Westmoreland Marcellus
Citizens’ Group Updates
July 26, 2013
* To view permanent documents, past updates,
reports, general information and meeting information
http://westmorelandmarcellus.blogspot.com/
*
To discuss candidates: http://www.facebook.com/groups/VoteProEarth/
* To contact your state
legislator:
For email
address, click on the envelope under the photo
* For information on the state gas legislation
and local control: http://pajustpowers.org/aboutthebills.html-
Calendar of Events
***County
Commissioners Meeting- 2nd
and 4th Thursday of the month at the county courthouse at 10:00
For a full calendar
of area events please see “Marcellus Protest” calendar:
http://marcellusprotest.org/
TAKE ACTION!!
***WTAE WTAE reported on the recent preliminary
findings of a study that indicated there was no migration from 8 Marcellus wells, but has not reported
on several other independent studies indicating contamination. KDKA did not
mention that the truck spilling hydrochloric acid on I- 70 was a fracking truck.
The media’s coverage of fracking is either non- existent or
pro-industry. I called WTAE and complained that they only reported part of the
study (see # 1) but more importantly that they have provided no coverage of
many other studies that have found water contaminated with methane, ethane,
propane, and toxic chemicals. The staff person responded that you could pick
any research you want. I explained that
there is gas industry sponsored research and independent research and the media
has not been covering any of the independent research unless it is pro-
fracking. They have not interviewed
people who are sick, or reported on the existence of the SW PA Environmental
Health Study. I mentioned several other important issues that have received no attention.
The WTAE representative responded that they have covered stories on fracking. I
asked when, and he had to admit the stories he was referring to were aired 3
years ago. 3 years ago! I commented that
that was before the station started receiving money from Range. He denied that
they received money from Range. I was,
of course, referring to huge amounts of money for advertisement. He had no response.
The point
is –We need to speak up. This is the public corporately owned media.
Speaking out is our civic duty. Don’t grumble to yourself and let irresponsible
reporting continue day after day. When you see something particularly
irritating and irresponsible —call or email the station and let them know it is
not accurate. Jan
WTAE—412- 244- 4444
***Stop Fracking Allegheny County Parks-From Doug Shields
Dear Friends,
I just created the petition "Stop The Fracking of Our
Allegheny County Regional Parks" and wanted to ask if you could add your
name too.
This campaign means a lot to me and the more support we can
get behind it, the better chance we have of succeeding. You can read more and
sign the petition here:
http://org.credoaction.com/petitions/stop-the-fracking-of-our-allegheny-county-regional-parks
Thank you!
Douglas Shields
P.S. Can you also take a moment to share the petition with
others? It's really easy – all you need to do is forward this email or share
this link on Facebook or Twitter:
*** Tell the Obama Administration: Don't put fracking advocates in charge of a fracking
pollution investigation
Earthworks
The state
of Wyoming is taking over a U.S. EPA investigation into the possible contamination
of Pavillion, WY area groundwater by fracking.
EPA had already concluded -- for the first
time -- that fracking had polluted groundwater, and was getting their
conclusion peer reviewed when Wyoming's Governor Mead announced it was taking
over.
The state could only take control if the
Obama administration allowed it. In allowing it, the White House is
allowing the very interests who denied there was a problem in the first place
to -- in essence -- investigate themselves. And now the people around Pavillion
have been abandoned, their polluted drinking water unresolved.
All-of-the-above
energy myth abandons communities.
This
decision continues a nationwide pattern of Obama Administration walk backs of
EPA investigations whose preliminary results indicate fracking-enabled oil and
gas development presents real risks to public health and water. Similar actions have occurred in Parker
County, Texas, and Dimock, Pennsylvania.
TAKE ACTION Here: Tell President
Obama and the EPA to stand by their own study!
***Tell Gov.
Corbett- Time to Clean Up the Fracking Mess-
Clean Water Action
“We know
that fracking is contaminating our water. We know that DEP knows. So is DEP
doing anything about it? We deserve better from our State Government - take
action today!
Every day
families receive no action from the DEP is a day they have to live without
access to one of our most basic needs, clean drinking water. Tell Governor
Corbett his DEP must take action to protect our drinking water from natural gas
drilling!
Send your message to Governor
Corbett and your State Legislators:
Please personalize your message! We've provided a sample
email, but your message will have a bigger impact if it is in your own words.”
***Tell Bureau of
Land Management to Reveal Frack Chemicals
Center for Effective Government
Recently, Duke University
published a new study showing that hydraulic fracturing, or
"fracking," poses serious threats to our drinking water. The Duke
study found that, on average, methane concentrations in drinking water were six
times higher and ethane concentrations were 23 times higher than normal at
homes near fracking wells. Propane, another flammable gas, was also found in
drinking water samples.
People
living near fracking sites have a right to know what chemical risks they may be
facing. Unfortunately, the federal
Bureau of Land Management (BLM) has proposed a weak rule that would not require
companies to reveal all the chemicals they are pumping underground when
drilling on public lands.
Please
click here to urge the Bureau of Land Management to require fracking companies
to disclose the dangerous chemicals they are using when drilling on public
land.
As
proposed, the BLM rule allows drilling companies to keep some of the chemicals
used in fracking secret from the public, the government, and emergency
responders. And instead of posting the names of disclosed chemicals on an
official public website, the companies would submit their information to a
private, industry-funded site called FracFocus.org. Information sent to this
site may not be subject to open government laws like the Freedom of Information
Act.
The
deadline to comment on the rule is Aug. 23, so please take a few moments to
weigh in now. Tell the Bureau of Land Management to revise its proposed rule
and protect our water supplies.
As always, thank you for being an active, engaged citizen.
Katherine McFate, President and CEO, Center for Effective
Government
Frack Links
***To sign up for
notifications of activity and violations for
your area:
***List of the Harmed--There are now
over 1300 residents of Pennsylvania who became sick after fracking began in
their area and placed their names on the list of the harmed. http://pennsylvaniaallianceforcleanwaterandair.wordpress.com/the-list/
The Daily Show’s John Oliver interviews Gasland Director
Josh Fox on his new film, Gasland Part II, which elaborates on the government’s
role in promoting the fossil fuel industry’s practice of fracking for natural
gas and oil. Exposing the grave warning signs coming from U.S. “energy
sacrifice zones,” Fox warns of the systemic corruption with regard to our
regulatory agencies and industry influence. He also discusses the technical and
engineering problems of the fracking process and the effects of methane
emissions being worse for climate change than coal.
