New website provides guidance on Marcellus Shale development
live.psu.edu/story/59159#nw69
Friday, April 13, 2012
The 'Marcellus Shale Electronic Field Guide' provides information about mitigating landscape changes as a result of natural-gas development, such as the well-pad construction pictured here.
UNIVERSITY PARK, Pa. — A new website developed by Penn State’s College of Agricultural Sciences and Penn State Extension offers assistance in land management at all stages of shale-gas infrastructure development.
The “Marcellus Shale Electronic Field Guide” is an unbiased manual aimed at presenting the best possible options in Marcellus Shale development for Pennsylvania’s future.
“The guide provides a comprehensive overview of how landscapes change during shale-gas development and offers ways throughout the process to minimize adverse effects while maximizing long-term site restoration success,” said Patrick Drohan, assistant professor of pedology and one of the website’s lead authors.
The guide’s sections reflect the questions asked most frequently by landowners and managers and by gas-industry employees.
The field guide introduces ecological concepts relevant to shale-gas development, including habitat fragmentation and restoration and basic wildlife science. It includes sections on predevelopment issues, such as effects of shale-gas development on agriculture and forestland, control of site activity, soil erosion and compaction, and planning for spills, accidents and invasive species control.
Restoration of shale-gas development sites is explored through pages on setting goals for restoration, landscape reconstruction, revegetation options, and restoring or creating wildlife habitat. The site includes detailed analyses of important wildlife species in Pennsylvania: wild turkey, ruffed grouse and white-tailed deer, with more featured species to come.
Landowners looking for general guidance on leasing provisions may benefit from sample leases and a section on best management practices.
The field guide also includes an image gallery and a public forum in which registered users can ask questions and receive feedback from those with on-the-ground experience.
“Exploration and development of natural gas within the Marcellus Shale formation is occurring at an accelerating rate across much of Pennsylvania and may produce large-scale ecological change,” said Margaret Brittingham, professor of wildlife resources and website co-author.
“There is a critical need among public and private landowners for information on how to develop drilling sites and their associated infrastructure so as to minimize ecological damage and allow restoration of sites to predrilling conditions,” she said. “We hope this website helps to fill that need.”
The website is based on work supported by the Heinz Endowments and was designed by Penn State’s Center for Environmental Informatics. Any opinions, findings, conclusions or recommendations expressed in the field guide are those of the authors and do not necessarily reflect the view of the sponsor.
The website, which is also accessible from smart phones and similar devices, can be viewed at http://marcellusfieldguide.org/index.php
Drilling law hurts health, docs say
thetimes-tribune.com/news/gas-drilling/drilling-law-hurts-health-docs-say-1.1298897#axzz1rpg4bvIU
Published: April 12, 2012
PITTSBURGH – Public health advocates and doctors on the front lines of Pennsylvania’s natural-gas-drilling boom are attacking the state’s new Marcellus Shale law, likening one of its provisions to a gag order and complaining that vital research money into health effects was stripped at the last minute.
Doctors say they don’t know what to tell patients who suspect their ailments are related to nearby gas industry activity because of a lack of research on whether the drilling of thousands of new wells – many near houses and drinking-water supplies – has made some people sick.
Yet when legislative leaders and the governor’s office negotiated the most sweeping update of the state’s oil and gas law in a quarter century, they stripped $2 million annually that included a statewide health registry to track respiratory problems, skin conditions, stomach ailments and other illnesses potentially related to gas drilling.
Just last week, the Department of Health refused to give The Associated Press copies of its responses to people who complain that drilling had affected their health. That lack of transparency – justified in the name of protecting private medical information – means the public has no way of knowing even how many complaints there are or how many are valid.
Studies are urgently needed to determine if any of the drilling has affected human health, said Dr. Poune Saberi, a University of Pennsylvania physician and public health expert.
“We don’t really have a lot of time,” said Saberi, who said she’s talked to about 30 people around Pennsylvania over the past 18 months who blame their ailments on gas drilling.
Working out of public view, legislative negotiators also inserted a requirement that doctors sign a confidentiality agreement in return for access to proprietary information on chemicals used in the hydraulic fracturing, or fracking, process.
Read more
EPA: Water quality OK at 20 wells in Pa. gas town
www.businessweek.com/ap/2012-04/D9TVLHPG0.htm
DIMOCK, Pa.
