IN PENNSYLVANIA, THE ANOMALIES ARE EVERYWHERE!

Water Problems From Drilling Are More Frequent Than PA Officials Said
by Abrahm Lustgarten, ProPublica - July 31, 2009

A drill site is seen from the back of Dimock resident Ronald Carter's home. Carter was told the methane coming from his pipes shouldn't be a problem as long as he cracked a window while running the tap. (Abrahm Lustgarten/ProPublica)

When methane began bubbling out of kitchen taps near a gas drilling site in Pennsylvania last winter, a state regulator described the problem as "an anomaly." But at the time he made that statement to ProPublica, that same official was investigating a similar case affecting more than a dozen homes near gas wells halfway across the state.

In fact, methane related to the natural gas industry has contaminated water wells in at least seven Pennsylvania counties since 2004 and is common enough that the state hired a full-time inspector dedicated to the issue in 2006. In one case, methane was detected in water sampled over 15 square miles. In another, a methane leak led to an explosion that killed a couple and their 17-month-old grandson.

Methane is the largest component of natural gas. Since it evaporates out of drinking water, it is not considered toxic, but in the air it can lead to explosions. When methane is found in water supplies, it can also signal that deeply drilled gas wells are linked with drinking water systems.

In many cases the methane seepage comes from thousands of old abandoned gas wells that riddle Pennsylvania's geology, state inspectors say. But other cases, including several this year and the 2004 disaster that left three people dead, were linked to problems with newly drilled, active natural gas wells.

Dimock resident Norma Fiorentino's drinking water well exploded on New Year's morning. The blast was so strong it tossed aside a several-thousand-pound concrete slab.(Abrahm Lustgarten/ProPublica)

The issue came to the forefront in January when methane was found in the water at 16 homes in the small town of Dimock, in northeastern Pennsylvania. State officials cited Cabot Oil & Gas for several violations they say allowed the gas to seep out of the well structures and into water supplies there. The Department of Environmental Protection asked the company to encase its lower well pipes completely in concrete — a process known in the industry as "cementing" — and assured the public that the contamination in Dimock was rare.

But according to a department spokeswoman, there have been at least 52 separate cases of what the state calls "methane migration" in the past five years. In two of the 2009 cases, regulators responded to complaints from more than 32 households and asked gas companies to supply clean water to at least a dozen homes with contaminated wells.

_____________________________________________________________

SPLASHDOWN EDITORIAL:

CONTACT: Robert F. Kennedy, Jr.!

http://www.robertfkennedyjr.com/contact.html

Point to these 52 cases of "methane migration", to the complaints from more than 32 households, to the dozen homes with contaminated wells, to the gas leak this week in Lycoming County, the toxic flaring, the contaminated creek, the contaminated spring, the 4 contaminated wells serving private homes. Remind him of the problems in Dimock.

Agree wholeheartedly with his comment, "Natural gas comes with its own set of environmental caveats. It is a carbon-based fuel and [its] extraction from shale, the most significant new source, if not managed carefully, can cause serious water, land use, and wildlife impacts, especially in the hands of irresponsible producers and lax regulators."

If he's going to advocate the use of natural gas instead of coal, tell him it's not good enough to simply say extraction needs to be managed carefully! Ask him to help insure the gas drilling industry is made more responsible. Ask him how he thinks these violatons of Life Itself can be prevented?

___________________________________________________________________

An undated report from the Pittsburgh Geological Society posted to the DEP's Web site makes it clear that old wells and new drilling can lead to stray gas problems. "Although it rarely makes headlines," the report reads, "damage or threats caused by gas migration is a common problem in Western Pennsylvania."

Craig Lobins, the DEP regional oil and gas manager who initially described the Dimock case as an anomaly in interviews with ProPublica, said he still believes the frequency of contamination incidents is statistically insignificant.

Records show there are roughly 58,000 active gas wells in Pennsylvania. "We are just dealing with a very small percentage," he said in a follow-up interview.

The case Lobins was investigating at the same time as the Dimock case concerned a string of problems in Bradford, a rural town 200 miles west of Dimock along the state's northern border. Shortly after a contractor for Schreiner Oil and Gas drilled several dozen wells in the area last spring, residents began complaining of murky and foul-smelling tap water. When the DEP investigated, it found methane in three water wells and metals in six others. It asked Schreiner to supply water to eight homes, and the company has begun installing water treatment systems at each house. While no new gas wells have been drilled in the Bradford area, according to the DEP, the existing ones continue to operate.

Michael Schreiner, Schreiner's president, declined to comment for this article.

Lobins said the problems in Bradford — as in many of the contamination cases across the state — stem from a bad cementing job around the core of the well. In most gas drilling, the well pipe is encased in layers of concrete to keep it isolated from surrounding groundwater. The concrete also contains the enormous pressure exerted on the system during the process of hydraulic fracturing, which pumps water, sand and chemicals to the well bottom to break up rock.

In Bradford, Lobins said, concrete was poured into the space around the wells but never filled the space — a sign of a possible leak. Because Pennsylvania does not have regulations that require inspections or testing of the concrete casing, the state didn't notice the problem until methane began showing up in water wells. By then, the suspected concrete error had been repeated in as many as 27 different places, Lobins said.

In most gas drilling, the well pipe is encased in layers of concrete to keep it isolated from groundwater. This practice of encasing the well is seen as key to protecting water supplies. (Graphic by Al Granberg/ProPublica)

Controlling the quality of cementing and well casing is widely viewed as the most important factor in protecting water supplies and ensuring the integrity of a well. A recent federally funded study of state regulations across the country(PDF), published by the Ground Water Protection Council, a consortium of state oil and gas regulators, industry representatives, and some environmental consultants, said that proper concrete casing is critical to environmental protection. While 96 percent of states, including Pennsylvania, have standards specifying that concrete be used to protect aquifers, the report found that one in five, also including Pennsylvania, do not require testing to confirm that the concrete used is strong enough for the job. That means that until water problems arose as a result of the casing problems in Bradford, the state had little recourse.
___________________________________________________________________

CONTACT: Robert F. Kennedy, Jr.!

http://www.robertfkennedyjr.com/contact.html

If he's going to advocate the use of natural gas instead of coal, tell him it's not good enough to simply say extraction needs to be managed carefully! Ask him to help insure the gas drilling industry is made more responsible. _________________________________________________________________

"What they are doing is not a violation until the gas is leaving the borehole," Lobins said. "We don't know that until it manifests itself somewhere else."

Lobins said the state is reviewing its regulations and that changes are planned to address both well casing and methane migration issues. But when asked what specific changes were being discussed, Lobins said he did not know. Similar questions went unanswered by Ron Gilius, the DEP's oil and gas director, after they were submitted by ProPublica both in interviews and in writing.

For their part, Bradford residents were surprised to learn that their problems were not unique.

"They didn't say that there were other problems similar to this," said Lori Trumbull, who complained about her water but later found that it was OK. "They said that the odds of having water contamination from drilling operations is very rare."

Fred Baldassare, the state's dedicated methane migration investigator, said he has investigated water contaminated with drilling-related methane in numerous places across the state in recent years. In Bridgeville, two homes exploded when a well casing failed and methane seeped into their basements, he said. In Dayton, he said, residents were evacuated after a well casing failed and methane migrated into an adjacent abandoned well, blowing out its casing and travelling a third of a mile underground.