***Health Problems Forum-Video
Mac Sawyer, former gas field truck driver, Joe Giovannini mason and resident of
Cannonsburg, Robert McCaslin who
worked as master driller. Larysa Dyrszka, MD, Board certified pediatrician, former director of pediatrics at Holy
Name Hospital in Teaneck, NJ, attendee at the first US Health Impact Assessment
Conference in Washington DC., and affiliate member of Physicians Scientists and
Engineers for Healthy Energy and Lauren
Williams, Esq, PA attorney specializing in environmental and public law who
focuses on land use issues including those that relate to gas drilling. Lauren
William’s discussion of the gag order on doctors is a good explanation of the
problems surrounding the Act 13 order.
You must click on each speaker in turn to hear all the presentations.
***Dr. Brasch
Hosts Fracking Program-- Dr. Walter Brasch, author of the critically
acclaimed book, Fracking Pennsylvania,
is hosting a weekly half-hour radio show about fracking. "The Frack Report" airs 7:30 p.m.,
Mondays (beginning July 29) and is re-run 7:30 a.m., Wednesdays, on WFTE-FM
(90.3 in Mt. Cobb and 105.7 in Scranton.) The show will be also be live
streamed at www.wfte.org and also available a day after the Monday night
broadcast on the station's website. Brasch's first guest is Karen Feridun,
founder of Berks Gas Truth. He will be interviewing activists, persons affected
by fracking, scientists, and politicians. Each show will also feature news
about fracking and the anti-fracking movement.
Brasch is a multi-award-winning four-decade
journalist and social activist, a former newspaper reporter and editor,
multimedia production writer-producer. Among his most recent awards are those
from the Pennsylvania Associated Press Broadcasters Association, Pennsylvania
Press Club, National Federation of Press Women, National Society of Newspaper
Columnists, and Society of Professional Journalists. He is professor emeritus
from the Pa. State System of Higher Education. He is also the author of 17
books, most fusing history with contemporary social issues.
***Watch Gasland
II for Free
FRACK NEWS
1.
Study: Water Not
Polluted At 8 Marcellus Well Sites
This report was very misleading. The account reprinted in
news sources, even USA Today and other national papers, comes from Kevin Begos.
Anyone who follows fracking news knows that there was never a gas well Begos
didn’t love. It is interesting that one article included the fact that DOE gave
the information to AP—not to other more critical news sources, just AP News was
noted. If this preliminary study, not
yet peer reviewed, does not find migration at the eight Marcellus well sites
that were selected, it does not mean drilling poses no risk to drinking water
as was headlined in the media. Most of the contamination that has occurred thus
far across the country has been attributed to faulty well casings, spills, and
leaks, not migration. In addition, this study only finds that migration did not
occur at these particular wells that were selected and monitored in corroboration
with the gas industry. There are many other studies that show migration from gas
wells into water wells/aquifers can occur much more quickly than previously
thought and that it has, in fact, occurred. But not a word of those studies was
televised and they received almost no newspaper space. Jan
“A study found no chemicals from the fracking process
migrated to contaminate drinking water aquifers at a western PA drilling site.
After a year of monitoring, the researchers found that the frack chemicals stayed
thousands of feet below the areas that supply drinking water. Drilling fluids
tagged with unique markers were injected more than 8,000 feet below the
surface, but were not detected in a monitoring zone 3,000 feet higher.
The National Energy Technology Laboratory study marked the
first time that a drilling company let
government scientists inject special tracers into the fracking fluid and
then continue regular monitoring to see whether it spread toward drinking water
sources. Eight new Marcellus Shale
horizontal wells were monitored in Greene County, Pa. The scientists also
monitored a separate series of older gas
wells that are about 3,000 feet above the Marcellus. While the lack of
contamination is encouraging, Jackson said he wondered whether the unidentified
drilling company might have consciously or unconsciously taken extra care with
the research site, since it was being watched. He also noted that other aspects
of the drilling process can cause pollution, such as poor well construction,
surface spills of chemicals, and wastewater.
"This
is good news," said Duke University
scientist Rob Jackson, who was not involved with the study. He called it a
"useful and important approach" to monitoring fracking, but cautioned that the single study doesn't
prove that fracking can't pollute, since geology and industry practices vary
widely in Pennsylvania and across the nation.
One finding surprised the
researchers: Seismic monitoring determined one hydraulic fracture traveled
1,800 feet (6 football fields long!) out from the well bore; most traveled just
a few hundred feet.”
Scott Anderson, a drilling expert with the Environment
Defense Fund, said:
"Very few people think that fracking at significant
depths routinely leads to water contamination. But the jury is still out on
what the odds are that this might happen in special situations," Anderson
said.
And more on Migration:
2.
Former Vice President of Mobil Speaks on Migration of Methane into Drinking water
“The industry will
tell you that the mile or two between the zone that's being fracked is not
going to let anything come up.
But there are already cases where the methane gas has made it up into
the aquifers and atmosphere. Sometimes
through old well bores, sometimes through natural fissures in the rock. What we
don't know is just how much gas is going to come up over time. It's a point
most people haven't gotten. It's not just what's happening today. We're opening
up channels for the gas to creep up to the surface and into the atmosphere. And
methane is a much more potent greenhouse gas in the short term - less than 100
years - than carbon dioxide.
Ellen Cantrow, Truthout Journalist: Was there any
major turning point that started you thinking about methane migration?
Louis Allstadt, former executive VP of Mobil: There were
many. An example is that one of the appendices of the draft SGEIS [New York
Department of Environmental Conservation guidelines for the gas industry] that
was issued in July 2011, had a section describing an EPA study of the only
cases where similar fractures had been unearthed. These were in a coal-mining
area. The EPA investigation indicated
that the fractures had progressed in unexpected patterns and at greater lengths
than expected. In September, when the draft SGEIS was eventually put out for
comment, that section had been expunged.
EC: That's shocking! I know a lot has been
discovered about the collusion between New York's DEC and the industry. Is this one big example?
LA: Yes, it is. To ignore the only direct evidence of fractures, or to
remove it from public information, indicates that the industry was trying to
hide something. The other point is that in terms of a turning point (in my
thinking), here is evidence that the fractures
go further and in patterns that were not expected. It showed that fractures
could allow methane to reach drinking water aquifers or the atmosphere.”
3. Interstate 70 near
Smithton Shut Down Due to 100 Gallon Hydrochloric
Acid Leak
Poister Says it Evaporated on the Road
From: Donnan
Landscape
Bob Donnan’s Commentary:
“Seems you
can never escape the presence of the oil and gas industry for very long.
Returning from a weekend trip to the Laurel Highlands, we became part of the
‘captive audience’ in an Interstate 70 traffic jam due to a spill of
[hydrochloric acid & ‘who knows what’] when the interstate was closed for
over 4 hours yesterday from a truck like the one in the photo below. Thanks Halliburton!
