Marcellus Shale Advisory Commission Issues Final Report
http://www.responsibledrillingalliance.org/newsletter/07272011.html
Back in March, Governor Corbett formed the 30-member Marcellus Shale Advisory Commission (MSAC), giving those appointed 120 days to develop recommendations on all aspects of natural gas drilling in Pennsylvania. This past Friday, the commission released it recommendations. The full 137-page report is available on the RDA web site: http://www.responsibledrillingalliance.org/newsletter/MSAC_Report_July_2011.pdf
Some of the commission’s recommendations include:
Economic & Workforce Development
- The Commonwealth should identify strategic locations to construct regional business parks.
- The state should create financial incentives for the conversion of mass transit and school bus fleets to natural gas, as well as for the manufacture of engines and other component parts, utilizing available funding sources.
- The Department of Community and Economic Development should work closely with its regional economic development partners and gas producers to grow the number of existing manufacturing firms participating in the shale gas industry.
Permitting and Infrastructure
- Pennsylvania should designate a state agency to create a “one-stop” permitting process.
- State agencies should offer accelerated permit reviews within guaranteed time frames.
- If the air contamination sources are covered by an exemption on the Air Quality Permit Exemption List, a Plan Approval and/or Operating Permit will not be required.
- The Commonwealth should expand its rail freight facilities and capabilities to handle supplies and commodities associated with natural gas development.
Public Health, Safety & Environmental Protection
- Triple well setback distance from streams, ponds, and other bodies of water from 100 to 300 feet.
- Increase setback distance from private water wells from 200 to 500 feet and to 1,000 feet for public water systems.
- Expand operator’s presumed liability for impairing water quality from 1,000 ft to 2,500 feet from a well, and extend the duration of presumed liability from 6 months to 12 months.
Local Impacts and Emergency Response
- Oil and gas well pads and related facilities should be assigned a 9-1-1 address for emergency response purposes, and oil and gas operators should be required to provide GPS coordinates for access roads and well pad sites.
- Recommend enactment or authorization to impose a fee to mitigate to uncompensated
- impacts caused to communities by natural gas development.
Commenting on the Commission’s report, Representative Camille “Bud” George stated, “What we’ve seen over the last several months is an industry-dominated commission offer few meaningful remedies for a process that has already polluted people’s water. It’s unfathomable and unconscionable to put people’s safety at risk as this industrial tide sweeps the Commonwealth.” Rep. George claims it is irresponsible to empower a profit-driven industry to regulate itself when Pennsylvania consumers will be paying for environmental remediation when accidents occur. George cautioned that some commission recommendations may appear to be environmentally friendly, but are actually disguised gifts to the gas industry.
Rep. George has introduced a bill that he believes would help to fill some of the most erroneous gaps in the commissions report. Several of the protection provisions in the ProtectPA bill mirror those made by Department of Environmental Protection Secretary Mike Krancer in his May 27th letter to Lt. Gov. Jim Cawley, who chaired the MSAC.
Known as ProtectPA, the bill calls for:
- Increasing the distance that wells may be placed from public drinking water sources
- Disclosure of the chemicals used in hydraulic fracturing
- Updated bonding and road-repair requirements
- Extension of a well operator’s presumed liability in cases of well pollution
- “Cradle-to-grave” tracking of Marcellus waste water
- Expanding pre-drilling survey rights for landowners
- Prohibiting open-pit frac water storage in flood plains
- A tax of 30 cents per 1,000 cubic feet of gas severed, with an adjustment mechanism if the price of gas changes.
- Severance tax revenue would go directly to the entities and projects most harmed by gas drilling, including local governments, infrastructure repair, and environmental programs
- No unrestricted revenue directed to the PA General Fund.
Law Suit Filed Due to Air Quality Concerns
One topic that the Marcellus Shale Advisory Commission all but overlooked in their report was air quality. No surprise, as the commission’s recommendation under “Economic and Workforce Development” includes courting some of the most notorious air-polluting industries to locate in Pennsylvania, where they will help to increase demand for natural gas. These include plastics and chemical manufacturing plants.
On Thursday of last week, one day before the final MSAC report was issued, Citizens for Pennsylvania‟s Future (PennFuture) filed a lawsuit against Ultra Resources, Inc., for air pollution at its Marcellus Shale drilling sites. PennFuture also filed a formal request with the Pennsylvania Department of Environmental Protection (DEP) for all records of air pollution at drilling sites throughout the Commonwealth.
