Westmoreland Marcellus Citizens’ Group Updates
April 17, 2014
* For articles and updates or to just vent, visit us on facebook;
* To view past updates, reports, general
information, permanent documents, and meeting information
http://westmorelandmarcellus.blogspot.com/
* Our email address: westmcg@gmail.com
*
To discuss candidates: http://www.facebook.com/groups/VoteProEarth/
* To contact your state
legislator:
For the email address, click on the envelope
under the photo
* For information on PA state gas legislation
and local control: http://pajustpowers.org/aboutthebills.html-
WMCG
Thank You
* Thank you to contributors to our Updates: Debbie Borowiec, Lou
Pochet, Ron Gulla, the Pollocks, Marian Szmyd, Bob Donnan, Elizabeth Donahue, and Bob Schmetzer.
*** WMCG Group Meeting We meet the second Tuesday of every month at
7:30 PM in Greensburg. Email Jan for
directions. All are very welcome to attend.
***Earth Day at St Vincent-April 27, 12-5:00
We
need people to work our table-even an hour would help. Please email or call Jan
if you can help and I will forward that information to Dr Walter . (Our group
email address is listed at the top of the Updates.)
***Dr John Stolz "Well Water Quality and Unconventional
Shale Gas Extraction in a Butler Community" - April 26, 1:00
The environmental impacts and microbiology of
unconventional shale gas extraction is a major interest of Dr. Stolz and his
laboratory. Dr. Stolz and his team have been studying the water contamination
in the Connoquenessing Woodlands and Dr. Stolz will speak about their findings.
Free and open to the public.
When: Saturday, April 26 at 1:00 pm
Where: Butler Public Library
218
N. McKean St.
Butler,
PA 16001
John
F. Stolz, Ph.D.
Director,
Center for Environmental Research and Education; Professor, Environmental
Microbiology
Bayer
School of Natural and Environmental Sciences
Department
of Biological Sciences; Center for Environmental Research and Education
***Webinar by TEDX -April 21
Natural Gas Development, Public
Health,
and Protecting the Most Vulnerable
Populations
Join Carol Kwiatkowski, TEDX's Executive Director April
21st at 2pm EDT for a webinar hosted by the Center for Environmental Health.
Dr. Kwiatkowski will be speaking about the public health implications of
natural gas development, with an emphasis on air pollution and the hazards it
might hold for vulnerable populations, including children and pregnant women.
Recent studies pointing toward the endocrine disrupting effects of chemicals in
natural gas operations will be discussed.
This
webinar is the first in a six-week series
on Fracking, Natural Gas, and Maternal Health. The webinars feature
presentations by experts in the field of environmental health, medicine, and
public health. They will each run 45-60 minutes with 10-15 minutes for Q &
A.
http://endocrinedisruption.org/enews/2014/04/14/natural-gas-development-public-health-and-protecting-the-most-vulnerable-populations/
A little Help Please
Take Action!!
***Tenaska Plant Seeks to Be Sited in South
Huntingdon, Westmoreland
County***
Petition
!! Please forward to your lists!
Please
share the attached petition with residents of Westmoreland and all bordering
counties. We ask each of you to help us
by sharing the petition with your email lists and any group with which you are
affiliated. As stated in the petition, Westmoreland County cannot meet air
standards for several criteria. Many areas of
Westmoreland County are already listed as EPA non-attainment areas for ozone
and particulate matter 2.5, so the county does not have the capacity to handle
additional emissions that will contribute to the burden of ozone in the area as
well as health impacts. According to the
American Lung Association, every county in the Pittsburgh region except for
Westmoreland County had fewer bad air days for ozone and daily particle
pollution compared with the previous report. Westmoreland County was the only county to score a failing grade for
particulate matter.
The
Tenaska gas plant will add tons of pollution to already deteriorated air and
dispose of wastewater into the Youghiogheny River. Westmoreland County already has a higher
incidence of disease than other counties in United States. Pollution won’t stop at the South Huntingdon
Township border; it will travel to the surrounding townships and counties.
If you know of church groups or other
organizations that will help with the petition please forward it and ask
for their help.
*********************************************************************************
Sierra Club Sues Texas Commission on Proposed Tenaska Plant
SIERRA CLUB VS
TEXAS COMMISSION On ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY,
I. CASE
OVERVIEW
Sierra Club seeks an order reversing Defendant’s December
29, 2010, final order in Docket No. 2009-1093-AIR.1 The order authorizes the
construction and operation of a new solid fuel-fired power plant by approving
the application of Tenaska Trailblazer Partners, L.L.C. (Tenaska, Trailblazer,
or Applicant) for state and federal air pollution permits.
This new facility is a large
solid fuel-fired electric generating unit, or power plant, to be constructed in
Nolan County, Texas. The Tenaska facility will generate about 900 megawatts
(MW) of electricity and is authorized to emit over 9,207 tons per year of
criteria air pollutants.2
While under the jurisdiction of the State
Office of Administrative Hearings, the proceedings bore SOAH docket number
582-09-6185. 2 There are several “criteria” pollutants: carbon monoxide, lead,
particulate matter with a diameter of less than 10 micrometers, particulate
matter with a diameter of less than 2.5 micrometers, nitrogen oxides, ozone,
and sulfur oxides. For each of these air pollutants, National Ambient Air
Quality Standards (NAAQS) have been established by the Environmental Protection
Agency (EPA) and are adopted through the Commission’s rules. See e.g 30 TEX.
ADMIN. CODE § 101.21 (“The National Primary and Secondary Ambient Air Quality
Standards as promulgated pursuant to section 109 of the Federal Clean Air Act,
as amended, will be enforced throughout all parts of Texas.”) Criteria
pollutants must be evaluated prior to obtaining a PSD permit.
1.
Filed
11 March 14 IN THE DISTRICT COURT OF TRAVIS COUNTY, TEXAS
.3
The facility will also emit an estimated 6.1 million tons per year of the
greenhouse gas, carbon dioxide (CO2).
At the heart of this
lawsuit, Sierra Club alleges the approval of the permit application was made in
violation of:
a. the requirements of the Texas Administrative
Procedures Act (TEX. GOV’T CODE, Chapter 2001) regarding Defendant’s authority
and duties upon adoption of a final order;
b. the requirements for a
preconstruction application and approval by TCEQ, including:
i) Deficient information and legal bases
for the findings related to hazardous air pollutants (HAPs) and the
corresponding maximum achievable control technology (MACT) determination.
ii) Deficient information and legal bases
for the findings related to prevention of significant deterioration (PSD)
review and the corresponding best available control technology (BACT)
determination.
iii) Failure to consider and minimize the
impact of greenhouse gas emissions. II. DISCOVERY
1. This case is an appeal of an
administrative agency’s actions, and therefore based on the administrative
record. Designation of a level of discovery is not applicable. If discovery
becomes necessary, it should be controlled by Level 3. TEX. R. CIV. PROC. §
190.4.
