westmcg@gmail.com
!!!!EPA Address for Written Comments on Carbon Emissions from Coal Fired Plants:
In addition to the public hearing in Pittsburgh, comments on the EPA’s new rule covering the carbon emissions from coal-fired power plants may be submitted via Email to A-and-R-Docket@epa.gov with docket ID No. EPA-HQ-OAR-2013-0602 in the subject line of the message. Also see Jan and jack's letter in testimonies tab.
* For articles and updates or to just vent, visit us on facebook;
https://www.facebook.com/groups/MarcellusWestmorelandCountyPA/
* To view past updates, reports, general
information, permanent documents, and meeting information
http://westmorelandmarcellus.blogspot.com/
* Our email address: westmcg@gmail.com
* 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.
Latrobe
Farm Market
Thank you to Mike Atherton and Cynthia Walter,
Dorothy Pochet and Jan Milburn for working our TDS testing table at Latrobe
Farm Market.
To Carol Cutler for a lovely job on creating the
flyer, Mike Atherton for publicity, and Jan and Jack Milburn for posting flyers
around the Latrobe area.
Thank You --Recent Donations
Thank
you to April Jackman, the Shelton family, and Marc Levine for their generous
donations that support our work to protect the health and environment of local
communities.
We have been busy—The group has been incredibly busy. We: worked at the Latrobe Farm Market for two
weeks testing water samples and sharing information about fracking, are working
on distributing the Tenaska petitions, are preparing new handouts on data about
fracking –including water pollution to the Yough River from the proposed
Tenaska plant, worked to get a logo created to have our banner made-which we
now have, continue to meet with grad students doing their research on various
aspects of fracking, are talking to
reporters as needed, are working on local zoning issues, are coordinating a session with Mt Watershed and Jim Rosenberg
to learn how to search DEP enotices and permits, and many of us are preparing testimony for
the Carbon hearings in Pittsburgh . We always need your support and could be
present at more farm markets and events with more volunteers. Our success is
limited only by the number of people who care enough to get involved and make a
difference. We will continue
informing the public, and fighting for the health and the environment of our
communities.
A little Help Please --Take Action!!
***Tenaska
Plant Seeks to Be Sited in South Huntingdon, Westmoreland County***
Petition !!
Just Use the Link
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.
*********************************************************************************
Calendar
*** WMCG Group Meeting We meet the second Tuesday of every month at
7:30 PM in Greensburg. August 12. Email
Jan for directions. All are very welcome
to attend.
***Fair Shake Gets
12% Profits at Wigle Whiskey -Monday, August 4 (6-9 PM)
2401
Smallman St.
Pittsburgh,
PA 15222
You
are invited.... and bring some
friends...
12%
of all sales will go to Fair Shake Environmental Legal Services.
http://www.fairshake-els.org/
"Fair
Shake provides legal representation so that your health, your well-being, your
work, and your environmental needs have a voice. No matter who you are. And we
teach young attorneys how to do the same."
Attorney
Jordan Yeager (of anti-Act 13 fame) is on Fair Shake's Board of Directors. Fair Shake is helping to provide legal
services in the fight against fracking.
*** Learn how to
better examine DEP e-notices and permits- August 5, 11:00, Mt Watershed Office Bring your laptop. There is limited room so
let Jan or Nick at Mt Watershed know if you are interested. Jim Rosenberg will
be our facilitator. Nick said they have a screen if some people do not have
laptop.
***Boston Art Show
Utilizes Local Voices-- July 11, 2014
through January 5, 2015
Open to the
public, Boston Museum of Science
Several of us spoke to artist
Anne Neeley about water contamination from fracking. Excerpts of what we said about
our concerns regarding fracking will play in a loop along with music in the
background as people view Anne’s murals of water. The show is not exclusively
about the effect of fracking on water and includes other sources of pollution.
(see sites below).
Some of us were fortunate to see
photos of Anne’s murals. They are beautiful and very thought provoking. Jan
ANNE
NEELY WATER STORIES PROJECT: A CONVERSATION IN PAINT AND SOUND
July
2014 – January 2015, Museum of Science, Boston
“Water Stories: A Conversation in
Painting and Sound” is at the Museum of Science, Boston through January 2015.
In recent years I have conveyed ideas about water and the phenomena of water
through nature, the news, memory and imagination. These paintings explore the
beauty and foreboding of water, related to central themes, mostly manmade and
thru climate change affecting this country. Sound artist Halsey Burgund has
created a 35 minute audio composition that accompanies the paintings, comprised
of five sections grouped by thematic content: The Future, Stories, Bad Things,
Science and Cherish. The voices are edited and combined with water sounds and
musical elements and play in a continuous loop throughout the gallery. By
placing this work in this Museum of Science there is an extraordinary
opportunity to clarify and illuminate issues around water through visceral
connections that paintings often elicit from viewers while raising public
awareness. My hope is that
this exhibition will spawn a new sense of ownership about not only the issues
facing us about water but how we use water on a daily basis.”
"Together, Anne and I plan
to explore big ideas about what’s happening with water in this country. In the
2014, the Museum will exhibit Anne’s work and host a series of related
programs. At the Museum, we find that mixing art with our more typical
educational approaches works well. The art opens people to ideas, emotion,
scale, and import, in ways that more explicit techniques may not. It broadens
the audience, welcomes people who learn differently, and adds dimensions of experience
that are otherwise unavailable."
—
David G. Rabkin, PhD, Director for Current Science and Technology, Museum of
Science, Boston, MA
Visit
these sites for images and more information:
http://www.anneneely.com/pages/mos.html
TAKE ACTION !!
***Letters to the editor are important and one of the best ways to share
information with the public. ***
***See Tenaska Petition
at the top of the Updates
***EPA
Carbon Hearing- Pittsburgh’s Air At Stake
To
Restrict Carbon From Existing Power plants
Everyone Should Submit a
Written Statement
From Sierra Club: It is too late
to register to speak, but you can send a statement to the EPA. We need to send
a strong message to the EPA and Big Coal that there’s overwhelming public
support for national climate action –NOW! Big Coal and their climate-denying
allies are already trying to weaken the EPA’s historic climate protection
efforts.
Comments on the
Clean Power Plan Proposed Rule must be received by October 16, 2014. You do not have to write a
long statement. Any statement of support for Carbon reduction is helpful and
there’s lots of data, just google climate change—flooding, storms, effects on
health, plant and animal adaptation, etc.
Be sure to
reference Docket ID:
EPA-HQ-OAR-2013-0602
Send Your Comments To:
Q: Can I submit written
comments at the hearing site
A: We recommend that you submit your written comments to the docket. The
docket number for this rule is: Docket No. EPA-HQ-OAR-2013-0602 (for the Clean
Power Plan for Existing Sources) and
information on how to submit written comments is listed below. The public
comment period will be open for 120 days from the time the rule is published in
the Federal Register. We will be taking comments that are submitted the day of
the hearing and will ensure that those get submitted to the docket.
