Wednesday, August 18, 2010

DEP Fines Atlas Resourcs for Drilling Wastewater Spill in Washington County

Bloomberg Businessweek
Associated Press
August 17, 2010

- The state's Department of Environmental Protection has fined a natural gas drilling company nearly $100,000 for a wastewater spill that contaminated a southwestern Pennsylvania watershed.

The DEP on Tuesday announced the $97,350 fine against Atlas Resources. Environmental officials say Atlas allowed hydraulic fracturing fluids used to drill in the Marcellus Shale to overfill a wastewater pit and contaminate a tributary of Dunkle Run in Washington County.

DEP officials say the spill happened in early December 2009. Environmental officials say Atlas corrected the problem but failed to report it to the DEP.

Atlas Energy says the spill had no negative environmental consequences and the company has stepped up monitoring in response.



Meanwhile, back on Paradise Road...

This 1,100-gallon tank was purchased for Jared and Heather McMicken and their children to supply them with fresh water to bathe and do laundry until a solution is found for their contaminated water. Chesapeake provided these tanks for two neighbors as well—the Mike Phillips and Scott Spencer families—who are currently experiencing the same water issues as the McMickens. Photo by Cain Chamberlin.

Chesapeake Responds to Paradise Road Water Woes
Cain Chamberlin
The Rocket-Courier, Wyalusing, PA

A streak of bad luck seems to be lingering over Jared and Heather McMicken of Paradise Road in Terry Township.

It all started in early June, when the couple discovered a strange, brown discoloration in their tap water. They still do not know what exactly is causing the disturbance as they are awaiting water test results from DEP. However, the DEP testing done in mid-July did find rising levels of methane in the well, which has now led to something the McMickens never saw coming.

Both of their next-door neighbors, the Mike Phillips and the Scott Spencer families, have the same discoloration in their water wells, which started about a month after the McMickens made that discovery. They all believed that a nearby Chesapeake gas drilling site was responsible for the sudden dilemma. Even though Chesapeake denied the claims at first, they are now taking action in a joint effort with DEP to solve the residents’ water problems.

Because of the increasing levels of methane in the water of each home, DEP installed an alarm device in the basement of each home. These devices are specifically designed to detect high amounts of methane that could be hazardous.

“We were told that if the alarms ever went off, we should call 911 immediately,” said Heather McMicken.

Early last Wednesday morning, their alarm went off, and the McMickens were consequently evacuated from their home as a precautionary measure.

“We made the call, and in no time DEP and Chesapeake were here,” she said. Since then, the McMickens and their two children have stayed at a hotel and also at the home of her mother until they feel safe enough to move back. They do make occasional stops at their home to pick up more clothes and necessities.

Meanwhile, DEP and Chesapeake have been on the property nearly every day trying to find an answer to the current predicament.

“Both are still doing all kinds of testing for us, and we are willing to welcome a third party to do tests too,” Jared McMicken explained.

During a meeting held late last week between Chesapeake and the Paradise Road residents, the company offered to have replacement water wells drilled for each home and purchase them all a temporary water source that they could use for bathing and washing clothes.

Hoses from an enormous 1,100-gallon tank are run through the house, replacing the old existing water pipes.

“We are very happy that they are taking care of the water problem,” said McMicken, “We are just trying to take a breather and wait for the test results to come back.”

Next-door neighbors Mike and Jonna Phillips are waiting on paperwork to look over and sign for a new water well. Their water issues began on July 12, and they finally had the temporary tank hooked up on Saturday. Before that, Jonna, who is seven months pregnant, drove to a friend’s house every day to shower. She is thrilled that she can finally wash clothes and bathe in her own home and is anxiously awaiting a new well. “Chesapeake is certainly trying to accommodate us better than before,” she said.

At the meeting with Chesapeake spokespersons, residents were also informed that there is ongoing testing to determine where the gas is coming from, and it was noted that the affected wells appear to be fed by the same aquifer.

