westmcg@gmail.com
* 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-
Thank
You
Contributors To Our Updates
Thank you to contributors to our Updates:
Debbie Borowiec, Lou Pochet, Ron Gulla, the Pollocks, Marian Szmyd, Bob Donnan,
Elizabeth Donahue, and Bob Schmetzer.
Thank you
To Stephanie Novak from Mt. Watershed Assoc., Carol
Cutler, and the Milburns for tabling and offering TDS water testing at the
Latrobe Farm Market. We had the opportunity to again talk to many interested people
about fracking.
A
little Help Please --Take Action!!
Tenaska Air Petitions—Please sign if you have not done so:
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. This
month we are meeting the third
Tuesday, Sept 16. Email Jan for
directions. All are very welcome to
attend.
***Conference-Shale
and Public Health Features Dr Paulson, Dr McKenzie, Dr Panettieri- Oct. 26/27
The League of Women Voters of Pennsylvania's
Straight Scoop on Shale initiative will hold a conference "Shale and Public Health: Days of Discovery" on Sunday
afternoon October 26 and Monday October 27 at the Pitt University Club.
Featured speakers on Monday
October 27 include Dr. Jerome Paulson, Director of the Mid-Atlantic Center for
Children's Health and the Environment (MACCHE), and Dr. Lisa McKenzie of the
Colorado School of Public Health.
On Sunday afternoon October 26,
Dr. Reynold Panettieri of the University of Pennsylvania Perelman School of
Medicine will present new research on the health impacts of shale gas
development.
The
conference is open to the public and free (with a small charge for lunch on
October 27), but pre-registration is required.
***Join the People’s Climate March in New
York City, Sept. 21. Peoples Climate March:
http://peoplesclimate.org/march/
http://watchdisruption.com/
On September 21 in New York City
a quarter million citizens are expected to demand that the world's leaders take
immediate action on climate change.
The Peoples Climate March will be held just
before President Obama and his Chinese counterpart attend the UN Climate Summit, http://www.un.org/climatechange/summit/.
The Sierra Club and Thomas Merton Center have
hired two buses to leave early on the Sunday morning and return late on Sunday night. If you are interested in reserving a seat on
the bus, please contact Peter Wray with CLIMATE on the Subject line …
pjwray@verizon.net.
ACTION: Register now for a seat
on one of the Pittsburgh buses.
http://alleghenysc.org/?p=19091
***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
***-
Pittsburgh’s Air At Stake- Please Comment
Send Statement/Comment To
Restrict Carbon From Existing Power plants
Everyone Should Submit a Written Statement
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.
Send Your Comments To:
A: 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.
Be sure to
reference Docket ID:
EPA-HQ-OAR-2013-0602
For
information about the carbon reduction plan:
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.
.And From
Public Citizen
See the top 10 FAQs on the
carbon pollution reduction plan.
***For Health Care
Professionals—Tell PA Dept of Health to Stop Ignoring Fracking Health Complaints
***Toxic Tuesdays
–Tell DEP’s Abruzzo--Do not approve paving with radioactive drill cuttings
“The next 4 Tuesdays, starting
8/26, are Toxic Tuesdays. They're the days we're going to call PA DEP Secretary
Abruzzo to tell him that his agency should NEVER have approved Range Resources'
permit to experiment with using drill cuttings as a paving material for well
pads and access roads! We're going to tell him to reverse their decision.
The DEP gave Range Resources
permission to experiment with using radioactive drill cutting to pave well pads
and access roads. We have 30 days to appeal.
Call
Sec Abruzzo to reverse the decision 717- 787- 2814”
From:
Karen Feridan
***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
***Food and Water Watch Asks For Your Story About Fracking Health
Complaints Earlier this summer,
StateImpact Pennsylvania reported that the Pennsylvania Department of Health
(DOH) has been willfully ignoring the health concerns and complaints connected
to drilling and hydraulic fracturing operations.
In
response, Food & Water Watch and our coalition partners, including Berks
Gas Truth, initiated a statewide listening project to collect the stories of
impacted Pennsylvanians who have personally contacted DOH to report their
families' health concerns. We have collected nearly a dozen stories from around
Pennsylvania thus far, but we know we are just scratching the surface.
Have you been directly
impacted by hydraulic fracturing? Did you reach out to DOH? Please let us know
by filling out the survey
Tell
us about your experience contacting Department of Health with a
fracking-related health complaint. Please share as many details about your
story as possible: When did you contact Dept. of Health? Why did you contact
Dept. of Health? How did you contact Dept. of Health? Did you contact them
once, or multiple times? Do you have any documentation of your attempts to
contact?
***Clean Air
Council--- Take the survey about the proposed Shell ethane cracker plant.
Health
Impact Assessment: Ethane Cracker
Royal Dutch Shell has proposed a
new natural gas and chemical processing station in Monaca, PA, outside
Pittsburgh. The proposed site is currently held by Horsehead Corporation which owns
the inactive zinc smelting facility. The proposed facility, known as a “cracker”,
will separate natural gas and chemical feedstocks into different compounds used
primarily in the manufacturing of plastics.
Increased hydraulic fracturing and natural gas collection has led to
increased ethane available for “cracking”.
The
ethane cracker is one of a number of large projects that Shell is considering.
Although, Shell has already secured feedstock agreements with multiple
companies, and has bought other land near the site of the proposed “cracker”.
Shell signed an additional option agreement with Horsehead, will pay for the
demolition of the existing buildings, and be allowed to take more time before
making a final decision. Considering these factors, and the fact that Shell
recently scrapped plans for a similar cracker in the Gulf Coast that was
competing for Shell’s capital resources, the likelihood of this project coming
to fruition appears relatively high. Even if this particular project does not come
to fruition, most industry experts agree that a cracker will be built in the
region eventually.
In partnership with community residents,
industry professionals, and academics, Clean Air Council is conducting a Health
Impact Assessment of the environmental, social, public health, and economic
impacts of such a facility.
Please
take our anonymous public survey about the proposed cracker: www.surveymonkey.com/s/WZC3WX5
***Sign On To Letter To Gov. Corbett-- Urge Him to Implement
De Pasquale’s Recommendations
For DEP
“I know you are as concerned as I am about
the recent news out of Harrisburg regarding the protection of our drinking
water from the dangers of natural gas drilling. Then join me to take action
now.
It started with the Pennsylvania Department of Environmental
Protection’s (DEP) acknowledgment that there have been 209 known cases of water
contamination from oil and gas operations since 2007. http://powersource.post-gazette.com/powersource/policy-powersource/2014/07/22/DEP-Oil-and-gas-endeavors-have-damaged-water-supply-209-times-since-07/stories/201407220069
If that wasn’t enough, Auditor
General Eugene DePasquale also released his much anticipated audit http://www.auditorgen.state.pa.us/reports/performance/special/speDEP072114.pdf
of DEP’s ability to protect water quality in the
wake of escalated Marcellus Shale drilling. The report shows how the explosive
growth of shale development caught the DEP flat footed, how the agency is
underfunded, and slow to respond to monitoring and accountability activities.
Some of the more alarming findings where:
DEP would rather seek voluntary compliance and encouraging industry to
work out a solution with impacted homeowners instead of issuing violations for
cases where industry impacted a water supply.
There is no system in place for frequent inspections of drilling pads,
especially during critical drilling operations much less during the lifetime of
the well.
DEP relies on a voluntary
system of reporting where and how fracking waste is disposed, instead of using a system,
where regulators can see how waste is handled from well site to disposal.
DEP’s system to track complaints
related to oil and gas development is “woefully inadequate.”