“Ultra’s drilling operations in Tioga and Potter counties are emitting dangerous and illegal air pollution and operating without the required permits,” said Jan Jarrett, president and CEO of PennFuture. “Unless gas drillers operating in Pennsylvania control the air pollution from their operations, air quality will deteriorate, putting public health at risk…The company is emitting large amounts of nitrogen oxides (NOx) into the air, creating serious health risks for anyone living downwind from the operations. According to the United States EPA, even short-term NOx exposures, ranging from 30 minutes to 24 hours, cause adverse respiratory effects including airway inflammation in healthy people and increased respiratory symptoms in people with asthma. And this air pollution also leads to more fine particle pollution, which can cause heart attacks and other deadly illnesses. But this appears to be business as usual for many drillers,” continued Jarrett.
“A study out of Fort Worth (TX) recently showed that the NOx pollution just from the average compressor engine there is about 60 tons per year. And with drilling going like gangbusters here in Pennsylvania, that same kind of pollution from all the operations would create serious public health problems, and destroy any ability of Pennsylvania to meet air quality standards. We’ve also seen the formerly pristine air in Wyoming now more dangerous than that in Los Angeles, thanks to massive drilling. We need to stop this problem here and now. “ claimed Jarrett.
“We are also asking DEP to open the books on its assessment of air pollution at other drilling operations throughout the Commonwealth,” said Jarrett. “We cannot and will not allow the drillers to operate without meeting our clean air rules.”
Copies of the PennFuture court filing and Right to Know request may be downloaded at www.pennfuture.org.
Coal ash taints groundwater
http://www.tennessean.com/article/20110725/NEWS11/307250034/Coal-ash-taints-groundwater-at-TVA-sites-report-finds
Inspector General report finds nine of TVA’s plant sites have contamination
A new report says groundwater contamination from coal ash has been found at Gallatin and eight of the nine other Tennessee Valley Authority fossil power plant sites where testing is being done.
Levels of toxic substances found at the Gallatin plant site in Sumner County and at the Cumberland site, 50 miles northwest of Nashville, are high enough that they could create a health hazard, the report says. Beryllium, cadmium and nickel levels are above drinking water standards at Gallatin, as are arsenic, selenium and vanadium at Cumberland.
One major surprise also showed up in the review by TVA’s Office of Inspector General: For more than a decade, the TVA had been finding substances in groundwater at its Allen coal-fired plant in Memphis that indicated toxic metals could be leaking from a coal ash pond there.
Arsenic above today’s allowable levels was found repeatedly in a monitoring well on the site, which is in a sensitive location. The plant and its ash ponds lie above a deep, high-quality aquifer that supplies drinking water to Memphis and nearby areas.
“I was not aware of this until today,” Chuck Head, Tennessee Department of Environment and Conservation’s senior director for land programs, said Friday after The Tennessean provided a copy of the TVA document.
“We would obviously have liked them to report it to us when they found the arsenic. But now that we have the information, we are going to work with them to try to resolve the problem.”
TVA declined requests for interviews on the topic, but spokeswoman Barbara Martocci sent an email, saying the legal limits for contaminants at Allen were met at the time of the testing.
“Even though some parameters were measured at levels higher than background, there were no exceedances of EPA municipal drinking water limits,” she wrote.
That was the case, up to a point.
TVA quit testing when the EPA tightened its standard — what’s called the Maximum Contaminant Level, the report said. Samples taken before then had showed arsenic levels above the new, higher standard.
“Testing has not been performed since the Maximum Contaminant Level was lowered,” the report said.
The toxic substances typically are found in small amounts — parts per billion. At the Gallatin site, they are likely moving down to and being diluted in the Cumberland River, Head said.
Similarly, at Allen in Memphis, the most likely result is discharge of the groundwater directly into the nearby Mississippi River and a lake there, he said. The threat to the Memphis aquifer is minimal.
Head said the state is set to talk Tuesday to TVA as they work toward a solution.
He said more monitoring wells will likely be needed to determine how large the contaminated plume is underground at the Gallatin plant.
’08 spill was catalyst
The OIG investigation of groundwater contamination at TVA coal ash sites, released June 21, began as a result of questions raised during congressional testimony following the December 2008 ash spill in East Tennessee.
A mountain of damp ash had buckled at TVA’s Kingston plant and 5.4 million cubic yards of the waste, which contains mercury, cadmium, lead, selenium, arsenic and other potentially toxic substances, cascaded into yards, fields and the Emory River.
The event brought national attention to the lack of regulation of coal ash and helped spark proposed rules last year from the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency that are being argued over today.
The OIG report is considered important on several counts by the Environmental Integrity Project that has been gathering data on coal ash sites.
“The list of plants where monitoring is taking place at TVA is notable for what is missing,” said Russell Boulding, a hydro-geologist and soil scientist working with the environmental advocacy group.
That includes the absence of testing at the ash impoundment at TVA’s closed Watts Bar Plant coal-fired plant, 60 miles southwest of Knoxville. No monitoring is done around Watts Bar, where an old, unlined ash pond is located.