For
information about the carbon reduction plan:
Additional
information
What the EPA
Rules Aim to Accomplish
According to the EPA, the
new emission rules will:
*Cut carbon emission from
the power sector by 30 percent nationwide below 2005 levels, which is equal to
the emissions from powering more than half the homes in the United States for
one year;
*As a co-benefit, cut particle pollution, nitrogen oxides, and sulfur
dioxide by more than 25 percent;
*Avoid up to 6,600 premature deaths, up to 150,000 asthma attacks in
children, and up to 490,000 missed work or school days—providing up to $93
billion in climate and public health benefits; and
*Shrink
electricity bills roughly 8 percent by increasing energy efficiency and reducing demand
in the electricity system.
Why the EPA
Rules Are So Important
The folk at Think Progress
have nicely explained why this action by the Obama administration is so
important. Jeff Spross explained:
*It’s the first step towards
a global solution
*Climate change is a threat
to America and the world
*U.S. carbon emissions are a
sizable part of the problem
*Congress isn’t going to do
it anytime soon
And Ryan Koronowski expanded
with the following points:
*This is the most
significant move any U.S. president has made to curtail carbon pollution in
history.
*There is room for improvement,
and time to improve it.
*The EPA is just doing what Congress (and the Supreme Court) told it to
do many years ago.
*States will have huge
amounts of flexibility to comply.
*Coal was on its way out and
this speeds up the transition.
*This is one rule in a long
string of carbon-cutting actions since President Obama took office.
*The rule won’t come into
effect overnight.
*It’s not just fossil fuel
companies and conservative groups that have a voice in this process.
Impact on
Pennsylvania
According to the EPA, coal
is currently the largest energy source for power generation in Pennsylvania
(Coal – 39.0 pct, Nuclear – 33.6 pct, Natural Gas – 24.0 pct and Clean Energy –
3.4 pct). In 2012,
Pennsylvania’s power sector CO2 emissions were approximately 106 million metric
tons from sources covered by the proposed rule. Based on the amount of energy
produced by fossil-fuel fired plants and certain low or zero emitting plants,
Pennsylvania’s 2012 emission rate was 1,540 pounds/megawatt hours (lb/MWh).
The EPA is asking Pennsylvania to develop a plan to
lower its carbon pollution to meet the proposed emission rate goal of 1,052
lb/MWh in 2030. The EPA is giving states considerable flexibility in how they
achieve their reductions, including energy efficiency, clean energy programs,
etc. It will be interesting to see what Gov. Corbett’s administration plans
before the deadline of June 2016, but the Governor’s quick criticism and the
failure to support programs such as the Sunshine Solar Program do not suggest
enthusiastic compliance. Nor does Pennsylvania’s decision in 2005 to serve as
an observer rather than active member of the northeast Regional Greenhouse Gas
Initiative cap-and-trade system reflect well on our state.
Opposition to
the New EPA Rules
The Obama Administration
clearly anticipates strong opposition to the new rules, and the fight will take
place on several grounds. Despite strong public support for the EPA’s proposed
rules, the climate change deniers were quick to claim the rules were unnecessary.
The national Chamber of Commerce said the costs were exorbitant, but Nobelist
Paul Krugman dismisses their argument. But it is the legal challenges that will
perhaps slow-down the implementation of the EPA’s rules, a delay we cannot
afford.
Global Impact
of the EPA Power Plant Rule
The most recent UN report
concludes that there is little time left for a meaningful international
agreement to be enacted. Progress towards global action on climate change has
been stymied by the failure of the U.S. to demonstrate its own willingness to
control CO2 emissions. The new EPA rules will now allow the U.S to take a
stronger stand in the upcoming UN discussions in New York in September and in
Paris next year. Some evidence of that shift came from the G7 meeting this
week, and a suggestion that China will follow the U.S.’s example of CO2
emission reduction.
Shift from
Coal to Natural Gas
As early as 2010 utilities
were shifting away from coal to natural gas for electricity generation, partly
in anticipation of eventual climate regulation but also because of lower
operating costs with gas. That shift has accelerated with the greater
production of fracked gas, with natural gas predicted to overtake coal as the
preferred fuel by 2035. Although overall burning natural gas is cleaner than
burning coal, it is by no means a ‘clean’ fuel, and that concerns
environmentalists.
Given the reliance on
natural gas to achieve the reduction in emissions, environmentalists will be
calling for a number of actions, such as calling for removal of exemptions to
the Clean Water Act, Clean Air Act, and other laws that the drillers currently
enjoy. But that requires unlikely Congressional action. What the Executive
branch can do is properly understand and strictly regulate air and water
pollution associated with all aspects fracking.
And From
Public Citizen
See the top 10 FAQs on the
carbon pollution reduction plan.
From Peter Wray, Sierra Club: MAJOR CLIMATE CHANGE ACTIONS COMING UP
We
are organizing two buses from Pittsburgh to the PEOPLES CLIMATE MARCH in New
York City, September 21. See
http://alleghenysc.org/?p=19091.
*Join the People’s
Climate March in New York City, Sept. 21. ACTION:
Register now for a seat on one of the Pittsburgh buses. http://alleghenysc.org/?p=19091
And Other Sierra Club Posts:
*Divestment from
Fossil Fuel Companies Gains Momentum. Churches and colleges
withdrawing financial support. (July 12, 2014)
http://alleghenysc.org/?p=19114
*Learn How
Citizens Forced Coke Plant Cleanup in New York. Visitors will describe how they gained a
record fine against polluting company, July 17 & 18. (July 10, 2014) http://alleghenysc.org/?p=19072
*Supreme Court
Supports EPA’s Right to Regulate Carbon Emissions from Industrial
Sources. Decision eases way for Obama’s
Climate Action Plan. (June 27, 2014)
http://alleghenysc.org/?p=18967
*******************************************************************************************
***Petition- Help the Children of Mars School District
Below
is a petition that a group of parents in the Mars Area School District are
working very hard to get signatures.
Please take a moment to look at the petition and sign it. It only takes 5 minutes. We are fighting to keep our children,
teachers, and community safe here and across the state of Pennsylvania.
Please share this with your
spouses, friends, family, and any organizations that would support this
cause. We need 100,00 signatures
immediately, as the group plans to take the petition to Harrisburg within a
week.
Your
support is greatly appreciated!
Best
Regards,
Amy
Nassif
***Petition For Full Disclosure of Frack Chemicals
From Ron Slabe
I created a petition to
Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) which says:
"We,
the undersigned, in conjunction with the public comment period currently
underway, call on the EPA to conduct public hearings in areas where fracking
operations are either occurring or have occurred so that we may voice our
concerns over the lack of full
disclosure of the fracking chemicals used in hydraulic fracturing. (Docket
number EPA-HQ-OPPT-2011-1019)"
Will
you sign this petition? Click here:
Thanks! Ron Slabe
***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
“Sunoco has petitioned the 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
***Link to Shalefield Stories-Personal
stories of those affected by fracking http://www.friendsoftheharmed.com/
***To sign up for Skytruth 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/
Frack News
All articles are excerpted and condensed. Please use
links for the full article.