In addition to his findings,
Auditor General DePasquale made 29 recommendations, 18 of which require no
additional funding, for how DEP can address these issues and improve
operations. Email Governor Corbett today and urge him to have DEP implement all 29 of
the Auditor General’s recommendations.
These types of events shake the
confidence Pennsylvanians like you have in our government’s ability to protect
our drinking water. However, they also serve as a call to action. DEP owes it to
you to do everything it can to protect water supplies and public health, Contact Governor Corbett TODAY and tell him
to have DEP take steps to improve the protection of our drinking water from
natural gas drilling.
Best,
Steve
Hvozdovich - Campaign Coordinator
Pennsylvania
Office, Clean Water Action http://org.salsalabs.com/o/2155/p/dia/action3/common/public/?action_KEY=16207
***TRI (Toxic Release Inventory) Action
Alert-Close the Loophole:
“We need your help!! Please send an email to the US EPA urging
them to "Close the TRI Loophole that the oil and gas industry currently
enjoys".
We all deserve to know
exactly what these operations are releasing into our air, water and onto our
land. Our goal is to guarantee the
public’s right to know.
Please
let the US EPA know how important TRI reporting will be to you and your
community:
Mr.
Gilbert Mears
Docket #: EPA-HQ-TRI-2013-0281 (must be included on all
correspondence)
Mears.gilbert@epa.gov
Some facts on Toxics Release
Inventory (TRI) – what it is and why it’s important:
What
is the Toxics Release Inventory (TRI)?
Industrial
facilities report annually the amount and method (land, air, water, landfills)
of each toxic
chemical
they release or dispose of to the national Toxics Release Inventory.
Where
can I find the Toxics Release Inventory (TRI)?
Once
the industrial facilities submit their annual release data, the Environmental
Protection Agency
makes
it available to the public through the TRI’s free, searchable online database.
Why
is this important?
The
TRI provides communities and the public information needed to challenge permits
or siting
decisions,
provides regulators with necessary data to set proper controls, and encourages
industrial
facilities
to reduce their toxic releases.
Why
does it matter for oil and natural gas?
The
oil and gas extraction industry is one of the largest sources of toxic releases
in the United
States.
Yet, because of loopholes created by historical regulation and successful
lobbying efforts,
this
industry remains exempt from reporting to the TRI—even though they are second
in toxic air
emissions
behind power plants.
What
is being done?
In
2012, the Environmental Integrity Project filed a petition on behalf of sixteen
local, regional, and
national
environmental groups, asking EPA to close this loophole and require the oil and
gas
industries
to report to the TRI. Although EPA has been carefully considering whether to
act on the
petition,
significant political and industrial pressure opposing such action exists.
What
is the end goal?
Our
goal is to guarantee the public’s right to know. TRI data will arm citizens
with powerful data,
provide
incentives for oil and gas operators to reduce toxic releases, and will provide
a data-driven
foundation
for responsible regulation.
What
can you do?
You
can help by immediately letting EPA know how important TRI reporting will be to
you and your
community.
Send written or email comments to:
Gilbert Mears
Toxics Release Inventory
Program Division, Environmental Protection Agency
1200 Pennsylvania Avenue, NW,
Washington, DC 20460
mears.gilbert@epa.gov
Docket #: EPA-HQ-TRI-2013-0281 (please be sure to include
in all your correspondence)
From: Lisa Graves Marcucci
Environmental
Integrity Project
PA
Coordinator, Community Outreach
lgmarcucci@environmentalintegrity.org
412-653-4328
(Direct)
412-897-0569
(Cell)
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/
*** To See Water Test Results of the Beaver
Run Reservoir
IUP students test for TDS, pH, metals- arsenic, chromium, and strontium.
A group member who checks the
site still does not see testing for other frack chemicals including the BTEX
group or cesium for example. Here is a link to the IUP site:
***Video of a
Flare at a Pumping Station
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IWKye3OA90k Sunoco Pipeline/Sunoco Logistics flare at a high pressure pumping
facility along the 3500 block of Watkins Road in Medina, Ohio. This video was
from an approximate distance of 900 feet. The gas was being flared from ground
level without a tower of any kind. They have since moved the flare to between
the buildings. This video link below will show you just how loud and powerful
the flaring of this product can be.
Local residents say, “It sounds like a jet engine running.”
***Video of
Pipeline Incidents since 1986
Frack News
All articles are excerpted
and condensed. Please use links for the full article. Special Thanks to Bob Donnan for many of
the photos.
Letter By Doug Shields
"All this conflicting
data raises questions about” the integrity of those running these companies
engaged in drilling. I have found them to be untrustworthy since we began to
focus on the issue of fracking in city council in 2009.
They lied to people leasing
land. They lied about waste water being dumped into our rivers. They lied about
contamination of water supplies. They lie about the poisons they pump into our
air. They have lied about their critics. They have promoted unconstitutional
laws, based upon lies, in our state assembly. They lied on permit applications
and waste disposal forms.
They are like “catfish” on
the Internet, posing as something you might find attractive while hiding their
ugliness behind a mask of lies and deception.
I have never seen such a
corrupting force in our society operate with such impunity. I have never seen
so many who claim to be in love with fracking and deny the truth in their
ardor.
"Love's best disguise is
the pretense of truth. And in our faults by lies we flatter'd be. And the lies
we tell each other help us forget our respective faults.” W. Shakespeare,
Sonnet 138
***Robinson Residents
Challenge Zoning amendment
“ Six Robinson Township residents are
challenging the validity of the township’s zoning amendment, passed last month,
which opened up more areas to drilling companies.
The challenge, filed Thursday
with the township, will require Robinson’s zoning hearing board to review the
validity of the amendment and make a determination. If the hearing board rules against the residents, they can take the
matter to court.
Residents named in the challenge
are Cathy and Christopher Lodge of Meinrad Drive, Bulger; Brenda and Nolan
Vance of Maple Grove Road, Bulger; and Irene and Richard Barrie, also of Maple
Grove Road. The challenge was filed by
Wexford attorney Dwight Ferguson, with
support from the Environmental Integrity Project, a nonprofit organization
founded by former Environmental Protection Agency attorneys.
Alan Shuckrow, solicitor for
Robinson Township, criticized the Environmental Integrity Project’s
involvement.
Robinson supervisors approved an
amendment to the zoning ordinance in a 2-1 vote Aug. 7. The amendment replaced the special exception process for considering
oil and gas applications with a permitted use or conditional use process,
depending on the zoning district.
As long as oil and gas companies meet a list of uniform requirements
outlined by the township, they can drill
land in the interchange business development, industrial, rural residential and
agricultural zoning districts.
A conditional use process,
which involves a hearing before the board of supervisors, will be used for
applications in commercial and special conservation districts.
The challenge alleges that these changes are in violation of the
Environmental Rights Amendment in the Pennsylvania Constitution, which provides
for the “preservation of the natural, scenic, historic and esthetic values of
the environment.”
The complainants
allege the amendment created entirely new zoning districts because it
“completely changed the comprehensive zoning scheme and disregarded the current
Comprehensive Plan by converting the expressly-intended purposes of the
affected zoning districts to radically different purposes.”
The challenge also alleges that
the amendment violates property rights and contradicts previous case law.
Adam Kron, an attorney for the
Environmental Integrity Project, said this is “a novel case,” especially in
light of the state Supreme Court decision in December that struck down parts of
Act 13 that pre-empted local zoning rules.