And the iffy-ness of what was actually in this
tanker truck further points to improvements that need to be made with
placarding and shipment logs of O&G trucks travelling Pennsylvania
highways.”
Responsible
Party--Halliburton
“July 21, 2013 -- A leak from a tanker carrying water mixed
with hydrochloric acid residue prompted officials to close a stretch of
Interstate 70 near Smithton for more than four hours Sunday. A motorist spotted a leaking valve on a
Halliburton tanker and called 911.
John Poister, DEP spokesman, said the tanker was carrying 100 gallons of water
with hydrochloric acid residue. “The water was back flow from a cleaning
project,” Poister said. It did not penetrate any groundwater sources. “I think
most of it evaporated on the pavement,” Poister said. Because the tanker was
stopped under an I-70 bridge, officials asked the nearby Flying J and Smithton
Travel Center plazas to evacuate.
“That (water mixed with the acid) is
what they claimed it was. We got it from three different (sources). The shipping papers did not really show
what was in there. We knew it was some type of acid. ... We originally
thought it was pure hydrochloric acid. ... I would trust their (DEP) judgment. Halliburton confirmed it and the driver
told us (it was a water mixture),” Nemec said.”
Read: http://triblive.com/news/westmoreland/4396738-74/county-department-interstate#axzz2ZjO0Bhug
**********************
HYDROCHLORIC ACID –From Bob Donnan
Concentrated hydrochloric acid (fuming hydrochloric acid)
forms acidic mists. Both the mist and the solution have a corrosive effect on
human tissue, with the potential to damage respiratory organs, eyes, skin, and
intestines.
4.
Delmont Rejects Seismic Testing
“Although it wants to
map subterranean gas pockets in Delmont, Cougar Land Services, Texas, won't have permission to survey
borough-owned lands.
Delmont Council last week rejected their request to complete seismic
testing underneath the borough building.
The proposed testing was in anticipation of future drilling by Chevron,
borough solicitor Dan Hewitt said.
“They want to plant small bombs on your property, detonate them and do
mapping,” Hewitt said. “There is no benefit to the borough.”
Seismic testing enables
drilling companies to determine what areas are suitable for hydraulic fracturing.
Using seismic waves, explosives or vibrating machines, drillers are able to
“map” where pockets of gas are located. The process is used to determine if
drilling would be profitable on a particular property.”
Comment from WMCG
member on Seismic Testing In Delmont:
“I found it
interesting, and encouraging, that Delmont's solicitor and council feel that
what is good for the drillers is not necessarily good for the community. And if it isn't good for the community, maybe
it isn't good for the residents of the community. What benefit is there to any
of this activity? The money? At what cost?
These are huge trucks, 60,000 to 80,000 pounds each and multiple trucks
are used. What are essentially man-made
earthquakes are created, sending energy into the earth--and locally, that earth
has been undermined for coal. Dynamite
is placed in "shot holes," 50-100 feet deep according to an article
from Wildlands CPR. And the advisors
(Penn State Extension) tell us, if we consider leasing or permitting seismic testing
on our property, to get a good lawyer who knows the gas industry. What is wrong with this picture?”
5. On Seismic Testing By Kathryn Hilton, Mt.
Watershed
“Seismic Testing is
performed before an area is selected for drilling. This involves laying miles
of lines, much like outdoor extension cords laid out over the land in grid
fashion for great distances. Then either explosive charges are dropped from the
air and ignited or “thumper” trucks are placed strategically in this grid to
pound the ground to create seismic waves, which can then be analyzed
electronically in a remote location. These seismic tests can damage
foundations, bridges, retaining walls, towers, and other infrastructure.
Homeowners’ insurance does not usually cover damage resulting from seismic
testing. To be able to claim a damage
one must allow the company to come into one’s home and on property to photograph
before testing happens for documentation.
However,
if you own gas rights you do not have to consent to allow testing on your
property and it is trespassing if they do come on your property- this applies
to if you own the road way and have given easement to a township or the state-
you have absolute right to refuse their testing.”
Good article on
Seismic: http://www.wildlandscpr.org/road-riporter/shake-rattle-roll-understanding-seismic-testing
6. Eminent Domain in Penn Township
“Sunoco Pipeline officials are trying to use eminent domain to
acquire an easement near a retirement home/assisted-living center in Penn
Township for a 50-mile liquid gas-transmission line. The company filed a
petition in Westmoreland County Common Pleas Court against Quest Realty
Partnership, which owns 89 acres.
Court
records show the filing is Sunoco’s
first attempt in the county to take right-of-way against a property owner’s
wishes for the Mariner East project. Sunoco also initiated cases last week
to request court orders enabling it to go onto properties in Sewickley and
South Huntingdon townships to perform environmental testing related to the
proposed pipeline path.
Sunoco
has plans to run its pipeline — to transport ethane and propane as natural gas
liquids — along the same route as an existing line owned by Dominion
Transmission Inc. Dominion previously got a court order to condemn via eminent
domain a portion of Quest’s property along Mellon Road in August 2011.
In its filing against Quest, Sunoco said
it may use the right of eminent domain because it is considered a “public
utility corporation” under Pennsylvania’s Business Corporation Law.
But a
Harrisburg attorney who represents some Washington County property owners in
the pipeline’s path says it’s not clear to him that Sunoco has the authority
for eminent domain.
Under
the law Sunoco cites, a company may receive permission to condemn land for
pipes transporting natural gas, petroleum or petroleum products but not
natural-gas liquids, Michael Faherty said.
“I
think it’s open to a number of challenges,” Faherty said after reviewing a copy
of Sunoco’s filing.
Quest’s
attorney, George Pomper, also disputed Sunoco’s authority in a letter earlier
this year in which he opposed Sunoco’s court filing to conduct environmental
testing on Quest’s property.
“Sunoco is not a ‘utility’ to the best of
our knowledge,” Pomper said in the Jan. 24 letter filed in court records.
“Sunoco is known as a gasoline retailer and purveyor of motoring products such
as wiper blades, tires and convenience store goods. “The owners of Quest Realty
are not aware of any electricity, natural gas, water and the like sold by
Sunoco to the public.” Pomper did not return messages from the Penn-Trafford
Star about Sunoco’s filing.
Landowners who oppose eminent domain can
raise objections questioning whether a company is properly licensed or if a
project could create environmental concerns, said Peter Georgiades, a
Pittsburgh attorney who specializes in eminent domain issues. But simply saying,
“I don’t want it” isn’t sufficient, he said. “There’s no leg to stand on if you
don’t want it,” Georgiades said.
