Court explained in Zwahr, eminent domain is the property owner’s one-and-only chance to be made “whole.”

Black Friday: Missouri Gas Pipeline Explosion

30 Saturday Nov 2013

Posted by in Uncategorized

≈ Leave a comment

Tags

, , , , , , , ,

A gas pipeline in western Missouri exploded Friday morning and sent a 300 foot high fireball into the air. The glow from the burning Panhandle Eastern Pipeline could be seen for miles and three homes within a half-mile of the blast were evacuated. The blaze took more than two hours to extinguish and by mid-morning on Friday the residents had been allowed back into their homes. according to Fox. A “smoldering moon-like crater” could be seen at the site of the explosion.

The flames also destroyed seven buildings on a nearby farm. One commenter said the fire “lit up the whole area like it was daytime.” Other residents reported their homes were shaking.
The explosion can be seen here courtesy of YouTube user Jason Knox:

This is not the first time an explosion has occurred on this pipeline. According to the Pipeline and Hazardous Materials Safety Administration, the same line ruptured on August 25, 2008, causing an explosion and a 7-feet deep crater, about 50 feet wide. The accident caused about $1 million in damage.

Tesoro Logistics Responsible for Recent Oil Spill, Landowner to Receive Compensation for Damages

24 Thursday Oct 2013

Posted by in JMEH Law News, Pipelines, Politics, Property Rights, Uncategorized

≈ Leave a comment

Tags

, , , , , , , , , , , , , ,

A Texas-based oil company discovered a leak in one of its pipelines in North Dakota after a local farmer reported it to ND officials on Sept. 29, but the oil company did not spill this news until 11 days after discovering the pipeline rupture that released an estimated more-than 20,000 barrels of crude oil.

State officials initially reported a 750-barrel spill that the company in question, Tesoro Logistics LP, did not publicize because of the smaller initial estimate and what it considered to be a lack of environmental damage.

Kris Roberts, an environmental geologist with the North Dakota Health Department, was quoted in a New York Times article stating that Tesoro officials reported the spill to the state within 24 hours of first discovery and that the state does not have to release information of all oil spills publicly.

While Tesoro responded to the spill promptly, the cleanup process could take a couple of years and will cost an estimated $4 million. The local wheat farmer, Steve Jensen, who notified the State Department of Health of the oil spill after seeing crude oil coating the wheels of his combine, will also receive compensation for damages to his field that could keep his wheat crops out for a couple of years.  He and Tesoro are negotiating a settlement in regards to this matter.

The spill seems to have originated from a hole — about a quarter-inch in diameter — in a segment of the 20-year-old pipeline originally built by BP in 1993 but purchased by Tesoro in 2001, according to Reuters. The pipeline runs 35 miles within the state.

Many people have criticized Tesoro for not detecting the spill of about 20,600 gallons over 7.3 acres, or the equivalent of seven football fields according to the NYT, and the spill comes during an oil boom for the state following its 1951 discovery of oil. This spill surely will not help mitigate those concerned about the much larger Keystone XL pipeline expansion that will cross international borders and include 1,700 new miles of pipeline if approved. The Keystone Pipeline did not see its day in Congress during the debt-ceiling debates, and a decision on its expansion will likely not come until 2014.

TransCanada, the company heading the Keystone project, Tesoro Corp. and other pipeline owners cannot afford to slack on detecting leaks under the current political climate. These companies must employ vigilance and preemptive measures to mitigate environmental concerns and to protect landowners like Jensen whose income depends on the land surrounding oil pipelines.

Coauthored by Justin Hodge and Ayla Syed.

Note: Tesoro Logistics LP is a partnership formed by Tesoro Corp. 

To read more about the spill, please click here.

Pipeline May Be Key to Unlocking Next Government Shutdown

02 Wednesday Oct 2013

Posted by in Uncategorized

≈ Leave a comment

Tags

, , , , , , , , , , , , , ,

Photo by Anne Sherwood for The New York Times. Dawson County Montana–one of the areas through which the proposed Keystone Pipeline XL would pass if approved.