“Our claim under the
Environmental Rights Amendment ... that’s pretty new because the Supreme Court
opened that up as much more of an actionable claim in the Act 13 case,” Kron
said. “There’s both old law at play and new law.”
http://www.observer-reporter.com/article/20140905/NEWS01/140909722#.VAs_uqO9Zww
***PennFuture
Scores Big Victory for Local Governments And Citizens’ Rights
Judge Lovecchio Rules
“On
Friday, Judge Marc F. Lovecchio of the Court of Common Pleas of Lycoming County
decided in favor of local residents by vacating and setting aside a conditional
use permit that would have allowed Inflection Energy, LLC to build and operate
an unconventional shale gas pad in the middle of a residential neighborhood in
Fairfield Township. The case is believed to be the first decision testing the
role of local government to regulate natural gas developments in the
post-Robinson Township world.
The Supreme Court in Robinson
Township relied on Pennsylvania’s Environmental Rights Amendment to strike down
portions of the state's Oil and Gas Law (Act 13), which compelled local
government to allow gas operations across all zoning districts, including
residential districts. Otherwise, the
state threatened to penalize local governments by withholding any "impact
fees" intended to address harm caused to local communities by the
industry. I know, nice guys.
In this case, Inflection applied
for a conditional use permit for its proposed gas well pad. A number of residents spoke out against the
well pad before the Fairfield Township Board of Supervisors, testifying to concerns
about air pollution, noise pollution, light pollution, traffic congestion, and
the impact of the operations on their property values and general well-being.
The company introduced the testimony of two witnesses, neither of whom were
experts in land-use matters. Often,
their testimony consisted of nothing but conclusions, such as that the
operations were compatible with existing uses authorized for residential
districts, without any explanation of how the witness reached those
conclusions.
On appeal, PennFuture made three
arguments: (1) that the language of the
ordinance expressly authorized gas operations in the industrial zoned district,
and it was therefore inappropriate to use a conditional use permit to allow it
in the residential zoned district; (2) that the township's decision was not
supported by substantial evidence on the record; and (3) that the township had violated the residents' substantive due process
rights and failed to comply with its obligations under Article I, Section 27 by
authorizing the gas well operation in the middle of a residential neighborhood.
The Township and Company argued
that the citizens had waived their rights to raise their various challenges,
that the Township properly used its conditional use process, that the
Township's findings were supported by substantial evidence, and that no
constitutional violations were committed.
Even though the Court "saw merit" in PennFuture's first
argument, Judge Lovecchio rejected the idea that the ordinance expressly
allowed gas operations only in industrial districts. Instead, the Court
vacated the conditional use permit on the basis that the Township's findings
were not supported by substantial evidence. The Court stated that the company failed to provide the Township with
any evidence to support the conclusion that the proposed use was similar and
compatible, while the citizens had “presented substantial evidence that there
is a high degree of probability that the use will adversely affect the health,
welfare and safety of the neighborhood."
Deciding
the case on the basis of substantial evidence relieved the Court of the need to
address PennFuture's constitutional arguments. Nonetheless, the Court made plain that the Township had an obligation
to protect the constitutional rights guaranteed to its citizens under Article
I, Section 27 of the Pennsylvania Constitution. The rights of citizens to a
healthy environment, the Court said, "cannot be ignored and must be
protected.”
In so ruling, the Court adopted
both the rationale and express language of the Supreme Court's decision in
Robinson Township.
The case is Gorsline et al. v.
the Board of Supervisors of Fairfield Township and Inflection Energy, LLC et
al.
George
Jugovic, Jr. is chief counsel for PennFuture and is based in Pittsburgh.”
http://pennfuture.blogspot.com/2014/09/pennfuture-scores-big-victory-for-local.html
Judge Lovecchio Uses
Act 13 Ruling to Deny Drilling Project
Max
Mitchell, The Legal Intelligencer
“Relying on the state Supreme
Court's recent interpretation of Act 13, a Lycoming County judge has denied an
energy company's bid to construct an oil and gas well pad in the county.
Judge
Marc F. Lovecchio ruled late last month in Gorsline v. Board of Supervisors of
Fairfield Township that a zoning ordinance prohibited Inflection Energy's
proposed project to build a well pad containing multiple wells. Lovecchio
determined the township board, which had approved the project, failed to prove
it would not be "detrimental to the public health, safety and welfare of
the neighborhood," which is a requirement under the zoning ordinance.
"As the Pennsylvania Supreme Court
recently noted, the technique used to recover the natural gas contained in Marcellus Shale 'inevitably' does 'violence
to the landscape,'" Lovecchio said, citing the high court's December
2013 decision in Robinson Township v. Commonwealth.
Lovecchio
went on to quote the opinion, written by Chief Justice Ronald D. Castille,
which states: "'By any responsible
account, the exploitation of the Marcellus Shale formation will produce a
detrimental effect on the environment, on the people, their children and future
generations ... perhaps rivaling the environmental effects of coal extraction.'"
George Jugovic of
Citizens for Pennsylvania's Future, who represented Brian Gorsline and three
others opposing the project, said the decision signals that courts should be
using Robinson Township to take a hard look at whether the evidence considered
by a municipality supports a board's findings.
"It
sends up a red flag for townships that when it comes to these decisions, the
courts are going to take a hard look," Jugovic said.
Energy
and environmental compliance attorney Kenneth Komoroski of Morgan, Lewis &
Bockius, however, said the decision relied on the strongest language from the
Supreme Court's decision.
"It's
troubling to see a respected trial court take that provision when it's actually
well established that nowhere in the record was it established that shale
'inevitably does violence to the landscape,'" he said. "That really
wasn't the essence of what the court decided. That was more of a drive-by
commentary. To see that pulled out was disappointing."
According
to Lovecchio, Inflection Energy applied
for a permit to use property located in a residential and agricultural zone
district, and two public meetings were held on the issue.
Lovecchio
noted that while there was only one home
within 1,000 feet of the proposed well pad site, a large residential
development and several individual homes were located within 3,000 feet of the
proposed site.
The township board approved the permit, but
Gorsline and others appealed.
Lovecchio considered whether the use of the
well pad would be similar to other uses allowed in the zone.
Lovecchio
said the board had argued that the operation would be similar to public
services facilities, such as power plants, substations and sewage disposal
plants.
However,
Lovecchio noted that Inflection Energy did not conclusively indicate how many
wells would be drilled, how much water would be needed for the construction,
what type of energy would be used, how long construction would last or whether
the company planned to continue drilling after it went through the Marcellus
Shale. Although testimony from Thomas Irwin, a field operations manager for
Inflection Energy, fell short of meeting the burden of proof, numerous
"concerned individuals provided contrary proof," Lovecchio said.
"[Gorsline and
the appellants] persuasively argue that the uses permitted in the [residential
and agricultural] district do not involve the use of industrial machinery and
chemicals, do not entail thousands of round trips of heavy truck traffic, do
not cause loud noises at all hours of the day, do not impose threats to human
health and safety and do not have negative impacts on the environment,"
Lovecchio said. "Their concerns went beyond mere speculation, bald
assertions, personal opinions or perceptions. Their concerns were factually
based and supported by cogent arguments and evidence."
Lovecchio
also considered whether the proposed operation conflicted with the purpose of
the zoning ordinance, particularly the protection of the health and safety of
the residents. He noted that although the burden of raising the issues fell on
the objections, sufficient concerns were raised during the public hearings.
Along
with traffic and lighting issues during construction, Lovecchio noted that the
company did not indicate whether background checks would be mandatory for all
construction workers.