*******************************************************************************************
***Letters to the editor are important and one of the
best ways to share
information with the
public. ***
***Forced Pooling Petition
“The PA DEP announced the
first public hearing on forced pooling in PA to be held in less than two weeks. We're pushing on the DEP to
postpone the hearings and address the many problems we have with their current
plans. In the meantime, we're circulating a petition to the legislature calling
on them to strike forced pooling from the books in PA.
Forced pooling refers to the ability to drill under private property
without the owner's permission. It's legal in the Utica Shale in western PA,
but the industry has not made an attempt to take advantage of it until now.
Forced pooling is a clear violation of private property rights and should not
be legal anywhere.
I know I've asked a lot of you.
Unfortunately, we're fighting battles on many fronts and they just keep coming.
But with your help, we've made lots of progress, so I'm asking you to help me
again by signing and sharing this petition.”
Appreciatively,
as always,
Karen”
***Sunoco Eminent
Domain Petition “PA PUC for public utility status, a move that would impact property
owners and municipalities in the path of the Mariner East pipeline. As a public utility, Sunoco would have the
power of eminent domain and would be exempt from local zoning requirements.
A December 2013 PA Supreme Court ruling overruled Act 13’s evisceration of
municipal zoning in gas operations and upheld our local government rights. We petition PA PUC to uphold the
Pennsylvania Constitution and deny public utility status to the for- profit
entity, Sunoco.
That's why I signed a petition to
Robert F. Powelson, Chairman, Public Utilities Commission, John F. Coleman Jr.,
Vice Chairman, Public Utilities Commission, James H. Cawley, Commissioner,
Public Utilities Commission, Gladys M. Brown, Commissioner, Public Utilities
Commission, Pamela A. Witmer, Commissioner, Public Utilities Commission, and
Jan Freeman, Executive Director, Public Utilities Commission, which says:
"We, the undersigned,
petition the Pennsylvania Public Utilities Commission to uphold the
Pennsylvania Constitution and deny public utility status to the for-profit
entity, Sunoco."
Will
you sign the petition too? Click here to add your name:
Frack Links
***The Daily Show
Public Herald
Public Herald’s Josh Pribanic and Melissa Troutman with Bradford
County Residents
If
you missed this Daily Show segment based on the reporting of the producers of
Triple Divide, a video will be available on line at the show’s website
http://thedailyshow.cc.com/ or go to www.publicherald.org.
Joshua
Pribanic [@jbpribanic] describes water contamination in Leroy Township,
Bradford Co., PA to Daily Show with Jon Steward correspondent Aasif Mandvi and
crew. Photo by Melissa Troutman [@melissat22].
***The Fight For Deer Lakes Park
Allegheny County Council Meeting ( 4 hours long)
***Act 13 Forum Video Is Up
The
video is split into 2 parts for a total viewing time of about 2 hours. There is a small amount of blank time (about
a minute) at the beginning of Part 1, but just let it play...
Our
Water, Our Air, Our Communities — And Forced Gas Drilling?
What: Delaware Riverkeeper
Network hosted a forum with the lead litigators and litigants of the landmark
Act 13 case – the case in which the conservative Pennsylvania Supreme Court
declared that the rights of pure water, clean air, and a healthy environment,
across the generations, must be protected by state and local legislators.
The forum included a discussion
of how Act 13 came to be passed, how and why the legal challenge was
formulated, including the interesting alliance between the 7 towns and the
Delaware Riverkeeper Network, and the implications for environmental,
municipal, and legislative decision making going forward.
***Concerned about the air quality in
your community due to drilling?—Speaker Available
Southwestern Pennsylvania
Environmental Health Project will provide a professional speaker if you host a
community meeting. “Tyler Rubright is available throughout the next couple of
weeks to come to meetings and present and/or help to facilitate and answer any
questions.”
Contact Jessa Chabeau
***To sign up for notifications of
activity and violations for your area:
*** List of the Harmed--There
are now over 1600 residents of Pennsylvania who have placed their names on the
list of the harmed when they became sick after fracking began in their area. http://pennsylvaniaallianceforcleanwaterandair.wordpress.com/the-list/
DEP Activity
DEP Response on Herminie
Compressor Station—Many of you commented on this station
Apr
2 at 1:19 PM
Dear
Commenter,
On March 31, 2014, the Department modified Plan Approval PA-65-00979A to
reflect the removal of the Waukesha L5794LT compressor engine, require
installation of an oxidation catalyst to control the Caterpillar G3516LE
compressor engine, prohibit the simultaneous operation of the Caterpillar
G3516LE and G3512LE compressor engines, and allow the second new Caterpillar
G3612LE engine currently authorized under PA-65-00979A to begin temporary
operation at the Herminie Compressor Station located in Westmoreland County.
This notice is being provided in accordance
with the requirements of 25 Pa. Code §127.51 to all protestants who have
submitted comments.
A
summary of the comments received during the public comment period and the
corresponding Department responses can be found in the attached Comment and
Response Memo which is included in the Plan Approval file. I have also attached a copy of the modified
plan approval. All other documents
relating to the Herminie Compressor Station air quality plan approval are
available for review at Pennsylvania Department of Environmental Protection,
Southwest Regional Office, 400 Waterfront Drive, Pittsburgh, PA 15222. Instructions for scheduling a file review may
be found under the Regional Resources section of the Department’s website
(www.dep.state.pa.us).
Sincerely,
Alan Binder | Air Quality Engineering
Specialist
Department
of Environmental Protection
Southwest
Regional Office
400
Waterfront Drive | Pittsburgh, PA 15222
Phone:
412.442.4168 | Fax: 412.442.4194
www.depweb.state.pa.us
Page 122 of Robinson v. Commonwealth Is Worth Repeating
The court ruled that governments
have trustee obligations.
"Proper exercise of a Trustees discretion is
measured by benefits "bestowed upon all [the Commonwealth's] citizens in
their utilization of natural
resources" rather than " by the balance sheet profits and
appreciation [the Trustee] realizes from its resource operations".
Frack News
All
articles are excerpted. Please use the links to read the full article.
1.
Murrysville
Council Delays Vote On Drilling Under Park
“Vision Statement for
the Recreation Department-
The vision of the
Murrysville Parks and Recreation Department is to improve our residents’ health
as well as create a sense of community by developing and supporting varied
recreational and educational opportunities for the citizens of Murrysville.”
April
17, 2014 5:33 AM
By
Tim Means
“Urged by residents and some council members not to go
forward, Murrysville council tabled a
decision on an ordinance that would allow the creation of bid specifications
for subsurface gas drilling deep under Murrysville Community Park.