Spokeswoman Martocci said it’s not required.
“It is not an active plant, and there were no solid waste permits (or other regulations) that required groundwater monitoring for the site,” she wrote.
The legacy ash pond there is under study for permanent closure, which, when officially closed, could require monitoring by the state.
Coal ash, once viewed as harmless, contains a variety of heavy metals in low concentrations. Without proper protection, they can leach into groundwater and move to drinking water sources, such as well water, posing “significant public health concerns,” according to an EPA report.
Some of the substances can also move up the food chain.
Martocci said TVA’s coal ash sites pose no threat.
“The small amount of heavy metals or other potential contaminants identified in groundwater at the fossil sites are confined to the TVA reservation and do not impact off-site drinking water sources,” Martocci wrote. “Moreover, there are no potable water supplies down-gradient from these sites.”
Data gap frustrating
The Environmental Integrity Project is among groups that have been advocating for the EPA to regulate coal ash, but a lack of monitoring nationally in the past means little data is available.
“This has been a big source of frustration for those of us who are looking at the impacts of disposal practices,” Boulding said.
At least in Tennessee there is some information, he said. Data, including this new report, is growing in the wake of the Kingston spill, and more is forthcoming. TVA voluntarily put in 29 groundwater monitoring wells last year at its power plant coal ash sites. Results from samples are expected this year.
In Colorado and some other states, the group can find virtually no data despite a large number of coal-fired plants pumping out coal ash, Boulding said.
Still, the EPA has found about 70 cases where coal ash has caused fish kills, sullied wells and tainted land in a 2007 report. The EIP, Earthjustice and the Sierra Club have put out reports on scores of other cases.
Time of reckoning
Coal, which has long provided cheap electricity nationwide, has also generated vast quantities of ash in Tennessee and around the country. After burning, the leftover chunks and flakes have generally been flooded with water for sluicing to ponds where the ash settles out. The water is then pumped into a river or lake. Coal ash has been left in the ponds, mounded beside rivers, placed in old coal mines and loaded into gravel pits.
Some has been spread on roadways or used to make walking paths. And some has been recycled in asphalt or other products .
Since at least the 1980s, with growing coal ash wastes and disasters environmentalists have been pressing for regulation.
Coal industry representatives have said federal regulation would be cumbersome and costly and want to leave it to states.
TVA officials have said they’re getting ahead of the curve. They announced plans earlier to convert to more costly but preferred dry ash disposal, which experts say makes ash easier to manage and less likely to contaminate groundwater. It also leaves materials available for recycling.
Though monitoring hasn’t been required, TVA carried out voluntary testing at the Allen plant ash ponds in Memphis from 1988-2008, according to the OIG report.
Elevated levels of boron and sulfate — which indicate ash releases from the impoundments there — and also arsenic “have been historically higher than the background data,” the report said.
“According to TVA personnel, these levels have not been reported to (the Tennessee Department of Environment and Conservation) because the testing was not required,” it said.
The report gave specific data for a few plant sites, but not for Allen. It did say that arsenic levels measured in the past were above today’s current safe limit.
Temple researchers will investigate methane gas from Marcellus Shale drilling
http://www.temple.edu/newsroom/2011_2012/07/stories/Marcellus_Shale_drilling.htm
CONTACT: Preston Moretz <preston.moretz@temple.edu> 215-204-4380
Wednesday, July 20, 2011
A Temple study funded by the William Penn Foundation will explore the origin of methane gas found at higher concentrations in drinking wells in areas surrounding Marcellus Shale drilling sites in Susquehanna County.
A multi-disciplinary team of Temple researchers will investigate the origins of methane gas found in drinking water wells near Marcellus Shale drilling sites in Pennsylvania and how science is influencing the formation of public policy on drilling. The research is being funded through a one-year, $66,000 multi-disciplinary grant from the William Penn Foundation.
“We know there are environmental concerns about the Marcellus Shale and there have been some accidents related to the drilling,” said Michel Boufadel, professor of environmental engineering and director of the Center for Natural Resources Development and Protection (NRDP) in Temple’s College of Engineering. “There has been a lot of hype about this issue and sometimes it is difficult to decipher what is fact-based and what is opinion.”
A recent study by researchers at Duke University showed that drinking wells located near Marcellus Shale drilling sites in Susquehanna County had an average concentration of methane gas that was 17 times greater than wells not near drilling sites. The study also concluded that the methane had originated deep below the earth’s surface.
Boufadel, principal investigator for the Temple project, said that the process used to drill into the shale creates enormous pressure that could be forcing pockets of methane toward the drinking wells. Temple’s research will attempt to determine if the methane gas found in the wells was released from the shale during drilling or whether it was located in pockets closer to the surface.