He
said the residents also raised concerns about whether the deep drilling would
increase the levels of radium in the water supply by citing a study from Duke
University. A health and safety director for Inflection Energy contended that
the study challenged a practice that the DEP has permitted, but Lovecchio found
the argument unpersuasive.
"Stating
that the process is already permitted by the DEP begs the question. Merely
because hydrofracking is regulated by DEP certainly does not mean the activity
should occur in this particular residential area," he said.
Lovecchio concluded that, since the Supreme
Court's ruling in Robinson Township, municipalities have a "substantial
and immediate interest in protecting the environment and the quality of life
within its borders."
"This quality of life is a constitutional
charge that must be respected by all levels of government," Lovecchio
said. "While the court understands the constraints that the board may have
been operating under as a result of Act 13 and the litigation regarding its
constitutionality, our Supreme Court has now ruled with respect to such, the
citizens' rights cannot be ignored and must be protected."
Komoroski
said the decision will likely be an outlier and that it went further than is
typical for a court considering a board's zoning decision.
According to Komoroski, officials usually work
with those proposing projects to establish what will be needed to address a
municipality's concerns. Lovecchio, Komoroski said, went beyond those findings
by the board.
"This is a really inappropriate
second-guessing by the court of common pleas," Komoroski said, adding that
if a court is going to expand the scope of it's review, attorneys must first be
put on notice. "Where's the due process here?"
However, Jugovic said the opinion implemented
the core aspects of the Robinson Township decision, and that Lovecchio did not
overreach or make findings on the validity of the zoning ordinance.
"It's the real-life application of the
Robinson Township scenario," Jugovic said. "He took a measured
approach to deciding the case, which does justice for all parties."
Fairfield
Township Solicitor J. Michael Wiley declined to comment, and Inflection
Energy's attorney, Kevin M. Walsh of Donald G. Karpowich, Attorney-at-Law, did
not return a call for comment.”
(Copies of the 27-page opinion in Gorsline v.
Board of Supervisors of Fairfield Township, PICS No. 14-1398, are available
from Pennsylvania Law Weekly. Please call the Pennsylvania Instant Case Service
at 800-276-PICS to order or for information.) •
http://www.thelegalintelligencer.com/home/id=1202669116468?et=editorial&bu=The%20Legal%20Intelligencer&cn=20140905&src=EMC-Email&pt=PM%20Legal%20Alert&slreturn=20140805153143
The
study itself is in the attached file.
***Union Township
Supervisors Refuse to Allow Water Impoundment At Trax Farms
(I
don’t have a citation for this article. It was submitted by a group member. Jan)
“Last
night the Union Township Supervisors in Washington County, PA refused to vote
to allow a water impoundment pond on Trax Farms. EQT drilled 11 wells there and
was to begin fracking on Oct. 2, and now they have no water for fracking. Could
this be the end of frack ponds in PA?”
***Research: Yale Study Cites Health Risks
Respiratory/Skin
by
Don Hopey / Pittsburgh Post-Gazette
“Washington County residents living near Marcellus
Shale gas drilling sites reported having significantly more health problems,
including upper-respiratory illnesses and skin rashes, than those living
farther away, according to a study released today by Yale University researchers.
The study, which randomly
surveyed 492 people in 180 households
with private water well supplies in the county south of Pittsburgh, found twice
as many people -- 39 % -- reported upper-respiratory symptoms if they lived
within a kilometer, or a little more than half a mile, from a shale gas well site,
compared to the 18% who reported such symptoms and lived more than a mile away.
Those living within a kilometer of a shale gas drilling and fracking site
were four times as likely to suffer from
skin problems as those living more than 2 kilometers away, although the
percentages -- 13 percent and 3 percent -- were lower.
The researchers noted that the
“association study” did not look at or establish causation, and the survey of
self-reported medical conditions was done by university researchers who visited
the respondents in their homes during the summer of 2012.
“Our
study suggests that natural gas drilling may increase the risk of health
symptoms in people living near the wells,” Meredith Stowe, a researcher at the
Yale Occupational and Environmental Medicine Program and the study’s senior
author, said in a release from Yale News. “We believe our findings support the
need for further research into the health and environmental implications of
this form of natural gas extraction.”
Travis
Windle, a spokesman for the Marcellus Shale Coalition, an industry
organization, issued a written statement questioning the objectivity of the
researchers and noting that state air monitoring tests in 2010 reported
emissions from individual wells in southwestern Pennsylvania posed no public
health concerns.
The study, funded by the Pittsburgh-based Heinz
Endowments and three other foundations, was published online today in
Environmental Health Perspectives, a journal of the National Institutes of
Health
Washington County is a hot spot
for Marcellus Shale gas drilling and hydraulic fracturing or “fracking,” with
624 shale gas wells drilled and 95 percent of them fracked at the time of the
survey, according to DEP records.
Ms. Stowe, in a phone interview,
said the survey is important because it is the first to move beyond individual
health cases that allegedly are attributable to shale gas development
operations.
While the survey found higher
rates of skin and respiratory problems nearer to shale gas development sites,
the study reported “no equivalent correlation” between well proximity and other
groupings of respiratory, neurological, cardiovascular or gastrointestinal
conditions.”
Don
Hopey: dhopey@post-gazette.com or 412-263-1983. First Published September 10,
2014 12:44 PM
Here's a link to the
abstract of the Yale Study.
http://ehp.niehs.nih.gov/1307732/
http://powersource.post-gazette.com/powersource/consumers-powersource/2014/09/09/Marcellus-Shale-boom-is-triggering-land-wars/stories/201409070032
***Fracking Air
Pollution Should Receive More Attention
By
Leigh Paterson & Jordan Wirfs-Brock
“If
you live right next to a drilling rig, or your kids go to school beside a
fracking site, or your county is suddenly littered with well pads -- are there health risks?
Is
frac fluid safe?
Industry
representatives will tell you that 99.5 percent of frac fluid is just water and
sand, and the rest is common household chemicals. To prove it’s safe, they’ll
even drink it.
Lisa McKenzie, an epidemiologist
at the Colorado School of Public Health, said, “That other 0.5% is important
from a health perspective.”
Why?
“Chemicals can have very negative
effects in extremely small quantities,” McKenzie said.
There’s another - more serious - concern that hasn’t caught public
attention the way flaming tap water has: Air pollution.
Air
pollution from oil and gas development is a real risk
John Adgate, a researcher at the Colorado
School of Public Health, said water contamination is of less concern than,
"the traffic and the noise and air pollution that are around these sites.”
Trucks and construction equipment - in addition to causing traffic
accidents - bring diesel exhaust and dust to communities. Extracting and
transporting oil and gas can release pollutants like benzene and ozone.
Although scientists - including those on Ryan’s team - are still learning how
these pollutants move through the atmosphere and interact with the environment,
we know they can be dangerous to humans. The National Institute for
Occupational Health and Safety (NIOSH) has issued a hazard alert to oil and gas
workers about dust inhalation, and recently announced results of a study that
showed cancer-causing chemical benzene is present in worker’s urine at unsafe
levels.
Because oil and gas drilling is
happening in residential areas, people who don’t work at well-sites may need to
worry about these air pollutants, too.
When it comes to oil and gas
drilling, our track record of using
scientific research to make policies and regulations hasn’t been great.
For example, how far do oil and
gas wells need to be from homes and schools? This is called set-back distance, and in Colorado,
when new rules were decided in 2013 increasing the distance to 500 feet from
homes and 1,000 feet from schools, Ryan said, “It was freely admitted that no scientific information went into the
current choice.”
That’s what the Air Water Gas
project aims to change. In the case of the Colorado set-back rule,
policy-makers couldn’t use science to drive regulations because at that time it
just didn’t exist.