In January, the municipality
received an offer from Huntley and Huntley, a Monroeville-based gas drilling
company, to lease the subsurface gas and oil rights for the park. Council then
instructed the solicitor to draw up an
ordinance permitting the creation of bid specifications. Such an ordinance
would allow the residents to put the question of drilling as a referendum on
the ballot in November, without committing to drilling now.
Confusion over the intention of
the ordinance and the changing status of state laws regulating gas and oil
extraction appears to have brought the plan to a halt.
“We have tried to make it clear
what the action before council is,” chief administrator Jim Morrison said. “First it is to notify Huntley and Huntley
that we reject their offer to drill under the park. Second it is to allow the
staff to develop the bid specifications. By doing it this way, we can write in
protections and standards beyond Act 13 [the state law].”
However, after two months of trying to clarify the
issues for the public, council was not ready to take action.
Linda Marts of Murrysville is a
member of the Citizens for the Preservation of Rural Murrysville, a local
citizens group that had agreed to head up the effort to gather names for the
referendum petition. She urged council Wednesday night not to approve the
ordinance. “Vote no tonight,” she told council. “We were in favor of this to
begin with, but in our meetings we are getting more confused.”
Councilman David Perry echoed Ms.
Marts’ position. “Originally, I advocated strongly for the referendum. But it
is going to be a very tough road. I’ve changed my position. I am against it,”
he said. Mr. Perry, who is a geologist, said he has spent hours trying to
clarify the issue on a Facebook page devoted to the Murrysville fracking
discussion, but to no avail. “No matter how we work it, it will still be
confusing.”
Councilman Jeffery Kepler agreed.
“Having attended several meetings, I am surprised about the massive amount of
confusion. The group we thought would take up the reins is now telling us not
to do it.”
Council president Joan Kearns
pointed out that the ordinance provided only for the creation of bid
specification and set no timetable for action.
In
the end, the only thing that achieved consensus was not to do anything.”
Tim
Means, freelance writer: suburbanliving@post-gazette.com First Published April
16, 2014 11:07 PM
2. Sunoco Wants
Exemption from Zoning-
“In a Mar. 21, 2014 letter addressed to the PUC,
Sunoco is looking for approval designating it a public utility. Sunoco
intends to build pump stations and valve stations in 31 PA communities,
including Salem, Rostraver, Hempfield, Penn Township, Loyalhanna, and Derry in
Westmoreland County. Sunoco is
requesting COMPLETE EXEMPTION from any local zoning ordinances, including those
applying to subdivision and land development.”
Here
is the site:
Sunoco Requesting
Public Utility Status For Pump Stations
“
Township residents are organizing against the construction of a proposed natural gas pump station, voicing
outrage over possible health and safety issues from the facility.
Sunoco Logistics Partners filed the
application with the township in February
asking for a special exception to the zoning ordinance in order to “permit
a public utility facility use on Sunoco’s property”. A
multitude of W. Goshen, PA residents are protesting a Sunoco pump station
planned for their area. This Mar. 31/14 article states this one
facility will use 4.5 acres.
The property is located within a
residential zoning district that permits the construction and use of a public
utility facility by special exception
If the PUC grants Sunoco a public utility status (using eminent domain
appears to be against a law signed into effect by former governor Rendell (see
http://www.prnewswire.com/news-releases/governor-rendell-signs-eminent-domain-bills-protecting-property-owners-rights-56073147.html)
then Sunoco will build these types of facilities in
31 PA communities, including Salem, Rostraver, Hempfield, Penn Township,
Loyalhanna, and Derry in Westmoreland County.
It appears the company will be distributing
the materials to foreign countries which would perhaps over time require
increased output. The initial output of
the project is expected to produce 70,000 barrels of propane and ethane liquids
per day.
Specifics
of the project include development of a
pump enclosure, piping, valves and a vapor combustion system to be 34-feet
high, according to the notice prepared by West Goshen Zoning Hearing Board
Secretary Diane Clayton.
Sunoco is seeking an additional special exception to the code
to construct the combustion system above the allowed height of 30 feet.
With less than 500 feet
separating his property from the proposed development, West Goshen resident,
Walker Thompkins, was one of the first to receive notice from Sunoco. Realizing
he was one of only a handful of residents who received notice of the possible
construction, he spread the word, quickly organizing about 50 residents.
“That’s the letter of the law and
that drives me crazy,” Thompkins said. “The township did nothing to inform the
residents.”
“We
are not in this for any political motivation, this is a quality of life issue,
period,” Casey said.
Concerns include reduced home
values, possible insurance premium increases, environmental risks, in addition
to health and safety issues.”
3. Deer
Lakes Park Meeting
From
Bob Donnan
“It was hard to come away from that meeting without feeling that
Range Resources was using a 'stall and delay' tactic since they knew the intent
of the meeting but did not have their people there to answer questions. Now
Range wants to bring them next week when the purpose of that 2nd meeting is to
focus on legal issues, not environmental.
Alan Eichler of the Pa. DEP sounded like a representative
for the drilling industry, as usual, playing down past violations - He didn't
mention the 161 confirmed cases of water well contamination in Pa. from
drilling, revealed by a recent Times-Tribune RTK
request.
Range's
use of the WW2 song "Over There" in TV commercials during the
Olympics did not play well for many of the Greatest Generation who frequent the
barber shop of one 'Committee on Parks' member as quoted in today's Trib:
"You
don't have a great image with a lot of people in this area,” Councilman John
Palmiere, D-Baldwin Township, told Osborne, mentioning that many customers at
his barbershop do not like the company's television commercials."
Right they are, especially when you consider all of Range's
contracts for exporting their so-called 'energy independence' for higher
profits, it is easy for us all to understand why those blackeyes have basis.
Range's psy-ops sure failed in the advertising department with veterans!”
Robert Donnan
More of the TRIB article:
http://triblive.com/news/allegheny/5947213-74/park-council-county#axzz2z8sUghIo
Post-Gazette article:
4. Gas Companies
Still Fudging the Facts
From Bob Donnan
“We’ve heard a host of Range lies
and omissions over the years, but it still amazes me that one of their
representatives can blatantly lie about their record of drilling in Cross Creek
County Park.
I believe this is the same man
who presented to the Beaver County School Board, telling them (apparently to
make Range sound ‘greener’) that Range no longer used open flares following
fracking in Washington County. It was just one day before that
presentation that I caught this photo with 4 flares on the Goettel Unit (or
one very similar to it in Buffalo – Harold Ward Unit) as well as the second
photo taken 2-1/2 years later.”
5. Neighbors Fear
Health Problems From Compressor Station
By
Mary Grzebieniak
New
Castle News, PA
“A group of residents said
they will go to court if a gas compressor station is built on Baird Road.