Special Thanks to Bob Donnan for photos.
I
have no report yet on the Wed night Mariner Pipeline Meeting in Delmont. I will
include notes next week. Jan
1. Property Rights
–Do No Harm To Your Neighbors
Justice Baer, PA Supreme
Court:
"Pursuant
to Article I, Section 1 of the Pennsylvania Constitution, and the Fifth and
Fourteenth Amendments to the United States Constitution, no person may be
deprived of his private property without due process of law. In the early years of the Union, this
constitutional guarantee translated into the general notion that a landowner
had the right to do as he saw fit with his property. As
modern American jurisprudence developed, however that constitutional guarantee
developed an important limitation: sic utere tuo ut alienum non laedas - so use your own property as not to injure
your neighbors." http://www.pacourts.us/courts/supreme-court/supreme-court-justices/justice-max-baer
John: “This is the basis for constitutional use of police powers and
zoning to ensure your neighbor's use of
his/her property is compatible with surrounding properties and is not used in a
way that injures a neighboring property.”
Elizabeth D’s Comment---To be kept in
mind when the air, water, soil of your property - not to mention the quiet
rural setting you chose to live in - is being compromised by an industrial
drilling site anywhere nearby. We each
have the right to livable, safe conditions...rights that are not trumped by a
neighbor's right to make money off the land they are living on. Land they should
be stewards of, frankly.
2. Construction of $500M
Power Plant in South Huntingdon
(Sign petition
at the top of the Updates to oppose this permanent source of air pollution and
water pollution which will go into the Yough. Jan)
“The enormous cost of building
gas-fired power plants, coupled with regulatory complexities, may mean only one
in five proposed plants ever will be built, says the regional grid operator
that moves wholesale electricity in all or parts of 13 states and the District
of Columbia.
But Ray Dotter, spokesman for PJM
International, the Valley Forge transmission group, predicted a plan by Omaha-based Tenaska Inc. to build a $500 million
power plant off Interstate 70 in South Huntingdon has a good shot because it
has negotiated many obstacles.
“Less than 20 percent of
proposals actually get built, but the Tenaska proposal has a higher
probability,” Dotter said.
Tenaska purchased 400 acres to
build a 930-megawatt plant and secured permits. It invested about $500,000 with the Westmoreland County Municipal
Authority to reserve water for the plant.
Even so, Tenaska has delayed the
start of construction until next year, partly because it hasn't penned
long-term commitments to buy electricity necessary to recoup the cost of
building.
The company is seeking 30-year
contracts with power companies, said Michael C. Roth, Tenaska's director of
development.
“It seems folks are looking for
shorter tenure. We're trying to work through it,” Roth said. “We have seen
growth for power, but it has been sluggish due to the economy. We have not seen
the demand we expected, but we remain optimistic.”
It's optimism fueled by
tightening federal emissions regulations forcing the planned deactivation or
retirement of six coal plants in Pennsylvania by 2019.
Of the 32 gas-powered plants
proposed for Pennsylvania, only one, by Texas-based Panda Power Projects, is
under construction.
“You have to have customers to
sell power,” said Jake Smeltz, president of the Harrisburg-based Electric Power
Generating Association.
Once built, however, gas-powered
plants are cheaper to operate than coal- or nuclear-fired plants, Smeltz said.
Panda's 829-megawatt plant in Asylum
in Bradford County, will provide electricity to 1 million homes. Thirty months
of construction began almost a year ago.
“The market needs power,” said
Panda spokesman Bill Pentak. He said the plant's proximity to Marcellus
shale-gas fields significantly lowers the company's operating costs.
But it wasn't a smooth road for
Panda.
“It's not easy to finance,” he
said. “It's very capital-intensive. There are so many requirements that the
question is, ‘Can you take it to Wall Street?' ”
Two other plants planned for
Western Pennsylvania are in development:
•
Construction has not begun on a 900-megawatt unit proposed by New Jersey-based
LSPower in North Beaver, Lawrence County. The state issued permits for the $750
million plant along the Mahoning River. Company officials did not return phone
calls or emails seeking comment.
• A
plan by Robinson Power/Beech Hollow Energy for a plant in Robinson, Washington
County, has been delayed since its 2011 proposal. Company owner Ray Bologna,
who could not be reached, told the Tribune-Review earlier that he would seek
better technology for the plant.
Read
more:
http://triblive.com/state/pennsylvania/6328602-74/plant-power-plants#ixzz38npa0dju
3. Penn Trafford Drilling: Mlakar Says No Safe Zones Are Permitted by State Law
(Solicitor
Mlakar said: “Because state law bars
municipalities from creating a “safe zone” from drilling…,” Did anyone question Mlakar’s opinion since the PA Supreme Court
ruled that fracking is an industrial process that doesn’t belong in residential
areas? Is that not creating a safe zone? jan )
“As drillers show more interest
in Penn Township land, municipal officials are planning to create an overlay zoning district that would allow
oil and gas extraction from almost anywhere in the township but prohibit wells
and other drilling structures in residential areas.
Township officials plan to meet with their consultant
from the Olsen and Associates firm next week to continue revisions to a new
zoning ordinance and zoning map. A new draft of the ordinance is expected to be
posted to the township's website in August as officials prepare for second
public hearing in September or October.
Because state law bars municipalities from creating a “safe zone” from
drilling, township officials are discussing the size of “substantial,
reasonable” setbacks necessary to limit the disturbance to residential areas
while preserving oil and gas rights for property owners or lease holders,
solicitor Les Mlakar said.
Like
the draft township officials put out for public review in May, the new proposal
would continue to allow extraction in residential areas — such as through
horizontal drilling techniques — but prevent wells, sediment ponds or pumping
or compressor stations in neighborhoods, Mlakar said.
“We're not calling them
‘permitted uses,'” Mlakar said about various operational facilities. “They're
going to be special exceptions no matter what area, but we're trying to isolate
the residential areas.”
Six of the 12 residents who
commented during the May public hearing expressed worries about drilling
affecting their general quality of life or the rural character of the township.
Officials of Apex Energy, a
Marcellus shale-drilling company, are considering as many as eight projects in
Penn Township. Company representatives have been soliciting residents in the
Level Green area for baseline water-quality tests related to a possible
drilling site in the township near the North Huntingdon and Trafford borders.
Earlier this year, Bow &
Arrow, the land-procurement arm of the Huntley & Huntley drilling company,
bought 219 acres off Pleasant Valley Road near the Murrysville border.