From a health perspective,
there’s very little evidence of the distance wells should be located from
homes,” said McKenzie. She is part of Ryan’s research team and looks at health
effects - like the rate of birth defects in babies born to mothers living near
wells - that can help fill in that knowledge gap.”
http://www.observer-reporter.com/article/20140909/NEWS01/140909434#.VBDI0aI6e8E
***DEP Issues
Notice Of Violation For Cecil Impoundment ‘Leak’
“CECIL
– The DEP has issued a notice of violation to Range Resources for “leaks of
fluids” that impacted groundwater at the Cecil Township No. 23 impoundment.
The notice, dated Monday, was
filed the same day DEP officials attended a private meeting with Cecil
supervisors to discuss the department’s groundwater test results from the
wastewater impoundment on Swihart Road, formerly called Worstell impoundment.
Those tests results were made public, but results are still being analyzed by
the DEP.
DEP spokesman John Poister said
they can’t say for sure what has been contributing to high chloride levels – a
key indicator of leaks – in one of the four groundwater monitoring wells at the
impoundment.
“We don’t know yet exactly what it was,” Poister said.
“We know that it is something that would come from the impoundment, but we
don’t know the full characterization.”
Poister said a fine will likely
be issued, but Range has until Sept. 24 to respond to the notice of violation.
He said Range will be required to hire a company to conduct more extensive
tests to determine the chemicals or minerals in the soil, as well as the extent
of the affected area. Range then must provide a site reclamation plan to the
DEP.
The impoundment was drained in
June and has not been used since. Range self-reported July 11 the company was
seeing chloride spikes at the impoundment since January, and the DEP conducted
its own tests Aug. 7.
Poister said the DEP also tested
well water at the two properties closest to the impoundment, and results showed
no impact.
According to data sent from Range
to the DEP, one groundwater monitoring well registered between 300 and 600
milligrams per liter of chloride between January and July – 250 milligrams and
up is a concern, according to Poister.
Range spokesman Matt Pitzarella
said the company does not know what caused the chloride spikes.
“We don’t know what happened at Cecil 23. We don’t know what the
issue was, and we may never know,” Pitzarella said. “It’s the same thing with the (Jon Day impoundment). You just might
not be able to figure out what had happened.”
High chloride levels were also recently detected at
Range’s Jon Day and Yeager impoundments in Amwell Township. Pitzarella stressed there
was no adverse impact to residents’ drinking supplies near the Cecil
impoundment.
Board of Supervisors Chairman
Andy Schrader said he felt Monday’s meeting with the DEP was productive. He
said department officials validated the board’s concerns about potential leaks
or spills at the impoundment.
“I think we’ve been concerned
about the safety of the residents out there, and basically this shows that
there was some need for our concerns,” Schrader said.
Vice
Chairwoman Cindy Fisher said she hopes the DEP will continue to monitor the
impoundment.
“I’m cautiously optimistic that
the DEP is going to take this seriously and is going to take into consideration
the township’s stand on this and the impact on our residents,” Fisher said,
“and that they will be true stewards of the environment and do what they’re
supposed to do.”
http://m.bizjournals.com/pittsburgh/blog/energy/2014/09/leaking-impoundment-prompts-dep-citation.html?ana=e_pit_rdup&s=newsletter&ed=2014-09-10&u=pT2D74%2FjLY2H5bhjhDNGWei2FKx&t=1410354975&r=full
Leaking
Impoundment Prompts DEP Citation
Sam
Kusic
Pittsburgh
Business Times
“The DEP has cited Range
Resources Corp. over leaks at its Wortsell water impoundment in Cecil Township,
Washington County.
In a notice of violation issued
Monday, the department said leaks were
detected by groundwater monitoring wells around the impoundment and by water
sampling at the well sites.
“These test results indicate that the groundwater around the impoundment
has been impacted by leaks of fluids from this centralized impoundment,” the
department stated in the notice.
But what exactly leaked isn’t yet clear, according to
DEP spokesman John Poister.
“We would expect the next step
for Range would be to conduct a complete characterization—analysis—of the soil
at the impoundment,” Poister said.
“That would provide information on exactly what leaked into the ground.
As part of the characterization, we would expect Range to determine the extent
of the contaminant plume and to implement the appropriate remedial response to
address the release.”
Range spokesman Matt Pitzarella
said of the four monitoring wells at the site, elevated levels of chloride were
found at one. The impoundment has been drained and has been out of use since
June, he said. The company is investigating the cause, he said.
"Importantly, no drinking
water sources have been impacted. Chlorides do not present a health or safety
risk. However, during our pre-construction testing we did find higher than
usual levels of chlorides in drinking water wells within 3,000 feet of the
location. This was before any of our work took place," Pitzarella said.
In August, Range began removing
another Washington County impoundment, which it decided to close following the
discovery of leaks into the surrounding soil.
In that case, the company said
low levels of chlorides were found beneath the impoundment liner and at
monitoring wells. Nothing was found at levels exceeding health-based
concentration limits, the company has said.”
Range
has until Sept. 24 to respond to the new notice.”
http://www.bizjournals.com/pittsburgh/blog/energy/2014/09/leaking-impoundment-prompts-dep-citation.html?page=all
***Rep Jesse White: “I'm not saying I told you so, but... well, I
told you so.”
On The
Cecil Impoundment Pits
“Not
only has the Worstell Impoundment in Cecil been leaking and contaminating the
soil and groundwater for quite a while, Range Resources spokesman Matt
Pitzarella admits, "We don’t know what happened at Cecil 23 (Worstell). We
don’t know what the issue was, and we may never know."
So,
let's recap the facts here.
1. Range Resources doesn't know what happened at
the Worstell impoundment.
2. Range
also doesn't know what chemicals are in their frac fluid that leaked from the
Worstell Impoundment.
3. Range doesn't know how much soil or how many
other water sources are contaminated from the chemicals they can't identify.
4. The Worstell Impoundment has shown high levels
of chlorides (an indicator of a bunch of other chemicals from drilling) for
years now.
5. Range
knew about the contamination for months (if not years) before telling the
public.
6. Range has
been denying there was a leak at Worstell for years now, and aggressively went
after anyone who said otherwise. (Anyone remember the "Leaking Impoundment
that Isn't Leaking" propaganda piece from Energy in Depth? You can find it
at http://energyindepth.org/marcellus/the-leaking-impoundment-thats-not-leaking/)
How
exactly does any of Range Resources' conduct here fall under anyone's
definition of "responsible drilling"? These open air wastewater
impoundments need to be banned in Pennsylvania, which is exactly what my House
Bill 1542 would do.
I give the DEP credit for finally stepping up and
taking some action here. Hopefully they will continue the investigation and
monitor the remediation in a fair and objective way to ensure public safety.”
By Jesse White
***Radon Gas In Flowback Water
“As part of
our collaboration with MSNBC, Vocativ (an on line news website, jan) went to
central Pennsylvania, which is adding fracking wells to its landscape at a
rate three times faster than the national average. There we
found executives and politicians campaigning on behalf of hydraulic
fracturing by drinking fracking fluid—the liquid that miners pump into the
ground—in front of large crowds to prove its safety.
At a
recent fracking convention, energy industry consultant Phil Grossweiler insisted
that these attempts to sway public perception are nothing but
publicity stunts. “The point of seeing executives and politicians drink
fracking fluid was deception,” he tells us. “It was an attempt to convince the
public that there is no harm from fracturing a shale oil well. It was deceptive
in the sense that it’s the least of the problems. What goes down the well is
not nearly as important as what comes up.”