If the methane is originating in the upper formations, the likely cause is the drilling operation or the well casing construction — issues that could be addressed at a reasonable cost, said Boufadel. However, if the gas is originating in the deep formation, the entire hydrofracking process could be considered hazardous and would need to be stopped or dramatically modified, he said.
Michele Masucci, associate professor and chair of geography and urban studies in the College of Liberal Arts, and Nicholas Davatzes, assistant professor of earth and environmental science in the College of Science and Technology will serve as co-investigators on the research project to be conducted by the NRDP Center.
Boufadel said Masucci, a social scientist, will explore how the science of the Marcellus Shale drilling is reaching policy makers, how they are processing it and using it to formulate public policy on the extraction of gas from the Marcellus Shale.
Davatzes, a structural geologist who has conducted research on energy from deep geo-thermal wells, will play a crucial role in constructing the geology of the impacted region, Boufadel said.
“Environmental research is inherently multi-disciplinary; the challenges are not only technical or technological, but socio-political as well,” said Boufadel. “This project is a template for dealing with important environmental issues, such as the Marcellus Shale, where we have researchers from three colleges — Engineering, Science and Technology and Liberal Arts — coming together to find solutions.”
In addition to the research, the grant requires Temple to organize a symposium on Marcellus Shale which will be held in the fall.
Tamaqua residents seek help in connecting to sewer line
http://www.tnonline.com/2011/jul/20/costly-delay
By LIZ PINKEY TN Correspondent tneditor@tnonline.com
Wednesday, July 20, 2011
LIZ PINKEY/SPECIAL TO THE TIMES NEWS Daniel Lattanzi, who could be facing a $25,000 bill to connect to the sewer main, called the wildcat sewer situation in Tamaqua a "moral issue" and requested that the borough provide some relief for residents facing large bills as they connect to the sanitary sewer.
Members of Tamaqua’s Borough Council got an earful last night from several citizens who are unhappy about the fact that they are responsible for footing the bill to connect to the sanitary sewer, after years of illegally, and in most cases, unknowingly, discharging waste into the Wabash Creek.
Although the project and its expense have people upset, one of the other issues that came to light at last night’s meeting is the fact that by delaying the investigation of the problem the borough may have caused citizens to miss out on opportunities to seek outside funding or loans to help finance the project.
Anna Brose, of 249 West Broad St., said that the first letter she received regarding the problem and explaining that dye testing would be completed in the future was in 2008.
“It has taken three years to have the dye test done. I have a problem with that,” she said. “There is no financial aid available. Two years ago, three years ago, there was money available. Now there is nothing.”
Brose went on to say that she had received a letter from the borough stating that there was money available through the USDA and through Schuylkill Community Action.
“That money has dried up,” she said. “Schuylkill Community Action said their funding dried up two years ago.”
Brose said she could take a low interest loan through the borough, but still balked at the cost.
“I have paid a lot of money to the borough, as have a lot of people in this room,” she said, referring to the estimated $9,200 she has paid in sewer bills over the last 30 years. “We just can’t absorb this amount of money, when this could have been done how long ago and money would have been available,” she said.
Borough President Micah Gursky agreed that the situation is not a good one. However, he stood by the borough’s process.
“Everyone agrees that it should have been done a long time ago,” he said. “Our initial plan was to dye test the properties, but the cost was much higher than we could afford as a borough. That was the delay. We were trying to figure out options, how to figure out who needed to hook up.”
Gursky also said this is not the first time that the borough has had to deal with properties where the owners believed that they were connected to the public system and were in fact, not.
“It happens from time to time,” he said. “Unfortunately, everyone is required to hook up.”
Councilman Tom Cara said that the borough was willing to “let this thing go on because we didn’t want to put the burden on you.” However, Gursky disagreed.
“You can’t flush your toilet into the creek,” he said.
Resident Kevin Kellner, who lost his home at 5 South Lehigh St. in a fire on July 5, was one of the property owners who was notified that he was not connected. Kellner said that his lawyer had advised him that the residents will be required to pay to connect to the sewer, however, he told him that he should recoup the money that he has paid to the borough over the years in sewer bills.
Gursky said that the borough has “been down that road before” and does not expect that the borough will be required to reimburse residents. Kellner also asked why DEP has not been held accountable for the cleanup of local waterways, including the Wabash and the Panther Creek.
Another unfortunate issue with the timing of the project has to deal with the Streetscape project that was recently completed along sections of Broad Street. Many of the property owners will be required to dig through the new sidewalks and pavers and replace them in order to connect to the sewer main.
“Yeah, we’re kicking ourselves because we’re going to have to cut into new sidewalks,” said Gursky.