Mlakar
updated the township's work on the zoning ordinance during a public meeting
Monday night after residents Michael Bertonaschi, Marian Szmyd and Val Lamanna
asked for answers about how township officials are responding to drilling.
Szmyd said she wants her well
water to be protected and township officials to create substantial setbacks.
“You are the police state of this
township; you make the rules,” she said. “I cannot do anything — add an
addition (or) whatever — and you're going to welcome this industrial use into
our township?”
Lamanna requested that township
officials take greater efforts to inform residents about drilling activity.
“I talk to people, and they have no idea what I'm
talking about,” Lamanna said. “They're like, ‘That's out in Washington County.
There's not going to be drilling in Penn Township.'”
Like the residents, Commissioner
Ed Sullivan described himself and his board colleagues as “concerned citizens”
who don't have anything to gain from drilling activity in the township.
Sullivan said he even expects
drilling to affect his quarter-acre residential lot, but he doesn't own the
mineral rights.
“We don't oppose, necessarily,
gas drilling,” Sullivan said of the commissioners' position, “but we want to
make sure it's done responsibly.”
Chris
Foreman is a staff writer for Trib Total Media. He can be reached at
412-871-2363 or cforeman@tribweb.com.
http://triblive.com/neighborhoods/yourpenntrafford/yourpenntraffordmore/6486054-74/township-drilling-officials#axzz38U5ThBdD
4. Independent Judges Rule--
Sunoco Logistics
Pipeline Can’t Bypass Local Zoning Laws,
But PUC Will Still Rule
“Sunoco Logistics can’t bypass
local zoning laws to develop its natural gas liquids pipeline project known as
Mariner East. That’s the word from a pair of independent administrative law
judges for the state’s Public Utility Commission, or PUC.
Sunoco Logistics wants to build 18 pump and valve
stations to keep natural gas liquids flowing along the pipeline’s 300-mile
route from western Pennsylvania to Marcus Hook.
For months, the company has
attempted to make the case – to local residents and to the PUC – that it is a
public utility corporation, and that the pipeline itself offers a public
utility service.
In a ruling issued Wednesday, the
judges dismissed that claim, resulting in a win for residents who have teamed
up with environmental groups to fight the project.
“We’re happy that it proves what
we’ve been saying all along,” said Tom Casey, the head of a citizens’ advocacy
group in Chester County.
However,
Casey, a resident of West Goshen Township, could not officially declare
victory.
The case will ultimately be decided by the five-member
Public Utility Commission. A PUC spokeswoman said the commission can accept,
reject or modify the judges’ decision.
Regardless of the outcome, the parties in the case can
appeal to the state’s Commonwealth Court.
Jeff Shields, a spokesman for
Sunoco Logistics, said the company believes the PUC will “continue to recognize
that the proposed Mariner East service will result in numerous public
benefits.”
PUC Chairman Robert Powelson was formerly the member
of a group of key industry players and business leaders promoting energy
projects in the Philadelphia region, leading some advocates to question his
objectivity in the Sunoco Logistics case.
In May, Powelson stepped down
from the group, he said, “to avoid even the appearance of bias.”
Lynda Farrel, executive director
of the Chester County-based Pipeline Safety Coalition, believes Powelson should
recuse himself from the Mariner East vote.
“Removing himself from the energy
[team] was a passive way of admitting that he does have a bias,” she said.
When asked by StateImpact
Pennsylvania previously, Powelson said he was not sure whether he would recuse
himself, and that he was able to do his job by looking at the facts.
A PUC spokeswoman said the
parties in the case will have through the end of August to file exceptions and
replies if they disagree with the judges’ ruling. It is not clear when the five
commissioners will take up the issue.”
5. Cecil Twp.
Again Requests DEP Meeting
DEP’s Poister Defends Waste Pit
“Cecil Township officials sent a
letter to local legislators after a letter to the DEP – requesting a meeting to
discuss a Marcellus Shale water impoundment – went unanswered.
Township Manager Don Gennuso sent
a letter to the DEP July 10, explaining
the township had concerns and questions about Cecil Impoundment 23, formerly
known as the Worstell impoundment. Some supervisors said they wanted the DEP to
test groundwater at the impoundment in light of a leak at the Jon Day
impoundment in Amwell Township.
Both impoundments are operated by Range Resources.
After two weeks had passed
without a reply from the DEP, Gennuso sent a letter to state Sen. Tim Solobay,
D-Canonsburg, and state Rep. Jesse White, D-Cecil, seeking assistance.
Gennuso wrote, “The lack of response is especially
frustrating given the recent findings of Auditor General Eugene DePasquale
regarding the DEP’s performance and responsiveness.”
The performance audit of the DEP,
released last week, sharply criticized the DEP’s handling of oil and gas
development and its “poor” communication with complainants.
“Given the recent high-profile problems at other similarly constructed
wastewater impoundments in the area (Jon Day, Yeager, etc.), it is completely
reasonable for Cecil Township to pursue their constitutional obligation to
protect the health, safety and welfare of their residents by ensuring the
integrity of the Worstell impoundment,” White said in a letter he sent to the
DEP Monday.
The impoundment was the subject
of several private meetings last year between supervisors and the DEP – and,
separately, with Range Resources. It also caused an ideological divide on the
board as to whether officials should accept a private meeting if it appeared to
be the only way to get answers.
DEP spokesman John Poister said
the impoundment can operate indefinitely as long as it is servicing wells. He
said there have been no recent issues at the site.”
6. Geyer Family
Plans To Frack Near School
“Kim and Bob Geyer have been in the center of a
firestorm as a parents group fights Rex Energy's plans to drill for natural gas
on the couple's 150-acre farm.
The Geyers say they have a constitutional right to lease their land
— which stretches from their home in Adams into adjacent Middlesex — for a
Marcellus shale drilling well pad.
“We've been doing this by the
letter of the law through the (Department of Environmental Protection),” said
Bob Geyer, 56, who owns a construction business.
He and his late father, Bill,
signed a lease with Rex about five years ago. The Geyers declined to discuss
the terms.
The DEP could decide within the
next few weeks whether to grant Rex permits to drill on the farm at a site in
Middlesex, three-quarters of a mile from Mars Area School District property in
Adams.
The parents group is fighting to
get a 2-mile buffer around the school campus where drilling and industrial
development would be prohibited.
“It's about the safety and well-being of our children in our community,”
said Amy Nassif, a member of the parents group.
The Geyers aren't buying the
group's safety argument. The couple said there is no scientific data to support
the need for a 2-mile prohibition.
Instead, the Geyers said, they
believe that opponents are concerned about their property values.
“We've never really even
discussed property values,” Nassif said.
The
Geyers said they have lived their entire lives in southern Butler County, and
their families go back in the area more than three generations. They care about
children.
“These people are trying to tell
me what to do with my property,” said Bob Geyer said of the opponents.