As of Monday, Sunoco reached agreements for rights-of-way for 16
Penn Township residential and industrial properties, county records show. Two
months ago, Penn Township commissioners declined to act on Sunoco’s offer of a
$1,550 payment for an easement on vacant property the township owns behind
Smartie Artie’s at Zackel’s restaurant in Claridge. Manager Bruce Light he
hasn’t heard anything from Sunoco since, but the township has received notice
that Sunoco applied for an erosion and sedimentation control permit from the
Westmoreland Conservation District.”
http://www.eminentdomainpa.com/mike-faherty-identifies-defenses-to-sunocos-attempt-to-use-eminent-domain-power/?
utm_source=feedburner&utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=Feed%3A+eminentdomainpa%2FoHQj+%28Eminent+Domain+PA%29
Chris Foreman
Staff
Reporter, Tribune-Review
Published: Wednesday, July 17, 2013
7. Act 13 Judges
"We’ve just
learned that the newly appointed 7th judge, Judge Stevens, will not
participate in the Act 13 case, meaning it will definitely be decided by six
justices. Unless one of them changes, a 3-3 decision would mean the lower
courts’ decision stands."
8. Act 13 –Understanding the
Legal Aspects
By
Michael C. Duffy and Harry Weiss All Articles
The
Legal Intelligencer
July
23, 2013 Excerpt:
“The fate of Pennsylvania's controversial
zoning provisions of Act 13, the 2012 amendment to the Oil and Gas Act, will
soon be decided by the Supreme Court in Robinson
Township v. Commonwealth. At stake are provisions that would require
municipalities to eliminate most restrictions on unconventional gas well
development from local zoning ordinances. The provisions at issue expressly seek to
provide a one-size-fits-all approach to local control of oil and gas
development. This effort at uniformity has been met with stiff opposition from
municipalities that believe Act 13 goes too far, usurping a local government's
traditional role of regulating land use within its borders for the health and
safety of its residents. So far, the plaintiff municipalities have had the
better of the argument, challenging Act 13 on constitutional grounds, in
contrast to a nationwide trend that has seen state courts relying on
state/local conflict pre-emption doctrine to limit local efforts to regulate
oil and gas development.
The Pennsylvania Commonwealth Court
declared the Pennsylvania provisions unconstitutional and void in July 2012,
and based on earlier Supreme Court decisions on the topic, there is reason to
expect that the state's highest court may uphold that decision. This outcome
would restore municipalities' authority to enact zoning ordinances limiting, at
a minimum, the location of oil and gas drilling activities within the
municipality — authority recognized by the Pennsylvania Supreme Court itself in
2009 in Huntley & Huntley v. Borough Council of Borough of Oakmont, 964
A.2d 855 (Pa. 2009).
To understand what Robinson Township is about, it is helpful to
understand what the case is not about.
Three
recent opinions from West Virginia, Ohio and New York provide an excellent
overview of the trend in other jurisdictions finding pre-emption of local
ordinances by state oil and gas law.
Trends in other states:
In West Virginia, the city of
Morgantown passed an ordinance banning unconventional gas drilling within the
city. The Monongalia County Circuit Court adopted the reasoning traditionally
applied in state/local conflict pre-emption cases in Northeast Natural Energy
v. City of Morgantown, No. 11-C-411, slip op. (Cir. Ct. Monongalia City. Aug.
12, 2011). The court found that West
Virginia law manifests the state's intent to control the entire field of oil
and gas development. Because the city's ban conflicted with the state's
objective, the ban was pre-empted.
In Ohio, an appellate court held that a
local ordinance imposing permitting, zoning and right-of-way construction
restrictions on unconventional gas development was pre-empted in part by Ohio
oil and gas law in State ex. rel. Morrison v. Beck Energy, 2013-Ohio-356, slip
op. (9th App. Dist. Feb. 6, 2013). The court noted that Ohio law gives the state exclusive authority to regulate
"permitting, location and spacing of oil and gas wells and production
operations."
New York courts that have addressed the
issue generally have come down on the
side of local regulation, despite using the same analysis as the West Virginia
and Ohio courts. In Norse Energy Corp. USA v. Town of Dryden, 964 N.Y.S.2d
714 (N.Y. App. Div. 2013), a New York
appellate court held that a local zoning ordinance that, in effect, banned all
unconventional gas development in the municipality was not pre-empted by New
York state oil and gas law because the state law contained no clear expression
of legislative intent to control the land-use aspects of oil and gas
development in such a way that it would pre-empt local zoning authority. Thus,
in contrast to the West Virginia and Ohio decisions, Norse Energy's home-rule
analysis favored preservation of local authority in the absence of any
conflict between the state oil and gas law and local ordinance. Although this
was a victory for the municipality, the Norse Energy court implicitly left open
the possibility that the New York Legislature could pre-empt local zoning authority
if it chose to clearly express such an intention.
At first glance, it appears as if this
tension between state regulation of all aspects of oil and gas development on
one hand and local governments' duty to ensure the health, safety and welfare of
the community through local ordinance on the other hand is at the center of
Robinson Township. However, Robinson
Township instead is about Pennsylvania's ability to constitutionally mandate
the development of local comprehensive growth and development plans (via the
Municipalities Planning Code), while simultaneously imposing uniform
restrictions on all municipalities' zoning powers, when such restrictions may
incidentally conflict with municipalities' comprehensive plans. In other words,
the constitutional limits of the state's ability to encroach on local zoning
authority, rather than the limits of local authority to encroach on a field
occupied by state law, is the central issue in Robinson Township.
In Robinson Township, the state argues that municipalities are
"creatures of the state," whose powers are limited to those granted
by the state, and, as such, the state can pre-empt the exercise of those
powers through statutory enactment, unless such enactment is unconstitutional.
The state further notes that Act 13's zoning provisions do not pre-empt local
governments from enacting zoning ordinances, as long as they do not place any
restrictions on the location of oil and gas drilling operations in conflict
with Act 13.
The plaintiffs, including seven municipalities,
assert that Act 13 would force municipalities to shoehorn oil and gas drilling
operations into zoning districts where such activities would conflict with the
local government's mandate to protect the health, safety and welfare of its
citizens and provide for orderly development of the community. Imposing such
requirements on local governments would be an improper use of the state's
police power under the due process provisions of Article 1, Section 1, of the
Pennsylvania Constitution. Thus, the municipalities have avoided confronting
Act 13 on conflict pre-emption doctrine grounds — a confrontation they almost
certainly would have lost — and put the state in the constitutional hot seat.
At the heart of the Commonwealth Court's decision
was the notion that zoning in furtherance of Act 13's oil and gas development
objectives is not the same as zoning "in conformance with a comprehensive
plan for growth and development of the community," the latter being the
only constitutional application of zoning. The
upshot of the court's decision is that the state now appears powerless to
pre-empt local zoning ordinances restricting oil and gas development, even if
such ordinances rise to an outright ban, as in New York. Consequently,
while the rationale of Norse Energy left room for the state to pre-empt municipality
wide local zoning bans on hydraulic fracturing if it should choose to, the
Robinson Township decision would leave Pennsylvania powerless to do so.