One resident could be looking at an even larger project. Daniel Lattanzi, of 403 E. Broad St., is facing an estimated $25,000 in bills as he would need to connect to a main located on the other side of Broad Street, which would necessitate digging all the way across Route 209. Lattanzi has lived at the seven unit apartment complex since 1950 and owned it since 1962. Although he said he could pursue a cheaper alternative and install a grinder pump and avoid crossing 209, he has no control over what is going into that pump and is not willing to risk incurring more expense for the continual upkeep of the pump.
“I can’t get a bit of help. We’ve been hung out to dry,” he said, calling it a “moral issue.”
“I feel the borough should do something,” he added.
Another resident, Maria Burke, of Rowe Street, asked what will happen to residents who cannot comply with the Aug. 31 deadline. Burke expressed the frustration that many residents feel at being told they are breaking the law.
“I don’t want my crap going in the freaking creek. Who does? We want to do the right thing,” she said, but she indicated that with a newborn at home, she may not be able to find the money and additionally, trying to find a plumber to complete the work by Aug. 31 is going to be difficult with more than 40 properties needing to be addressed.
“We’re begging you,” she said to council members, “be an advocate for us.”
Councilman Brian Connelly said that the borough will contact other offices, including U.S. Rep. Tim Holden, to see if there is any aid that can be made available to residents.
However, he and other council members are not optimistic that funding will be forthcoming, especially not by the Aug. 31 deadline.
Borough manager Kevin Steigerwalt said that the borough will definitely need to ask DEP for an extension. The Tamaqua Public Library has already missed its deadline to connect to a lateral on a neighboring property and will need to look at another alternative.
Steigerwalt said that DEP has been advised of that situation and has not approved or denied an extension request, it has just asked that it be corrected as soon as possible.
Cancer patients’ urine suspected in Wissahickon iodine-131 levels
http://articles.philly.com/2011-07-21/news/29798099_1_drinking-water-radioactive-iodine-water-department
July 21, 2011|By Sandy Bauers, Inquirer Staff Writer
Three weeks after an earthquake and tsunami severely damaged Japan’s Fukushima nuclear power plant, Lisa Daniels opened an e-mail with test results of river water samples from Southeastern Pennsylvania.
It was just after lunch April 1. Nationwide, officials were testing rain, rivers, milk, and other substances to learn if radioactivity from the stricken plant was present.
They’d seen it after Chernobyl, and now it was showing up nationwide, including in rainwater from a deluge in central Pennsylvania.
Daniels, a water division chief at the state Department of Environmental Protection, wasn’t worried. Enough time had passed that the radiation would have decayed or been carried away.
But when she looked at the sample from the Wissahickon Creek near Green Lane, just upstream from a city drinking water intake, she froze.
None of the other river samples in the batch showed iodine-131. But this one did.
By 6 p.m. that day, that drinking water intake would be getting extra treatment, and officials would be embarking on a detective mission that has generated interest nationwide.
Since then, officials have found more iodine-131 in the Wissahickon, and at several sewage treatment plants along the creek.
They’ve also realized that worrisome levels of iodine-131 had been detected long before the Fukushima accident in several Philadelphia drinking water samples taken as part of an obscure monitoring program run by the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency.
Within that limited data set of 59 locations across the country, Philadelphia’s levels were the highest in the previous decade, the Water Department discovered.
So Fukushima couldn’t be the cause after all.
The source they now suspect was a surprise. Iodine-131 is used to treat thyroid cancer, and they suspect it’s coming from patients excreting excess radioactivity in their urine, which then winds up in rivers, and ultimately in Philadelphia’s drinking water intakes.
- Iodine-131 is not good for you. When radioactive iodine gets into the body, it concentrates in the thyroid gland. Low doses can impair the gland’s activity, according to the EPA. Long-term exposure to high amounts can cause cancer.
Officials from the Water Department, the EPA, and the DEP emphasize that the levels detected are tiny and don’t constitute a public health threat. Philadelphia’s drinking water meets standards for radioactivity and remains safe, they say. Read more
40 Tamaqua property owners given 60 days to connect to sewer system
http://www.tnonline.com/2011/jul/19/expensive-proposition
By ANDY LEIBENGUTH aleibenguth@tnonline.com
Tuesday, July 19, 2011
Exposed PVC pipe lies behind the Tamaqua Public Library leading into the Wabash Creek.
Forty Tamaqua property owners are being given 60-day notices to stop discharging wastewater directly to the Wabash Creek culvert and to connect to Tamaqua’s municipal sewer system. The work is to be done at property owners’ expense.
The state Department of Environmental Protection (DEP) issued an order to the borough last December to investigate and remove all illegal sewage discharges to the creek, which runs under downtown Tamaqua from South Lehigh Street to Rowe Street and then to South Railroad Street.
The deadline to comply with this order is Aug. 31.