“It's setting precedence in not
just gas-well drilling, but in defending private property rights,” Kim Geyer
said. “It's an American, it's a constitutional thing.”
Kim Geyer, 51, secretary for
Butler County Commissioner William Pinkerton, serves on XTO Energy's community
advisory panel, a role she said educated her about the drilling industry.
She also is a former president of
the Mars Area School Board.
Kim Geyer said her family
believes that DEP rules and regulations governing drilling, including a 500-foot
setback from schools, are enough protection.
Nassif said the group is not
pointing fingers any one person.
“I don't think that anyone in the
group personally knows the Geyers. It's not only about the Geyers, but
everybody who wants to develop around the schools,” she said. “
Read
more:
http://triblive.com/news/butler/6486407-74/geyer-geyers-drilling#ixzz38ipE9dJ7
7. EPA Says Lead
Exceeds Standards
From Bob S. via LAWPA
“EPA said today that in Potter,
Center and Vanport Twps. the air lead concentrations exceed the Federal
standards and pose a serious violation and health risks. The PaDEP will hold a
public meeting on Sept. 3rd, 2014 at 1 PM , S.W. Regional Office Waterfront
Drive Pittsburgh. This is the proposed CRACKER PLANT ZONE !”
timesonline.com
8. Ruling: Public
Safety Plan Will Not Be Public
“The Office of Open Records in Harrisburg sided with Chartiers Township
and denied the Observer- Reporter’s appeal for access to the township’s
evacuation plan.
Appeals
Officer Benjamin Lorah ruled the evacuation plan is public safety information
that is exempt under the Right to Know Law.
“Obviously, we are disappointed
in the decision to deny our request for the evacuation plan,” said Lucy
Northrop Corwin, the O- R’s director of news. “We feel the community is better
served by having the information in advance of an actual emergency at the
plant.”
The newspaper filed a Right to
Know request for the evacuation plan two weeks after about 100 township
residents were evacuated in May when lightning struck the MarkWest cryogenic
plant on Western Avenue and caused a natural gas leak.
Chartiers Township Manager Jodi
Noble denied the request, and the newspaper appealed the decision to the Office
of Open Records June 25. The Observer-
Reporter argued the evacuation plan should be made public because confusion
ensued during the evacuation in May, and several residents self-evacuated
before first responders arrived.
Several residents also complained that first
responders did not immediately divulge what had happened.
The township, in its response to
the newspaper’s appeal, argued the evacuation “ was performed calmly and
professionally with no resulting injuries or panic.”
According to state law, documents
pertaining to law enforcement or public safety can be kept private if releasing
them would be “reasonably likely to jeopardize or threaten public safety.”
The Office of Open Records agreed
with Chartiers Township that the exemption applied. The plan includes
evacuation procedures, control points used to limit traffic and the planned
stations of emergency personnel. It also includes information provided by Mark-West, such as power supply sources,
access locations and site infrastructure.
Chartiers
Township argued that releasing the evacuation plan would make evacuation routes
“vulnerable to disruption” and also would make police officers vulnerable by
disclosing their locations in the event of an emergency.
“It is Chartiers Township’s
position that the disclosure of names, addresses and procedures in the event of
an evacuation will create confusion among the general public and would threaten
public safety and protection,” the township said in its response to the
Observer-Reporter’s appeal.
A separate Right to Know request was submitted last
October by township resident Erin Sethman, who lives across from the MarkWest
plant. In her request, she wrote, “Our home is in very close proximity of the
plant. … This request is reasonable due to small children and elderly living in
harm’s way.”
The township also denied Sethman’s request.
Chartiers Township cannot be
compelled to provide the plan, but Lorah cited a section of state law indicating that the township could opt to make
an otherwise-exempt document public if the township “determines that the public
interest favoring access outweighs any individual, agency or public interest
that may favor restriction of access.”
In response to the Observer-
Reporter’s appeal, Chartiers Township provided a copy of the “basic plan”
portion of the emergency response plan but said the “incident specific”
evacuation plan was not public. The basic plan includes a safety checklist and
several blank forms that would be used in the event of an emergency.”
9. Colorado Judge
Strikes Down Longmont’s Fracking Ban “Boulder
County District Court Judge D.D. Mallard decision regarding Longmont, CO’s
fracking ban includes no ambiguity. Instead
it clearly states that concerns about health risks to residents don’t quite
stack up against Colorado’s stake in the oil and gas industries.
“While the court appreciates the
Longmont citizens’ sincerely held beliefs about risks to their health and
safety, the court does not find this is sufficient to completely devalue the
state’s interest,” Mallard wrote in the decision. Voters approved
the ban in 2012, but the Colorado Oil and Gas Association never stopped
fighting to overturn it. Earthworks, the Sierra Club, Our Health, Our
Future, Our Longmont and the other environmental groups listed as defendants
plan on appealing the decision. The judge ruled that the ban can remain in
place while an appeal is considered.
A judge’s decision favoring Colorado’s fracking
industry makes it clear that residential safety isn’t as much of a priority.
“While we respectfully disagree
with the court’s final decision, [Mallard] was correct that we were asking this
Court, in part, to place protection from the health, safety and environmental
risks from fracking over the development of mineral resources,” Kaye Fissinger,
president of Our Health, Our Future, Our Longmont, said in a statement on
Earthworks’ website.
“It’s tragic that the judge views
the current law in Colorado is one in which fracking is more important than
public health; reversing that backwards priority is a long-term battle that
we’re determined to continue.”
According to the Post, the City
of Longmont had spent $116,324 defending the ban as of June 30. Though the
groups argued that the language the industry relied on to get its desired
result was written far before modern practices like fracking, Mallard said the
issue should be taken up with a higher court or state legislators.
“This decision means two things:
The judge has invited us to seek the change we need either through the higher
courts or the legislature,” said Bruce Baizel, Earthworks Energy Program
director. “We fully intend to pursue the former on appeal, while the latter
underscores the need for the citizens of Colorado to get out and support the
Environmental Bill of Rights ballot measure this Fall.”
http://ecowatch.com/2014/07/25/colorado-longmont-fracking-ban/?utm_source=EcoWatch+List&utm_campaign=952e61c38f-Top_News_7_25_2014&utm_medium=email&utm_term=0_49c7d43dc9-952e61c38f-85873301
Brandon
Baker | July 25, 2014 10:17 am | Comments
10. Huge Loss of
Jobs Forecast for Europe Due To US Shale Boom
“The U.S. shale-gas boom is placing 30 million jobs at risk in Europe as
companies with greater reliance on energy contend with higher fuel prices than
their American counterparts, the International Energy Agency said.
Manufacturers of petrochemicals, aluminum, fertilizers
and plastics are leaving Europe to take advantage of booming U.S. production of
natural gas
from shale rock formations, Fatih Birol, chief economist for the International
Energy Agency, a Paris-based adviser to 29 nations, said at a conference in
London today.