Testing at 20 more water wells in a northeastern Pennsylvania community at the center of a debate over the safety of natural gas drilling in the Marcellus Shale shows no dangerous levels of contamination, according to a report issued Friday by the Environmental Protection Agency.
The EPA had already tested 11 wells in Dimock, showing the presence of sodium, methane, chromium or bacteria in six of the wells before the results of the latest round of testing.
Three of the newly-tested wells showed methane while one showed barium well above the EPA’s maximum level, but a treatment system installed in the well is removing the substance, an EPA spokesman said.
Featured in the documentary “Gasland,” the Susquehanna County village of Dimock has been at the center of a fierce debate over drilling, in particular the process of hydraulic fracturing, or fracking. The process involves injecting a mixture of water and chemicals deep underground to free trapped natural gas so it can be brought to the surface.
State environmental regulators previously determined that Houston-based Cabot Oil & Gas Corp. contaminated the aquifer underneath homes along Carter Road in Dimock with explosive levels of methane gas, although they later determined the company had met its obligation to provide safe drinking water to residents.
The EPA is still providing drinking water to three homes where prior tests showed contamination. A second round of tests is under way, regulators said.
A group of Dimock residents suing Cabot assert their water is also polluted with drilling chemicals, while others say that the water is clean and the plaintiffs are exaggerating problems with their wells to help their lawsuit.
A Cabot spokesman said in a statement Friday that the “data confirms the earlier EPA finding that levels of contaminants found do not possess a threat to human health and the environment.”
“Importantly, the EPA again did not indicate that those contaminants that were detected bore any relationship to oil and gas development in the Dimock area, particularly given the fact that any contaminants are more likely indicative of naturally-occurring background levels or other unrelated activities,” the statement said.
Goddard Forum to examine oil, gas development impacts on forests
live.psu.edu/story/58780#nw69
Thursday, March 29, 2012
The conference, which focuses on protecting forests, will feature more than 30 speakers.
UNIVERSITY PARK, Pa. — Penn State’s 2012 Goddard Forum, “Oil and Gas Development Impacts on Forested Ecosystems: Research and Management Challenges,” will bring together scientists, managers, conservation organizations and industry representatives working with oil and gas development to share research results and management strategies.
The conference, to be held April 9-10 at the Penn Stater Conference Center Hotel, is sponsored by the School of Forest Resources in the College of Agricultural Sciences. The U.S. Forest Service’s Northern Research Station, headquartered in Newtown Square, Pa., is a co-sponsor of the event.
“During this two-day meeting, we will have a diversity of invited and offered presentations focused specifically on impacts on and adaptive management strategies for forested ecosystems,” said Jim Grace, Maurice K. Goddard Chair in Forestry and Environmental Resource Conservation.
“The pertinent questions revolve around how we can manage gas-development activities in a manner that preserves our environmental quality of life and deals with our social needs, while providing economic benefits to our citizens and bolstering our supply of clean domestic energy.”
Grace, who served as director of the Bureau of Forestry in the Pennsylvania Department of Conservation and Natural Resources from 1994 to 2007, noted that conference presentations by both managers and scientists will explore the full range of forest issues.
“They will discuss landscape modification, water, air, habitat, roads, timber supply, invasive species, noise, landscape restoration, management and monitoring strategies, and other topics focused on forests,” he said. “Sessions will cover public as well as industrial and other private forests.”
More than 30 conference speakers will represent academia, state and federal government, industry, and environmental and conservation organizations. Additional information, including a complete list of speakers and presentations, is available on the 2012 Goddard Forum website at http://psu.ag/wJUONr.
For information about conference accommodations, meals and registration, contact the Office of Conferences and Short Courses toll-free at 877-778-2937 or at csco@psu.edu via email.
Study: ’Fracking’ may increase air pollution health risks
www.timesleader.com/stories/Study-Fracking-may-increase-air-pollution-health-risks-,129383
By Neela Banerjee, Los Angeles Times
Air pollution caused by hydraulic fracturing, a controversial oil and gas drilling method, may contribute to “acute and chronic health problems for those living near natural gas drilling sites,” according to a new study from the Colorado School of Public Health.
The study, based on three years of monitoring at Colorado sites, found a number of “potentially toxic petroleum hydrocarbons in the air near the wells including benzene, ethylbenzene, toluene and xylene.” The Environmental Protection Agency has identified benzene as a known carcinogen.