In Vandergrift, drillers stumbled across an old gas well that no one knew was there. Baldassare said that when the new well was hydraulically fractured, the intense pressure forced gas into the adjacent wells. It then percolated up through water and mud until it surfaced just feet from homes in a heavily populated neighborhood.

The most tragic Pennsylvania methane case began on March 5, 2004, in Jefferson County, about 80 miles northeast of Pittsburgh. According to Baldassare, gas seeped into the home of 64-year-old Charles Harper and his 53-year-old wife, Dorothy, from one of several adjacent wells being drilled by Snyder Brothers. The gas collected until it exploded and, according to court records and news reports at the time, reduced the home to "a pile of rubble." Debris was found across the road, and insulation hung from trees 30 feet in the air. The bodies of the Harpers and their grandson, Baelee, were found buried in the debris.

Executives from Snyder Brothers did not return calls for comment. The company was sued in state court in Jefferson County and reached an undisclosed settlement with the Harper family.

State officials traced the methane's geochemical fingerprint and determined it had come from one of three Snyder wells nearby. The investigation, however, remains open in part because Snyder has yet to comply with state orders to conduct pressure tests on the wells — orders delivered in 2005, according to Baldassare. But that doesn't mean state officials aren't sure about what happened.

According to Baldassare, the Snyder methane caused the explosion.

"In my view," he said, "there was no uncertainty."

For original publication site, CLICK HERE.

DEMAND ACCOUNTABILITY!

PennFuture Calls Penn State Marcellus Shale Study Fuzzy Logic, Fuzzy Math

Earlier this week, Citizens for Pennsylvania’s Future (PennFuture) called the recent economic study on the impact of natural gas drilling in the Marcellus Shale formation completed by the Pennsylvania State University for the industry and its supporters in the House Natural Gas Caucus “a study replete with fuzzy logic and even fuzzier math.”

“The study’s main finding – that a severance tax will drive up the cost of the gas, causing Pennsylvania drillers to lose customers to cheaper gas providers – has one very basic flaw,” said Jan Jarrett, president and CEO of PennFuture. “There is no cheaper gas anywhere, with or without a severance tax. Pennsylvania’s natural gas deposits have a huge competitive advantage, with higher Btu ratings than supplies elsewhere, and reduced delivery costs, since the gas is close to lucrative northeast markets. And I don’t care how much they dress it up with a study, this fact cannot be denied.

“And there is no case to be made that the severance tax will harm the growth of this industry,” continued Jarrett. “If this tax is onerous, we would expect that Pennsylvania would be the drilling capital of the nation. But it isn’t. Pennsylvania is 15th out of 32 gas-producing states, nearly all of whom have a severance tax. The gas is here, and the industry will drill where the gas is.

“No one doubts that drilling in the Marcellus Shale formation presents a tremendous opportunity for growing Pennsylvania’s economy,” said Jarrett. “But without a severance tax, Pennsylvania taxpayers will get very little benefit, while they risk being stuck with the bill to fix the environmental damage the drilling causes. Instead, the only folks who stand to make really big money out of Pennsylvania’s natural gas assets will be the multinational corporations who are blocking the tax."

For the complete article, CLICK HERE.

DEMAND ACCOUNTABILITY!

Help Protect Our Drinking Water NOW!

Recent Supreme Court rulings have narrowed the scope of protections of the Clean Water Act, putting the drinking water of millions of Americans at risk for contamination.

But the Senate has an opportunity to restore the original protections of the Clean Water Act by supporting the Clean Water Restoration Act.

Please CLICK HERE for the link to send the following letter to your Senator today.

Dear Senator ___,
I am writing to urge you to support the Clean Water Restoration Act and restore the original intentions of the Clean Water Act, which has been compromised by recent Supreme Court rulings.

These rulings narrowed the scope of protections of the Clean Water Act, and as a result have allowed corporate polluters to contaminate streams, rivers, wetlands, lakes, and other previously protected waters.

The loss of Clean Water Act safeguards has put the drinking water of more than 110 million Americans in jeopardy. This is unacceptable.

The Clean Water Restoration Act will not only re-establish protections for drinking water at risk for contamination, but streamline enforcement between federal and local governments to make protection more effective. In addition, this legislation will ensure that water and wetlands used for boating, fishing, and other recreation are kept free of contamination, disease, and bacteria.

Please do your part to support the Clean Water Restoration Act. Thank you.

DEMAND ACCOUNTABILITY!

PA DEP Investigating Natural Gas Well Leak In Lycoming County

WILLIAMSPORT, Pa., July 28 /PRNewswire-USNewswire

SOURCE Pennsylvania Department of Environmental Protection

The Pennsylvania Department of Environmental Protection is investigating a natural gas well leak at an East Resources well in McNett Township, Lycoming County.

"East Resources is cooperating fully with our investigation, and has already implemented measures to stop the leak," said DEP Northcentral Regional Director Robert Yowell. "DEP staff will continue to work closely with East Resources and local emergency responders to ensure the safety of nearby residents."

DEP was alerted to the problem last week by a citizen who reported discoloration of water in a tributary to Lycoming Creek and in a nearby spring. DEP staff investigated on July 24 what was then a suspected sediment problem in the creek.

On Monday, DEP received a report of possible natural gas bubbling from the tributary. DEP staff collected water samples from the spring and the tributary. Those samples are being analyzed for methane and other parameters in the department's laboratory in Harrisburg. DEP staff confirmed the bubbling in two Lycoming Creek tributaries earlier today.

East Resources personnel monitored 18 private water wells in the nearby area that same day, and are providing water to four homes. They also monitored methane levels in the homes.

East Resources has three wells in the area, which are in the Oriskaney geologic formation, and not in the Marcellus Shale area. Two of the wells are drilled and completed, but not yet in service due to the lack of gathering lines in the area. The third well was previously plugged and abandoned.

East Resources began flaring the Delciotto #2 well on Monday to reduce pressure from the natural gas, and is currently working to flare the other two wells. The company is investigating the possibility that a casing failure in part of the Delciotto #2 well caused the natural gas leak. The company is attempting to seal off the leak with drilling mud to stop the natural gas from escaping.

CONTACT: Daniel T. Spadoni (570) 327-3659

_______________________________________________________________

Better yet, CONTACT: Robert F. Kennedy, Jr.!

http://www.robertfkennedyjr.com/contact.html

Point to this gas well leak, the toxic flaring, the contaminated creek, the contaminated spring, the 4 contaminated wells serving private homes. Remind him of the problems in Dimock.

Agree wholeheartedly with his comment, "Natural gas comes with its own set of environmental caveats. It is a carbon-based fuel and [its] extraction from shale, the most significant new source, if not managed carefully, can cause serious water, land use, and wildlife impacts, especially in the hands of irresponsible producers and lax regulators."

Ask him to help get the gas drilling industry to be more responsible. Ask him how these violatons of Life Itself can be prevented?

DEMAND ACCOUNTABILITY!

King Coal... RF Kennedy, Jr. Weighs in on Coal vs. Natural Gas

ROBERT F. KENNEDY, JR.

THE HUFFINGTON POST, JULY 27, 2009: LINK HERE.