“Many petrochemicals companies in
central Europe are moving out,” Birol said. “Thirty million jobs are in
danger.”
The U.S. has become the world’s largest producer of
oil and gas as hydraulic fracturing and horizontal drilling help producers
extract resources from shale rock. The country’s refineries processed a record
volume of crude last week as plants took advantage of cheaper domestic crudes.
Chemical makers from Germany’s BASF SE to Brazil’s Braskem SA plan to invest as
much as $72 billion in U.S. plants to take advantage of low-cost natural gas
feedstock.
U.S. refineries are competing for
market share and benefiting from margins that exceed those of European
competitors by as much as $10 a barrel because of cheaper crude, Hermes
Commodities said in a report today.”
http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2014-07-17/europe-risks-losing-30-million-jobs-to-u-s-shale-boom.html
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
Comment
by Duane Nichols: By continuing to ignore all of the environmental impacts and
secondary costs of “shale fracking,” the U. S. is sowing the seeds of major
societal disruption around the world. And,
how can we in all conscience refuse to adopt very strong programs to abate
“climate change” as well as global “plastics pollution.” Our oceans and sea
creatures are already plasticized. The future of Earth is in the balance now!
11. Federal Report Details
Chemicals Used At Frack Site
MONROE
COUNTY, Ohio – “For the first time, we are learning some of the chemicals used
to frack an oil and natural gas well that was involved in a huge fire June 28
in Monroe County.
But we're learning about the
chemicals the hard way, after those products and trucks staged to hydraulically
fracture oil and natural wells went up in a giant inferno.
An investigation in the explosion and fire is still
ongoing, but NBC4's Rick Reitzel was able to get some of those details from the
U.S. EPA. The fire was so large it could
be seen across the Ohio River in West Virginia. The smoke from it was so thick
the Monroe County EMA Director, Phil Keevert said firefighters had to be pulled
back three times and it took more than 24 hours to extinguish.
First responders poured in from
around Monroe and Belmont counties and from West Virginia to attack the fire.
In all, Keevert said 12 fire departments and other state, federal and private
agency assisted. The report states more
than 300,000 gallons of water were poured onto the burning well pad.
On the site there were sixteen different chemicals
were staged in trucks ready to frack wells. Along with those chemicals we have
learned were three radiological sources, called Cesium-137, shaped charges,
primer cord and detonators.
NBC4: "Do you feel satisfied
that you knew enough about what was going on there to keep fire fighters safe?
"There were some
questionable moments not have a full list of the chemicals," said Phil
Keevert, Monroe County EMA Director.
He said a Halliburton
representative told him about the chemicals at the fire scene. As to the
radiological sources, “we were told about the three boxes on site,"
Keevert said. But none of the 12 fire
departments knew what chemicals, radiological and explosives they were
encountering before they arrived at the emergency.
"Where has the state been on
all of this," said Dr. Juilie Weatherington-Rice. She is a geologist, soil
scientist and Adjunct Professor at The Ohio State University.
She said fire departments should
have a list of chemicals and an emergency plan for each site before an
emergency.
"Why
don't people know ahead of time, because we can't make the assumption this will
never happen, because guess what it did," she said.
Weatherington-Rice said she hopes first responders on the
scene were wearing breathing masks. Because some of the chemicals consumed in
the fire were toxic and could make you sick, others more hazardous could kill
you. The affects, she said, might not be realized immediately. The report
states 70,000 fish were killed in Opossum Creek which leads into the Ohio
River. There is no evidence of whether fish were killed in the river. Contrary to what the well owner StatOil
said after the fire, the US EPA report shows flowback water also poured out of
one of the seven well on the site, in the creek.
Dr. Weatherington-Rice said she
is concerned about the state being our watchdog.
"It does not appear to be as
concerned about protecting the people of Ohio as it appears to be concerned
about promoting oil and gas drilling," she said.
ODNR Spokesman Mark Bruce said
the investigation into the fire is still ongoing and they cannot comment about
it. But said state and federal laws ensure first responders and investigators
were aware of the hazards onsite.”
http://www.nbc4i.com/story/26085529/federal-report-details-chemicals-used-at-drilling-site
Reading the EPA Report is an eye opener.
To read the PDF of the Report: http://ftpcontent5.worldnow.com/wcmh/pdf/eisenbarth_well_pad_fire.pdf?referrerDomain=www.nbc4i.com
Excerpts:
1.1.2.2
Description of Threat:
“Over 16 different chemicals
products were staged on the Pad at the time of the explosion and subsequent
fire. Materials present on the Pad
included but was not limited to: diesel fuel, hydraulic oil, motor oil,
hydrochloric acid, cesium-137 sources, hydrotreated light petroleum
distillates, terpenes, terpenoids, isoproponal, ethylene glycol, paraffinic
solvents, sodium persulfate, tributyl tetradecyl phosphonium chloride and
proprietary components. As a result of fire-fighting efforts and flow back from the well head, significant
quantities of water and unknown quantities of products on the well pad left the
Site and entered an unnamed tributary of Opossum Creek that ultimately
discharges to the Ohio River. Runoff left the pad at various locations via
sheet flow as well as by two catch basins located at the northwest and
southeast corners of the well pad.
Opossum Creek discharges to the
Ohio River 1.7 miles upstream of a public water intake on the West Virginia
side of the river. There are also protected species located down steam of the Opossum
Creek confluence with the Ohio River.
1.1.3 Preliminary Removal
Assessment/Removal Site Inspection Results
The fire and explosion that occurred on the Eisenbarth Well Pad
involved more than 25,000 gallons of various products that were staged and/or
in use on the site. Upon USEPA arrival at approximately 2000 hours on June 28,
2104, numerous fires continued to burn on the well pad, uncontained run-off was
exiting the site and entering an unnamed tributary of Opossum Creek to the
south and west and flowback water from the Eisenbarth Well #7 was spilling onto
the well pad. Initial air monitoring did not detect any concentrations of
volatile organic compounds (VOCs) in the community downwind of the site.
Initial inspections in the early hours of June 29, 2014 of Opossum Creek
approximately 3.5 miles downstream of the site identified dead fish in the
creek.
Initial reports identified the following products were involved and
lost in the fire: ~250 gallons of hydrochloric acid (28%), ~7,040 gallons of
GasPerm 1000 (terpenes, terpenoids, isopropanol, citrus extract, proprietary
components), ~330 gallons of LCA-1 (paraffinic solvents), ~ 1900 gallons of
LGC-36 UC (hydrotreated light petroleum distillate, guar gum), ~1000 gallons of
BC-140 (monoethanolamine borate, ethylene glycol), ~3300 gallons of BE-9
(tributyl tetradecyl phosphonium chloride), ~30,000 gallons of WG-36
(polysaccharide gel), ~1,000 gallons of FR- 66 (hydrotreated light petroleum
distillate), ~9000 gallons of diesel fuel, ~300 gallons of motor and hydraulic
oil.