Geologists were present at the meeting in an attempt to help explain aquifers, the type of rock formations in the area and how it may all relate to the potential movement of gas beneath the earth.

The Rocket-Courier has been communicating over the past week with Chesapeake Energy officials on the Paradise Road situation, posing a number of questions.

As of press time, there has been no response or statement.


Friday, August 13, 2010

EPA delays final hearing on study of controversial process

By Sarah Hoye, CNN
August 13, 2010 5:06 p.m. EDT

Philadelphia, Pennsylvania (CNN)
-- The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency is on the hunt for a new location to hold its final public hearing on a planned study of hydraulic fracturing, the controversial process used to extract natural gas from underground, agency officials say.

"We wanted a central location and wanted to keep it in the area where the drilling has been proposed. We're leaving no stone unturned," said agency spokeswoman Betsaida Alcantara. "We are pushing to make an announcement as swiftly as possible."

In July, public hearings were held in Fort Worth, Texas; Denver, Colorado; and Canonsburg, Pennsylvania, to help determine how the EPA will conduct the study.

A final public hearing was slated for Thursday at Binghamton, New York, but on Monday it was rescheduled for Saturday in Syracuse, New York, and on Tuesday it was postponed indefinitely, agency officials said. About 1,800 people had registered to speak for two minutes each, Alcantara said.

Both of the proposed venues, Binghamton University and Syracuse's Oncenter Complex, expressed concern about hosting an event estimated to attract 8,000 people.

"The last-minute change to Syracuse was caused by Binghamton University taking several actions to dissuade the EPA from holding the meetings at its campus, including increasing the cost from $6,000 to almost $40,000," the EPA said in a statement Tuesday.

The university issued a statement putting the cost at $32,000, which it said included "all of the estimated operational costs that the university believed it would incur in order to ensure that activities associated with these meetings would be carried out in a safe and orderly manner."

The EPA now is planning to hold the meeting in September at a location in upstate New York that will be announced as soon as it is confirmed, Alcantara said. The meeting is open to industry stakeholders and the general public.

Victoria Switzer, who registered to speak at Thursday's hearing, is among 15 residents of the northeastern Pennsylvania township of Dimock who filed suit in November 2009 against Cabot Oil & Gas Corp., alleging it contaminated their well water. Cabot solicited Switzer for a gas lease in 2006, according to court records.

Changing the location and then postponing the meeting was upsetting but did not come as a total surprise, Switzer said.

"I had a feeling it was going to be big, but it's absurd," she said.

"Who's leading this pack?" asked Switzer, a former schoolteacher. "I am against drilling as it's going now. They need to step back, call a moratorium and do some serious geological studying."

Julie Sautner of Dimock planned to attend the EPA meeting with her husband, Craig, a cable splicer, and 17-year-old daughter Kelly. They also are a part of the lawsuit.

"We might seem small, but we're here, too, and we're fighting the industry not to pollute, and were fighting for the future generations," said Sautner, who added she has been unable to use her well water for nearly two years. "We're not mad at anybody but we're stuck here."

The EPA announced in March that it would study the potential adverse impact that hydraulic fracturing may have on drinking water, human health and the environment, agency officials said.

"People have raised important concerns that require our attention," said Jeanne Briskin, EPA liaison on hydraulic fracturing from the agency's the Office of Research and Development. "I've worked for EPA for a long time, I was here in the early '80s, this is a case that is unusual."

Hydraulic fracturing is used by gas producers to stimulate wells and recover natural gas from sources including coalbeds and shale gas formations, said Briskin. The process requires the injection of fluids -- generally water and chemical additives.

"We need to have a baseline to get an idea of what the effects of that are, and if you're doing monitoring you have to know what to look for," she said. "At the federal level there is no requirement that companies have to tell us what they use and what concentrations."