Over the past decade, nearly one hundred coal burning power plants have died in the proposal stage trumped by the legitimate objections of local communities fearful of a dirty deadly fuel that is neither cheap nor clean. Ozone and particulates from coal plants kill tens of thousands of Americans each year and cause widespread illnesses and disease. Acid rain emissions have destroyed the forests over the length of the Appalachian and sterilized one in five Adirondack lakes. Neurotoxic mercury raining from these plants has contaminated fish in every state--including every waterway in nineteen states--and poisons over a million American women and children annually. Coal industry strip mines have already destroyed 500 mountains in Appalachia, buried 2,000 miles of rivers and streams and will soon have flattened an area the size of Delaware. Finally, coal, which supplies 46% of our electric power, is the most important source of America's greenhouse gases.

Beating our deadly and expensive coal addiction will be lucrative. America's cornucopia of renewable energy resources and the recent maturation of solar, geothermal and wind technologies will allow us to meet most of our future energy needs with clean, cheap, abundant renewables. Bright Source, a solar thermal provider, has just signed contracts to provide California with 2.6 gigawatts of power annually from desert mirror farms. Construction costs are about the same per gigawatt as a coal plant and half the cost of a nuke plant. Once built, the energy is free forever. In contrast, once you build a coal plant, your biggest costs--fuel extraction and transportation and the harm from emissions--are just the beginning.

In the short term, a revolution in natural gas production over the past two years, has left America awash in natural gas and has made it possible to eliminate most of our dependence on deadly, destructive coal practically overnight--and without the expense of building new power plants.

How? Well it's pretty easy. Around 900 of America's coal plants--78% of the total--are small (generating less than half a gigawatt), antiquated, and horrendously inefficient. Their average age is 45 years, with many limping past 75. These ancient plants burn 20% more coal per megawatt hour than modern large coal units and are 60-75% less fuel efficient than high-efficiency gas plants. These small units account for less than 42% of the actual capacity for coal fired power but almost one half the total emission of the entire energy sector! The costs of operation, maintenance, capital improvements and repair costs of these antiquated worm-eaten facilities, if properly assessed, would make them far more expensive to run than natural gas plants. However, energy sector pricing structures make it possible for many plant operators to pass those costs to the public and make choices based on fuel costs, which in the case of coal, appears deceptively cheap because of massive subsidies.

Mothballing or throttling back these plants would mean huge cost savings to the public and eliminate the need for more than 350 million tons of coal, including all 30 million tons harvested through mountain top removal. Their closure would reduce U.S. mercury emissions by 20-25%, dramatically cut deadly particulate matter and the pollutants that cause acid rain, and slash America's CO2 from power plants by 20%--an amount greater than the entire reduction mandated in the first years of the pending Climate Change Legislation--at a fraction of the cost.

These decrepit generators can be eliminated very quickly--in many instances literally overnight by substituting power from America's existing and underutilized natural gas generation, which is abundant, cleaner and more affordable and accessible today than dirty coal.

Since 2007, the discovery of vast supplies of deep shale gas in the United States, along with advanced extraction methods, have created stable supply and predictably low prices for most of the next century. Of the 1,000 gigawatts of generating capacity currently required to meet national energy demand, 336 are coal fired, many of which are utilized far more heavily than for cleaner gas generation units. Surprisingly, America actually has more gas generation capacity--450 gigawatts--than coal. But most of the costs for coal-fired units are ignored in deciding when to operate these units. Public regulators traditionally require utilities to dispatch coal first. For that reason, high efficiency gas generators, which can replace a large percentage of U.S. coal, are used only 36% of the time. By simply changing the dispatch rule nationally, we could quickly reduce power generated by existing coal-fired plants and achieve massive emissions reductions. The new rule would change the order in which gas and coal fired plants are utilized by requiring that whenever coal and gas plants are competing head-to-head, the gas generation must be dispatched first.

To quickly gain further economic and environmental advantages, the larger, newer coal plants that remain in operation should be required to co-fire with natural gas. Many of these plants are already connected to gas pipelines and can easily be adapted to burn gas as 15 to 20% of their fuel. Experience shows using gas to partially fuel these plants dramatically reduces forced outages and maintenance costs and can be the most cost effective way to reduce CO2 emissions. This change can immediately achieve an additional 10 to 20% reduction in coal use and immediately reduce dangerous coal emissions.

Natural gas comes with its own set of environmental caveats. It is a carbon-based fuel and [its] extraction from shale, the most significant new source, if not managed carefully, can cause serious water, land use, and wildlife impacts, especially in the hands of irresponsible producers and lax regulators. But those impacts are dwarfed by the disastrous holocaust of coal and can be mitigated by careful regulation.

The giant advantage of a quick conversion from coal to gas is the quickest route for jumpstarting our economy and saving our planet.
__________________________________________________________________
SPLASHDOWN EDITORIAL:

It sounds reasonable, doesn't it?
All we need are responsible producers and vigilant regulators!

Congress can't even agree that this is necessary! Money isn't there for environmental protection agencies to hire the number of inspectors necessary to monitor this lawless industry. And YES! coal mining and burning is dangerously toxic, but when Kennedy talks about enough affordable natural gas to last us into the next century, he's supporting perpetuation of a carbon-based energy industry that has demonstrated it is unwilling to divert a nickel of its profits to safeguard our absolutely VITAL resources: WATER, AIR and LAND. Their best practices are simply NOT GOOD ENOUGH. Especially not a century's worth!!!
Closing coal fired plants would reduce carbon dioxide emissions from power plants by 20%... BUT, what measure of CO2 and even more environmentally harmful methane is released into the atmosphere during extraction of natural gas, including toxic air polluting emissions from transportating the millions of gallons of water to and from well pads, treatment or burial of "produced water", operating drilling rigs, compressors and other associated gas production equipment and activities, over and above emissions from well flares and finally, power plant emissions from enegy generation from natural gas? How does all that stack up against that 20%?
How too does Kennedy justify the permanent depletion and contamination of drinking water supplies across the country, occuring as a result of mining for gas? Surely he can't think that indicating the need for responsibility and vigilance is going to suddenly manifest a new attitude on all fronts, by all players in this play?
What guarantees do we have that a gluttonous industry won't milk the quick fix dry, leaving us with an irrevocable permanent loss in exchange for temporary energy?

There are important unanswered, and without drilling reform legislation in place, perhaps unanswerable questions. They loom like loopholes in his argument as we continue to learn how criminally untrustworthy corporate America is willing to be in pursuit of the almighty dollar. We've seen too how even regulations aren't foolproof, and how when one entity acts outside the law it encourages others to follow suit.
Meanwhile, the gas industry has already been irresponsible for deadly releases of toxins into the atmosphere, deadly releases of toxins into our waters, for killing and/or sickening livestock, wildlife and humans, for the seepage of toxic wastewater into our lands, contaminating land and water, the evaporation into the atmosphere of carcinogens from open sludgepits... in short, there isn't anything healthy or friendly about the production of natural gas and turning a blind eye to the devastating problems of the lesser of two evils does not make the lesser evil any better.
Today, Governor Ed Rendell of Pennsylvania announced the availability of a new tax credit to help Pennsylvanians in their quest to create renewable sources of clean, alternative energy. Types of eligible projects include solar, wind, geothermal, biologically derived methane gas, fuel cells, biomass and also (unfortunately, and not sure how it's renewable) coal methane. Still, support for 6 out of 7 clean energy sources is encouraging. Let's hope Pennsylvanians take advantage of this inducement!