Additionally, there was an inventory of shaped charges, primer
cord and detonators on the site as well as three Cesium-137 radiological
sources (2-100 millicurie and 1-55 millicurie) with unknown disposition as a
result of the fire.
Operations Section
2.1---- 1-mile evacuation notice was issued for
the area surrounding the Site affecting 25 residences. At approximately 1900,
fire departments ceased fire-fighting efforts and left the scene. A water
curtain was maintained, using pump lines on site, to prevent the fire from
spreading to a trailer containing 1100 pounds of SP Breaker (an oxidizer), 200
pounds of soda ash and compressed gas cylinders of oxygen (3-2000 lb.),
acetylene (2-2000 lb.), propane (6-20 lb.), among miscellaneous aerosol cans.
2.1.2 Response Actions to Date
June 28--Upon arrival, USEPA observed uncontrolled runoff of liquids
from the Eisenbarth Well Pad from the south and west sides of the site.
Numerous fires were observed across the well pad and a well head was observed
releasing flowback water. All runoff from the Site flowed downhill to the
south and west and entered an unnamed tributary to Opossum Creek which
discharges to the Ohio River. At least 16 different products were present on
the well pad and most were lost in the fire. The chemicals present in the aforementioned
products included but is not limited to the following: hydrotreated light
petroleum distillates, terpenes, terpenoids, isoproponal, ethylene glycol,
paraffinic solvents, sodium persulfate, tributyl tetradecyl phosphonium
chloride and proprietary components among others. In addition, three Cesium-137
radiological sources were present on the pad as part of densometers and shaped
charges, primer cord and detonators were present for use in the perforating guns.
June 29-There was concern over the ability to analyze for
and detect the primary component of BE-9 [tributyl tetradecyl phosphonium
chloride (TTPC)] for which there is no approved standard method to detect.
Water samples of runoff indicated the
presence of TPH, 2-butanone, acetone, benzene, ethylbenzene, xylenes, toluene,
bis(2-ethylhexyl)phthalate, phenanthrene, pyrene, phenol, and chlorides.
Surface water sampling results indicated the presence of TPH, acetone,
o-Cresol, bis(2-ethylhexyl)phthalate and chlorides downstream of the well pad.
June 30-
ODNR Division of Wildlife completed
their in stream assessment of the fish kill and reported an estimated 70,000
dead fish from an approximately 5 mile stretch extending from the unnamed
tributary just west of the Eisenbarth Well Pad to Opossum Creek just before its
confluence with the Ohio River. No fish kills were reported on the Ohio
River.
Water samples of runoff indicated the presence of TPH,
2-butanone, acetone, benzene, xylenes, toluene, bis(2-ethylhexyl)phthalate,
1-methylnapthalene, 2-methylnapthalene, o-Cresol, m&pCresol, naphthalene,
phenol, and chlorides. Surface water sampling results indicated the presence of
TPH, acetone, bis(2-ethylhexyl)phthalate, phenol and chlorides downstream of
the well pad.
July 2-Fires continued to rekindle on the pad and spread. Several options were evaluated and Statoil worked with Monroe
County EMA to smother the fire with earthen material.
July 30--Hot
spots on the well pad continue to
smolder and are addressed as needed if open flames are observed. The tank
full of WG-36 also continues to burn. Plans to extinguish it are being
developed.
Work
was again halted on the pad after an inventory reconciliation determined that
additional explosives remained somewhere on the pad. All 5 missing “barrels”
were located and removed by Horizontal.
Plans to assess surround
drinking water wells are being developed. Statoil has previously sampled all
wells within 5,000 feet of well head prior to commencing operations.
July 5
Fish collection was completed. In total,
11,116 dead fish were collected (20 different species), 3,519 crustaceans, 7
frogs and 20 salamanders. Due to the warm weather, number of days the fish
were in the creek, scavenging, etc., the fish recovered were in advanced states
of decomposition. Following the removal of this biomass, in stream dissolved
oxygen readings began to return to normal after several days of low readings.
A visual
inspection of the creek by USEPA and OEPA noted continued presence of some dead
fish. Also noted was the presence of minnows and small mouth bass in portions
of the creek. Caddisflies, mayflies and a dobsonfly larvae (of significant
size) was noted in the lower reaches of Opossum creek. Also algae and snails
were also noted returning to the creek.
12. Halliburton Misplaced
Radioactive Cylinder: ‘Do Not Handle’-Texas
(I
copied this article because it provides some information about a radioactive tool
used in fracking. Jan)
“The radioactive cylinder that Halliburton
lost in West Texas is similar to the device pictured, according …
Somewhere
in West Texas is a 7-inch radioactive cylinder that Halliburton would like to
find. Anyone who comes across it is advised to keep their distance.
The
oil field services company lost track of the device, which is used to assess potential sites for hydraulic fracturing, on
Tuesday (Sept. 11) while trying to transport it from Pecos to a well site near
Odessa 130 miles away. A special unit of the Texas National Guard has now
stepped in to aid Halliburton in a search for the cylinder, according to
Bloomberg.
"It's not something
that produces radiation in an extremely dangerous form," said Chris Van
Deusen, a spokesman for the Texas Department of State Health Services.
"But it’s best for people to stay back, 20 or 25 feet."
The tool that Halliburton lost
contains a mixture of beryllium and americium-241, the same radioactive isotope
of americium that is found in very small quantities in a common type of smoke
detector.
"In the presence of
beryllium, the alpha particles [emitted by americium-241] will react to form
neutrons," explained Tom Hei, associate director of Columbia University's
Center for Radiological Research. "For alpha particles, you can put a
piece of paper in front of it and will provide adequate shielding. Such is not
the case for neutrons, which require significantly more shielding or a longer
distance from the source for adequate protection."
The neutrons emitted by the cylinder have a biological impact 10 times
more powerful than X-rays and the distance at which they would be dangerous to
humans would depend on how much of the radioactive material is contained in the
device, Hei told Life's Little Mysteries.
According to the International
Atomic Energy Agency's five-tier scale for categorizing radioactive sources,
the americium-241/beryllium neutron sources used for assessing hydraulic
fracturing sites are classified as Category 3 sources (Category 1 is the most
dangerous).
The agency's explanation of a
Category 3 source that hasn't been dispersed by fire or explosion reads:
"This source, if not safely managed or securely protected, could cause
permanent injury to a person who handled it or who was otherwise in contact
with it for some hours. It could possibly — although it would be unlikely — be
fatal to be close to this amount of unshielded radioactive material for a
period of days to weeks."