Soon to be published in an upcoming edition of Science of the Total Environment, the report said that those living within a half-mile of a natural gas drilling site faced greater health risks than those who live farther away. Colorado allows companies to drill for natural gas within 150 feet of homes.
Hydraulic fracturing, or fracking, involves injecting great volumes of water and sand laced with chemicals into shale formations to break apart the rock and unlock reservoirs of oil and gas. Its advocates say it carries minimal environmental risks and the chance of great economic rewards for companies and communities. Its critics have largely focused so far on fracking’s possible contamination of underground and surface water.
But when a well is fracked, it’s almost as if a small factory is rapidly erected at the drilling site, as machinery and tanks of chemicals and water are brought in. Studies have shown that air pollution at many of these sites is greater than in surrounding areas. Adhering to EPA standards, the researchers for this study used air toxics data collected in Garfield County from January 2008 to November 2010. A small rural community in Colorado, Garfield is poised to undergo a sharp increase in drilling activity.
The study pointed out that earlier research indicated that prolonged exposure to petroleum hydrocarbons in the air near refineries, oil spills and petrol stations pointed to “an increased risk of eye irritation and headaches, asthma symptoms, acute childhood leukemia, acute myelogenous leukemia, and multiple myeloma.”
“Our data show that it is important to include air pollution in the national dialogue on natural gas development that has focused largely on water exposures to hydraulic fracturing,” said Lisa McKenzie, Ph.D., M.P.H., lead author of the study and research associate at the Colorado School of Public Health.
The EPA is finalizing new rules to curtail air pollution at oil and gas drilling sites. A recent Bloomberg News poll suggested a majority of Americans would like to see tighter regulation of fracking.
For Pennsylvania’s Doctors, a Gag Order on Fracking Chemicals
www.theatlantic.com/health/archive/2012/03/for-pennsylvanias-doctors-a-gag-order-on-fracking-chemicals/255030/
By Climate Desk
Mar 27 2012
A new provision could forbid the state’s doctors from sharing information with patients exposed to toxic—and proprietary—fracking solutions.
Under a new law, doctors in Pennsylvania can access information about chemicals used in natural gas extraction — but they won’t be able to share it with their patients. A provision buried in a law passed last month is drawing scrutiny from the public health and environmental community, who argue that it will “gag” doctors who want to raise concerns related to oil and gas extraction with the people they treat and the general public.
Pennsylvania is at the forefront in the debate over “fracking,” the process by which a high-pressure mixture of chemicals, sand, and water are blasted into rock to tap into the gas. Recent discoveries of great reserves in the Marcellus Shale region of the state prompted a rush to development, as have advancements in fracking technologies. But with those changes have come a number of concerns from citizens about potential environmental and health impacts from natural gas drilling.
There is good reason to be curious about exactly what’s in those fluids. A 2010 congressional investigation revealed that Halliburton and other fracking companies had used 32 million gallons of diesel products, which include toxic chemicals like benzene, toluene, ethylbenzene, and xylene, in the fluids they inject into the ground. Low levels of exposure to those chemicals can trigger acute effects like headaches, dizziness, and drowsiness, while higher levels of exposure can cause cancer.
Pennsylvania law states that companies must disclose the identity and amount of any chemicals used in fracking fluids to any health professional that requests that information in order to diagnosis or treat a patient that may have been exposed to a hazardous chemical. But the provision in the new bill requires those health professionals to sign a confidentiality agreement stating that they will not disclose that information to anyone else — not even the person they’re trying to treat.
“The whole goal of medical community is to protect public health,” said David Masur, director of PennEnvironment. He worries that the threat of a lawsuit from a big industry player like Halliburton or ExxonMobil for violating a confidentiality agreement could scare doctors away from research on potential impacts in the state. “If anything, we need more concrete information. This just stifles another way the public could have access to information from experts.”
The provision was not in the initial versions of the law debated in the state Senate or House in February; it was added in during conference between the two chambers, said State Senator Daylin Leach (D), which meant that many lawmakers did not even notice that this “broad, very troubling provision” had been added. “The importance of keeping it as a proprietary secret seems minimal when compared to letting the public know what chemicals they and their children are being exposed to,” Leach told Mother Jones.
The limits on what doctors can say about those chemicals makes it impossible to either assuage or affirm the public’s concerns about health impacts. “People are claiming that animals are dying and people are getting sick in clusters around [drilling wells], but we can’t really study it because we can’t see what’s actually in the product,” said Leach.