Like Living with the Atomic Bomb

During the 1950's part of growing up was living with the constant threat of the atomic bomb exploding over my home or my school when I'd be in it, separated from my family, unprotected by them... and knowing they'd be separately annihillated, just like me. This was a kind of silent fear I've learned as an adult that every other person from my time slot endured as a child too. A stressor without personal remedy, and a government with other goals at the helm. Quality of life at the level of individual well-being seems to be low on the list of national priorities. We don't even argue with our legislators about the logical priorities of our health and well-being, or that of the singular irreplaceable environment that feeds and nurtures us, and how that should govern our leadership roles both here at home and abroad.
Global warming, fed by an energy crisis, fed by an unsustainable demand for MORE, by ever more people around the globe, is creating a new, pervasive stress for all of us, including our children who, just as my young friends and i intuitively and helplessly understood the dangers of the atomic bomb, today are understanding and have much to fear about the future they are helplessly inheriting from profligate leaders with antisocial agendas.

DEMAND ACCOUNTABILITY!

The Giant Sucking Sound...

SRBC approves gas drilling water draws

BY STACI WILSON, SUSQUEHANNA COUNTY INDEPENDENT
July 22, 2009

Large draws from area waterways by natural gas drillers were greenlighted by the Susquehanna River Basin Commission at the June 18 quarterly meeting held in Binghamton, N.Y.
The SRBC approved Alta Operating Co. LLC to take 393,000 gallons per day from Turner Lake, in Liberty Twp.

Chesapeake Appalachia LLC received approval to take up to 499,000 gallons per day from the Wyalusing Creek, in Rush Twp. for the Venderfeltz well pad.

A water withdrawal from the Tunkhannock Creek, Gibson Twp., of up to 380,000 gallons per day was also approved by SRBC for Southwestern Energy Company for the Price well pad.

Stone Energy Corporation received two approvals to take 750,000 gallons per day each from the Wyalusing Creek in Rush Twp. for use at the Hogan and Stang well pads.

Although two Wyoming County municipalities (Meshoppen and Tunkhannock) have been selling water to natural gas companies, no Susquehanna County municipalities have been approved by SRBC to do so.

Pennsylvania American Water Company, a public water supplier, has agreed to provide and has been approved by SRBC to provide 75,000 gallons per day to Cabot Oil and Gas Corporation the Montrose area filter plant.

According to Susan Turcmanovich, Pennsylvania American Water communications and corporate responsibility specialist, PAWC cannot sell water directly from the reservoir. Cabot is a metered customer of PAWC.

Susan Obleski, SRBC Director of Communications, said the SRBC is currently in the process of revising its regulations to improve administration efficiency and also recognize the mobile nature of the natural gas industry.

Although natural gas companies have previously identified specific well pads with the request for water draws, the proposed revisions will allow the gas companies to use water at other well pads as long as they stay within the approved water draw limits, according to Obleski.

The public comment period for the proposed SRBC revisions is open until Aug. 15. More information is available at the SRBC website, http://www.srbc.net.

DEMAND ACCOUNTABILITY!

DON'T MISS: Split Estate

Imagine discovering that you don't own the mineral rights under your land, and that an energy company plans to drill for natural gas two hundred feet from your front door. Imagine having little recourse, other than accepting an unregulated industry in your backyard. Split Estate maps a tragedy in the making, as citizens in the path of a new drilling boom in the Rocky Mountain West struggle against the erosion of their civil liberties, their communities and their health.

Zeroing in on Garfield County, Colorado, and the San Juan Basin, this clarion call for accountability examines the growing environmental and social costs to an area now referred to as a “National Sacrifice Zone."

This is no Love Canal or Three Mile Island. With its breathtaking panoramas, aspen-dotted meadows, and clear mountain streams, this is the Colorado of John Denver anthems — the wide-open spaces that have long stirred our national imagination.

Exempt from federal protections like the Clean Water Act, the oil and gas industry has left this idyllic landscape and its rural communities pockmarked with abandoned homes and polluted waters. One Garfield County resident demonstrates the degree of benzene contamination in a mountain stream by setting it alight with a match. Many others, gravely ill, fight for their health and for the health of their children. All the while, the industry assures us it is a "good neighbor."

Ordinary homeowners and ranchers absorb the cost. Actually, we all pay the price in this devastating clash of interests that extends well beyond the Rockies. Aggressively seeking new leases in as many as 32 states, the industry is even making a bid to drill in the New York City watershed, which provides drinking water to millions.

As public health concerns mount, Split Estate cracks the sugarcoating on an industry touted as a clean alternative to fossil fuels, and poignantly drives home the need for real alternatives.

CLICK HERE to watch the trailer of this important documentary.

CLICK HERE to hear the powerful voices of determination!

DEMAND ACCOUNTABILITY!

SLUDGE PITS: Noxious, Toxic, Evaporating into the Atmosphere, Seeping into the Earth

5/18/09: Sludge pit at Otten Well Site, Asylum Twp. Bradford Co., PA
Note toxic water seeping into soil where liner has fallen into the pit.

7/8/09: Same Pit: Otten Well Site, Asylum Twp. Bradford Co., PA
Current Condition
Note partially exposed remnants of pit liner...

Noxious Sludge Pit, Spring Lake, Asylum Twp. Bradford Co., PA
Choking Malodors from SECRET Ingredients Evaporate
into the Atmosphere across the Entire Surface of this Pit: 7/8/09

The Ground Water Protection Council report (PDF) that analyzed state oil and gas regulations also raises serious questions about the construction of the pits used to store toxic drilling waste and what happens when dangerous fluids are spilled.

The pits can contain oil-laden waste water mixed with hydraulic fracturing fluids and drilling mud brought up from well bores. Tests show they often contain large amounts of benzene and other carcinogenic compounds.

Of the numerous incidences of water contamination [documented] over the past year, many could be traced to spills or seepage from waste pits. New Mexico toughened its industry rules for waste pits last year after finding that water had been contaminated in hundreds of cases.

The GWPC report states that "[t]he containment of fluids within a pit is the most critical element in prevention of shallow ground water contamination" and emphasizes that 23 states require pits to be lined with natural or artificial liners to keep fluids from seeping directly into the ground. The report did not mention the correlating figure: that at least four states do not have this precautionary requirement. It also did not name those states, an important detail given that a few states can account for a large proportion of the nation’s drilling activity. (Getting that information requires analyzing all of the state regulations attached in the report's appendices (PDF) and repeating much of the research the GWPC already did.)

The report reveals that 17 states do not require that pits be kept at a distance from streams and rivers, and that 17 states do not explicitly forbid pits from intersecting the underground water table. Furthermore, less than half of the states surveyed have a specific cleanup standard when waste fluids or pits do spill.

excerpted from "Lax Laws Often Govern Waste Pits" Abrahm Lustgarten, ProPublica - July 8, 2009

But last month, the WVA state Department of Environmental Protection proposed some rule changes that are at least a beginning step toward more closely regulating the biggest concern: Water pollution from the “pit fluids,” the huge amounts of water used to fracture rock and release gas, especially from the wells drilling into the Marcellus Shale formation. ...

Among the more significant changes proposed by DEP are:

– Requiring all pits used to store contaminated water from drilling to have synthetic liners to prevent seepage or leaks.

– Forcing operators to remove all solid wastes, including liners, during reclamation of pits and impoundments.

– Adding new design and construction standards for these pits.

– Requiring inspection of the pits by a registered professional engineer.
...

excerpted from "Gas Drilling Update: DEP Proposing tougher rules" Ken Ward Jr., Charleston Gazette, Charleston, WVA - July 16, 2009

DEMAND ACCOUNTABILITY!