The borough hired Alfred Benesch Company and A One Service, Shenandoah, to investigate both the Wabash Creek and Panther Creek, which runs through eastern portions of Tamaqua, for the sources of any possible illegal sewage discharge, aka wildcats. Inspections of the creeks were performed between March 1 and March 31. Initially, 56 connections were found to have active sanitary connections to the Wabash Creek culvert, with dry residue indicating recent sanitary connections.
Investigators used special equipment and cameras. The notice, given to affected property owners about a month ago, states, “In accordance with the DEP order and Borough Ordinance No. 304, you are hereby notified to stop discharging sewage to the Wabash Creek and connect your property to the municipal sewer system within 60 days of your receipt of this notice.”
Receiving the notice were homes and business owners on South Lehigh Street, West Broad Street, Spruce Street, Rowe Street and South Railroad Street. The notice also states that if a property owner fails to correct the illegal sewer discharge within 60 days of receiving the notice, the matter will be referred to the code enforcement officer and borough solicitor for legal action.
Some property owners are upset with the short notice and unexpected financial burden this has placed on them. Ann Brose, 249 West Broad St., said that it will cost approximately $7,000 to connect to the sewer system.
“I have to pay to dig into the second lane of SR209 to hook up to the sewer. I never knew my sewage wasn’t connected to the borough’s system,” adding, “I want to do what’s right, but not 30 years after I purchased my house.”
Brose, who pointed out that she doesn’t qualify for low interest loans, added, “I’ve paid the borough $9,200 over 30 years for sewer and now I have to pay to connect to a sewer system I thought I was already connected to.” Brose and other affected property owners are expected to attend tonight’s borough council meeting to bring up their concerns.
A summary of required steps was also given with the notice. The summary lists detailed instructions concerning steps required to connect to the borough’s sanitary sewer system, as well as a Building Sewer Permit Application. Current sewer customers do not have to pay the borough’s $2,000 first-time sewer connection charge.
Low and moderate income property owners may qualify for financial assistance for construction of their sewer connection. Kevin Steigerwalt, Tamaqua borough manager, stated that property owners can save on construction expenses by consolidating contract work with other affected property owners.
Assistance may be available through the U.S. Department of Agriculture, Schuylkill Community Action and the Tamaqua Borough’s Community Development Department. Affected residents are encouraged to contact Steigerwalt or Rob Jones, Tamaqua public works director, at (570) 668-3444 or (570) 668-0300 with any questions or concerns.
Your Private Drinking Water and the Natural Gas Industry (Part Two)
http://www.northcentralpa.com/news/2011-07-17_your-private-drinking-water-and-natural-gas-industry-part-two
July 17, 2011
By Penn State Cooperative Extension in Gas Industry
Part two of an article on considerations for private drinking water wells and natural gas drilling
At Penn State Extension’s programs that focus on protection and testing of private water supplies near natural gas drilling, Bryan Swistock, water resource extension specialist provides valuable information and practical advice for people interested in protecting their private drinking water supplies. Knowing the quality of your home well or spring water before natural gas drilling is critical to knowing if that quality changes or is impacted by natural gas drilling (or any other factors, for that matter). Swistock says if you want to legally document your water quality prior to any drilling occurring, you need to use a third-party, state-certified test lab. Importantly, he says that many drilling companies conduct what is called “pre-drilling survey” water testing.
“This is a survey of drinking water supplies in the vicinity of the natural gas drill site. The survey is not actually performed by the drilling company, but by a third-party, accredited testing firm,” says Swistock. “If you are asked to participate in such a survey, it’s in your best interest to do so, since the drilling company will pay for the water test.”
Swistock says people always have the option of paying for their own water testing. He says there are several factors to consider.
As far as “what” to test for when testing your drinking water supply, Swistock recommends a tiered approach. “There’s no perfect answer, but I suggest setting some priorities – ask yourself what is most critical to test for and start there. Prioritize and determine what you can afford to test for. If you are financially able to do more, there are some additional parameters you could consider.”
Once you’ve decided to have your drinking water tested, and have determined what to test for, understanding the results can be complex. Swistock says the report you will receive from the certified testing lab is considered a legal document, and it can be difficult to understand what the numbers mean.
“Many Penn State Cooperative Extension offices have both the people resources and informational materials to help people better understand their water test results. In fact, there’s an on-line form to help people interpret test results. You can also ask the lab that conducted the test if they will explain the results to you,” says Swistock.
Swistock also provided a number of informational web sites. He said the eNotice web site atwww.dep.state.pa.us/enotice/ allows people to sign up to receive e-mail notices when drilling is going to occur in a specific municipality or county.
Swistock says there are a number of pro-active measures people can take to protect their drinking water. For people leasing land to drillers, he recommended several stipulations that should be included as part of the lease. He also urged people to report problems and concerns to the PA Department of Environmental Protection, which has regulatory oversight for the natural gas activities in the region.
