A US federal court jury ended a 14-day trial by awarding $US4.24 million ($A5.61 million) in damages to two couples – Nolen Scott Ely and his wife Monica-Marta Ely, and Raymond and Victoria Hubert who pursued the case for six years after rejecting a settlement offer in 2012 – for contaminating their well water.

Yet a shadow still hangs over their case, as presiding Judge Martin Carlson precluded their lawyer, Leslie Lewis, from presenting more than 300 exhibits as she did not provide them to the defence until a few weeks before the trial.

Carlson had to interrupt Lewis three times during her closing argument for making improper statements referencing excluded evidence and making comments that Houston-based Cabot Oil & Gas Corporation was “hiding something”, which he said had unfairly influenced the jury against the oiler.

Cabot will now attempt to have the case thrown out.

Its lawyer questioned Lewis’ conduct, which she defended saying: “My job as an attorney and advocate for these folks is to push the envelope.”

Cabot spokesman George Stark said the oiler was surprised at the jury’s verdict “given the lack of evidence provided by plaintiffs in support of their nuisance claim”

“The verdict disregards overwhelming scientific and factual evidence that Cabot acted as a prudent operator in conducting its operations,” he said.

“Cabot will be filing motions with the court to set the verdict aside based upon lack of evidence as well as conduct of plaintiff’s counsel calculated to deprive Cabot of a fair trial.”

Gasland gestation

The Independent Petroleum Association of America believes the case being brought to federal court in the first place had more to do with the state’s “presumption of liability” law which assumes a company is accountable for any contamination within 1000 feet of a drilling site that develops within six months of drilling.

In 2011, the state Department of Environmental Protection investigated whether oil and gas activity was responsible in allegations of groundwater impacts, determining that Cabot had fulfilled its obligations under a consent decree.

Upon a request from Gasland director Josh Fox, the US Environmental Protection Agency stepped in late 2011 to investigate and agreed that the well water posed no immediate health threats.

“The data does not indicate that the well water presents an immediate health threat to users,” the EPA said in an email to Dimock residents in December 2011.

Lewis said in her opening statement that …“this is not a case about toxic materials ending up in the water. We do not have proof of that. We don’t have proof of that. This is not about fraccing fluid appearing in the water. Hydraulic fracturing materials, we don’t have proof of that”

NT fracas

Yet Australian activist group Lock the Gate says the latest decision in Dimock had “proven wrong” the claims by the Australian Petroleum Production and Exploration Association and oilers that fraccing did not cause water contamination.

Activists had referred the case to local media as a pressure point for NT’s burgeoning industry which could be stopped in its tracks if Labor wins the August 27 election and follows through in its threat to impose a moratorium on hydraulic fracturing.

Empire Energy Group executive chairman Bruce McLeod told NT ABC Country Hour before the decision that the Dimock case would prove there was no risk from fraccing, and that the water contamination reports that led to the New York State’s decision to ban the practice were “rubbish”

Empire has a joint venture with US fraccer American Energy Partners in the NT and has leases in New York State.

LTG cited farmer Nick Kostowski, who has run the Nenan Station about 150km from Katherine for 15 years and has been in the cattle industry for 35 years, as voicing concerns over fraccing.

He said all Nenan’s water for cattle, hay production and household use came from an underground aquifer, and it would become “unviable” as a cattle and hay producing property if it were to lose its underground water supply.

“The exploration companies have to be totally upfront with what happens when fracking goes wrong,” said Kostowski, who has also written to the federal Senate Inquiry on Unconventional Gas.

LTG also quoted Katherine resident Charmaine Roth as saying the US decision “flies in the face of what the Territory oil and gas companies and the NT Government are telling us”

"Just this week we had Ron Kelly from Department of Mines and Energy in Katherine trying to convince stakeholders that fraccing does not contaminate water,” she said.

"It’s a bit of a slap in the face to realise our own government is trying to sell us misleading information to prop up a risky onshore gas industry.

"Now we know that not only do gas fraccing companies contaminate the water supply of families, but they lie about it and try and discredit the scientists that state the facts.”

APPEA response

APPEA said the Pennsylvania jury’s decision to award damages against Cabot “is not a verdict against hydraulic fracturing, as claimed by some activists”

“All parties involved in the Dimock trial have admitted that there was no evidence that chemicals or fluids used to fracture wells had contaminated local water supplies,” APPEA said in a statement.

“At issue was a claim that methane, or natural gas, had migrated into local water wells. According to the jury, this had created a ‘nuisance’ that had denied the plaintiffs the full enjoyment of their properties.”

APPEA pointed out that the US EPA had tested local water supplies numerous times and found there was no threat to human health. It reported that contaminants found in some wells were naturally occurring and treatable.

“The reaction by anti-gas activists has been predictable; but the reality is there have been no proven cases of groundwater contamination directly linked to hydraulic fracturing anywhere,” the lobby group said.