ONE TOWN'S ROLE MODEL POSITION FOR THE HEALTH, SAFETY AND WELFARE OF ITS CITIZENS VIS A VIS HYDRAULIC FRACTURING FOR GAS IN THE MARCELLUS SHALE

CHERRY VALLEY TOWN MEETING MINUTES

Posted Wednesday, July 15, 2009 by the Town Clerk

Resolution of the Cherry Valley Town Board
Resolution # 2008- 8 December 11, 2008

A RESOLUTION OF THE TOWN OF CHERRY VALLEY ENTITLED “COMMENTS TO NYSDEC ON THE on the Draft Scope for Draft Supplemental Generic Environmental Impact Statement on the Oil, Gas and Solution Mining Regulatory Program for Well Permit Issuance for Horizontal Drilling and High-Volume Hydraulic Fracturing focusing on the Development of the Marcellus Shale and Other Low-Permeability Gas Reservoirs.”

WHEREAS, the Town of Cherry Valley recognizes the need to develop domestic sources of energy and their potential for economic development in upstate New York; and

WHEREAS, the Town of Cherry Valley is located in the Marcellus shale field and other gas bearing formations; and

WHEREAS, the Town of Cherry Valley is located at the shallow, northern edge of the Marcellus Shale Field where it outcrops along U.S. Rte 20 in northern Otsego County; and

WHEREAS, there are numerous natural gas leases signed between private land owners and gas exploration companies within the Town on file with the Otsego County Clerk; and

WHEREAS, aspects of hydraulic fracturing include the potential impacts of (1) water withdrawals, (2) transportation of water to the site via town roads, (3) the use of additives in the water to enhance the hydraulic fracturing process, (4) space and facilities required at the well site to ensure proper handling of water and additives, and (5) removal of spent fracturing fluid from the well site and its ultimate disposition.

WHEREAS, due to the technological advances of horizontal drilling and hydraulic fracturing, the Marcellus shale and others gas bearing formations in the Town of Cherry Valley, these gas bearing formations have become economically feasible to exploit; and

WHEREAS, the Town of Cherry Valley has identified the pollution of groundwater as a major concern in its comprehensive plan, adopted by the Cherry Valley Town Board in 2007; and

WHEREAS, the karst topography, limestone bedrock and shallow depth to the Marcellus shale which underlie the Village and the Town of Cherry Valley make our water bearing formations especially vulnerable to pollution; and

WHEREAS, groundwater is the sole source of all public and private water use in the Town and Village of Cherry Valley; and

WHEREAS, the Department of Environmental Conservation is solely responsible for regulating the exploration, development and production of oil and gas resources in New York; and mineral rights owners and exploration companies are interested in developing a potentially significant gas resource in the Town of Cherry Valley through the use of horizontal drilling and hydraulic fracturing; and

WHEREAS, the New York State Department of Environmental Conservation is accepting written comments from ALL interested parties on the Draft Scope for Draft Supplemental Generic Environmental Impact Statement on the Oil, Gas and Solution Mining Regulatory Program for Well Permit Issuance for Horizontal Drilling and High-Volume Hydraulic Fracturing focusing on the Development of the Marcellus Shale and Other Low-Permeability Gas Reservoirs; and

WHEREAS, the Town of Cherry Valley is a local unit of government that has afforded the citizens an opportunity to comment and provide input in the Draft Scope and the actions therein; and

WHEREAS, the oil and natural gas industries are exempt from Federal Clean Water Act, Federal Clean Air Act, Safe Drinking Water Act, and are exempt from local planning review under the New York State Environmental Conservation Law (ECL Section 23-0303); and

WHEREAS, the New York State Environmental Conservation Law (ECL Section 23-0303) preempts towns from regulating land use by the Oil and Natural gas industries except over roads or the rights of local governments under the real property tax law; and

WHEREAS, drilling and hydraulic fracturing involves the use of heavy equipment, millions of gallons of water, all delivered to the well site by heavy trucks, the potential for the degrading of Town roads is possible; and

WHEREAS, the Town of Cherry Valley has reviewed the Draft Scope and affirms that the Draft Scope and the Supplement to the Generic Environmental Impact Statement must include measures to afford adequate protection for the Town’s citizens, water resources, public health, environment and roads.

NOW, BE IT RESOLVED THAT THE TOWN BOARD OF CHERRY VALLEY APPROVES THAT THE NEW YORK STATE DEPARTMENT OF ENVIRONMENTAL CONSERVATION (NYSDEC) TAKE ACTION TO ADDRESS IMPACTS TO THE HEALTH, SAFETY AND WELFARE OF THE CITIZENS OF THE TOWN REGARDING the Oil, Gas and Solution Mining Regulatory Program for Well Permit Issuance for Horizontal Drilling and High-Volume Hydraulic Fracturing BY INCLUDING THE FOLLOWING IN THE DRAFT SCOPE AND SGEIS:

(1) Notify the Town of Cherry Valley upon receipt of an application to drill within the Town and notify the Town of issued permits and permit conditions enacted by the NYSDEC for each well, and

(2) Require representatives (company) of the oil and natural gas industry operating in the Town of Cherry Valley to provide the Town a comprehensive list of all substances and their concentrations (chemical and inert) used in drilling, hydraulic fracturing and recovery processes a minimum of six months prior to the start of drilling or hydraulic fracturing so an adequate water quality baseline for our water supplies can be established prior to drilling/hydraulic fracturing; and

(3) Prohibit the use of all hydraulic fracturing fluid constituents that are known to pose a significant risk to human health, and

(4) Require all oil and natural gas exploration in the Town of Cherry Valley use closed loop systems to avoid open pits and potential of contamination of surface and ground water by hydraulic fracturing fluid due to the sensitive nature of the karst topography and shallow depth to the water bearing formations within the Town, to safeguard our drinking water, public health and the environment; and

(5) Notify the Supervisor of the Town of Cherry Valley of violations to permit conditions that occur at any drilling/hydraulic fracturing site within the Town within 24 hours of the violation; and

(6) Require representatives (company) of the oil and natural gas industry operating in the Town of Cherry Valley to fund completely, water tests for residues of drilling/hydraulic fracturing fluids before and after drilling/hydraulic fracturing for any public or private potable water source (well or surface) within 10,000 feet of the water source to be repeated annually at the expense of the representatives of the oil and natural gas industry for 3 years post drilling/hydraulic fracturing; and

(7) Require representatives (company) of the oil and natural gas industry operating in the Town of Cherry Valley to fund completely, radon tests for any home within 10,000 feet of the proposed well to be repeated annually at the expense of the representatives of the oil and natural gas industry for 3 years post drilling/hydraulic fracturing; and

(8) Make the results of the aforementioned tests available to the Cherry Valley Town Board and every owner of the water source or home within that area, and

(9) Require each representative (company) of the oil and natural gas industry operating in the Town of Cherry Valley to post an Environmental Quality Bond to the Town of Cherry Valley while operating in the Town, the amount of this bond to be determined in consultation with NYSDEC, and

(10) Require representatives (company) of the oil and natural gas industry operating in the Town of Cherry Valley to provide the Town a comprehensive list of all substances used in hydraulic fracturing and their concentrations (chemical and inert) moved off site, including a final destination for these substances to insure proper disposal, and

(11) File a transportation plan with the Town Supervisor and Highway Supervisor to insure Town roads and bridges will accommodate this industrial use, and

(12) Require each representative (company) of the oil and natural gas industry operating in the Town of Cherry Valley to post a Performance Bond to the Town of Cherry Valley for potential damages to Town roads, the amount of this bond to be determined in consultation with NYSDOT and Otsego County DPW, and

BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that this industry should result in NO additional tax burden whatsoever on the citizens of the Town of Cherry Valley; and

BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the certified copy of this resolution be filed with the New York State Department of State, Office of the Assembly, Office of the NYS Senate, and the Governor’s Office to convey that necessary action is needed to update New York Environmental Conservation Law (ECL) Section 23-0303 to allow for more local influence in protecting the health and welfare of residents.