The EPA plans to complete the study design by September 2010, begin the study in January 2011 and release initial results by late 2012, she said.

"This is an expedited process; it usually takes longer," Briskin said of the timeline. "As we get results, we're going to be reporting them."



Tuesday, August 10, 2010

EPA hearings on hydraulic fracturing moved from Binghamton to Syracuse

A regional hearing to be held Thursday on a landmark Environmental Protection Agency study of hydraulic fracturing has been moved from Binghamton to Syracuse, N.Y., the agency announced Monday.

The hearings on the controversial natural gas drilling process, which are expected to draw as many as 8,000 participants and protestors, including many from Northeast Pennsylvania, will be held in the Exhibit Hall of the Oncenter Complex Convention Center in Syracuse, after the EPA and Binghamton University, the initial host site, disagreed on a venue.

The three, four-hour information sessions and hearings will be held at the same time they were originally scheduled: 8 a.m., 1 p.m., and 6 p.m. The 300 speaking slots at the event are full, but the agency expects slots will open up because of the venue change. It will open registration for those slots by phone and online beginning at 10 a.m. on Wednesday.

People who preregistered to speak at or attend the event remain registered, according to the EPA, and others who would still like to preregister can do so by Wednesday morning. Walk-in attendees will also be welcome.

The venue was changed after the anticipated crowd size - and the cost of hosting the event - swelled.

Binghamton University released a statement Monday saying that the event is expected to involve 1,200 registered participants, but might have drawn 8,000 people to the campus. The university developed a price based on the expected crowd size "to ensure that the campus would remain cost neutral," it said.

Judith Enck, the administrator of EPA Region 2, criticized that price in a statement, saying it was "more than 500 percent higher than the University's original estimate" and "unacceptable." An EPA official familiar with the situation said the price increased from $6,000 to $40,000.

The venue was moved to Syracuse when an alternate location in Binghamton could not be found, she said.

The EPA announced in March that it will conduct a multiyear, $1.9 million study of the potential for hydraulic fracturing - the process of breaking apart gas-bearing rock with chemically treated water and sand - to harm water quality and public health.

The Syracuse sessions are the largest of four such events that have been held across the country this summer in Colorado, Texas and southwestern Pennsylvania to gather comment about the study's design.



Sunday, August 8, 2010

Marcellus Shale plan would OK extraction without leases

August 7, 2010

Don’t want natural gas companies drilling under your property?

Tough. They might be able to do it anyway.

The natural gas industry is asking legislators to allow them to take gas from Marcellus Shale under certain properties without a lease and against the owner’s wishes when the owner has neighbors who’ve agreed to drilling.

That’s how opponents see a provision, which they call “forced pooling,” about to be proposed in the state House of Representatives.

Companies would have to pay the owner a “fair” price for the gas extracted.

Nevertheless, a group of more than 30 environmental groups sent a letter to legislators calling the measure an expansion of eminent domain to benefit corporations.

That view is wildly skewed, according to those in favor of the measure, who call it “fair pooling protection.”

“By far and away the largest impact would be on the producers, not on the actual landowners,” said Matt Pitzarella, the public affairs director for Range Resources, an oil and gas firm. “We have not encountered a landowner that says, ‘I’m just fundamentally opposed to drilling.’ It’s a very, very rare occurrence.”

According to the Marcellus Shale Coalition, a natural gas industry group, those who don’t want to lease “will not be considered leasees, nor will they see a rig on their property or an inch of their land disturbed. The only thing they will see? A check in their mailbox each month.”

Horizontal drilling technology allows companies to drill thousands of feet in multiple directions from one well pad, Pitzarella said.

Jan Jarrett, the president of the environmental group PennFuture, did not sign the letter to legislators opposing the plan because PennFuture sees potential for good in a pooling law.

“We weren’t willing to reject the concept out of hand,” Jarrett said. “It could have some benefits, but the devil will be in the details.”