The Keystone Pipeline XL may be a key to unlocking the next cement door put up by the GOP to meeting fiscal deadlines, the New York Times reported. The Republican Party will likely seek approval of the pipeline in the discussion to raise the national debt ceiling, which has an Oct.-17 deadline, rather than in debates pertaining to the missed Oct. 1 budget deadline that defunded the U.S. government and brought the government into its second day of the shutdown. Tying the pipeline to the debt ceiling could have a significant impact on landowners’ rights as TransCanada, the pipeline builders, try to attain land for the project, which will bring into question the eminent domain rights of the company as a “public” utility as well as any resulting condemnation claims.

House of Representative member Lee Terry (R-Nebraska) said to the NYT that the Republicans feel the debt ceiling debate may be their “only option” in seeing the pipeline come to fruition, and his opinion may not be far from the truth considering President Obama’s more aggressive approach toward preventing climate change in his second term. The pipeline crosses an international border and needs approval from the Obama administration in order to continue, and the President has ordered an internal review to consider the potential environmental risks the Keystone Pipeline XL may impose. A decision on the pipeline from the President without interference from Congress could come in early 2014, but a Republican-led, last-ditch effort to guarantee the pipeline’s completion may change that timeline.

President Obama stated that he has little patience for any provisions on the upcoming debt ceiling bill, and considering the lack of bipartisanship that has become a trademark of about the last 4 years of U.S. politics, another looming budget battle about the national debt ceiling, and, therefore, the Keystone Pipeline, likely awaits the Congress currently tied up on approving a national budget.

This battle will most likely not carry the same momentum as the current budget debates simply because it follows the budget deadline that resulted in defunding the U.S. government, a move not well received or likely to be repeated within the same term. But, nothing is certain, especially the future of the Keystone Pipeline XL.

Supporters of the pipeline argue that it would help decrease the United States’ dependency on the Middle East for oil and create more jobs within the nation, while opponents fear the carbon emissions that would result from such a large build.

The Center for Biological Diversity, a non-government organization that often lobbies for greater environmental protection for endangered species, recently released a study about the potential damage the pipeline will cause on habitats it crosses, according to Al Jazeera America on Sept. 29. Al Jazeera America also reported that the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change, sponsored by the United Nations, released a report linking global warming to “human carbon dioxide output from fossil fuels, including carbon-rich tar sands oil like that which the Keystone pipeline is designed to transport.”

The Pew Research Center reported that about two-thirds of Americans support the pipeline, but the same margin of Americans also opposes great carbon emissions. Waiting for the Obama administration’s report on the Keystone Pipeline XL could lead to a well-informed decision that considers all different arguments for and against the pipeline, but forcibly linking that decision to the debt ceiling may rush an important decision on an issue that is clearly more grey than black or white.

The decision to link the pipeline to the Oct. 17 deadline might change considering the potential political ramifications that will result from the current government’s continued failure to pass a budget — a move not boding well for Republicans in office as their constituents begin to feel the effects of a government shutdown domestically and abroad.

Coauthored by Justin Hodge and Ayla Syed.

How the 2012 Presidential Election Can Affect You, the Landowner

09 Friday Nov 2012

Posted by in Politics, Property Rights

≈ 1 Comment

Tags

, , , , , , , , , , , ,

With America’s new president decided, both sides of the energy argument speculate victories. Some oil and gas enthusiasts think President Obama is likely to pass TransCanada’s Keystone XL Pipeline in his second term now that the company has assured that the pipeline will not pass through a sensitive aquifer in Nebraska. At the same time, environmentalists are looking forward to the President’s motions towards clean energy, absent the use of fossil fuels. Whether President Obama will favor one side over the other is left to be revealed when Congress convenes in early January, but in the meantime, we do know the President plans on employing an “all of the above” strategy to solve the energy issue. This means no energy source is likely to be abandoned completely. This also means landowners will need to be far more wary when it comes to their property rights. Whether it is a wind farm or a pipeline, or anything in between, you have the right to just compensation for your land if a private company or the government decides to condemn it. Eminent domain laws were not set in place to favor one side over the other. Know your rights and how to fight back.

To read more about how the 2012 election will affect eminent domain, visit here.

Arrests, some heated rhetoric mark East Texas pipeline protests.

16 Tuesday Oct 2012

Posted by in Pipelines

≈ Leave a comment

Tags

, , ,

How are private property rights being protected? The pipeline clearly damages the property, but the pipeline company does its best to avoid paying damages by offering very little to the property owners impacted by the line. The property owners have to deal with little to no compensation, protesters on their property, and damaging construction activities. Texas eminent domain law needs to be changed to provide compensation for the problems caused by the line.