Mike Angelo of Hillsville Road
said the group is prepared to sue Mahoning Township and Hilcorp Energy Co. if
the station is approved.
They said survey stakes have gone
up and they have been told the station is being planned on property Hilcorp
already is leasing on Baird Road. The property is about one and a half miles
south of Route 422, not far from the site of a proposed racetrack and casino.
About 40 residents attended a
Mahoning Township Planning Commission meeting Thursday to express opposition.
But the Mahoning Township supervisors, who all attended the meeting, said that
while they are aware of the plans, nothing has been submitted to the township
and no decisions have been made.
Supervisor Vito Yeropoli said he has suggested other places
for a site. “Believe me, you don’t have to get nervous. It ain’t done. It’s not
over.
“People are talking and saying
they might slide something in,” he added. “You can’t slide something in.”
Angelo said he has family in that area and
“when your children and grandchildren are exposed to danger, you address it
before it happens.”
Angelo said he has three grandchildren who live within 500 feet of the
proposed site and said skin and throat cancers have been found in children and
adults near such plants and that home values in those areas “have plummeted.”
He said there are other sites in
the township where such a plant would be safer and asked the planning
commission and the supervisors to help Hilcorp find an alternative.
“This group here is willing to take any necessary steps to block the
construction of this plant in our area ...” he said, adding some are even
willing to make “personal contributions” to the township “in case Hilcorp
decides to file suit against Mahoning Township for blocking this plant.”
He
said some also would consider a temporary tax to help the township defend any
potential lawsuit if it refuses to allow the plant.
Angelo, who said he is in the
thoroughbred racing business, asked whether the township has considered the
possibility that such a plant could cause Penn National to move the racing
license from the Baird Road site to another location because of “potential
health problems” and traffic problems.
One woman tearfully said she and her elderly mother live within feet of
the site, adding she fears the health issues as well as the noise and lights
that could shatter the peace of their area. “No money can buy you health.”
Allen Miller, planning commission
chairman, said, “We haven’t seen this plan. This is the first I’ve heard of
it.”
He added the supervisors would
have to approve such a project.
Some residents asked the
supervisors to state whether they would favor such a plant. However, township
solicitor Lou Perrotta cautioned them not to respond, because they are the ones
who would have to vote on its approval.
A Hilcorp spokesman said company
officials had not given him any statement on whether such a plant is proposed.”
http://ncnewsonline.cnhi.newsmemory.com/publink.php?shareid=1260c482a(Email: grzebieniak
@ncnewsonline.com)
6. Range Resources
Has ‘Significant Leak’ at Washington County
Centralized Impoundment
“DEP spokesman John Poister
on Thursday afternoon confirmed that a notice of violation would be issued to
Range Resources for what he said was a
“significant leak” at the John Day Impoundment in Amwell Township, Washington
County.
Poister said the notice of
violation would go out “very soon” for the leak, which Range Resources officials told DEP was detected during an inspection.
Salt was found in the soil, Poister indicated.
He said Range Resources would have to remove a
“significant amount of soil” because of the leak.
“I can’t tell you right now what the extent of
that penalty would be,” Poister said Thursday.
Centralized impoundments are used
to store millions of gallons of water used during the hydraulic fracturing
process.
Range Resources impoundments in
Washington County have been the subject of both controversy and national
headlines this past year – mostly over questions about what exactly is in the
water stored at the sites.
State Impact reported that company executives testified in a civil court
case that they do not know what chemicals they are using in the fracking
process.
Critics have long maintained that impoundments, sometimes called frack
pits, are not an industry best practice, and have pushed for safer storage
methods, such as closed-loop systems.”
http://marcellusmonitor.wordpress.com/2014/04/17/dep-issuing-notice-of-violation-to-range-resources-for-significant-leak-at-washington-county-impoundment/
7. Pipeline
Violation Penalties Breaks Record in 2013
“The Pipeline and Hazardous Materials Safety
Administration proposed $9.78 million in civil penalties against pipeline
operators for alleged violations of federal law in 2013, the agency announced
April 7.
PHMSA said in a statement that 2013 saw the highest yearly amount of
proposed penalties in the agency's history. The agency has proposed more
than $33 million in penalties in pipeline enforcement cases since 2009, while
seeing the number of serious pipeline incidents resulting in fatalities or
major injuries decline each year during that time period, according to PHMSA.
The 85 percent assessment rate
for 2013 cases resolved so far is lower than the rate in recent years—92
percent in 2012 and 95 percent in 2011—but higher than the annual rate in all
years from 2004-2010.”
8. DEP Releases
Pollution Data from Gas production
Increases in Particulate, VOCs, and CO
“Remember the BIG
headline news recently that Pittsburgh air is SO MUCH better?
Only one problem with that news, it left a bunch of air
pollutants out!” Bob Donnan
“The DEP released 2012 annual emissions data for the
gas industry, which included emissions from gas production, processing
operations and compressor stations.
The
emissions report found a 7.27 % increase
from 2011 in carbon monoxide emissions, which most likely come from diesel
fuel-fired engines used during drilling operations and well completions and at
processing facilities and compressor stations, said DEP spokeswoman Lisa
Kasianowitz.
The data also showed an 8.51 % increase in
particulate matter 2.5, a smaller type of particulate matter; and a 3.99 percent increase in particulate
matter 10, a larger type of particulate matter. These types of emissions
are mainly from diesel fuel-fired engines, drilling operations and well
completions, she said.
There
was also a 42.7 % increase in volatile
organic compound emissions, an increase due in part to the reporting of 250
additional compressor stations that were not required to report in 2011. Other
sources of these types of emissions include pumps, completions, tanks, drill
rigs, dehydrators, and fugitive emissions.
But some emissions did go down.
There
was a 1 % decrease compared to 2011’s
numbers in nitrogen oxide emissions, which mainly come from engines used
during drilling operations and well completions and at processing facilities
and compressor stations; and a 17 %
decrease in sulfur dioxide emissions, which generally are the result of the
combustion of a fuel that contains sulfur, Kasianowitz said.
“There
are very low levels of sulfur in natural gas,” she said. “Combustion of diesel fuel-fired
engines used during drilling operations and well completions, and at processing
facilities and compressor stations, account for the majority of the sulfur
emissions.”
Data
came from 56 drilling companies that operated 8,800 natural gas wells in the
Marcellus shale and 70 operators of 400 compressor stations that processed that
natural gas.
“New to this round of reporting were 250
additional compressor stations that process gas from traditional well sites,”
said Kasianowitz. “These compressor stations were not required to report in
2011. Accounting for the emissions from these compressor stations gives the
department and the public a more comprehensive emissions inventory for the
natural gas industry.”