Taking people’s resources without their permission “is an uncomfortable proposition,” even if rare, Jarrett said. And she’s waiting to see the legislation put forward to make sure those landowners “are treated quite fairly.”

Garth Everett, the Lycoming County Republican co-sponsoring the bill, agreed with Jarrett.

Everett said he’s interested in the issue from a property-rights perspective, and if the details of the legislation don’t “work out to be landowner-friendly, I’ll have to switch horses,” he said.

So what’s the benefit of pooling legislation?

“It is the single most effective device to ensure the orderly development of the resource,” Pitzarella said.

He said pooling creates a mechanism to force different drilling companies within a geographic area to cooperate and share resources, and that leads to fewer rigs, fewer tanker trucks, less land disturbance and more gas extracted.

If the companies can’t work out an agreement to “rationalize” the parcels through lease swaps, the gas never gets drilled, said Pitzarella, or else the companies want to drill it on their own, and landowners have the sense of being surrounded by drilling rigs.

Pooling would allow a maximum amount of gas to be extracted with a minimum of drilling pads and a minimum of environmental disturbance, he said.

“It’s more economical and less of an impact,” he said.

Many landowners support the measure, he said, because it makes it more likely their leases will produce royalties.

Everett agreed with that.

Companies are already creating pools through swaps and agreements, but “right now we don’t have much in the way of rules and regulations in Pennsylvania for how that can be done.”

“The gas companies are not my constituents,” said Everett, and “many of my constituents are very unhappy with how it’s being done right now.”

“It seems to be a very secretive process right up until [the companies] announce it” by filing in the local courthouse, he said.

Everett said his primary interest is in better regulating the pooling process for the benefit of landowners.

In the few cases of landowners opposed to their resources being taken, he said, “We will have to have a lot of very positive things on the consumer side” to justify it.

Pitzarella said that for those who don’t want to lease their land, “We’d rather that person be as pleased as possible — he’s not going to be happy with three drilling locations around his house with three different companies.”

Some environmental groups are suspicious of the claims that pooling would be better for the environment because it would result in fewer drilling rigs.

“There is no evidence that forced pooling diminishes environmental impact,” said Myron Arnowitt, the Pennsylvania director for Clean Water Action.

The letter Arnowitt and others sent to legislators claims “the design of forced pooling is simply to ensure full gas extraction at the lowest cost to the gas companies. ... Forced pooling provisions put all landowners at a disadvantage when trying to negotiate with gas companies. Why negotiate protections for landowners when you know that you can force them to sign a lease in the end?”

Everett said the bill is being written and he’s not sure when it will be introduced.
For the complete article, CLICK HERE.


Friday, August 6, 2010

Pa. DEP chief fires back at New York lawmakers over Marcellus Shale oversight criticism

Associated Press

SCRANTON, PA. — Pennsylvania's top-ranking environmental official suggests New York could stop buying natural gas produced in the Keystone State if its legislators are so concerned about the environmental consequences.

Department of Environmental Protection Secretary John Hanger fired back Thursday at criticism from Pennsylvania's northern neighbor over regulation of drilling in the Marcellus Shale region.

New York lawmakers held Pennsylvania up as an example of what not to do during discussion of a bill that on Tuesday imposed a nine-month moratorium on hydraulic fracturing. Known as "fracking," the drilling practice has drawn criticism for endangering water supplies.

Hanger says New York is riding a moral "high horse" while consuming Pennsylvania gas. He says Pennsylvania has strengthened enforcement standards and hired more staff to monitor drilling activity.



Thursday, August 5, 2010

RED ALERT! Trouble in Paradise Redux!

Residents evacuated yesterday (Aug. 4th) on Paradise Road.
CLICK HERE for related Paradise Road post.

5:30 p.m. Update: Paradise Road Family Still Out of Home
Rocket-Courier Reports:

Paradise Road residents, Jared and Heather McMicken and family, were still reportedly out of their Terry Township home and staying with friends or neighbors Thursday.