Such an
outcome could be groundbreaking from a national perspective but not inconsistent with prior
Pennsylvania case law on point. In Huntley, the Supreme Court broadly
acknowledged the state's ability to limit local power, stating that even where
the state previously granted municipalities power to act in a particular field,
such powers are abrogated when the state pre-empts the field. However, the
"field" at issue in Huntley was oil and gas development, not zoning.
Ultimately finding that the then-applicable oil and gas law did not conflict
with, and therefore did not pre-empt, local zoning restrictions on oil and gas
development, Huntley left the door open, as New York has, for the state's
express pre-emption of local zoning authority.
Nevertheless, Huntley observed
that the purposes of zoning ordinances and oil and gas law are distinctly
different — an observation relied upon heavily in the Robinson Township ruling.
Because those doors were left open, the Supreme Court now has the opportunity
to uphold the lower court's Constitution-based decision while preserving the
well-established principles of state/local conflict pre-emption doctrine
articulated by the Huntley court. Notably, the municipalities also have an
advantage in the Robinson Township proceedings because the currently
shorthanded court's three liberal and three conservative justices would uphold
the Commonwealth Court's ruling by default in the event of a tie — though it's
possible interim Justice Correale Stevens will be involved with the ruling
depending on its timing.
Victory for the plaintiff municipalities is not set in stone, but it
appears that the Pennsylvania Supreme Court will have to fracture the existing
legal bedrock to extract an outcome favorable to the state and industry.
Michael C. Duffy is an associate
in Ballard Spahr's litigation department. He focuses on federal and
Pennsylvania environmental regulatory compliance and environmental litigation.”
Harry Weiss is a partner in the firm's environment and
natural resources practice.
Read
more: http://www.law.com/jsp/pa/PubArticlePA.jsp?id=1202611305808&slreturn=20130623234346#ixzz2ZvoQRtOn
9. Allegheny National Forest
Drilled
"Those
wondering what opportunity looks like to drillers in regions originally set
aside for conservation need only visit the Allegheny National Forest in Western
Pennsylvania, a state that has opened its arms to drillers in recent years.
Nearly 4,000 oil and gas wells were drilled in the Allegheny between 2005 and
2011. “Where there were once remote
areas of the forest there is now oil and gas infrastructure,” said Ryan Talbott
of the Allegheny Defense Project. “If you are a recreationist going to go out
and go hiking, camping, fishing, what might have been your favorite area before
is now a sea of roads and pipelines and well sites.”
In 2009, under
pressure from Allegheny Defense and other environmental groups, the Forest
Service sought to monitor the drilling, implement environmental safeguards and
provide a measure of planning to the spaghetti network of drill sites. But 93
percent of the mineral rights in the state are privately held and the Forest Service, in a case currently under
review by the 3rd Circuit Court of Appeals, was sued by the gas companies who
claim their property rights were violated."
http://blog.skytruth.org/2011/11/us-national-forests-no-match-for.html
http://www.commondreams.org/view/2013/07/17
10. Treatment Plants Accused
of Illegally Disposing Radioactive
Frack Wastewater
Clean Water Action Sues
DeSmogBlog
By Sharon Kelly
“A
Pennsylvania industrial wastewater
treatment plant has been illegally accepting oil and gas wastewater and
polluting the Allegheny River with radioactive waste and other pollutants,
according Clean Water Action, which announced today that it is suing the plant.
“Waste
Treatment Corporation has been illegally discharging oil and gas wastewater
since at least 2003, and continues to discharge such wastewater without
authorization under the Clean Water Act and the Clean Streams Law,” the notice
of intent to sue delivered by Clean Water Action reads.
Many pollutants associated with oil and gas drilling—including chlorides, bromides, strontium
and magnesium—were discovered immediately downstream of the plant’s discharge
pipe in Warren, PA, state regulators discovered in January. Upstream of the
plant, those same contaminants were found at levels one percent or less than
those downstream, or were not present at all.
State officials also discovered that
the sediments immediately downstream from the plant were tainted with high
levels of radium-226, radium-228 and uranium. Those particular radioactive elements are known to be
found at especially high levels in wastewater from fracking, and state regulators have warned that the
radioactive materials would tend to accumulate in river sediment downstream
from plants accepting Marcellus waste.
“To us, that says
that they are discharging Marcellus Shale wastewater, although no one admits to
sending it to them,” said Myron Arnowitt, Pennsylvania state director for Clean
Water Action.
A request for comment
sent to Waste Treatment Corporation has not yet been answered.
The amount of radioactivity found in
the Allegheny riverbed is striking. Sediments just downstream of the Waste
Treatment Corporation’s discharge pipe contained over 50 picocuries per gram
(pCi/g) of radium-226, state records show. To put that number in rough context,
the levels in found in the Allegheny are
10 times those that the U.S. EPA requires the surface soil at cleaned-up uranium mining
sites to achieve.
Most of the radioactive
wastes associated with fracking are too weak to cause harm to people unless they
are breathed in, drank or eaten, since the alpha and beta radioactivity they
primarily give off is too weak to get past people’s skin. But at the levels discovered
by state regulators, the dirt from the Allegheny’s
riverbed could potentially be
radioactive enough to cause harm to people who are simply near it.
Once-confidential oil
and gas industry
studies have also pointed to another
risk from disposing of radioactive materials from drilling or fracking in
waterways—the risk to fish and aquatic life like crustaceans and mollusks. Radium bioaccumulates
in fish, meaning that the more a fish ingests contaminated water or soil over
its lifetime, the more radium it will contain. If people eat those fish, those radioactive materials consumed along
with the fish can do harm to people’s internal organs.
In their January
study, state officials did not test fish or other animals like large clams or
mussels from the Allegheny to see whether they were carrying radium or other
pollutants. But they did study smaller organisms, and concluded that the wastewater being discharged after being
processed by Waste Treatment Corporation into the Allegheny was “negatively impacting” aquatic life,
specifically bugs, snails and small mollusks in the river. Many
pollution-sensitive creatures found upstream of the plant’s discharge pipe were
missing downstream from the pipe.
“Those are the base
of the food pyramid for large species like fish that people are generally more
concerned about,” Mr. Arnowitt said.
Just last month another
industrial wastewater treatment plant was sanctioned by the EPA for illegally
discharging untreated Marcellus waste. Environmental regulators also discovered high levels of radium around
the discharge pipe at the Pennsylvania
Brine Treatment Josephine plant. That plant was fined over $80,000 and the
owner agreed to make up to $30 million in upgrades before accepting any more
Marcellus shale wastewater.