Emissions
were measured from compressor stations; dehydration units; drill rigs;
fugitives, such as connectors, flanges, pump lines, pump seals and valves;
heaters; pneumatic controllers and pumps; stationary engines; tanks,
pressurized vessels and impoundments; venting and blow down systems; well heads
and well completions.
The
U.S. EPA requires the state to submit comprehensive air emissions inventory
once every three years.”
http://www.heraldstandard.com/new_today/dep-releases-emissions-data-from-natural-gas-production/article_accd6d52-7e28-5572-a1de-9d35c999f59d.html
9. PA Reps. Jesse White and Others Want Disclosure
and Air Monitoring
HOUSE BILL No.1721 Session of 2014
Disclosure
INTRODUCED BY WHITE, MUNDY, COHEN, ROEBUCK,
MURT, KIRKLAND, MCCARTER, STURLA, V. BROWN, O'BRIEN, McGEEHAN, MULLERY AND
TRUITT, REFERRED TO COMMITTEE ON ENVIRONMENTAL RESOURCES AND ENERGY, APRIL 10, 2014
AN ACT
1Amending Title 58 (Oil and Gas) of the
Pennsylvania Consolidated
2Statutes,
in development, further providing for hydraulic fracturing chemical disclosure
requirements.
4The
General Assembly of the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania
5hereby
enacts as follows:
6Section
1. Section 3222.1 of Title 58 of the Pennsylvania
7Consolidated
Statutes is amended by adding a subsection to read:
8§
3222.1. Hydraulic fracturing chemical
disclosure
9requirements.
11(c.1)
Product disclosure.--A well operator and service
provider must provide the product name and
manufacturer of each
product used in the hydraulic fracturing process. Subsection
(c)
shall
not be construed to prevent the disclosure of product
names
and manufacturers under this subsection. A disclosure made
under
this subsection must be made available to the public.
HOUSE BILL
No. 2172 Session of 2014
Air Monitoring
INTRODUCED BY WHITE, BOBACK,
FRANKEL, MUNDY, COHEN, MCCARTER, MUSTIO, YOUNGBLOOD, McGEEHAN, MULLERY AND TRUITT
REFERRED TO COMMITTEE ON ENVIRONMENTAL
RESOURCES AND ENERGY, APRIL 10, 2014
AN ACT
1Amending Title 58 (Oil and Gas) of the
Pennsylvania Consolidated
2Statutes,
in development, further providing for air
3contaminant
emissions.
4The
General Assembly of the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania
5hereby
enacts as follows:
6Section
1. Section 3227 of Title 58 of the Pennsylvania
7Consolidated
Statutes is amended by adding subsections to read:
8§
3227. Air contaminant emissions.
9*
* *
10(e)
Monitoring.--An owner or operator of a facility
conducting natural gas operations in unconventional
formations,
including development, production, transmission and
processing,
must install and maintain air quality monitoring
systems within
300 feet of all natural gas operations. The
department shall
develop specifications for the air quality
monitoring systems
that may be used by facility owners and operators
to comply with
this subsection. 20130HB2172PN3368
10. Air monitoring
in Fracking Areas Fails to Detect Spikes In
Toxic Emissions
People Are Sick, But The Wrong Kind
of Monitoring Won’t Detect the Culprit
“People in natural gas drilling
areas who complain about nauseating odors, nosebleeds and other symptoms they
fear could be caused by shale development usually get the same response from
state regulators: monitoring data show the air quality is fine.
A new study helps explain this discrepancy. The most commonly used air monitoring
techniques often underestimate public health threats because they don’t catch
toxic emissions that spike at various points during gas production,
researchers in the peer-reviewed journal Reviews on Environmental Health. The
study was conducted by the Southwest Pennsylvania Environmental Health Project,
a nonprofit based near Pittsburgh.
A health survey the group
released last year found that people who live near drilling sites in Washington
County, Pa., in the Marcellus Shale, reported symptoms such as nausea, abdominal pain, breathing
difficulties and nosebleeds, all of which could be caused by pollutants known
to be emitted from gas sites. Similar problems have been reported by people
who live in the Eagle Ford Shale in South Texas, the subject of a recent
investigation by the Center for Public Integrity, InsideClimate News and The
Weather Channel.
While residents want to know
whether gas drilling is affecting the air near their homes — where emissions
can vary dramatically over the course of a day — regulators generally use methods designed to assess long-term, regional
air quality.
They're "misapplying
the technology," said lead author David Brown, who conducted the study with
three of his colleagues at the Environmental Health Project.
Stuart Batterman, an
environmental health sciences professor at the University of Michigan, said the
study underscores the need for specialized monitoring programs that target
community health.
But creating these programs is
difficult, Batterman said, because scientists don't fully understand the
emissions coming from natural gas facilities. Air pollutants ebb and flow based
on equipment malfunctions, maintenance
activities and the weather. They're released from storage tanks, compressor
stations and pipelines during every step of the process: drilling, hydraulic
fracturing, production, and processing.
"Unfortunately, the states
don't have much in the way of discretionary funds,” to add monitors, Batterman
said. “Their programs have been cut back because most legislatures are not
funding their environmental agencies generously."
The Pennsylvania report is the
latest demonstration of how little is known about the health impacts of
fracking. In February, 190 experts from industry, government and the medical
community gathered in Philadelphia to discuss major data gaps. The conclusions
they reached were almost identical to those in a recent study in Environmental
Science & Technology that cited a
lack of "comprehensive" public health research.
Many federal and state-run
monitors average their data over 24 hours or take samples once every few days.
It's a technique that's been used for decades to assess regional compliance
with the Clean Air Act. But natural gas
facilities have sporadic emission spikes that last just a few hours or minutes.
These fleeting events, which release particulate matter, volatile organic
compounds and other harmful toxins into the air, can quickly lead to localized
health effects. When averaged over 24 hours, however, the spikes can easily be
ignored.
The averaging technique is "useless" for detecting pollution
spikes, said Neil Carman, clean air director of the Sierra Club's Lone Star
Chapter in Texas. "If the police had to use 24-hour averaging for
enforcing speed limits, nobody would ever speed. It would average out."
Spot
monitoring can only catch a fraction of the emission spikes.
"Attempts
to capture these peaks with 24-hour [averages]; through periodic or one-time
spot sampling (under 24 hours); or after a complaint has been filed, will most
often miss times of peak exposure," the authors of the new study wrote.
Batterman, the University of
Michigan professor, said 24-hour samples are still useful for long- term health
studies, since pollutants like benzene and particulate matter can lead to
chronic effects that don't show up until years or decades later.
Ideally, scientists should use a combination
of methods to monitor long-term and acute impacts, he said, "but there are
technology and cost issues."
The best way to analyze short-term impacts like skin rashes and
headaches is to take frequent samples over a sustained period of time, said
Beth Weinberger, a co-author of the new study.