The unconfirmed word is that they were advised by DEP or another agency monitoring the methane levels that it was potentially unsafe to stay there. They moved out of the residence sometime Wednesday, A neighbor reported this morning that they were still out of their house and had turned the electricity off. Look for a full story in next week's print edition and possible updates on our web page.


Wednesday, August 4, 2010

Why Gas Leaks Matter in the Hydraulic Fracturing Debate

by Abrahm Lustgarten ProPublica, Aug. 2, 3:56 p.m.

Last week's article (see July 29 Splashdown post) about a hydraulic fracturing clause that was included in the Senate's drilling accountability bill sparked a lively debate on ProPublica's website about why methane contamination from drilling is relevant to a discussion of environmental risks of fracturing. In response:

Methane migration is a critical part of the discussions of underground contamination risks from drilling and hydraulic fracturing because it demonstrates that a pathway exists for contaminants to move through the substrata to the surface or into water supplies. In many of the cases described in ProPublica's articles, methane -- which was proved to be thermogenic and not from biological decay -- is believed to have moved from thousands of feet underground, or travelled several miles laterally, sometimes from the same layer of gas being exploited for energy.

Fracturing consists of injecting water and (usually secret) concoctions of chemicals deep underground, where it fractures the rock and releases the natural gas deposits. One of the most influential explanations why fracturing presents no risk hinges on the assertion that the deep isolation and many layers of rock and earth effectively seal off the fracture zone from the surface -- that it is impossible for chemicals, water, gas or anything else to move from thousands of feet below into shallow aquifers.

But the consistent and widespread detection of methane migration from unnatural causes -- in places including Colorado, Wyoming, Pennsylvania, Ohio and New York -- shows that it is not impossible, that in fact there are underground pathways for such movement. And if methane can move, it's an indicator of other substances' ability to migrate as well.

Many of the methane migration cases have been traced to flaws in the cementing and casing of the wells, as many of our articles have explicitly explained. Research shows that others may have migrated directly through underground faults and fissures.

Scientists we ask about these issues consistently make two points:

1. The pressure of hydraulic fracturing inside a well structure exerts great force that can exploit cementing problems. In other words, a crack in the cement or casing might be fine until the pressure of hydraulic fracturing forces substances through it.

2. It doesn't matter whether contaminants reach aquifers through a spider web of geologic cracks created by hydraulic fracturing, or in the spaces alongside the well bore that was pushed through the earth. Contaminants are reaching water supplies as a result of the processes and pressures being exerted underground.

The question of whether hydraulic fracturing is responsible for this contamination, and whether it is causing other contamination, remains unanswered. Neither our articles, nor anyone we have spoken with, has claimed to have reached a conclusion on that point. That is why the Environmental Protection Agency conducting two simultaneous studies of these issues -- one in Pinedale, Wyo., which will attempt to assess a specific pattern of contamination there, and another broad national study meant to evaluate the potential risks of fracturing. These are the first studies we are aware of that have engaged a scientific process to study these issues.

Two things are clear now, however:

1. Hydraulic fracturing is the only aspect of the complicated drilling process where basic standards for safe operations are not set by the federal government.

2. If fracturing were regulated, for instance, under the Safe Drinking Water Act -- the federal law that regulates every other type of underground chemical injection -- the law would likely require the sort of well integrity tests and localized pre-drilling geologic analysis to ensure that underground faults and fractures could not reach water supplies. It would also likely require that well casing and cementing be solid enough to withstand the pressures exerted by the fracturing process, and thus prevent the well from leaking methane, or chemicals, or anything else.


N.Y. Senate Approves Fracking Moratorium

August 4, 2010

The New York State Senate voted 48 to 9 Tuesday night in Albany to issue a temporary moratorium on a type of natural gas exploration that combines hydraulic fracturing with horizontal drilling and the injection of millions of gallons of chemically treated water underground. The aim of the measure is to ensure an adequate review of safety and environmental concerns.