The Clean Water Action lawsuit also calls
attention to a troubling lack of record keeping for the toxic wastewater
generated by the shale drilling boom, raising the possibility that more illegal
dumping could be uncovered in the future.”
11. Pipelines and Ordinances
(from a group member)
“In looking into the
issue of pipeline safety, I found a series of articles published in the Phil.
Inquirer in Dec 2011 right before Act 13 was passed.
There are two references to municipalities in Westmoreland County in
the article “’Us vs. Them’ in PA Gaslands”:
In Westmoreland County, near
Pittsburgh, Range Resources successfully
filed suit to strike down the drilling and pipelines ordinance in Salem
Township.
The court case, said Township Solicitor Gary Falatovich, "did a
really good job of dismantling every modest control that the township was
trying to impose. What can I tell you?"
and
Larry Grimm, a supervisor in Mount Pleasant Township in Westmoreland
County, was more emphatic. He said Corbett and the legislature were stripping
local officials of the ability to tailor laws to fit their unique areas.”
"We're different
than they are up there in Potter County, enormously different," Grimm
said. "They're taking that away from us. It's just that simple."
Read more at http://www.philly.com/philly/news/special_packages/inquirer/marcellus-shale/20111212_Us_vs__Them_in_Pa__Gaslands.html#3BZCZQXD4XZx0W6J.99
12.
Past President Colorado Medical Society ---Cancer Concerns with Fracking
“A former president
of the Colorado Medical Society calls the current hydraulic fracturing boom an
“experiment in motion” for the public.
One that could lead to higher rates of cancer and other illnesses over
the next 10 to 15 years.
Dr. Michael Pramenko,
a Grand Junction family physician, says he isn’t as worried about acute cases
of exposure to carcinogens in “fracking” fluid – although he has treated a
patient who accidently guzzled cancer-causing benzene. Pramenko says he is more
concerned with long-term exposure from tainted water.
“Are there
people out there being exposed to low quantities [of carcinogens] that we won’t
ever know about? Sure,” he said. “Are there going to be some cancers down the
road that come about across the United States? I think that’s true.”
Officials acknowledge there are up to 400 oil and gas spills each year
in Colorado, but they say only 20 percent contaminate groundwater.
Boulder attorney Corey Zurbuch this
month argued a case before the Colorado Court of Appeals pitting a Western
Slope family against Denver-based Antero Resources. The Strudleys of Silt Mesa, near Glenwood Springs, claimed a nearby gas
rig forced them from their home in 2011 by fouling their water and air and
causing severe rashes, nosebleeds and blackouts.
Their case was
dismissed before the discovery stage, Zurbuch argued, without the company fully
divulging what chemicals they used, whether any spilled and if there were
problems with the well. A ruling is still pending, but Zurbuch says such
litigation will become more common as drilling moves closer to schools and homes
in populated areas of the state – and that physicians need to become more aware
of the symptoms of exposure.
“The panoply of
symptoms that you can get if you’re living near one of these [rigs] – you’re
being subjected to air pollution, pollution from the increase of diesel trucks,
the pollution directly off the wells, and you may have water contamination,”
Zurbuch said.
Depending on the
chemical, symptoms can range from vomiting to gastrointestinal pain, seizures,
dizziness, drowsiness and weakness.
Tainted water sometimes leaks from holding ponds and pipelines, and on
occasion has contaminated nearby drinking water wells in rural areas. Major
spills also occurred at a Suncor refinery north of Denver in 2011 and at a Williams’s
gas plant near Parachute on the Western Slope this year. Both spills resulted in benzene levels higher than federal limits for
safe drinking water in Sand Creek and the South Platte River (Suncor) and
Parachute Creek (Williams).
One of the most
common industrial chemicals, benzene is also used in gasoline, diesel fuel,
industrial solvents and paint. Long-term exposure can lead to acute myelogenous
leukemia (AML), which is a cancer of the blood-forming organs.
That’s alarming to
Pramenko, who is particularly concerned about rural areas where drinking water
often comes from domestic wells near drilling operations. Pramenko treated Ned Prather, a DeBeque rancher and outfitter who five
years ago accidentally ingested a glass of benzene-laced water from his
drinking well the state later said was fouled by a nearby Williams rig.
“Equate it to a
cigarette,” Pramenko said. “You’re not going to get cancer from smoking one
cigarette. You’re not going to get cancer from drinking one glass of water. Its
repeated exposure.”
http://kunc.org/post/cancer-concerns-colorados-drilling-fracking-boom
13.
Studies: How Fracking Decreases
Property Value
Earthworks cites 2 Studies
Water Source a
Deciding Factor in Property Value
“A Duke
University and Resources for the Future study found that the most significant factor in
the impact of oil and gas development near residential property is whether
water is piped in or sourced on-site from a well.
Based in Washington County, PA,
the study found that property with on-site wells lost 13 percent of their
value.
Fracking in residential areas impacts the property value of both lease
owners and their neighbors.
Another study by Integra Realty Resources in Flower
Mound, TX, looked at the relationship between property value and proximity
to wells. It concluded that properties
with houses that were less than 750 feet away from a drill site experienced an
average sales price drop of 2-7 percent.
Mortgages
Oil and gas leases have
also made it more difficult to get a new mortgage or refinance and can even
constitute a technical default on an existing mortgage. Depending on the site
of the well, leases can also affect neighbor’s mortgages due to setback
violations or requirements, or uncertain future property value.
Last year, Jack and Carol Pyhtila spent several weeks working to
refinance the mortgage on their roughly 30 acres in Tompkins County, NY. But
when they arrived to sign the mortgage, the lender, Visions Federal Credit Union,
had taken a closer look at the lease on their land and revoked its offer, said
Mr. Pyhtila, 72.
Of course, making it more difficult to get a mortgage isn’t going to
make selling a property with a lease any easier.
The rush to drill has
led many single young men and family men to places like Williston, ND, for a
shot at financial comeback.
As the Williston Herald reported, apartments that used to rent for
$400 a month five years ago are going for four times that today, and homes that
sold for $60,000 are now on the market for $200,000.
While this may sound like a dream for local residents, some,
particularly senior citizens and people on fixed income, have found that they
are no longer able to afford their rent and have been forced to move.”
Visit EcoWatch’s FRACKING page for more related news on this topic.
14. Study:
Fracking’s Costs to Local Communities
Penn Environment
“From contaminated
drinking water to long-term illness, who is going to be there to pay the piper
after the new gas rush is over?” asked Erika Staaf, Clean Water Advocate from
PennEnvironment. “With Pennsylvania’s weak bonding requirements, all too often
individual residents and communities are going to be left with a heavy tab for
fracking damage.” A recent study by
PennEnvironment discloses that just reclaiming a fracking site can cost
hundreds of thousands of dollars. And the damage done by fracking – from
contaminated groundwater to ruined roads – can cost millions of dollars.
