An underground plume of toxic hydrocarbons from an oil spill north of the Colorado River near Parachute has been spreading for 10 days, threatening to contaminate spring runoff.

Vacuum trucks have sucked up more than 60,000 gallons, but an unknown amount remains in the ground by Parachute Creek.

The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency on Monday was in the process of formally ordering the Williams energy company — which runs a gas-processing plant on the creek — to do all in its power to protect surface water. State regulators who on Friday ordered the same now are preparing to issue Williams a “Notice of Alleged Violation” and demand a long-term cleanup plan.

A cattleman who runs a herd along the creek said such spills are common and often remain secret. State records show the oil-and-gas industry causes hundreds of toxic spills each year and that water often is contaminated.

Industry response crews have dug two interceptor trenches at the scene, north of Parachute, and found that spilled material has mixed into shallow groundwater.

No cause was reported. No source of the spill has been identified, Williams spokeswoman Donna Gray said. Chemicals present in the plume were not revealed.

“Everyone wants to know that,” Gray said. “There is free-flowing hydrocarbon underground. It’s coming from something. There’s pipes underground. There’s tanks in the ground. We really do not know yet.”

The second trench along Parachute Creek — between the creek and an earlier trench 60 feet from surface water — “was done with the consent and blessing of the Colorado Oil and Gas Conservation Commission to serve as a buffer,” she said. “We’ve been pulling fluid out of that.”

Williams also is sampling water and sending crews along creek banks every 30 minutes to scan for any oily sheen.

A problem characterized as contaminated soil was reported verbally by industry workers on March 8 to the COGCC, the state body charged with promoting and regulating the oil and gas industry.

A required written report from Williams, released Monday, says “hydroexcavation work was being done” in a pipeline corridor along the creek when workmen found the problem.

The vacuum trucks summoned by Williams had removed at least 60,648 gallons of hydrocarbon material and 5,418 gallons of oil, state spokesman Todd Hartman said.

An undetermined amount of material remained underground as the plume continued to expand. Williams officials estimated the plume is 200 feet long, 170 feet wide and 14 feet deep.

Containment booms were placed along the creek. “There continues to be no evidence of impact to Parachute Creek,” Hartman said.

It is among the worst of recent spills reported in a part of western Colorado traditionally known for fruit orchards and green pastures — now home to what are meant to be heavily regulated industrial facilities.

“I’ve had to accept it,” said cattleman Rick Bumgardner, whose 200 cows graze along Parachute Creek. His family homesteaded in the area. Over the past year, a leak from a storage tank and another from a gas compressor station affected his cattle operations, Bumgardner said.

“If I had my choice, I’d just as soon be someplace away from here, but I guess I couldn’t afford it,” he said.

Nobody notified him about this spill or the others, he said. Oil and gas companies “try to beat it back, hope nobody finds them. That’s the way they operate.”

In 2008, Colorado wildlife officials began sampling fish in Parachute Creek for contamination in response to concerns about the impact of oil and gas operations. State overseers allow drilling and production activities along most mountain waterways — a concern environment groups long have pointed to as a regulatory deficiency.

A recent review of state data by the Center for Western Priorities found that the oil and gas industry in Colorado often pollutes water. It found that more than 60 percent of the spills reported since January 2011 by five major operators (555 of the total 985 spills reported) occurred within 1,500 feet of surface water and that more than 30 percent occurred within 500 feet.

Construction crews were excavating in preparation for an expansion of Williams’ Parachute Creek Gas Plant, to add a cryogenic capability, when they discovered this plume.

State regulators did not respond to queries about oversight and inspections at the plant.

Parachute Mayor Judy Beasley and town officials planned to meet Tuesday with Williams environmental specialists. They’ve conveyed displeasure about not being informed soon enough.

A headgate used to divert creek water into a town reservoir has been closed. “We haven’t opened that up and obviously won’t until we have this figured out. We don’t want to have any contamination,” town administrator Bob Knight said.

About 1,083 people live in Parachute.

Irrigators also rely on the creek, which flows into the Colorado River.

The oil and gas industry is “responding kind of reactively right now,” Knight said.

“You put infrastructure in the ground, things like this can happen. Fortunately, there are containment protocols,” he said. “Is it worth it? If the Colorado River is totally polluted, I’d say no. There is no industrial activity that is worth polluting those waterways.”

Colorado Department of Public Health and Environment emergency officials were notified verbally last week, according to Williams’ report. No public health announcements have been made.



Bruce Finley: 303-954-1700, twitter.com/finleybruce or bfinley@denverpost.com