Most
relevant to Grossweiler and other critics are the ingredients of the fracking
fluid that returns to the surface—referred
to as “flowback water”—as radon-laced toxic waste. Radon gas is the second
leading cause of lung cancer in America. Yet there are no federal regulations
limiting radon in flowback water.
To
measure the amount of radon gas actually present in water found in the
proximity of fracking sites, Vocativ
tested flowback from a stream near Trout Run, Pennsylvania, an area lined with
upwards of 15 wellheads. “We are now 15 minutes into this test for radon,”
Andrew Nelson, a scientist at the University Iowa, explains as he tested our
flowback sample. “We can say that the amount of radon in this vial is thousands
of times higher than the allowable standards for drinking water based on the
EPA limits.”
Still,
locals in the nation’s fracking capital are enjoying the economic spoils. Hydraulic
fracturing is expected to add $30 billion to Pennsylvania’s economy over
the next two decades. “ Cassidy,
a waitress at Fry Bros. Turkey Ranch in Trout Run, is also experiencing the
financial benefits that the fracking industry tows behind it as it rolls into
town. “Sometimes we get gas workers in here and they get very large to-go
orders,“ she says. “They leave us really big tips.” Here’s another tip: Don’t
drink the water.
Radon
is not limited in flowback water. “
Go to about 2min 45 sec mark
***Research: Tiny Doses of Chemicals
May have Serious Health Effects
Low
dose endocrine disruptors can be toxic
Tufts U. - Laura Vandenberg lead researcher
“The higher the dose, the more
dangerous the toxin—that principle is the basis for most regulatory chemical
testing in the United States. But a new report shows that even low doses of
some toxins can be harmful, and that finding could have implications for the
long-standing debate over the chemicals used in hydraulic fracturing.
The
toxins surveyed in the report affect the endocrine system, which produces
hormones, the small signaling molecules that control reproduction, brain
development, the immune system and overall health.
Although
the report doesn't specifically mention hydraulic fracturing, a separate peer-reviewed study released in September identified 649
chemicals used during gas production and
found that at least 130 could affect the endocrine system. They include
petroleum distillates, methanol and other, more obscure compounds like
dibromoacetonitrile and ethoxylated nonylphenol.
Endocrine-disrupting
chemicals have been linked to a variety of health problems, including obesity,
diabetes, fetal development and infertility. Babies and young children are
particularly vulnerable, said Laura Vandenberg, a postdoctoral research fellow
at Tufts University and lead author of the new report. It was published last
week in the peer-reviewed journal Endocrine
Reviews.
"I
can't think of a single tissue in the body that isn't affected in some way by
hormones," she said.
Many
of the chemicals in question are manmade. The food-packaging additive BPA,
which mimics estrogen, is probably the best-known example. Dozens of cosmetics,
pesticides and industrial chemicals found in the environment also affect the
endocrine system.
The earlier
study, which identified potential endocrine-disrupting chemicals used in
natural gas production, was led by Theo Colborn, an environmental health
analyst who also co-authored the new report.
Colborn began studying endocrine disruption in the 1980's and has spent the
past eight years researching the health effects of natural gas drilling.
It
has been difficult for endocrinologists to research fracking-related health
risks, because much of the information about fracking chemicals isn't available
to the public, said Sonya Lunder, a senior analyst at Environmental Working
Group, a nonprofit that advocates for public health. At least nine states have passed chemical disclosure laws, but all the
regulations have loopholes that allow natural gas companies to keep the names
or concentrations of certain chemicals as trade secrets.
Without
an accurate understanding of how and where chemicals are used, "we don't
know nearly enough ... to figure out the magnitude of human exposures and
concerns," Lunder said.
The new
report confirms what scientists like Colborn have known for years—that small
amounts of endocrine-disrupting chemicals can have big health impacts. Although the overall conclusion isn't new, the paper—which
cites more than 840 research articles—is significant for its scope, said Louis
Guillette, a doctor and endocrinologist at the Medical University of South
Carolina who was not involved in the study.
"It's
a monster review—it really has looked at a very large amount of literature out
there," he said. The research cited came from laboratories around the
world and includes experiments performed on cell cultures, animals and human epidemiologic
studies. "This paper is critical because it's showing that there's a
legacy, a history demonstrating that these are real effects, from many
different labs."
Some
endocrine-disrupting chemicals are already present in the environment at similar
concentrations as naturally occurring hormones in the body. Since hormones function at concentrations
of parts per billion or parts per trillion, "you can imagine that anything
affecting it in a small way can have a drastic effect on health,"
Vandenberg said. She compared one part per trillion to a single drop of water
in 20 Olympic-sized swimming pools.
Yet the
importance of low-dose testing has been slow to catch on in regulatory
agencies. Researchers generally test chemicals
by giving lab animals large doses of a particular compound to see if it kills
them, Vandenberg said. The scientists then calculate a smaller dose that's
considered safe for human exposure—but they rarely test the lower doses to see
whether they, too, might cause health effects.
Guillette
said that's because "the whole belief system of toxicology, which is put
up in every introductory class, is that 'the dose makes the poison.' There's a
perception that as you increase the dose, things become more toxic."
While
that's true for effects such as death, cancer and certain birth defects,
endocrine-disrupting chemicals can act in more subtle ways. Some symptoms take
years to materialize.
"There
are effects at low doses you don't see at high doses," Vandenberg said. The high-dose tests don't look for the
effects on brain development, for example, or prenatal exposure.
"During
fetal development, if you don't have the right levels of [hormones] in the
thyroid, you can have severe mental retardation. And the difference between
enough and not enough is a very slim margin."
Because
children and developing babies are particularly vulnerable, the
endocrine-disrupting chemicals used during natural gas drilling may
disproportionately impact local communities, said Lunder of the Environmental
Working Group.
"In a community, you want to limit exposures…because
someone's generally pregnant, or there are kids around. Those effects may be
less for the healthy [adult] workers who are handling these products."
The
chemical industry and some scientists say more evidence is needed about how low
doses of endocrine-disrupting compounds affect human health. Last week, the
American Chemistry Council, an industry trade group, issued a statement in
response to the new report, saying it "has committed substantial resources
to advancing science to better understand any potential effects of chemical
substances on the endocrine system."
"We hear all the time that 'the dose isn't
high enough to be toxic,'" said Guillette, the South Carolina
endocrinologist. "We're trying to get physicians in the U.S. to be aware
of how important environmental exposures are to health."
Some
regulatory agencies are already on board. Last
week, the peer-reviewed journal Environmental Health Perspectives ran an
editorial by the director of the National Institute of Environmental Health
Sciences (part of the National Institutes of Health) that emphasized the
importance of low dose testing. And in early
2011, a group of scientific associations representing 40,000 researchers wrote
an open letter to the journal Science about "the growing recognition that
currently accepted testing paradigms and government review practices are
inadequate for chemicals with hormone-like actions."
Vandenberg
hopes the new report can help regulators design better safety tests, and raise
awareness of the importance of endocrine-disrupting chemicals.
"BPA
has been a way for people to understand how small amounts of a chemical…could
be having an effect," she said. "But in general, the public probably
doesn't realize how widespread the problem is.
http://insideclimatenews.org/news/20120321/endocrine-disrupting-chemicals-fracking-natural-gas-low-dose-environmental-health
***PA Blind To Fracking Oversight
BY JOHN NORBECK, PennFuture
IN
A FRANTIC race to tap the vast natural resource under our feet - namely,
natural gas - Gov. Corbett and state
agencies are letting industry dictate the terms of the game. How else to
explain the countless lapses in oversight and regulation that are allowing
drillers to continually foul our air, land and water? Yes, the rush to
drill absent foresight and proper planning could turn Pennsylvania's gas rush
into a race to the bottom where environmental protection is concerned.