According to the Who Pays the Costs of Fracking? report,
Pennsylvania’s bonding requirements do
not even come close to covering these costs:
*Drilling operators are only required to secure $4,000 to $10,000 in
bonds up front, for single wells.
*The bonds only cover site
restoration and well plugging, not compensation for victims for damage to
property or health, provision for alternative source of drinking water in case
of contamination, and full restoration of damage to public infrastructure.
*The state releases the drillers
from this assurance one year after the well is plugged and the site
reclaimed, leaving impacted residents, communities, and taxpayers on the hook
for longer-term damage.”
PennEnvironment Quoted in Sierra Club, Allegheny Group
15. XTO fined $100,000
“XTO
Energy, a subsidiary of Exxon Mobil Corp., was ordered to spend $20 million to
improve wastewater management practices to recycle, properly dispose of and
prevent spills of wastewater generated from natural gas exploration in PA and
West Virginia. An inspector with the Department of Environmental Protection
discovered pollution occurred Nov. 16, 2010. That's when the company released between 150 to 1,366 barrels, or 6,300 to 57,373 gallons of flowback and
produced water into state streams, according to the government report. The
spill, which initially was estimated at more than 13,000 gallons by the
company, polluted an unnamed tributary to Sugar Run and a spring.
The inspector observed wastewater spilling from an open valve from
a series of interconnected tanks. The investigation determined that wastewater stored in the tanks at the
facility contained the same variety of
pollutants, including chlorides, barium, strontium and total dissolved solids,
that were observed in surface waters. Untreated discharges of wastewaters
from natural gas exploration and production activities typically contain high
levels of total dissolved solids and other pollutants and can adversely impact
fresh water aquatic life and drinking water quality.”
***********
While XTO
Energy was singled out by the federal government for its 2010 spill, Pennsylvania
residents are waiting for a crackdown on fracking spills throughout the state.
In May, a malfunction at a fracking well sent 9,000
gallons of fracking fluid onto nearby residents’ land, including a farm site.
It was the second spill in two months for Carrizo Oil and Gas. In March, a
malfunction at another Pennsylvania
fracking site spilled more than
227,000 gallons of fracking fluid, causing the evacuation of several homes.
The EPA has not issued penalties against Carrizo for the spill.”
http://ecowatch.com/2013/exxonmobil-fined-fracking-wastewater-spill-pennsylvania/
16. A Moratorium on Fracking
in PA? (from Marcellus Protest)
Excerpt:
A brief timeline:
April 2013 – Grassroots groups,
including PennEnvironment, Clean Water Action, Mountain Watershed Association,
Food and Water Watch, 350.org, and others delivered a petition of over 100,000
signatures calling for a moratorium to PA Gov. Tom Corbett.
April 2013 – State Senator Jim Ferlo is
offering a bill to place a moratorium on all new shale gas extraction.
May 2013 – A poll indicated that 58% of Pennsylvanians want a
moratorium on all fracking while risks are studied.
June 15, 2013 – The Pennsylvania Democratic Party voted
115-81 to support a moratorium on fracking until “the practice can be done
safely” and until “full restitution by the natural gas industry for any harm”
is made.
It is important to note that the Democratic Party’s resolution
does not immediately give us a moratorium, nor does it require elected
Democrats to support the idea. A bill would still need to pass the legislature
and be signed into law by the governor. However, considering that Democratic
politicians in PA have received millions of dollars in campaign contributions
from gas corporations over the last decade, this move does demonstrate an
increasing awareness that shale gas fracking destroys com- munities, pollutes
air and water, decreases property values, makes people sick, poses dangers to
workers and residents harms ecosystems and farming, and financially benefits
only a tiny percentage of those involved in the process.
What is needed now? It was the shift in public opinion that made
the Democratic Party’s resolution a possibility, so Pennsylvanians must to
continue to educate their neighbors about why a stop to fracking is so urgently
important, as well as to continue to push politicians of both parties to support and actually pass a moratorium bill into
law.”
17. Study: Glycol Ether Affects Ovarian Function, Longer
Time to Pregnancy
(As most of you
know, glycol ethers are found in fracking fluids. Jan)
“Background: Glycol ethers are present in a wide range of
occupational and domestic products. Animal studies have suggested that some of
them may affect ovarian function.
Objective: To study
the relation between women’s exposure to glycol ethers and time to pregnancy.
Methods: Urine from randomly selected women in the PELAGIE
mother-child cohort who had samples collected before 19 weeks of gestation was
tested to measure eight glycol ether metabolites by chromatography coupled to
mass spectrometry. Time to pregnancy was collected at the beginning of the
pregnancy by asking women how many months they took to conceive. Associations
between metabolite levels and time to pregnancy were estimated in 519 women
with complete data using discrete-time Cox proportional hazards models to
adjust for potential confounders.
Results: Glycol ether metabolites were detected in 6% (for
ethoxyacetic acid) to 93% (for phenoxyacetic and butoxyacetic acids) of urine
samples. Phenoxyacetic acid was the only
metabolite with a statistically significant association with longer time to pregnancy
(fecundability OR 0.82; 95% CI: 0.63, 1.06 for the second and third quartile
combined; fecundability OR 0.70; 95% CI: 0.52, 0.95 for a fourth-quartile
(≥1.38 mg/L) vs. first-quartile concentration (<0.14 mg/L)). This
association remained stable after multiple sensitivity analyses.
Conclusion: Phenoxyacetic
acid, which was present in most of the urine samples tested in our study, was
associated with increased time to pregnancy. This metabolite and its main
parent compound, 2-phenoxyethanol, are plausible causes of decreased
fecundability, but may also be surrogates for potential co-exposures frequently
present in cosmetics.”
18. Public Be Damned in
Cecil Township
“The idea
that the PA DEP, under the Corbett administration, works primarily for the benefit
of the people of Pennsylvania took another hit last week when it became clear
that the DEP has no interest in hearing the questions and comments of those who
live near the Worstell impoundment in Cecil Township.
The impoundment is operated by Range
Resources and has been a point of contention since the first of this year, when
township officials wrote to the DEP to
allege that the company failed to obtain proper approvals for the original use
and construction of the impoundment, which is a repository for gas-drilling
wastewater.
Some township officials say that even though drilling of wells has been completed
near the site of the impoundment, trucks
continue to bring in fracking water from other locations. Andy Schrader, vice chairman of the township
supervisors, says a counter on the road indicates that a truck is coming into
or out of the impoundment every 18 minutes. Yet Range has indicated that the
site is used sparingly.