The state Department of Environmental Conservation is currently reviewing the environmental impact of drilling in upstate New York, where natural gas companies are buying up leases and applying for permits to tap the Marcellus Shale, one of the largest natural gas fields in North America.

The moratorium proposed in the bill would prevent new drilling permits from being issued for the Marcellus Shale until May 15, 2011. While the measure cannot become law before the state Assembly passes a similar bill, and that chamber is not expected to take up the issue until September, environmentalists said the vote was significant in that it buys state officials more time to examine safety issues. They noted that a new administration will be taking over after the November elections because Gov. David Paterson is not running for re-election.

“This is the first action in the country to put the brakes on this type of drilling to give New York the time we need to assess the risks if we’re going to move forward responsibly,” said Katherine Nadeau, a program director with Environmental Advocates of New York.

New York City officials, who oppose drilling anywhere near the watersheds that supply drinking water to the city, welcomed the vote. Councilman James F. Gennaro, head of the City Council’s environmental protection committee, called it “a historic victory for all New Yorkers.”

“Speaker Quinn and I urge the Assembly to follow the lead of the Senate and for Governor Paterson to sign this historic first-in-the-nation hydraulic fracturing moratorium bill,” he said, referring to Christine C. Quinn, the City Council speaker.

Officials with the Independent Oil and Gas Association of New York, a trade group, had no immediate comment on the vote. They have argued that delays and more regulation of gas exploration only serve to stifle an energy source that the nation sorely needs.

3:01 p.m. | Updated Brad Gill, the association’s executive director, said Wednesday that the moratorium is delaying the jobs, tax revenue and other benefits the state would attract with more drilling. “We have companies that want to come to New York, but in this regulatory and legislative climate and instability they’re going to Pennsylvania,” he said. “We’re just losing out on this economic opportunity.”

Horizontal hydraulic fracturing, or fracking, is controversial because of the chemicals and vast amounts of water it requires and the risks that opponents say it poses to groundwater. The Senate bill noted both the “risks of accidents” and “potential effects on the communities in which shale gas production is located, including traffic, noise and an influx of transient workers.”

The federal Environmental Protection Agency is currently holding hearings on the effects of hydrofracking as it conducts a national study.



Marcellus Shale drilling industry 'is not operating at an excellent level,' state official says

Wed., August 4, 2010

There are too many spills, too many leaks, and too much natural gas migrating into people’s drinking water wells due to drilling in the Marcellus Shale, said John Hanger, Pennsylvania’s Secretary of Environmental Protection.

“The industry as a whole is not operating at an excellent level,” he said. “We are not demanding perfection, but we are demanding excellence.”

Hanger’s comments were made in response to a report from the Pennsylvania Land Trust that Marcellus Shale drilling companies had been cited for 1,435 regulatory violations in the last two and a half years.

“The report disproves the claim made by some that this industry is not regulated in Pennsylvania,” Hanger said. “All of those violations were written by DEP personnel and are an indication we are regularly at drilling sites.”

Hanger responded to criticism that his agency wasn’t doing enough and had been hamstrung by budget cuts.

“I don’t think the public knows a lot of what’s actually been happening,” he said.

Despite budget cuts, he said, the agency has actually more than doubled its oil and gas inspection staff. By the end of this month, DEP will have hired 105 additional oil and gas inspectors, for a total of 193.

“We have more inspectors than the state of Louisiana,” Hanger said. “There’s no state in the country that has come anywhere close to having our oil and gas staff.”

Money for those new hires has come from raising permit fees for Marcellus drillers from $100 to a sliding scale that averages between $5,000 to $10,000 per well, Hanger said. Those increased fees have generated $10 million so far.

He said DEP has opened new offices in Williamsport and Scranton to put inspectors closer to where the drilling is taking place. The agency has equipped them with better technology, like infrared cameras to better detect leaks.