DEMAND ACCOUNTABILITY!

TAKE EASY & CONSTRUCTIVE ACTION TODAY!!!

Tell Congress to close the "Halliburton Loophole" to protect drinking water from contamination

Just CLICK HERE to access emailable version of the letter below, which will be sent, on your behalf, directly to your senators and representatives!

Dear _________,

I urge you to co-sponsor H.R. 2766/S. 1215 to repeal the exemption for hydraulic fracturing in the Safe Drinking Water Act and require public disclosure of the chemicals used in hydraulic fracturing fluids. This exemption, also known as the "Halliburton Loophole," means that hydraulic fracturing, an increasingly common aspect of the oil and gas production process, is not subject to the same standards as other industries when it comes to protecting underground sources of drinking water. It is one of several environmental loopholes granted to the oil and gas production industry.

Hydraulic fracturing involves the injection of fluids, often containing toxic chemicals, into oil or gas wells at very high pressure. This technique fractures the underground formation and can cause underground sources of drinking water to become contaminated. Other forms of underground injection are regulated under the Safe Drinking Water Act to protect drinking water, but in 2005 Congress exempted hydraulic fracturing from the act to benefit Halliburton and other oil and gas companies.

I am concerned that some families have already experienced drinking water contamination linked to hydraulic fracturing operations. Communities across the country are suffering from pollution caused by the oil and gas industry. We should hold this industry to the same standards as any other and close the Halliburton Loophole, and all other loopholes, to achieve consistent federal oversight.

Natural gas may be an important part of our energy portfolio, but the right balance needs to be established between oil and gas development and protection of our precious natural resources, including clean air and clean water. This legislation is simple, straightforward and reasonable, and I hope you will co-sponsor it. Every American deserves clean drinking water.

Sincerely,
_____________

DEMAND ACCOUNTABILITY!

Democrats Call for Studies as Industry Assails Proposals to Regulate Hydraulic Fracturing

by Abrahm Lustgarten, ProPublica
July 13, 2009

Legislators who've been pushing a bill to regulate a controversial natural gas drilling process are now calling for further scientific study, a change in tack made under intense lobbying pressure and after a personal request from Colorado's Democratic governor.

If the lawmakers wait for the results of a study, the bill is unlikely to move forward any time soon.

Rep. Diana DeGette, D-Colo., and Rep. Maurice Hinchey, D-N.Y., two of the sponsors of the so-called FRAC Act (PDF), a House bill that would establish federal environmental controls over the process of hydraulic fracturing, are now calling for committee hearings and renewed research into the environmental impacts of the drilling method. Last month, Hinchey attached a provision authorizing funding for such a study to a House appropriations bill.

In an interview this week, Hinchey told ProPublica he is not backing off the FRAC Act. He said he is concerned about new reports of water contamination from drilling and thinks a study could bring those incidents to the forefront of the debate.

"What we want to do is make it clear what is going on," Hinchey said. "The appropriations bill is an incremental step. It will continue to focus attention on this."

Asked whether the FRAC Act is losing momentum, Hinchey pointed out that the bill now has 13 sponsors, 10 more than it had in June. But he acknowledged that the energy industry's opposition to the bill has swayed some members of Congress. "It's not moving forward with the rapidity that I would like to see it move forward," he said.

That may be in part because of the difficulties of bringing diverse perspectives together on energy and economic issues, including within the Democratic Party.

In a speech Thursday before the Colorado Oil and Gas Association, a prominent industry trade group, Colorado Gov. Bill Ritter, a Democrat, assured the group of his support for the natural gas businesses and said he had asked DeGette not to pursue the legislation.

"I encouraged Congresswoman DeGette to consider authorizing a comprehensive study of this issue instead of going directly to a new and potentially intrusive regulatory program," the governor said. "She agreed at that time to go instead to something that would be more in the way of a study instead of an amendment that would prescribe a certain way of every state having to put in place these rules. I thank the congresswoman for having done that."

DeGette, who has been trying to pass fracturing legislation since 2005, confirmed through a spokesman that she and the governor had spoken last month, but said that she had not agreed to abandon the legislation.

"She understands his concerns," said her spokesman, Kristofer Eisenla, "but all options remain on the table. She is moving forward with a potential hearing, and with a study which she would welcome the industry to be a part of."

In an earlier interview, Eisenla said that the information campaign undertaken by the bill's opponents had surprised legislators and slowed their progress.

"The oil and gas guys came out of the barn storming," he said. "I think that opposition has been throwing out scare tactics and mischaracterizations of what she is trying to do."

At least five reports (PDF) have been issued since January arguing that the proposed legislation -- which would give the Environmental Protection Agency authority to investigate fracturing accidents and to dictate how the process is done -- would hamper exploration (PDF), raise fuel prices and cost Americans jobs and energy.

The industry maintains that state regulations already protect drinking water from hydraulic fracturing, a process that forces vast amounts of water laced with chemicals underground to break up rock and release gas. In Thursday's speech, Ritter touted Colorado's new rules as an example of strong state regulation, and later that day an industry group sent out a news release underscoring his statement. What neither mentioned at the time: the Colorado Oil and Gas Association is suing Colorado to block those rules.

The reports supporting the industry's arguments were examined in a recent article by ProPublica [13], which found that the economic assessments were exaggerated and based in part on 10-year-old data (PDF). Three of the reports were paid for by the Department of Energy but produced by consulting firms that also work for the oil and gas industry. One of the DOE reports (PDF) was written by the same person who produced a study for the Independent Petroleum Association of America -- and bore a nearly identical cover.

The oil and gas industry has spent millions of dollars lobbying against fracturing regulation over the last two years. In May, it launched a Web site that disputes criticism of industry and argues against regulation.

As a result, Eisenla said, the true content of the FRAC Act and its implications for the oil and gas industry have become muddled in a thicket of rhetoric and misleading data.

The [FRAC Act] bill proposes to remove an exemption that was written into the Safe Drinking Water Act (SDWA) in 2005 that says hydraulic fracturing is not subject to regulation. It would also require drilling companies to disclose the names of the chemicals they pump underground, information that is currently a protected trade secret. If the act is passed, hydraulic fracturing would be governed by the portion of the SDWA that controls what is injected into underground wells and how it is done.

According to the EPA, the oil and gas industry is the only industry exempted from oversight under one of the nation's landmark laws to protect drinking water.

Representatives of the energy industry say the 2005 legislation wasn't an exemption as much as a clarification of the law. They maintain that the Safe Drinking Water Act didn't explicitly apply to hydraulic fracturing until 2001, when the 11th Circuit Court of Appeals forced the EPA to oversee the process in Alabama. At the time the EPA wasn't using the SDWA rules to monitor hydraulic fracturing, then an emerging technology.

Whether the EPA applied the SDWA to fracturing or not, prior to 2005 it had the authority to do so, according to the agency's former assistant administrator for water, Benjamin Grumbles. Now it does not.