At the federal level, natural gas developers have long been allowed to keep the mixture of chemicals they use in fracking fluid a secret from the general public, protecting it as “proprietary information.” The industry is exempt from the Environmental Protection Agency’s Toxics Release Inventory — the program that ensures that communities are given information about what companies are releasing. In 2005 the industry successfully lobbied for an exemption from EPA regulation under the Safe Drinking Water Act as well, in what is often referred to as the “Halliburton Loophole.” The Obama EPA has pressed drillers to voluntarily provide more information about fracking fluids, but the industry has largely rebuffed those appeals.
The latest move in Pennsylvania has raised suspicions among the industry’s critics once again. As Walter Tsou, president of the Philadelphia chapter of Physicians for Social Responsibility, put it, “What is the big secret here that they’re unwilling to tell people, unless they know that if people found out what’s really in these chemicals, they would be outraged?”
This story was produced by Kate Sheppard at Mother Jones as part of the Climate Desk collaboration.
DEP asks gas driller to help remedy Franklin Twp. methane spike
citizensvoice.com/news/dep-asks-gas-driller-to-help-remedy-franklin-twp-methane-spike-1.1287800#axzz1pfKvaAid
DEP asks gas driller to help remedy Franklin Twp. methane spike
By Laura Legere (Staff Writer)
Published: March 20, 2012
The Department of Environmental Protection has asked a natural gas drilling company to step in and help three Franklin Twp. families whose well water contains high levels of methane.
State environmental regulators have not determined the source of the gas and are not saying WPX Energy is responsible for the methane, DEP spokeswoman Colleen Connolly said. But in a letter to the driller Friday, regulators asked that WPX help address the problem.
“They can offer to put in (methane) mitigation systems. They can offer to buy bottled water. We did ask them to vent at least one well,” Ms. Connolly said.
“We’re looking at a situation where some temporary fixes need to be put in, and we’re putting the ball in WPX’s court.”
The department began investigating elevated methane in the water wells in December when residents along Route 29 in the hamlet of Franklin Forks noticed discolored water and intermittent eruptions of gas and water from their well.
WPX has been cited by the DEP for flaws in the steel and cement barriers in two of its Marcellus Shale wells closest to Franklin Forks, but the company has said those well casings were properly installed and cemented.
WPX spokeswoman Susan Oliver said that the company received the message from DEP late Friday and reached out to the department Monday to set up a meeting this week.
“WPX Energy has been a good neighbor to the Endless Mountain area,” she said, adding that the company has spent more than $2 million on road repair, charitable giving and flood relief in the last year.
Methane, the primary component of natural gas, has seeped into water supplies through faults or weaknesses in Marcellus Shale wells in other areas of Susquehanna County and the region.
The department also is investigating a natural methane seep in nearby Salt Springs State Park as a possible cause of the well contamination.
Ms. Connolly said she did not have a copy of the letter to WPX to release on Monday.
Tammy Manning, whose family of seven lives in one of the affected homes, said the amount of methane dissolved in her well water rose from 38.9 milligrams per liter during a DEP test in December to 58.4 milligrams per liter during a test this month.
A flammable gas, methane can pose a fire or explosion risk when it escapes from water and becomes trapped in enclosed spaces.
The atmosphere in the open gap in Mrs. Manning’s water well was 82 percent methane during a recent DEP test, she said – too rich to pose an explosion risk, she was told.
Methane is generally explosive at a concentration of between 5 and 15 percent in air.
As of Monday afternoon, her well was still not vented.
Contact the writer: llegere@timesshamrock.com
First 11 Dimock homes sampled by EPA show no health concerns
citizensvoice.com/news/first-11-dimock-homes-sampled-by-epa-show-no-health-concerns-1.1286406#axzz1pCMrG0Lu
By Laura Legere (Staff Writer)
Published: March 16, 2012
The first 11 Dimock Township water supplies tested by the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency did not reveal levels of contamination that could present a health concern, but the samples indicated the presence of arsenic and other compounds that will require further tests at some homes, the agency said Thursday.
Agency officials hand delivered test results to residents whose wells were sampled during the week of Jan. 23 and will meet again with the families individually to review the results and answer questions.
The first test results reported Thursday represent about a sixth of the data collected by the EPA over weeks of sampling in a nine-square-mile area of Dimock where the agency is investigating the potential impact of nearby natural gas drilling on water supplies.