An ongoing review of agency rules and regulations has resulted in new water quality standards that require drilling companies to treat wastewater to drinking water standards before returning it to a commonwealth stream.

Getting that regulation into effect has taken two years, during which time, “the industry has been looking at other options, and they now reuse a large proportion of drilling wastewater,” Hanger said.

“Range Resources publicly say they are a zero discharge company now. That’s major progress as a result of tightening the rules.”

More stringent rules for well construction are also in the works.

“It’s not the case we’re just starting today,” Hanger said. “We’ve been working at it for two years.”

Some of the violations in the report involved serious consequences for companies, he said, because sometimes it’s appropriate “to take out a regulatory two-by-four and hit companies over the head with it.”

However, it would have been helpful, he said, if the report had also included a top 10 list of companies with the least violations per well drilled.

“In attempting to move this industry to a standard of excellence ... It’s useful to identify companies that are doing it well,” Hanger said.

“This industry requires strong oversight; there’s no question about that,” he said, but the record of some companies — like Anadarko — “really points out it’s possible to operate in a manner that creates few problems.”

“At the end of the day, what’s really going to determine if the industry maintains public confidence or loses it entirely — and at best it’s shaky right now — is their safety record and their environmental record,” Hanger said.

“We are creating strong incentives for safe operations, but it’s absolutely true that the government doesn’t run these wells and doesn’t drive the trucks. ... There are limits to what government can do. The companies themselves are writing their own safety record, and that record in Pennsylvania is going to be public.

“This industry has a huge amount at stake to create a true culture of safety,” Hanger said.


Monday, August 2, 2010

Marcellus Drillers Amass 952 Violations Likely To Harm The Environment
August 2, 2010

Harrisburg, PA (8/2) The Pennsylvania Land Trust Association has reviewed environmental violations accrued by Marcellus Shale drillers working in Pennsylvania between January 2008 and June 25, 2010. The records were obtained via a Right to Know Request made to the PA Department of Environmental Protection (DEP).

DEP records show a total of 1435 violations of state Oil and Gas Laws due to gas drilling or other earth disturbance activities related to natural gas extraction from the Marcellus Shale in this 2.5-year period. The Association identified 952 violations as having or likely to have an impact on the environment. 483 were identified as likely being an administrative or safety violation and not likely to have the potential to negatively impact the environment.

The report breaks the violations down by type. For example, of the 952 violations:

  • 268 involve improper construction of waste water impoundments
  • 10 involve improper well casing
  • 154 involve discharge of industrial waste
  • 16 involve improper blowout prevention

The report lists the 25 companies with the most violations as well as the 25 companies with the highest average number of violations per well driller.

Download the report HERE.



DEP Fines Talisman Energy USA for Bradford County Drilling Wastewater Spill, Polluting Nearby Water Resource

Dept. of Environmental Protection

Commonwealth News Bureau
Room 308, Main Capitol Building
Harrisburg PA., 17120


Daniel T. Spadoni, Department of Environmental Protection Northcentral Regional Office

WILLIAMSPORT -- The Department of Environmental Protection has fined Talisman Energy USA Inc., of Horseheads, N.Y., $15,506 for a spill of used natural gas drilling fluids last November at its Klein gas well pad in Armenia Township, Bradford County that polluted a small, unnamed waterway.

The spill involved hydraulic fracturing flowback fluid, which is the substance that returns to the surface after a company injects the pressurized fluid underground to fracture, or “frack,” a geologic formation and extract natural gas.

“DEP’s investigation in late November 2009 determined that Talisman spilled between 4,200 to 6,300 gallons of fracking flowback fluids when a pump failed and sand collected in a valve,” said DEP North-Central Oil and Gas Program Manager Jennifer Means.