She and her colleagues assessed indoor air quality in 14 homes near
drilling sites by taking measurements of
fine particulate matter once a minute for up to 24 hours. After examining their
data, they found that some homes had very high levels of particulate matter
more than 30 percent of the time.
“It was alarming, because we realized if fine particulate matter was
getting into the house, other things, like benzene and formaldehyde, probably
were as well,” Brown said.
Weinberger said her group is now
working with other organizations to find affordable monitors that would allow
them to take indoor and outdoor samples so they can design better studies.
The limits of air monitoring are
especially apparent when regulators respond to citizen complaints near drilling
sites.
"The
plume touchdowns or emission events are often quite short, and by the time
anybody comes out there and sets up their monitoring [equipment], there's
nothing to measure,” Batterman said. “I have some sympathies for the regulated community
because it's very difficult to validate these exceedances that certainly
occur."
In the Eagle Ford, the TCEQ has
up to 30 days to investigate a complaint. In Pennsylvania, the deadline is
usually two weeks. In Colorado, inspectors often respond within 24 hours,
according to a spokesman for the state's Air Pollution Control Division. (The
TCEQ refused to make any of its experts available for phone interviews.)
InsideClimate News and the Center
for Public Integrity reviewed more than a dozen TCEQ investigation reports on
Eagle Ford oil and gas-related complaints. In most cases, regulators responded
by taking instantaneous air readings next to industrial facilities. Some
inspectors conducted an initial survey by sniffing the air for detectable
odors, then returned days later with monitoring equipment. On several
occasions, the instruments detected such high levels of contaminants that
inspectors fled the site.
Weinberger said the TCEQ's
practice of taking quick "grab samples" is "the perfect
design" to miss detecting emission spikes.
"That's what you do if
you're not interested in capturing episodic exposures," she said.
Weinberger said more frequent and
consistent sampling is needed, such as monitoring once an hour for two weeks.
Regulators can then compare the individual data points with existing health
standards to see how often they're exceeded.
Even
when scientists use the right monitoring techniques, it can be hard to figure
out what the numbers mean.
Federal air quality standards exist for only six chemicals: ozone,
particulate matter, carbon monoxide, nitrogen oxides, sulfur dioxide and lead.
All other pollutants, including dozens of volatile organic compounds, are
managed by a patchwork of occupational standards and state guidelines.
Texas, for instance, uses
short-term exposure guidelines of 180 parts per billion for benzene and 4,000
parts per billion for toluene to determine whether a situation requires further
investigation.
Other
states have different guidelines, and some chemicals have none at all because
little is known about their health impacts. The guidelines have another flaw:
They don't fully consider what happens when people are exposed to many
chemicals at once, as is common near gas and oil production sites.
By
David Hasemyer, Ben Wieder and Alan Suderman February 18, 2014
This
report is part of a joint project by the Center for Public Integrity,
InsideClimate News and The Weather Channel. Lisa Song is with InsideClimate
News and Jim Morris is with the Center for Public Integrity. InsideClimate News
reporter Zahra Hirji contributed to this article.
http://www.publicintegrity.org/2014/04/03/14514/air-monitoring-fracking-areas-fails-detect-spikes-toxic-emissions-new-study-says
11. New Study on Fracking and
Health
61 Airborne Chemicals
Found
“ The fracking, process requires
dozens of chemicals for various purposes, including reducing heat and
suspending drill cuttings to avoid clogs.
Fracking
is booming in northeastern British Columbia, Alberta and New Brunswick, Canada.
The provinces of Quebec, Newfoundland and Labrador, and Nova Scotia have imposed
moratoriums until more evidence about its effects on the environment and health
is available.
But the epicenter of fracking is
south of the border, in Pennsylvania, where
officials have embraced the economic opportunity of Marcellus shale. The
industry's sway in PA led to 2012 gas drilling legislation that featured a
medical gag rule; physicians were permitted to investigate fracking chemicals,
but barred from disclosing information to patients. Nephrologist Dr. Alfonso Rodriguez, who launched a first-amendment
lawsuit challenging the law, was one of the physicians leading the fight
against the gag order.
Dissatisfied
with the lack of information available for residents, the Southwest Pennsylvania Environment Health Project has been leading
what it calls a public health response to the shale gas industry. Staff
document resident's symptoms and monitor pollutants in the air so they can warn
residents about peaks. Dr. Leslie
Walleigh, the medical and occupational health consultant with the project, says
the most common symptoms that residents blame on fracking are respiratory,
including coughing, shortness of breath and worsening asthma.
Despite the viral videos of flaming
methane-laden tap water, some scientists are now saying air pollution
associated with shale gas drilling may be a bigger threat than water
contamination.
"When
they punch a hole in the ground, you're going to get air pollution coming
up," says Carol Kwiatkowski, executive director of the science-based
non-profit research organization, The Endocrine Disrupter Exchange in Paonia,
Colorado.
In addition to releasing toxic gases, like
benzene, that occur naturally in the rock, the chemicals that are added to the
fracking water also come back up. Often, the chemical-containing gas is vented
and the toxic wastewater is stored in open pits; both processes release
volatile organic compounds into the air, says Kwiatkowski, who is an
assistant professor adjunct in the Department of Integrative Physiology at the
University of Colorado, Boulder.
For
12 months, Kwiatkowski and colleagues collected weekly air samples in Garfield County, Colorado, within one
mile of 130 shale gas wells. Their
study, published this year in Human and
Ecological Risk Assessment: an International Journal, reported 61
airborne chemicals.
One of the most concerning was methylene
chloride, which may be a carcinogen, according to the EPA. Acute inhalation
can be fatal, while chronic exposure can cause memory loss, nausea and
respiratory symptoms. This high-powered
cleaning solvent was detected in 73% of the weekly air samples, at times
spiking above 563 parts per billion by volume (ppbv). There is no national
standard for acceptable levels of airborne methylene chloride, but the
Wisconsin Department of Natural Resources says action should be taken if indoor
methylene chloride levels are above 15 ppbv.
Another
set of chemicals causing concern are
polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons (PAHs). Kwiatkowski's study reported levels at 15.5 nanograms per cubic
meter (ng/m3); previous studies by the Columbia Center for Children's
Environmental Health correlated prenatal exposure levels of PAHs greater than
2.26 ng/m3 and 4.16 ng/m3 with lower IQ scores and mental development.
Another
study published Jan. 28, 2014 in Environmental Health Perspectives compared
live birth data over a 13-year period with geographical proximity to natural
gas drilling and found that babies born to homes with more than 125 wells
within a mile radius had a 30% greater prevalence of congenital heart defects
than those with no wells within ten miles. However, lead author Lisa McKenzie,
a researcher at the Colorado School of Public Health, University of Colorado in
Aurora, warns that the findings show only a "correlation."