Industry analysts, including at the American Petroleum Institute, maintain that hydraulic fracturing shouldn't be subject to Safe Drinking Water Act regulations that address injection disposal, because the fluids aren't disposed of underground [18]. But the analysts also acknowledge that 30 to 70 percent (PDF) of fracturing fluids can be left underground after the process is completed, and that hydraulic fracturing with chemicals is far more prevalent today than when the Safe Drinking Water Act was written or when courts were examining the issue in Alabama.

The language of the SDWA explicitly gives states authority to enforce the law as long as they meet basic federal criteria. So if federal authority is restored, state regulations would be superseded only if the EPA deemed them insufficient.

The proposed bill would not ban hydraulic fracturing. Nor does the bill, or the Safe Drinking Water Act, require the expensive processes that one industry report said it does.

"Because there has never been any federal regulation of hydraulic fracturing, we have to make some assumptions based on what could be done," said Lee Fuller, vice president for government relations at the Independent Petroleum Association of America. "It's an educated guess based on what the history of regulation has been and the kinds of requirements they would plausibly think that the EPA might require."

Several industry representatives have told ProPublica that what is really driving their opposition to the FRAC Act is their worst fear: that if EPA authority is restored, a suite of lawsuits from environmental organizations will follow, forcing the agency to issue tougher regulations -- possibly even creating a new class of laws for fracturing -- and grinding business to a halt while the issues play out in court.

HOUSE SPONSORS: Rep. Michael A. Arcuri, D-NY, Rep. Lois Capps, D-CA, Rep. Diana DeGette, D-CO, Rep. Maurice Hinchey, D-NY, Rep. Rush D. Holt, D-NJ, Rep. Dennis Kucinich, D-OH, Rep. Carolyn B. Maloney, D-NY, Rep. Eric J.J. Massa, D-NY, Rep. John M. McHugh, R-NY, Rep. Patrick J. Murphy, D-PA, Rep. Jared Polis, D-CO, Rep. Bobby L. Rush, D-IL, Rep. Lynn C. Woolsey, R-NY

To view the article at ProPublica, CLICK HERE.

Write to your Senators and Representatives today!
Urge them to pass the FRAC Act!

See sidebar left for contact info.

DEMAND ACCOUNTABILITY!

Marcellus Shale Drillers: NOT SAFE ENOUGH!

This fence inadequately surrounds this capped well at Spring Lake in Bradford County, PA.

Have a closer look: Is it child proof?
Is there a chance you could misstep and get hurt if you got too close?
Currently, there are no signs preventing persons from entering this well pad and walking up to this fence.
DEMAND ACCOUNTABILITY!

Rep. DeGette pursues hearing, study on 'fracking'

By JUDITH KOHLER
ASSOCIATED PRESS WRITER

Last updated July 10, 2009

DENVER -- U.S. Rep. Diana DeGette is moving ahead with her bill to put a widely used oil and gas drilling process under federal oversight while also seeking a study to gather more data on the practice.

The Colorado Democrat is sponsoring a bill that would repeal a ban on regulating hydraulic fracturing under the federal Safe Drinking Water Act. The 2005 energy bill exempted the process, also called "fracking," from federal oversight.

The bill, also sponsored by Rep. Maurice Hinchey, D-N.Y., is being vigorously opposed by industry groups, which say the technology is used to drill the majority of the country's oil and gas wells and is crucial to energy development. The industry says claims that fracking threatens groundwater are unsubstantiated.

The process injects liquids, sand and chemicals underground to force open channels in tight sand and rock formations so that oil and gas will flow.

The industry says fracking is crucial to producing gas from the tight sands of the Rockies as well as gas shale reserves such as the Marcellus Shale that underlies much of New York, Ohio, Pennsylvania and West Virginia.

Colorado Gov. Bill Ritter entered the debate Thursday when he said in a speech at the Colorado Oil and Gas Association's annual conference that he has asked DeGette to consider a comprehensive study "instead of jumping directly to a new and potentially intrusive regulatory program."

Kristofer Eisenla, DeGette's spokesman, said the congresswoman has talked to Ritter as well as industry representatives. She is talking to the Environmental Protection Agency about studying fracking.

That doesn't mean DeGette isn't pursuing the legislation, Eisenla said.

"She's not backing off," Eisenla said, "but she does believe more data is necessary."

DeGette is trying to schedule a hearing on her bill, he added.

Gwen Lachelt of the Colorado-based Oil and Gas Accountability Project, which works with communities across the country, said she would welcome a comprehensive study. Lachelt, who supports federal oversight of fracking and required disclosure of the chemicals companies use, said the Bush administration quashed a plan for federal monitoring of groundwater near drilling operations.

"There's never been a study on the effects of fracking," Lachelt said.

...

People living near gas wells in parts of the Rockies that experienced record gas drilling in recent years have complained about bad-tasting well water, well blowouts when fracking is going on, and health problems they believe are caused by methane or chemicals from gas production.

In some cases, companies have bought out or compensated the affected landowners. In others, they say no connection was found to their operations.

...

DeGette has said clean drinking water is a national priority and a national standard is needed. Her bill would also require companies to disclose the substances used in fracking. Companies guard their recipes for competitive reasons.

Lachelt said a federal minimum standard is necessary because laws vary from state to state. New regulations in Colorado require companies to tell state regulators what chemicals they're using if the chemicals are above certain volumes.

"There are many states that aren't as far along as (Colorado)," Lachelt said. "And Colorado has a long way to go."

To read this article in its entirety, CLICK HERE.

DEMAND ACCOUNTABILITY!

DEP ORDERS U.S. ENERGY TO CEASE DRILLING OPERATIONS THROUGHOUT PENNSYLVANIA

Gas and Oil Corporation Based in New York State Causing Environmental Impairments in McKean and Warren Counties

MEADVILLE -- The Department of Environmental Protection has issued a cease and desist order to U.S. Energy Development Corp. of Getzville, N.Y., for persistent and repeated violations of environmental laws and regulations. The order prohibits the company from conducting all earth disturbance, drilling and hydro-fracturing operations throughout Pennsylvania.

The 302 violations that serve as the basis for the order were documented over a period of two years, beginning in August 2007. About one-third of the violations have been resolved, but 197 violations remain uncorrected.

“U.S. Energy has demonstrated a pattern of behavior that displays disregard for environmental regulations and laws, the consequences being the contamination of water and soil in Warren and McKean counties,” said DEP Regional Director Kelly Burch. “This order stops U.S. Energy from building new sites and gives the company 30 days to fix those sites that already have been built. Other companies are meeting Pennsylvania’s environmental standards; U.S. Energy must also comply with our laws and regulations.” DEP issued the cease and desist order on July 10 because of continued and numerous violations of the Oil and Gas Act, the Clean Streams Law, and the Solid Waste Management Act. The violations include failure to implement measures to prevent accelerated erosion, unpermitted discharges, failure to restore well sites, encroachments into streams and wetlands without obtaining required permits, and failure to plug abandoned wells. The order allows U.S. Energy to continue producing at existing wells.

Some of the U.S. Energy well sites that were cited are on the Allegheny National Forest and property owned by Bradford Water Authority.

Oil and gas permitting, exploration and development is regulated in Pennsylvania under the Oil and Gas Act of 1984, which is administered by the DEP Bureau of Oil and Gas Management. For more information on oil and gas wells, visit www.depweb.state.pa.us, Keyword: “Oil and Gas.”