The Texas health department says
the cylinder is stamped with the words “danger radioactive” and “do not handle”
along with a radiation warning symbol. Anyone who sees it is advised by the
department to keep away and notify local law enforcement.”
http://news.yahoo.com/halliburton-misplaced-radioactive-cylinder-not-handle-224308508.html
13. PA Health
Dept. Does Not Instill Confidence
Write nurses RUTH McDERMOTT-LEVY and NINA M. KAKTINS
“Imagine you’re a parent living near a natural-gas
fracking site in Pennsylvania when suddenly your child begins having nose
bleeds and skin rashes. The pediatrician suspects some type of exposure from
the nearby well, and you’ve heard stories on the news and from neighbors about
health issues related to fracking. You decide to call the health department, a
trusted source of information. But no one returns your calls and your questions
remain unanswered.
The Pennsylvania Department of
Health is charged with ensuring and protecting the health of all state
residents. It fulfills this obligation by partnering with communities to
monitor existing and emerging health problems and to establish programs that
prevent disease and injury.
Recent revelations and
allegations indicate the health department may not be serving all
Pennsylvanians as it claims.
As reported by NPR’s StateImpact
Pennsylvania, two former health department employees say staff were given a
list of “buzzwords,” such as “fracking,” “Marcellus Shale” and “drilling,” and
instructed not to respond to health complaints containing these words but
instead to refer them to the department’s Bureau of Epidemiology. This practice was different from how they
handled all other health issues throughout their extensive careers at the
department.
Although the state health
department initially denied the list existed, it has since acknowledged that it
did but said it was intended only as a guide. The Bureau of Epidemiology
maintains it is investigating health complaints related to fracking, but,
unlike in other states, in Pennsylvania complaints of potential fracking-related
health problems are not made public.
In the face of these allegations
and the fact that public information is not available about how thoroughly
complaints are being investigated by the Bureau of Epidemiology, it is
difficult to tell whether the Pennsylvania Department of Health is fulfilling
its mission. We depend on the department to put the health of Pennsylvanians’
first and base its practices on science, not politics.
This concern was heightened Tuesday when
Auditor General Eugene DePasquale issued a scorching review of how another
state agency, the Department of Environmental Protection, is overseeing the
shale gas industry and responding to citizens' complaints that drilling has
affected their drinking water.
There is certainly reason to worry about the health
impacts of fracking, with mounting evidence of both water and air
contamination.
The Post-Gazette revealed Tuesday
that the DEP is about to report that oil and gas operations have damaged
Pennsylvania water supplies 209 times since the end of 2007. A document
released to the newspaper did not detail which companies were involved, what
pollutants were found or why the problems occurred.
We do know that methane migration has affected
groundwater and that discharge of under-treated waste has affected surface
waters. Increased particulate matter and ground-level ozone have affected local
triggers for asthma attacks, cardiac problems and the exacerbation of
respiratory ailments.
People living in fracking areas have experienced
various illnesses, and there is potential for long-term effects. We have a
dynamic public health issue growing in our state, but the state health
department does not seem to have adapted to meet the health needs of
Pennsylvanians.
Since the department has failed to provide a public registry of fracking-related
complaints, there is no way to
determine whether it is adequately monitoring and investigating fracking’s
health effects. Additionally, unlike some other states, the commonwealth
has never conducted a health impact assessment to identify the health risks for
Pennsylvanians in drilling areas.
In the absence of a public
registry of illnesses or considerations of risk, the health department and the
shale gas industry can more easily suggest there’s a lack of evidence that
fracking can cause health problems. We
ask the health department to publicly report complaints of potential
fracking-related health problems, status reports and conclusions of complaint
investigations, and recommendations made to address illnesses and prevent them
in the future.
This seems a reasonable request
since information on other public health investigations is posted for the
public on the health department’s website. Why should fracking investigations
be treated differently?
Furthermore, the health department has neglected to provide educational and public
health information on identified risks in fracking areas, such as general ways
to avoid air pollution and address water-quality concerns. A review of the
department’s website shows no information or links for health information
related to fracking, natural gas or the Marcellus Shale. Pennsylvanians are not
able to turn to their state health department to make informed decisions or to
learn safe practices to reduce health risks related to fracking.
The allegations by the former
health department employees and the lack of public evidence that the health
department is seriously addressing fracking as a public health issue should
matter to all of us, even if we don’t live near natural-gas operations. Might
the department be sitting on information about other public health issues?
Perhaps to further political agendas?
As
health care professionals, we ask our legislators for an independent
investigation of the health department. We hope other Pennsylvanians will ask
the same of their representatives.”
Ruth
McDermott-Levy is an assistant professor at Villanova University who
specializes in global and public health nursing. Nina M. Kaktins is a
registered nurse and adjunct professor at Chatham University. They are writing
in a personal capacity on behalf of the Alliance of Nurses for Healthy
Environments (www.envirn.org).
http://www.post-gazette.com/opinion/Op-Ed/2014/07/27/Is-the-Pa-health-department-fracko-phobic-Its-actions-don-t-instill-confidence-that-it-is-protecting-us-write-nurses-RUTH-McDERMOTT-LEVY-and-NINA-M-KAKTINS/stories/201407230019#ixzz38fqa9fyA
14. EPA Extreme
Says The Heritage Foundation
“A Discussion on Federal Overreach, Regulation Costs, and Climate
Realities
The
Heritage Foundation is sponsoring an event at their Lehrman Auditorium to discuss
EPA’s move to limit Carbon. (Note that
Rep. Mike Kelly-R of PA is featured in this event that declares the science of
climate change to be questionable. Jan)
Featuring:
Congressman Mike Kelly (R-PA)
Followed
by a discussion with
William
Yeatman
Senior
Fellow, Competitive Enterprise Institute
David Kreutzer, Ph.D.
Research
Fellow in Energy Economics and Climate Change,
Center
for Data Analysis, The Heritage Foundation
Host:
Nick
Loris
Herbert
and Joyce Morgan Fellow, The Heritage Foundation
On
June 2, the Environmental Protection Agency proposed the next step in its
climate change agenda with a draft rule that would cap carbon dioxide emissions
and greenhouse gases from existing power plants. In doing so, the Heritage
Foundation says the EPA used questionable science, ignored climate realities,
and discounted major investments around the world to build power plants. This rule will significantly reduce the use
of coal as an efficient and inexpensive source of reliable power in America,
if the EPA is allowed to succeed in finalizing it in addition to other climate
change regulations already in the books or on the way. The consequences will be lost jobs and higher
energy costs for American families and businesses with no meaningful reduction
in global emissions or temperatures.
During
the final week of July, the EPA will be holding its public hearings on the
proposed rule in three different states throughout the nation, as well as the
District of Colombia. At the beginning of this crucial week, join
us as we discuss climate realities and fallacies, the EPA’s war on coal, and
efforts to stop the EPA’s unchecked climate change regulation. Leading the discussion will be a special
address by Representative
Mike Kelly of Pennsylvania’s 3rd District, whose successful fight against
federal overreach in the private sector led him to Washington and motivates his
ongoing effort to stop such regulatory extremism.”
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
Blogsite –April Jackman
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