One would think that six months would
be more than enough time to get to the bottom of this, to satisfy the concerns
of township officials and answer the questions of those who live near the
operation. One would be wrong.
Initially, there was a move by some
supervisors to have a private meeting with the DEP about the Worstell site and
other drilling-related matters, but when word of that proposed
behind-closed-doors gathering created a backlash, the session was scrapped and
there was hope that a public meeting would result. But the DEP is now making it crystal clear that it has no interest in an open
discussion of the issues.”
Flaring devices at Worstall Compound near Cannonsburg- Photo by Bob Donnan
19. Gov. O’Malley to Frack
Maryland Despite Calls for Ban
He Says MD will not be Like PA where regs are practically
non- existent
“Leaders in
the Maryland Legislature rejected a bill last session that would have placed a
ban on fracking in the state, seemingly supporting Gov. O’Malley (D-MD) in
whatever plan he unveils for Maryland. The governor, in turn, has appropriated
taxpayer money to conduct several studies to determine whether or not the
long-term effects of fracking would be too detrimental to public health and the
environment.
In fact, Gov. O’Malley has been telling
anti-fracking advocates that the Old Line State will not turn into another
version of Pennsylvania, where regulations are scant and taxes on the oil and
gas industry are virtually non-existent. But more and more, we are seeing
evidence that Gov. O’Malley wants to turn Maryland into a natural gas-friendly
state like Pennsylvania. Almost as if to demonstrate that very point, I got
some news that is as surprising as it is frustrating.
State
officials recently revealed to Food & Water Watch that Gov. O’Malley has hired John H. Quigley, who served as secretary of the
Pennsylvania Department of Conservation and Natural Resources during the
state’s rapid expansion of fracking, to help draft key fracking regulations in
Maryland. The news is further proof that Gov. O’Malley has already made his
mind up to allow fracking and is moving forward with developing regulations to
issue fracking permits in Maryland. “
Food
& Water Watch, By Jorge Aguilar
http://ecowatch.com/2013/forge-ahead-with-fracking-maryland-despite-calls-for-ban/
20. Bob Donnan on the Smith
Compressor Station Hearing
“So what
did we learn from this drill? For those
who attended the meeting, we found out that industry still knows how to pack a
room with supporters. We further learned that Pa DEP representatives were
perfectly willing to sit there and listen to a bunch of comments in favor of
the compressor station that had nothing to do with the air quality permit.
You can see the complete meeting in living color right here:
Bob’s Comment on
the Smith Compressor Station:
Comment regarding PA-63-00968A~I’m writing to request that PA DEP hold a
public meeting and hearing for the Smith Compressor Station air permit because
it would allow more local residents attend and learn about the project, ask
questions, and directly communicate with MarkWest and PA DEP staff. I strongly
recommend that you hold a hearing on this compressor station.
I have major
concerns about the potential environmental and health impacts of MarkWest’s
proposed Smith Compressor station in Washington County, PA. The Smith
Compressor station, in combination with the extensive natural gas
infrastructure in the area, will create significant environmental and health
impacts. Has PA DEP ensured that
approving this station will not deteriorate regional air quality and jeopardize
compliance with the National Ambient Air Quality Standards (NAAQs)?
If the Department
must grant this permit, I request PA DEP to ensure that the lowest emitting
technology required by law be used at this station. Blow downs are a huge
problem for residents who live near compressor stations, so blow-down
prevention practices should be written into the permit.
Thank you for
taking the time to read and consider my comment, and please respond back with
any decisions on public hearings or updates on this permit.
Sincerely,
Robert Donnan, McMurray PA
***************
DEP releases
findings on Smith compressor hearing
The
May 1 hearing was an opportunity for residents to express concerns over the
air-quality effects of an expansion of the station near Route 22 in Smith
Township. The site is adding between six
and eight additional Waukesha rich-burn engines. Findings from the hearing
were released this week. The 19-page document highlighted some of the issues
brought up by citizens and offered responses from the DEP.
Finalization
of the plan approval means MarkWest has 18 months to get the additional engines
up and running. Poister said once they’re operational, the facility must make
it through a “shakedown” period in which DEP inspectors would ensure the plant
is running to specifications. “They have to show that the new rich-burn system
works as advertised,” Poister said. “This is a definite upgrade and is designed
to improve the operation of that facility.”
Godwin Compressor
Station in Canton, PA Photo by Bob Donnan
21.
Youngstown Pushes for Protection From Fracking, Earthquakes, and Pollution
“They’re back and
more determined than ever to win on Election Day in November 2013. The
Youngstown, OH, Community Bill of Rights Committee is coordinating a new
door-to-door campaign to get the required number of registered Youngstown voter
signatures to put a question on the November ballot.
The group says that a “Yes” vote on that ballot question would uphold
Youngstown citizens’ fundamental rights to protect their family’s safe drinking
water, clean air and land, and to local self-governance.
“We came so close to
winning last time that we fully expect to win the vote in November.”
http://ecowatch.com/2013/youngstown-protections-fracking-earthquakes-pollution/
22. NY Advocates Want Probe
of Pro-Fracking Campaign Donations
“A coalition has called for a probe of
campaign donations from pro-hydrofracking interests, after Common Cause
detailed more than $14 million in contributions to politicians and political
parties since 2007.
According
to Common Cause/NY, a total of 183 entities who support shale-gas drilling
donated to political campaigns, including some of the state Legislature’s top
fracking advocates
Sen. Thomas Libous, R-Binghamton,
was the biggest beneficiary among state lawmakers, with his campaign taking in
$353,205, according to the analysis.
“Powerful
businesses and industries which stand to benefit from fracking use campaign
contributions to gain influence with their local lawmakers, candidates, and
party organizations,” Common Cause/NY Executive Director Susan Lerner said in a
statement. “We see a wide spectrum of fracking-related interests taking full
advantage of New York’s lax campaign finance laws in the hope of a future
payday if fracking is permitted.”
Hiscock
& Barclay, an Albany-based law firm and lobbying group that has spent close
to $753,000 on campaign donations. The firm declined comment.”
To view the Common Cause report, visit
www.commoncause.org/ny/deepdrillingdeeppockets
Westmoreland Marcellus Citizen’s Group—Mission Statement
To raise the public’s general awareness and
understanding of the impacts of Marcellus drilling on the natural environment,
health, and long-term economies of local communities.
Officers:
President-Jan Milburn
Treasurer-Wanda Guthrie
Secretary-Ron Nordstrom
Facebook Coordinator-Elizabeth Nordstrom
Blogsite –April Jackman
Science Subcommittee-Dr. Cynthia Walter
To remove your name from our list please put
“remove name from list’ in the subject line