DEMAND ACCOUNTABILITY!

Moody Road, Spring Lake

Well, Sludge Pit and Pipeline
Bradford County, PA

Drilling: May 18, 2009
(click to enlarge)

Capped, photo: July 8, 2009

Sludge Pit, noxious choking odor
From Lax Laws Often Govern Waste Pits by Abrahm Lustgarten:
The pits can contain oil-laden waste water mixed with hydraulic fracturing fluids and drilling mud brought up from well bores. Tests show they often contain large amounts of benzene and other carcinogenic compounds.

Pipeline

Pipeline Crossing Wetland Stream
(click to enlarge)

Pipeline: Note Child's Swing Set in Adjacent Backyard
(click to enlarge)

Read BURIED SECRETS: GAS DRILLING'S ENVIRONMENTAL THREAT
Includes Feature Story: Energy Industry Sways Congress with Misleading Data,
6 Major Stories & Ongoing Coverage

DEMAND ACCOUNTABILITY!

Pipeline Construction with Child

Bradford County, PA

(click to enlarge)

DEMAND ACCOUNTABILITY!

Hydraulic Fracture: Your Money or Your Life

By TXsharon
Fri Jul 03, 2009 at 11:37:54 AM PDT

Ninety-two percent of the 278 known chemicals used to produce natural gas have adverse health effects including endocrine disruption, neurological disorders and cancer. Chemical information is limited because the industry claims formulas are trade secrets. If, like most Americans, you believe your water, air and soil are protected from these chemicals by federal environmental statutes, you are dead wrong. Loopholes in our federal environmental laws allow the oil and gas industry to endanger public health and safety and risk vital natural resources.

Fueled by technological advances, a frenzied expansion in natural gas drilling has exploded into 34 American states. Once the burden of rural areas, it now encroaches into heavily populated cities turning neighborhoods into industrial zones.

They’re calling natural gas a bridge fuel, an alternative fuel, the “clean” energy. Enough PR money burnishes a dirty fossil fuel into an environmentally friendly magic bridge to lead us far from our energy crisis. In truth, the production process that endangers public health and safety, depletes scarce water supplies, and generates colossal amounts of toxic waste cancels out the slightly cleaner burn.

It's a heavy toll to cross this bridge. The question becomes: who pays?

Before crossing this magic bridge, we must guarantee that they “Do it Right.” The Federal Energy Policy Act of 2005 essentially removed all federal oversight and regulation of one part of natural gas production called hydraulic fracturing. It also opened up another loophole for stormwater runoff under the Clean Water Act. Drilling Down, written by Amy Mall (blog), Natural Resources Defense Council, lists these and other industry loopholes:

Decades of dealmaking by the industry, Congress, and regulatory offices have resulted in exemptions for the oil and gas industry from protections in the Clean Air Act, the Clean Water Act, the Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation, and Liability Act (CERCLA, also known as the Superfund law), the Resource Conservation and Recovery Act, and the Safe Drinking Water Act. In addition, the oil and gas industry is not covered by public right-to-know provisions under the Emergency Planning and Community Right-to-Know Act, meaning that companies can withhold information needed to make informed decisions about protecting the environment and human health.

Tough regulations won’t be enough for an industry plagued with graft, patronage and deeply rooted corruption. We must guarantee enforcement. Every stage of natural gas production pollutes and at every stage toxic chemicals are used.

As natural gas production rapidly increases across the U.S., its associated pollution has reached the stage where it is contaminating essential life support systems - water, air, and soil - and causing harm to the health of humans, wildlife, domestic animals, and vegetation.

The Endocrine Disruption Exchange

To continue reading this important and powerful post, CLICK HERE.
Thank you Sharon, for all you do.

DEMAND ACCOUNTABILITY!

McLinko thinks county will get crummy deal on tax revenue

BY JAMES LOEWENSTEIN
STAFF WRITER, THE DAILY REVIEW

Published: Friday, July 3, 2009 5:43 AM EDT

TOWANDA — A Bradford County commissioner warned Thursday that as the state rushes to enact a severance tax on gas drilling, Bradford County — which will be the most drilled-upon county next year in the Marcellus Shale in Pennsylvania — will get only “crumbs” from the tax revenue for its townships.

Bradford County will be “the No. 1 drilled-upon county in the state” as far as the amount of drilling that will be taking place in the Marcellus Shale next year, Bradford County Commissioner Doug McLinko said at the Bradford County commissioners’ meeting on Thursday.

Yet if the latest version of the proposed severance tax, which was passed by the House Energy Committee last week, becomes law, the formula for distributing the tax revenue will be “locked in,” and little of the tax revenue will come back to the townships in Bradford County in perpetuity, McLinko said.

“They’ll send back crumbs to our townships and that’s what you’ll get forever,” he said.
The issue of the severance tax was raised at the commissioners’ meeting by Bradford County Republican Committee Chairman Eric Matthews, who asked Commissioner Mark Smith during the public comment period whether he supported the severance tax.

“I think in some manner or fashion we’re going to have to have money going back to the counties — whether that’s from a severance tax, or a property tax paid by gas companies,” Smith said. “I don’t see any other way that the impacts of this (gas drilling) industry are going to be covered.”

He said the gas-drilling industry will have impacts on roads, bridges, the criminal justice system and the county jail, as well as social impacts.

However, like McLinko, Smith said that he believes the version of the tax that was passed by House Energy Committee — which was a 5 percent severance tax — would not distribute enough of the tax revenue to townships and counties.

The committee voted to keep 60 percent of the revenues from the severance tax for the state General Fund, but split the remaining 40 percent this way: 4.5 percent each to municipalities and counties where gas drilling is taking place, 5 percent for local road and bridge work, 15 percent to a state environmental fund, 4 percent to a state hazardous waste cleanup fund, 2 percent each to the state game and fish and boating commissions, and 3 percent to the state-run heating assistance program.

McLinko said he opposes the severance tax because it will impose a financial burden on gas companies that will either force them to cease drilling or reduce the number of wells they drill.

However, if the state is going to enact a severance tax, “the lion’s share should come back here,” he said.

“It’s our resource, not Harrisburg’s,” he said.
“I think in some manner or fashion we’re going to have to have money going back to the counties — whether that’s from a severance tax, or a property tax paid by gas companies,” Smith said. “I don’t see any other way that the impacts of this (gas drilling) industry are going to be covered.”

He said the gas-drilling industry will have impacts on roads, bridges, the criminal justice system and the county jail, as well as social impacts.

However, like McLinko, Smith said that he believes the version of the tax that was passed by House Energy Committee — which was a 5 percent severance tax — would not distribute enough of the tax revenue to townships and counties.

The committee voted to keep 60 percent of the revenues from the severance tax for the state General Fund, but split the remaining 40 percent this way: 4.5 percent each to municipalities and counties where gas drilling is taking place, 5 percent for local road and bridge work, 15 percent to a state environmental fund, 4 percent to a state hazardous waste cleanup fund, 2 percent each to the state game and fish and boating commissions, and 3 percent to the state-run heating assistance program.

McLinko said he opposes the severance tax because it will impose a financial burden on gas companies that will either force them to cease drilling or reduce the number of wells they drill.

However, if the state is going to enact a severance tax, “the lion’s share should come back here,” he said.

“It’s our resource, not Harrisburg’s,” he said.

DEMAND ACCOUNTABILITY!