The fluids flowed off the well pad and toward a wetland, and a small amount ultimately discharged to an unnamed tributary to Webier Creek, which drains into the upper reaches of the Tioga River, a cold water fishery.

Talisman successfully completed DEP’s Act 2 process for spill cleanup activities.

The fine will be deposited into the fund that supports DEP’s oil and gas permitting and enforcement programs.


Sunday, August 1, 2010

Department of Environmental Protection Unlawfully Permitting Water Withdrawals For Marcellus Shale Gas Drilling in Western Pennsylvania

Allegheny Defense Project
July 26, 2010
Contact: Cathy Pedler – (814) 454-7523
Bill Belitskus – (814) 778-5173
Ryan Talbott – (503) 887-7845

Only riparian owners can make use of water in streams and rivers

Natural gas companies have descended on Pennsylvania’s forests and farmlands to drill into the Marcellus Shale. Each Marcellus Shale gas well requires millions of gallons of water for the drilling process. That water is taken from Pennsylvania’s streams and rivers under the alleged authority of the Pennsylvania Department of Environmental Protection (DEP). The DEP, however, does not have the authority to permit water withdrawals in Pennsylvania.

In central and eastern Pennsylvania, water withdrawalsare managed by the Susquehanna River Basin Commission and Delaware River Basin Commission. Congress created the two commissions as federal interstate compacts with the authority to permit water withdrawals within their respective basins. The rest of Pennsylvania, most of which is in the Ohio River basin, is governed by riparian rights common law, which allows only the owner of property along a watercourse to withdraw water for use on their land. There is no state law regulating water withdrawals other than for municipal drinking water supplies.

In a letter sent to DEP Secretary John Hanger, the Allegheny Defense Project (ADP) outlined the current state of Pennsylvania law regarding water withdrawals and charged the DEP with operating an unauthorized water withdrawal program that allows natural gas companies to take water that they have no legal right to fortheir Marcellus Shale gas drilling operations. (LINK to source.)

“The fact is, the DEP has absolutely no authority to permit water withdrawals in Pennsylvania,” said Cathy Pedler, ADP’s forest watch coordinator. “Outside of the Delaware and Susquehanna River watersheds, water withdrawals are governed by riparian rights common law, which means only those who live adjacent to the water can make reasonable use of the water on their land. A gas company cannot take water that flows through property it does not own.”

Nevertheless, documents obtained by ADP reveal that the DEP is unlawfully authorizing water withdrawals from western Pennsylvania streams and rivers. On March 31, 2010 the DEP approved a Water Management Plan for Hanley & Bird, Inc. The Water Management Plan allows Hanley & Bird to withdraw 1.44 million gallons of water a day from the Redbank Creek in Jefferson County for five years.

Under the Water Resources Planning Act of 2002, the DEP is required to develop Water Management Plans for the entire state. That law, however, does not provide any authority to the DEP to authorize water withdrawals.

“The Water Resources Planning Act is just that, a planning act,” said Bill Belitskus, ADP’s board president. “That law provided no substantive authority to the DEP to regulate or permit water withdrawals from Pennsylvania’s surface waters. Each time the DEP approves a water management plan and tells a natural gas company that it can withdraw surface water for their drilling procedures, it is acting without authority and encouraging illegal conduct.”

Visit ADP’s website to see the documents we obtained from recent file reviews at the DEP’s Northwest Regional Office:




Natural gas development in Colorado, the impacts on communities, environment and public health. A primer for public servants and residents of counties that care for their lifestyles.

Drilling for Gas in Bradford County, PA ... Listen!

Cattle Drinking Drilling Waste!

EPA... FDA... Hello? How many different ways are we going to have to eat this? ... Thank you TXSharon for all you do! ... Stay tuned in at


A film by Txsharon. Thank you Sharon for all you do. Click HERE to read the complete article on Bluedaze: Landfarms: Spreading Toxic Drilling Waste on Farmland

SkyTruth: Upper Green River Valley - A View From Above