Signs
that oversight as well as adequate resourcing of DEP professionals has not kept
up with the pace of drilling have been piling up of late. The recent report by
the state Auditor General's Office faults DEP with antiquated record-keeping
systems, poor oversight of well inspections and drilling waste, and failing to
track and respond to public concerns about drilling activities, including
complaints that drilling has fouled water supplies.
"DEP is underfunded, understaffed and
inconsistent in how it approaches shale-gas development," Auditor General
Eugene DePasquale noted on the release of his office's report. "It's
like firefighters trying to put out a five-alarm fire with a 20-foot garden hose."
We
need more cops on the beat at DEP.
Equally
concerning is the flip-flop routine at the state Department of Health, where
two retired employees said that they were forbidden from talking to the public
about health issues related to the Marcellus Shale. Instead, department employees were given a list of buzzwords
that signaled which calls to avoid, a list that included "gas,"
"fracking" and "soil contamination." The department
originally denied the existence of the list but later backtracked.
More
backward logic permeated the decision by
the Corbett administration not to fund a statewide health registry that would
track the health of those in drilling areas, a registry recommended by the
governor's own Marcellus Shale Advisory Commission and his first secretary of
health.
Again,
where are cops on the beat at the Department of Health?
In
addition to the plentiful errors of commission regarding drilling activities in
the state, there is also an error of omission that could be far more
significant than the rest. The specter of fugitive methane emissions looms
large and is the 800-pound gorilla when it comes to natural-gas drilling and
its impacts on global warming and climate change.
Methane is
the main component of natural gas, but it is also an extremely potent,
short-lived climate pollutant. Air-quality monitoring studies conducted at
sites throughout the Marcellus Shale show that methane leaks from drilling,
processing and distribution equipment. These leaks
are not only a waste of a valuable resource, but they also contribute to
current warming trends. What's more,
when methane leaks, so do other air toxins, such as the compounds that create
smog and related unhealthy air conditions. If you feel like you've been choking
on hot, smoggy air during the last few Philly summers, well, you have.
The
city recently received a failing grade in the American Lung Association's
annual State of the Air report.
So,
where are the cops on the beat in the Corbett administration who should be
demanding that methane emissions be addressed, controlled and regulated? These
are the same folks who are obliged to protect our health, welfare and the
environment as noted in Article 1, Sec. 27 of the Pennsylvania constitution:
"The people have a right to clean air, pure water, and to the preservation
of the natural, scenic, historic and aesthetic values of the environment."
Natural-gas
drilling is not likely to go away any time soon in Pennsylvania. But that
doesn't mean that we should tap our shale-gas reserves blindly and without
regard for the negative consequences with which we are already dealing.
Improved accountability gives the industry clear rules to follow, ensures that
citizens can express their concerns and puts the government in charge of
guarding this finite natural resource.
Let's
dispense with the pandering to industry and replace it with a solid blue line
of cops on the beat who will look out for Pennsylvania and Pennsylvanians where
our air, water and land are concerned.
John
Norbeck is vice president and COO of PennFuture, a statewide environmental
advocacy organization. http://articles.philly.com/2014-09-10/news/53735691_1_drilling-methane-leaks-marcellus-shale-advisory-commission
***DEP Gives $150,000 To Industry Backed Group For Research
“The state DEP has approved a
$150,000 grant earmarked in the state budget for “independent research regarding natural gas drilling” to an
industry-backed nonprofit organization.
The funding was approved on a non-competitive basis– other groups were not able to apply for the
money.
The Pittsburgh-based Shale Alliance for Energy Research (SAFER PA) was
formed as a partnership between industry and academia. Its board includes two representatives
from PA universities and five members from the oil and gas industry. SAFER PA’s president, Patrick Findle, heads
the Pittsburgh office of the Gas Technology Institute– an Illinois nonprofit
that conducts research for gas companies. In 2012 Findle also served as the research committee vice chair of the industry
group, the Marcellus Shale Coalition.
Reached by phone, Findle declined to comment and refused to even
confirm that SAFER PA was working with DEP. He asked that all questions for
this story be emailed to him and did not respond to the email.
The DEP did not respond to
repeated requests to comment.
Barry
Kauffman of the government reform group, Common Cause PA.:
“Hopefully
that’s not the situation here because we need unbiased research. One would hope
this group was not selected because it would produce a predetermined outcome.”
None of the university professors from the SAFER PA board– representing
Penn State, Drexel, and the University of Pittsburgh– would comment for this
story.
A
Penn State spokeswoman says Dr. John Hellman, an engineering professor who is
listed as the vice chair of SAFER PA’s board, left the group due to his busy
schedule.
To date, SAFER PA has published one report on its website– a handbook for
homeowners with private water wells. The booklet was written by Groundwater and Environmental Services, Inc. — an
engineering company that does the majority of its business with oil and gas
companies.
Scott
Anderson of the Environmental Defense Fund, which is also part of the
committee:
“We
thought it was a good project,” he says. “We just told them we wouldn’t be able
to devote more than a day or two a year to advising them.”
In a 2013 PowerPoint presentation,
Findle described SAFER PA as having a “seasoned team conducting PA
appropriations efforts,” with plans to
raise $8-$10 million per year for shale research– to be funded by the state and
other sources.
Last year the DEP received $150,000 in the state budget specifically
for “independent research regarding natural gas drilling.” The agency
awarded the entire sum in a sole source grant to SAFER PA.
Emails obtained by StateImpact
Pennsylvania through an open records request show the DEP appears to be on the
verge of signing a contract, but at this point it’s not entirely clear what
SAFER PA will do for the agency.
The group says it intends to
track the waste generated by shale development and study potential human health
impacts. It also plans to create an online training tool about erosion and
sediment control related to oil and gas activities.
The emails also show the
governor’s office checking in with DEP on the status of the grant– once in
March and again last month. Governor Corbett’s press secretary did not respond
to requests to comment.”
***There Will Be
No Fracking In Nova Scotia
“Energy Minister Andrew Younger
announced that the Liberal government plans to introduce legislation in the
fall prohibiting hydraulic fracturing in shale oil and gas projects in the
province.
“Nova Scotians have indicated
that by a wide margin they are concerned about hydraulic fracturing and they do
not want it as part of onshore development of shales in Nova Scotia at this
time,” Younger said during a news conference, to the loud applause of
environmentalists in attendance.
“Nova Scotians have put their
trust in our government, that we will listen to the concerns and not allow a
process that most Nova Scotians are just simply not comfortable with at this
time.”
http://thechronicleherald.ca/business/1233818-nova-scotia-to-ban-fracking
***Flooding the
Zone: Gas Industry Pours Millions into Lobbying
PA
“Kauffman says the industry’s
campaign spending and lobbying have helped the industry score key victories in Pennsylvania.
“Number one, we all know—it got
them no severance tax,” says Kauffman. “So Pennsylvania is the only major
drilling state in the nation that doesn’t have a severance tax.”
This
began when former Gov. Ed Rendell decided not to pursue a severance tax, and
continued under Gov. Tom Corbett, and the passage of Act 13.
The 2012 law established an impact fee on drillers.
This is a flat, per-well fee—as opposed to a more commonly assessed severance
tax on the gas that comes out of the ground. This fee has given the state and local
governments more than $600 million, but not as much as a severance tax would
have.