In a statement Thursday, the EPA said samples from six of the 11 homes showed concentrations of sodium, methane, chromium or bacteria, but all were within the safe range for drinking water. The sampling results also identified arsenic in two homes’ water supplies, both of which are being sampled again by the agency.
“Although the (arsenic) levels meet drinking water standards, we will resample to better characterize the water quality of these wells,” EPA spokesman Roy Seneca said in the statement.
Three of the 11 homes tested during the first week of sampling are receiving replacement water deliveries from the EPA. Those deliveries will continue “while we perform additional sampling to ensure that the drinking water quality at these homes remains consistent and acceptable for use over time,” Seneca said.
The agency began testing about 60 water wells in January after the EPA’s review of past tests by the state and other groups raised concerns about contamination from Marcellus Shale drilling.
Seneca said that the agency will share more test results with Dimock homeowners “as further quality assured data becomes available for the remaining homes.”
The statement released by the EPA did not include a complete list of the compounds detected in the first 11 water supplies.
In the test results given to the families, the EPA highlighted compounds found at concentrations that exceeded what the agency described as “trigger levels” based on risk-based screening levels or the standards for public drinking water supplies.
Although all of the results were reviewed by a toxicologist before they were presented to residents, compounds above a trigger level were reviewed sooner by toxicologists and processed quicker by the agency “should we need to take an immediate action to provide water,” Seneca said.
“EPA conducted those reviews and found no health concerns,” he said.
Dimock resident Scott Ely said his test results showed five compounds above their trigger levels, including arsenic, chromium, lithium, sodium and fluoride. The arsenic level in his well water, 7.6 micrograms per liter, was below the federal drinking water standard of 10 micrograms per liter but above the 3 micrograms per liter chronic drinking water screening level for children established by the Agency for Toxic Substances and Disease Registry.
Ely, who has three small children in his home, said the results reveal “nothing surprising: my water is contaminated.”
The number of compounds in his water well that triggered an expedited toxicological review “just confirms that we have issues,” he said.
The natural gas industry said that the results confirm that their operations have not affected drinking water.
George Stark, a spokesman for Cabot Oil and Gas Corp., the firm drilling extensively in the township, said the company is “pleased that data released by EPA today on sampling of water in Dimock confirmed earlier findings that Dimock drinking water meets all regulatory standards.”
He said that the company will continue to work with the EPA as well as state and local regulators to address concerns in Dimock, but he chided federal regulators for intervening in the case.
“We hope that lessons learned from EPA’s experience in Dimock will result in the agency improving cooperation with all stakeholders and to establish a firmer basis for agency decision making in the future,” he said.
llegere@timesshamrock.com
Webinars on March 15 and 22 to examine Pa.’s new gas-well impact fee
live.psu.edu/story/58352#nw69
The webinars are aimed at two different audiences. The March 15 session is a broad overview for the public; the March 22 session is intended for local municipal officials.
UNIVERSITY PARK, Pa. — Two Web-based, evening seminars presented by Penn State Extension, on March 15 and 22, will provide a detailed examination of the shale-gas impact fee legislation recently passed by the General Assembly and signed into law by the governor.
The free webinars, both beginning at 7 p.m. and running 90 minutes, are aimed at two different audiences. The March 15 session, “What the Public Needs to Know about the New Shale Gas Impact Fee: Act 13,” will offer a broad overview, while the March 22 session targets local municipal officials in areas where Marcellus gas-well drilling is prevalent. The March 22 webinar will focus on the local control and planning aspects of the act.
Presenting in the March 15 webinar will be Timothy Kelsey, professor of agricultural economics in the College of Agricultural Sciences, and Stanford Lembeck, professor emeritus of agricultural economics and rural sociology and director of the Pennsylvania Municipal Planning Education Institute. They will briefly discuss background about “The Unconventional Gas Well Impact Fee Act,” including the scale of gas development so far in Pennsylvania, and the impacts on local governments and communities.
“We also will cover how Pennsylvania’s primary local taxes — the real property tax and the earned income tax — miss much of the economic growth occurring from Marcellus,” Kelsey said.
“We then will talk about the impact fee components of the act, including the fee schedule, the decision facing counties — and municipalities, if the counties don’t act — how the dollars will be allocated, and how local governments can use them.”
Kelsey noted that an introduction to the environmental setbacks and local-control components of the act will be provided in the March 15 webinar, including how the act relates to the Municipalities Planning Code.