Water contamination
While
air pollution is being seen as inherent to the fracking process, water
contamination can also occur due to unintended leaks or spills. In 2010, the
Environmental Protection Agency sampled groundwater near EnCana shale gas sites
in Wyoming and warned residents not to
cook with or drink the water due to the presence of benzene, methane and other
hydrocarbons.
"Some
of the chemicals used are carcinogens," says Dr. Warren Bell, British
Columbia, family physician and founding member of the Canadian Association of
Physicians for the Environment. "There are also things like methanol,
which is a wood alcohol and something that if your kid accidentally drinks it,
they could go blind and die."
At
the Southwest Pennsylvania Environment
Health Project, Walleigh reports four
residents' water wells have tested
positive for contaminants including benzene, toluene, arsenic, and metals such
as manganese, barium and strontium.
Water
contamination can also occur off-site due to the disposal of
chemical-containing water. Mike Benusic, a medical student who published a
review of the available literature on fracking with the Environmental Health Committee
of Doctors, BC, says the wastewater is stored in underground concrete
reservoirs, but spills or improper disposal are highly possible, given the
sheer volume of fracking waste fluid (4.2 billion litres in 2009 alone).
"The water is often disposed 100 kilometres away," he says.
"There are so many areas in that link where there's a possibility of a
leak."
DOI:10.1503/cmaj.109-4725— Wendy
Glauser, Toronto, Ont.
http://www.cmaj.ca/site/earlyreleases/15april14_new-legitimacy-to-concerns-about-fracking-and-health.xhtml
12. Up to 1,000
Times More Methane Emissions Than Estimated
“Purdue and Cornell
universities on Monday released a study in the Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United
States of America with data on higher-than-expected methane levels found above
shale gas wells.
It is particularly
noteworthy that large emissions were measured for wells in the drilling phase,
in some cases 100 to 1,000 times greater than the inventory estimates,” Shepson said. “This
indicates that there are processes occurring—e.g. emissions from coal seams
during the drilling process—that are not captured in the inventory development
process. This is another example pointing to the idea that a large fraction of
the total emissions is coming from a small fraction of shale gas production
components that are in an anomalous condition.”
http://ecowatch.com/2014/04/15/purdue-cornell-researchers-methane-emissions/#comment-1339911607
13. Pollution
Fears Crush Home Prices Near Fracking Wells
“Researchers from the University
of Calgary and Duke University studied property sales from 1994 to 2012 in 36
Pennsylvania counties and seven counties in New York. They mapped sales against the locations of shale-gas wells, and they
compared homes connected to public drinking-water systems to homes with private
wells.
Properties with private wells
suffered a loss in value compared to properties connected to a municipal water
system, they found, offsetting gains in value from mineral-rights royalties.
The loss varied with distance from the nearest shale-gas well. At 1.5
kilometers, properties with private wells sold for about 10 percent less.
Properties suffered greater losses when closer to fracked shale-gas
wells . Within 1 km of shale gas wells, properties with private drinking water
wells dropped 22 % in value. Properties connected to public water suffered no
losses, but also showed no net gains.
“If you get closer, if you look at the properties that are only
1 km from a shale gas well, then for the ones that are on groundwater we see a
22 percent loss in property values,” Muehlenbachs said, ”and for the ones that
have access to pipe water, there’s zero gain, so essentially all of the
positive benefits get wiped out by these negative externalities of having this
well pad nearby.”
Such
negative externalities include truck traffic, noise, light, and air pollution.
14. Ohio
Earthquakes Linked to Fracking
“The Ohio Department of
Natural Resources (ODNR) announced that recent earthquakes in northeastern Ohio
were likely caused by fracking. This is the fourth documented case of
induced seismicity linked to fracking, and the latest in a series of
earthquakes in Ohio caused by oil and gas production activities. The earlier
quakes resulted from disposal of waste water into underground injection wells.
Scientists have long known that
injecting fluids underground can cause earthquakes. Despite this fact, neither
state nor federal regulations require operators of fracking wells or disposal
wells to evaluate the risk of induced earthquakes when deciding where to site
wells or how to operate them. Ohio will
now be the first state to require companies to monitor for seismic activity
during fracking and shut down operations if earthquakes occur.
Earthquakes caused by oil and gas
production activities have been happening across the U.S., including in places
where natural earthquakes are uncommon. It’s time for regulators everywhere to
put public health and safety first, and create rules to assess and mitigate the
risk of induced earthquakes.”
http://ecowatch.com/2014/04/14/ohio-earthquakes-companies-test-seismic-activity/
15. Wind Power Cut
Nearly 100 Million Tons of Carbon Emissions
In 2013
Wind
energy figures from 2013 keep pouring in and they continue to impress.
“According to a report preview
from the American Wind Energy Association (AWEA), wind generation reduced carbon dioxide emissions in the
power sector by 4.4 percent. That’s good for 96 million metric tons, or the
equivalent of taking 16.9 million cars off the road.
According to AWEA, wind also reduced sulfur dioxide, nitrogen
oxides and other toxins. It also helped the nation cut down on the amount
of water typically evaporated during the process used at most conventional
power plants.”
16. Gov. Corbett Inflates Job numbers
“Natural-gas
production in Pennsylvania increased by 72 % from 2011 to 2012, the largest
jump out of all the major gas-producing states. So what explains the 170,000-job gap between Corbett's campaign and his
state agency calculation?
The 30,000 figure is the state's
estimate of jobs that includes employment in fields like gas extraction, well
drilling, and pipeline transportation.
The state also calculates
employment in the larger natural-gas supply chain. The total for this category
comes to 214,946 jobs in the third quarter of last year.
That's the figure Corbett is
relying on for his ad, his campaign confirmed.
But that number covers industries
whose connection to oil and gas development is tenuous at best, ranging from freight trucking to highway,
street, and bridge construction. And agency officials openly admit that the
figure—when used to estimate jobs supported by shale—amounts to little more
than a guess.
"We have absolutely no idea how many jobs in that second category
are due to natural-gas production," said Tim McElhinny, an economic research
manager at the state Department of Labor and Industry's center for workforce
information and analysis. "It's a drop in the bucket," said Tim Kelsey, a professor at
the Pennsylvania State University and cofounder of the Center for Economic and
Community Development. "Relative
to statewide employment this is a very small number of jobs." http://www.nationaljournal.com/new-energy-paradigm/how-many-jobs-does-fracking-really-create-2014041
17. DEP Fines Range $75,000 for Lycoming
County Brine Spill
WILLIAMSPORT --
The DEP) announced that it has fined
Range Resources $75,000 for a July 2012 manufactured brine spill of 3,066
gallons at its Cornwall Mountain Hunting Club Unit A well pad in Lewis
Township, Lycoming County. “This
was a significant spill that Range
reported to the department but did not properly remediate until nearly a year
later,” DEP Director of District Oil and Gas Operations John Ryder said.
