"If the contamination charge sticks, wouldn't that set a...

"If the contamination charge sticks, wouldn't that set a precedent for the CSG companies to be charged for their recent contamination issues? Especially given their readings were higher than CXY's."

Yes, and they audaciously admit it. 100ppb no problem at all. The Cougar contamination charge is all about 2ppb if I recall it correctly. (DERM accepts the 84ppb reading was a test lab error.)

Anyway see for yourselves at http://origintogether.com/your-questions/faqs/

**************************************

Why were traces of BTEX found?

The traces were found as part of Australia Pacific LNG?s routine testing, from samples of fluids from hydraulic fractured exploration wells. However, Australia Pacific LNG does not use BTEX in its fracture fluids and the supplier has confirmed that the fluids do not contain BTEX.

Comprehensive testing is currently underway, aimed at determining the source of the BTEX.

BTEX (benzene, toluene, ethyl benzene, xylene) is present in a range of oil-based products, including lubricating oils, diesel and petrol.
Can BTEX chemicals cause health problems?

In a concentrated form, the chemicals are hazardous. Material Safety Data Sheets are available to refer to when handling the chemicals. The traces of benzene were very low ? ranges from 1 part per billion to 100 ppb at the maximum level, equivalent to a half a cup in an Olympic size swimming pool.