An investigation by the Allegheny
Front and 90.5 WESA found the oil and gas industry spent heavily on lobbying
while the state was writing regulations for shale gas.
The industry
spent $34 million on lobbying in Pennsylvania since 2007, according to the
Pennsylvania Department of State's lobbying disclosure database. That includes a high of $9 million in 2012, the year Act
13 passed. The money was spent by 27 companies that have drilled
unconventional wells or are 'board members' of the Marcellus Shale Coalition,
and five trade associations.
Compare that to the state’s largest environmental
groups—who spent about $1.5 million dollars combined in that period—and $330,000 in
2012.
What did this lobbying
accomplish? For starters, it appears to have gotten the industry face time with
decision makers in Harrisburg.
Consider the meeting calendar for
Patrick Henderson, Gov. Corbett’s Energy Executive, shown above . Henderson was
involved with negotiations around Act 13, and helped put together the
Governor’s Marcellus Shale Advisory Commission. Not surprisingly, the gas
industry wanted to talk to him.
In his public calendar from late
January 2011 to when Act 13 was signed
in early February 2012, Henderson had over 130 meetings scheduled
with industry executives or lobbyists registered with the oil and gas industry
or affiliated business groups. In that same time period, he had 29 scheduled
meetings with environmental groups. That information was obtained through a
right-to-know request by The Allegheny Front.
Representatives for the Marcellus Shale Coalition, Range Resources, and
Chesapeake Energy met most frequently with Henderson. The lopsided tally on his
calendar underscores what Joanne Kilgour has seen since she became director for
Pennsylvania Sierra Club earlier this year.
“That confirms the way it feels
to be in the Capitol as an environmental lobbyist,” Kilgour says. “There are so
many industry lobbyists that are always, always in the Capitol and in-district
and have significant resources to pour into just their lobbying effort.”
What is the impact of this
lobbying effort? On that question, those in the environmental community are
mixed.
The setback limitations for the
DEP were deemed too vague by a plurality of state Supreme Court justices, who
helped overturn it. For some in the environmental community, the setback rule
was emblematic of how Act 13 went too far in industry’s favor.
“Those setbacks weren’t worth the paper they were written on—they were a
sham,” says John Quigley, former secretary for the Department of Conservation
and Natural Resources. A Democrat, Quigley is volunteering for the campaign
of Tom Wolf, who’s running for governor against the Republican Corbett.
“Clearly, there was a big overreach in Act 13. And that didn’t just happen by
itself.”
http://www.alleghenyfront.org/story/flooding-zone-gas-industry-pours-millions-lobbying-pa
***Brine Firm Sues
Over Billboard Against Injection Wells
(So,
according to the industry, it’s ok for huge billboards to call environmentalists
opposed to fracking “green slime”,jk but
it’s not legal for a billboard that criticizes waste injection wells. Jan)
COLUMBUS,
Ohio (AP) — An Ohio man who uses a biblical reference and a statement against
"poisoned waters" on billboards opposing wells for disposal of
gas-drilling wastewater is fighting a legal threat from the Texas well owner on
free-speech grounds.
Austin, Texas-based Buckeye Brine alleges in a July lawsuit that the
billboards paid for by Michael Boals, of Coshocton in eastern Ohio, contain
false and defamatory attacks against its two wells, which dispose of
contaminated wastewater from oil and gas drilling.
The complaint by the company and Rodney Adams, who owns the land and
operates the well site, contends the wells are safe, legal and meet all state
safety standards. The parties object to statements on two billboards along
U.S. Route 36, including one that "DEATH may come."
"The accusation that the
wells will cause 'DEATH' is a baseless and malicious attempt to damage the
reputations of the plaintiffs," according to the complaint. "The
billboards are also defamatory because they state or imply that Mr. Adams and
Buckeye Brine are causing 'poisoned waters' to enter the drinking water
supply."
It's considered unsafe for ground
water and aquifers, so Ohio regulations require waste liquid to be contained
and injected deep underground. Ohio has recorded no aquifer contamination, but
as the state grapples with some 16 million gallons of the wastewater a year,
it's seen earthquakes linked to injection wells and a Youngstown-area
businessman indicted in a federal dumping case.
Boals, a 55-year-old timber harvester,
refuses to pull his billboards, which he said cost him more than $1,000.
He said the complaint misrepresents his statements,
one of which is that injection wells "pump POISONED WATERS under the feet
of America's Citizens." The second sign quotes prophecy from Revelation —
on men dying from waters "made bitter."
"I think a lot of people
hear the word 'injection well' and they don't realize they inject wastewater
into the ground," he said. "I said the poisoned waters travel under
the feet of all the people in the area. That's a true statement. 'Bitter'
speaks about something not desirable, not something you'd ever want to
drink."
After a cease-and-desist letter
failed to get Boals to pull the signs, the legal fight escalated. Buckeye Brine
directed its appeal for relief to the sign owner, and Boals enlisted the legal help of Fair Shake Environmental Legal
Services.
Megan Lovett, an attorney at the
Pittsburgh-based nonprofit, said Boals' signs represent protected speech,
especially in a rural, hilly region where billboards are one of the more
reliable forms of mass communication.
"You can't defame someone
with an opinion in Ohio," she said. "You can't control an idea. The
way we control ideas is in the marketplace of ideas, not in a court."
Lovett also argues that oil and
gas drilling, particularly fracking, can rightly be considered to
"destroy" and "poison" water, as the billboards contend.”
***Airport
Drilling Money Stays At Airport
“Any day now, wells on the 9,000
acres surrounding the airport will begin drilling the stores of shale under the
airport. The deal is expected to bring more than $20 million a year to prop up
the struggling airport.
When the drilling deal was first
discussed, proper questions were raised about where the money would go; the
airport is owned by Allegheny County. A decline in flights and the
consolidation of airlines has the airport, which derives its income from retail
and airline leases, faltering financially. Enter
the frackers, and then the Federal Aviation
Administration, which claimed
that income derived from the airport must stay at the airport. That ought to
rankle the residents of the county, if not of the state.
This is just the latest in a
series of dubious decisions and directions related to fracking in the state. Earlier in the year, Gov. Corbett moved to
lift a moratorium on drilling on state lands, including game and park land.
One environmental group has sued
to stop the drilling. Such drilling not
only has the potential to alter the landscape, but nearly a million acres of
state land is already subject to drilling and some claim it's already having a
negative impact on wildlife populations.
The race to drill the state -
Corbett says he also wants to drill under state prisons - is especially
troubling given how little time is spent studying fracking's potential impact,
and how little drillers pay the state for the privilege.
Just last week, a group of health
professionals raised questions about the Corbett administration's handling of
the health questions raised by fracking. They accuse the administration of
directing state Health Department officials not to pay proper attention to
calls from those with health problems or concerns.
Drillers
pay only fees, not taxes, unlike all the other states in which fracking occurs.
Public-health experts bemoan the lack of long-term health studies on the
effects of fracking. And, most outrageously, a health registry that would
record and analyze complaints that was part of recommendations of a governor's
commission was abandoned because the $2 million it would cost was deemed too
expensive.
When the state legalized
gambling, it created a set of policies and regulations that involved high taxes
for the gaming companies, with shares going to host cities and the bulk divided
among a range of programs and tax deductions that benefited those throughout
the state. Even more important, the Gaming Control Board was established to
strictly monitor gambling as well as its impact.
Too bad the same approach wasn't
adopted when the state went crazy for fracking - especially since there's
potentially even more at stake. Corbett's
fervor for drilling without proper controls is an increasingly bad gamble.”
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