In addition, Swistock says researchers at Penn State University, through the Center for Rural Pennsylvania, have begun natural gas-related research to monitor drinking water wells and gather data.
Swistock finishes his presentations by noting the vast amount of information that is available from the Extension Office. He encouraged people to visit their web site at http://extension.psu.edu/naturalgas
Excerpted from the Clinton County Natural Gas Task Force (www.clintoncountypa.com ) weekly columns.
As Focus On Fracking Sharpens, Fuel Worries Grow
http://www.npr.org/2011/07/13/137789869/as-focus-on-fracking-sharpens-fuel-worries-grow
by Jeff Brady
July 13, 2011
A controversial technique for producing oil and natural gas called hydraulic fracturing — or fracking — has led to drilling booms from Texas to Pennsylvania in recent years. But there are concerns that it may be polluting drinking water.
As policymakers in Washington discuss how to make fracking safer, there is concern that fracking itself has become a distraction.
In the U.S., pretty much all of the oil and gas that was easy to get to is gone. Fracking makes it possible to extract petroleum from hard-to-reach places — say, a mile underground in dense layers of shale.
Drillers pump truckloads of water mixed with sand and chemicals into the rock. Under intense pressure, that creates tiny fractures that allow oil and gas trapped there to escape.
“Hydraulic fracturing is truly the rocket science of what’s happening in energy,” says Tisha Conoly Schuller, president and CEO of the Colorado Oil and Gas Association.
Schuller has seen fracking bring new life to old oil and natural gas fields, boosting domestic production in the U.S. She says that’s a good thing — especially for natural gas, because it burns cleaner.
In Pennsylvania the number of natural gas wells drilled into the Marcellus Shale has increased from 34 in 2007 to 1,446 last year.
But drive around the region and you’ll see that not everyone shares the industry’s appreciation of fracking. There are lawn signs opposing gas drilling, and in Sullivan County, N.Y., a handmade sign reads, “Thou shalt not frack with our water. Amen.”
Many fracking opponents were inspired by the movie Gasland. In one compelling scene, Weld County, Colo., resident Mike Markham shows how he can light his tap water on fire.
Throughout the movie, filmmaker and activist Josh Fox gives fracking special attention — calling into question how safe it is and whether it’s adequately regulated.
Says Schuller: “I think hydraulic fracturing has become a synonym for oil and gas development or anything one doesn’t like about oil and gas development.”
The industry worries that the focus on fracking could prompt policymakers to restrict the practice and bring a halt to the gas booms under way. That’s already happening around the country in places such as Buffalo, N.Y., Pittsburgh and most recently Morgantown, W.Va. New York is deciding on new rules to govern fracking there.
It’s not just the industry concerned about the focus on fracking. Some environmentalists say it may be taking attention away from the other problems that go along with drilling, like air pollution and toxic spills.
“I’m hoping that it’s really just a starting point — a jumping-off point — to look at all these other issues,” says Amy Mall, senior policy analyst with the Natural Resources Defense Council.
And Mall hopes the focus on fracking will lead to more research about how oil and gas development affects people.
“There’s very little science about any of these impacts — not just the fracking, but the air quality, the waste-management issues,” Mall says. “But it does seem the immediate priority of the agencies is to focus on fracking.”
Certainly that’s what the Energy Department’s Natural Gas Subcommittee will discuss as it meets in Washington, D.C., this week. Eventually the group’s recommendations will be sent to the federal agencies that have a role in regulating fracking.
New study demonstrates toxic impacts of hydrofracking fluid on forest life
http://coloradoindependent.com/93580/new-study-demonstrates-toxic-impacts-of-hydrofracking-fluid-on-forest-life
By David O. Williams
07.11.11
Hydraulic fracturing itself may not directly contaminate groundwater supplies, as the oil and gas industry has steadfastly maintained for years, but the wastewater associated with the controversial process can be very hazardous to forest life, at least according to a new study produced by a U.S. Forest Service researcher.
Conducted by researcher Mary Beth Adams and published in the Journal of Environmental Quality, the study is entitled “Land Application of Hydrofracturing Fluids Damages a Deciduous Forest Stand in West Virginia.”
Adams applied more than 75,000 gallons of fracking fluid to a quarter-acre plot of land in the Fernow Experimental Forest in West Virginia. All of the groundcover on the plot died almost right away, and within two years 56 percent of the approximately 150 trees in the area had died.
“The explosion of shale gas drilling in the East has the potential to turn large stretches of public lands into lifeless moonscapes,” said Jeff Ruch, executive director of Public Employees for Environmental Responsibility, which reported on Adams’ study last week.