“We will address what this means for local decision-making and influence about where Marcellus-related activity occurs within a jurisdiction,” Kelsey said. “We also will talk about the Public Utility Commission’s new roles under the act.”
In the March 22 webinar, “What Local Officials Need to Know about the New Shale Gas Impact Fee: Act 13,” presenters will be Ross Pifer, clinical professor and director of the Agricultural Law Resource and Reference Center in Penn State’s Dickinson Law School, and Jerry Walls, AICP, professional planner and retired executive director of the Lycoming County Planning Commission. They will discuss possible impacts of Act 13 on municipalities and suggest aspects of the new law to consider.
They will evaluate the local control components of the act, digging deeper into the specific details about local ordinances and what is allowed and not allowed. Their presentation will be more technical in nature, breaking down the act for planning commission members, elected officials and others who create, update and implement ordinances.
“I will offer perspectives on how to frame policy questions and draft ordinance wording for Public Utility Commission review,” Walls said. “Also, I will explain how the Natural Resource provisions of the Pennsylvania Municipalities Planning Code and the Comprehensive Plan are important as the policy framework within which to write ordinance provisions.”
Questions will be taken and answered as time allows after both webinars. The URL to take part in the webinar is https://meeting.psu.edu/naturalgaswebinars/. For more information, contact Carol Loveland at 570-433-3040 or by email at cal24@psu.edu.
EPA’s Dimock tests divisive
www.timesleader.com/news/EPA_rsquo_s_Dimock_tests_divisive_03-06-2012.html
Mar 6, 2012
Cabot Oil & Gas Corp. and its supporters are at odds with the federal agency.
DIMOCK — The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency’s testing of scores of water wells will give residents of this small Suquehanna County village a snapshot of the aquifer they rely on for drinking, cooking and bathing.
The first EPA test results, expected this week, are certain to provide fodder for both sides of a raging 3-year-old debate over unconventional natural gas drilling and its impacts on Dimock, a rural crossroads that starred in the Emmy Award-winning documentary “Gasland.”
A handful of residents are suing Cabot Oil & Gas Corp., saying the Houston-based driller contaminated their wells with potentially explosive methane gas and with drilling chemicals. Many other residents of Dimock assert the water is clean, and that the plaintiffs are exaggerating problems with their wells to help their lawsuit.
In a letter to EPA Administrator Lisa Jackson, a pro-drilling group called Enough is Enough contends the agency’s “rogue” Philadelphia field office has allowed itself to be a pawn of trial lawyers seeking a big payout from Cabot. More than 300 people signed it. “Dimock Proud” signs dot lawns throughout the village in Susquehanna County, one of the most intensively drilled regions of the Marcellus Shale gas field.
The same group recently launched a website aimed at dispelling what it contends is the myth that Dimock’s aquifer is contaminated.
Residents who have been clamoring for federal intervention say the attacks on the EPA — which have come not only from their neighbors but from Cabot and Pennsylvania’s environmental chief — are groundless.
“Since the EPA’s investigation began, Cabot and (state regulators) have undertaken a shameless public campaign against the EPA’s attempt to rescue the victims who are now without potable water and prevent their exposure to hazardous constituents now present in the aquifer,” one of their lawyers, Tate Kunkle, wrote recently.
Cabot spokesman George Stark said the company opposed the EPA testing because it creates a false impression about Dimock.
“It’s the notion that there must be something wrong there in order for the EPA to either do testing or to deliver water. I think it causes more concern, more mistrust, more misinformation about the industry overall,” he said.
In addition to testing scores of water wells, the EPA is paying to deliver fresh water to four homes where the agency cited worrisome levels of manganese, sodium and cancer-causing arsenic.
Brian Oram, an independent geologist and water consultant from Northeastern Pennsylvania, said he is puzzled by the agency’s rationale for being in Dimock, since the substances that EPA said it’s most concerned about are naturally occurring and commonly found in the regional groundwater.
Nevertheless, Oram supports the EPA testing because it will provide water quality data the parties can trust, and against which future drilling can be measured.
Cabot asserts the high methane levels that its own testing has consistently found in the Dimock water wells are naturally occurring and easily remediated.
But state regulators have cited “overwhelming evidence,” including chemical fingerprinting, that linked the methane in Dimock’s water supply to improperly cemented gas wells drilled by Cabot.