The department’s investigation
determined that a leak from the manhole
cover on a manufactured brine storage tank caused the brine to flow off the
well pad, over an access road and into an unnamed tributary leading to Trout
Run, a high quality stream. There is not evidence the brine reached Trout Run.
http://www.portal.state.pa.us/portal/server.pt/community/newsroom/14287?id=20459&typeid=1
18. DEP Notice of Violation
For Chevron Explosion and Fire
March 18, 2014
Chevron Appalachia LLC
600
Corporate Drive
Moon
Township PA 15108-2973
Dear Chevron:
This
is a Notice of Violation for events that occurred at the Lanco pad in Dunkard Township,
Greene County, in February 2014. There are three Marcellus Shale conservation
wells on this location, identified as the Lanco 6H (Permit No. 059-25887),
Lanco 7H (Permit No. 059-25888), and Lanco 8H (Permit No. 059-25889). These
wells are owned and operated by Chevron Appalachia, LLC (‘Chevron’).
On February 11, 2014, during activities to
prepare the Lanco 7H for production, an explosion and fire occurred at the
Lanco 7H, which caused other equipment to burn. As a result of the explosion,
fire, and resultant heat, the Lanco 6H well head was damaged and also ignited.
During
these events, one individual died and another was injured on the well site.
These fires burned until sometime on February 15, 2014. Gas was emitted
uncontrollably to the air until the wells were capped on February 23, 2014, for
the 7H well and February 25, 2014, for the 6H well.
In addition to gas emissions, the Lance 6H
and 7H wells discharged production fluids into the air and onto the well pad
until the wells were capped. On multiple occasions during these events, Chevron failed to provide access to
properly identified Department personnel and agents to the Lanco well site,
access road, and vicinity.
As
a result of the above, and based on the Department’s observations and
investigation to date, Chevron is
responsible for the following violations:
1.
Failure to use efforts and endeavors to effectively prevent explosions and
fires, a violation of Section 3219 of the Oil and Gas Act, 58 Pa. C.S. 3219.
2. Failure to construct and operate a well to
ensure that the well integrity is maintained and health, safety, environment,
and property are protected, a violation of 25 Pa. Code
3. Hazardous venting of gas, violations of 25
Pa. Code 78.74, 79.15.
4. Failure to prevent waste of gas due to
blowout equipment not in good working condition, a violation of -25 Pa. Code
79.12.
5. Failure to provide to provide access to a
permitted oil and gas facility to properly identified Department personnel and
agents, a violation of 58 Pa. C.S. 3258(a), and the express conditions of the
well permits which allow entry without notice or a search warrant.
6. Emission of fugitive air contaminants
without approval, a violation of 25 Pa. Code
7. Open burning outside of an air basin, a
violation of 25 Pa. Code
8. Construction, modification, or operation of
an air contamination source without Department approval, violations of Sections
6. 1(a) and 6.l(b) of the Air Pollution Control Act, 35 P.S. and 25 Pa. Code
127.11 and 127.402.
9. Discharge of production fluids onto the
ground, a violation of 25 Pa. Code 78.54, A and 78.57, and a. violation of
Section 301 of the Solid Waste Management Act, 35 P.S. 6018.301.
Violations
1, 2, 3, 5, and 9, above, constitute unlawful conduct under Section 3259(1),
(2), and (3) of the Oil and Gas Act, 58 Pa. C.S. Violations 3 and 4, above,
constitute unlawful conduct under Section 12(a) of the Oil and Gas Conservation
Law, 58 P.S. 412(a).
Violations
6, 7, and 8, above, constitute unlawful conduct under Section 8 of the Air
Pollution Control Act, 35 P.S. 4008. Violation 9, above, constitutes unlawful
conduct under Section 610(4) of the Solid Waste Management Act, 35 PS.
Each day that each one of the
violations listed above occurred could constitute a separate violation. All
violations are subject to the enforcement and penalty provisions as provided in
the relevant statutes. 58 Pa. C.S. 3256; 58 P.S. 412; 35 P.S. 4009.1; 35 PS.
6018.605.
These
events also constitute a well control emergency. The Department may pursue its
costs in responding to these events under the Oil and Gas Act and the Air
Pollution and Control Act. 58 Pa. OS. 3254.1, 3256; 35 P.S.
Please
submit a Written response to this Notice of Violation Within 10 business days.
Investigation
of these events is ongoing. Your full cooperation with the investigation is
required by law. 58 Pa. C.S. 3258, 3259(3). Additional violations may be
identified. This NOV, therefore, does not constitute final evaluation of these
events and may be expanded.
This
Notice of Violation is neither an order nor any other final action of the
Department of Environmental Protection. It neither imposes nor waives any
enforcement action available to the Department under any of its statutes. If
the Department determines that an enforcement action is appropriate, you will
be notified of the action.
If you have any questions in this matter,
please Contact me at 412.442.4000.
Sincerely,
Alan
Eichler, Program Manager
District
Oil and Gas Operations
Southwest
Region
PDF of Document:
http://www.marcellus-shale.us/pdf/Lanco-DEP-Ltr_3-18-14.pdf
Donations
We are very appreciative of
donations, both large and small, to our group.
With your help, we have handed out thousands of flyers
on the health and environmental effects of fracking, sponsored numerous public
meetings, and provided information to citizens and officials countywide. If you
would like to support our efforts:
Checks to
our group should be made out to the Thomas
Merton Center/Westmoreland Marcellus Citizens’ Group. And in the Reminder line
please write- Westmoreland Marcellus Citizens’ Group. The reason for this
is that we are one project of 12 at Thomas Merton. You can send your check to:
Westmoreland Marcellus Citizens’ Group, PO Box 1040, Latrobe, PA, 15650. Or you
can give the check or cash to Lou Pochet or Jan Milburn.
To make a contribution to our
group using a credit card, go
to www.thomasmertoncenter.org. Look for the contribute
button, then scroll down the list of organizations to direct money to. We are
listed as the Westmoreland Marcellus Citizens’ Group.
Please
be sure to write Westmoreland Marcellus
Citizens’ Group on the bottom of your check so that WMCG receives the
funding, since we are just one project of many of the Thomas Merton Center. You
can also give your donation to Lou Pochet or Jan Milburn.
Westmoreland Marcellus Citizen’s Group—Mission Statement
WMCG is a project of the Thomas
Merton Society
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 and
Thomas Merton Liason-Lou Pochet
Secretary-Ron
Nordstrom
Facebook
Coordinator-Elizabeth Nordstrom
Science
Advisor-Dr. Cynthia Walter
To receive our news updates, please email jan at westmcg@gmail.com
To remove your name from our list please put “remove name from list’ in
the subject line