Ruch noted that land disposal of fracking fluids is a common practice and that Adams’ study was conducted with a state permit. “This study suggests that these fluids should be treated as toxic waste,” Ruch added.
In Colorado, U.S. Rep. Diana DeGette for several years has been pushing different versions of the Fracturing Responsibility and Awareness of Chemicals (FRAC) Act, which in its latest incarnation would require the national disclosure of chemicals used in the process.
The oil and gas industry maintains it must keep its formulas secret for proprietary reasons, and the process is exempt from federal regulation by the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency under the Safe Drinking Water Act.
But state oil and gas regulators in Colorado, as well as state industry representatives, argue that chemical disclosure will not prevent spills from holding pits and pipelines and that those areas of concern should be the real focus of regulatory efforts.
Fracking typically injects water, sand and chemicals thousands of feet below the surface to crack open tight rock and sand formations in order to free up more natural gas. Those results occur far below drinking water wells and groundwater supplies. There is still debate, even among scientists, over whether fracturing itself can cause contamination of groundwater.
Pa. seeks stronger look at drilling near water
http://www.businessweek.com/ap/financialnews/D9OBFMKG0.htm
By MARC LEVY
HARRISBURG, Pa.
Pennsylvania environmental regulators have agreed to take more precautions before they approve certain permits for oil and natural-gas drilling sites where well construction poses a pollution threat to some of the state’s highest-quality waterways.
The state Department of Environmental Protection agreed to the measures to settle a complaint by the Chesapeake Bay Foundation first filed in 2009 that also asserted the agency had approved three deficient permit applications.
The settlement, dated Wednesday, essentially reverses some steps the department took two years ago to speed up the permitting process for Pennsylvania’s booming natural gas industry. The foundation argued the speedup was illegal.
Primarily, the agreement will impact drilling-related activity — land clearing, production, processing, treatment and pipeline construction — in northern Pennsylvania, where the state’s “high quality” and “exceptional value” waterways are predominantly found, said foundation scientist Harry Campbell.
“The heart of the matter is that those water bodies overlay, almost to a T, where predominantly the drilling activity is occurring,” Campbell said. The settlement contains “very significant sea changes in the way we are permitting those facilities within those watersheds that house the very special water.”
The settlement was approved by an Environmental Hearing Board judge and included subsidiaries of Houston-based Ultra Petroleum Corp. and Calgary-based Talisman Energy Inc. The resulting stricter review process could take up to 60 days. Currently, those permits can get approved in a matter of two weeks.
“It’s important to give the DEP more time to look at everything,” foundation lawyer Amy McDonnell said.
The DEP said in a statement that the revisions would make the permit review process “more robust.”
“This proposed settlement is an important step forward in our continued commitment to oversee this industry in an environmentally and economically conscious manner,” the statement said.
The agency must still take public comment for 60 days on the proposed change.
Under it, the department will require the stricter review if drilling-related activity poses the potential to pollute a high-quality waterway, or if a well pad is on a flood plain.
The DEP will have to decide how close a project has to be to warrant more scrutiny, McDonnell said. Current state law dictates that no well may be prepared or drilled within 100 feet of any waterway, though a number of lawmakers, as well as the DEP, have proposed expanding that buffer.
Amid industry complaints about a slow and bureaucratic permitting process, the DEP in 2009 took steps to speed up reviews of permits for well-related construction. However, the foundation complained that, without a technical review, fast-tracking the permit reviews of erosion, sediment and stormwater control plans was illegal.
The DEP was only reviewing the applications administratively to ensure they were complete, and relied on the word of a professional engineer that the application complied with the law.
The foundation began reviewing some of the permits the department had issued and found, for instance, that one failed to mention that a pipeline would be crossing a high-value wetland or they lacked stormwater preparations, foundation officials said.
As a result, the DEP revoked permits issued to Ultra and Talisman, both in northern Pennsylvania, and then reissued them after the problems were fixed.
The foundation has not carried out a more recent review to see whether the DEP has continued to approve error-riddled permit applications. But Campbell said the department since then has made strides to get more inspectors in the field to enforce compliance.
Major drilling companies began descending on Pennsylvania in earnest in 2008 to exploit the Marcellus Shale formation, regarded as the nation’s largest-known natural gas reservoir.
It lies primarily beneath Pennsylvania, New York, West Virginia and Ohio. Pennsylvania is the center of activity, with more than 3,000 wells drilled in the past three years and thousands more planned in the coming years as thick shale emerges as an affordable, plentiful and profitable source of natural gas.
For decades, energy companies have drilled shallow oil and gas wells in Pennsylvania. But the use of high-volume hydraulic fracturing, which involves the underground injection of chemicals and produces millions of gallons of often-toxic wastewater, in the Marcellus Shale formation has sparked fresh environmental concerns about the protection of public waterways that provide drinking water to millions of people.