Posts Tagged ‘fracturing’

WATER SUPPLIES IN BERNALILLO COUNTY ARE THREATENED WITH OIL DRILLING

•    Oil and gas drilling may contaminate pristine drinking water aquifers in Bernalillo County.

Oil and gas companies frequently use a technique, hydraulic fracturing or “fracking,” to increase a well’s production of oil and gas. Fracturing fluids, which often contain toxic chemicals, are injected underground into wells at high pressures to crack open an underground formation and allow oil and/or gas to flow more freely. More than 90 percent of oil and gas wells in the United States undergo fracturing.  While a portion of the injected fluids are transferred to aboveground disposal pits, some of the chemicals may remain underground.

•    Drilling has polluted drinking water in New Mexico, Alabama, Colorado, Virginia, West Virginia and Wyoming.

Residents have reported changes in water quality or quantity following fracturing operations of gas wells.  Here is one homeowner’s account:
Laura Amos, her husband Larry and daughter Lauren live south of Silt in western Colorado.  “We were among the first in our area to have natural gas drilling on our property.  In May 2001 while fracturing four wells on our neighbors’ property (less than 1000 feet from our house) the gas well operator “blew up” our water well.  Fracturing opened a connection between our water well and the gas well, sending the cap of our water well flying and blowing our water into the air like a geyser at Yellowstone. Immediately our water turned gray, had a horrible smell, and bubbled like 7-Up…”

•    Oil and gas drilling wastes water

Oil and gas drilling in the arid west wastes billions of gallons of water and may have potentially devastating economic and environmental impacts for affected communities in the long-term.  Discharging ground water can deplete freshwater aquifers, lower the water table, and dry up the drinking water wells of homeowners and agriculture users.  The water discharged from oil and gas wells is highly saline. This water can permanently change chemical composition of soils, reducing soil, air and water permeability and thereby decreasing native plant and irrigated crop productivity.

•    The oil and gas industry has exemptions from two major laws established to protect the nation’s water—the Clean Water Act and the Safe Drinking Water Act.

The Clean Water Act is our bedrock law that protects American rivers, streams, lakes, wetlands, and other waterways from pollution. These surface waters are often sources of drinking water for people and livestock.  The Safe Drinking Water Act (SDWA) was enacted to protect public drinking water supplies as well as their sources. This Act authorizes health-based standards for drinking water to protect against both naturally occurring and man-made contaminants.

The Safe Drinking Water Act’s Underground Injection Control program protects current and future underground sources of drinking water by regulating the injection of industrial, municipal, and other fluids into groundwater, including the siting, construction, operation, maintenance, monitoring, testing, and closing of underground injection sites.  Unfortunately, the oil and gas industry is exempt from crucial provisions of the Safe Drinking Water Act intended to protect our drinking water.

•    The New Mexico Oil Conservation Division has detected and documented more than 700 incidents of groundwater contamination from oil and gas facilities across the state.

Prior to 1990, only 39 orders were issued against oil and gas companies for contaminating groundwater; since 1990, 705 documented groundwater incidents related to the oil and gas industry have been recorded in New Mexico.

For a PDF version of this fact sheet, click here

For More Information:
www.OGAP.org

Copyright:

New Energy Economy

By Steve Mocarskysmocarsky@timesleader.com
Staff Writer

WILKES-BARRE – A representative of a trade association for the oil and natural gas industry defended her members’ record on environmental issues Tuesday during a meeting with The Times Leader editorial board.

Sara Banaszak, senior economist with the American Petroleum Institute in Washington, D.C., also shared her perspectives on federal regulation and state taxation of the industry.

Banaszak indicated she understands concerns that residents of the region might have, given the legacy of coal barons profiting from the region’s anthracite, disappearing with their profits, and leaving future generations to deal with stripping pits, mine subsidence, acidic streams and lung disease.

“From the industry perspective, no accident and no amount of pollution is acceptable. It’s not sustainable for the industry. If I’m polluting your water, I know I’m going to be tossed out of town in two minutes, so it’s not in my interest,” Banaszak said.

Banaszak said any industrial process can be dangerous, “and anything we do has impacts on the earth. So what we’re trying to do is continuously and on an ongoing basis employ best knowledge, best practices and the technological development and the regulation needed to make sure that we’re getting the best that we can. And the best that we can has to be clean water. We have to have clean water,” she said.

Banaszak said many people don’t realize there is already regulation in place to protect Pennsylvania from water pollution.

“Even if I get a lease, I’m not going to drill a well or even move equipment onto that site until I’ve presented to the state of Pennsylvania a well drilling plan, and a well drilling plan has a water management plan attached to it,” she said.

Much concern has been raised about “fracking” – the hydraulic fracturing of rock to release natural gas.

Banaszak said fracking has been used in the industry since the 1940s. And when the Safe Drinking Water Act was passed in 1974, the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency found it unnecessary to regulate because it wasn’t threatening drinking water. The manner in which it was being managed at the state level was sufficient to protect drinking water, she said.

Banaszak said problems with the completion of drilling and cementing of wells or poor management of fracking fluid on the surface led to pollution of groundwater, not the fracking process itself. She said more oversight is needed for those practices.

Banaszak said gas companies don’t want to reveal formulas for fracking fluids because they are proprietary. But the industry doesn’t oppose disclosing the proprietary information to state regulators, local authorities and hospitals if the information is kept confidential, she said.

Banaszak said making the EPA responsible for oversight of fracking would require the agency to develop a new oversight program or dramatically overhaul its program regulating underground use of fluids.

A complete overhaul would be a slow process, taking six months to two years to develop a proposal, plus more time for advertising, public comment and developing draft and final plans.

“That’s why there’s so much concern. It’s not a simple matter just to say, oh, we’re just asking under federal law for the disclosure of chemicals,” she said.

Regarding concerns about fracking depleting water supplies, Banaszak said that even at double the peak drilling level in the Barnett Shale in Texas, which is 10 times greater than Marcellus drilling was in 2009, water use would represent only half of what is used for recreational purposes in Pennsylvania, such as golf course and ski slope maintenance.

As for economics, Banaszak said imposing a severance tax on natural gas production could actually hamper economic development.

Although the Marcellus Shale is the second-largest natural gas field in the world, she said other sources are available to investors. She said it seems natural to assume that the state could gain more revenue through taxing natural gas production, but the issue can be counter-intuitive.

“If you impose a tax, you get less investment and the government could see less net revenues. … If you let the situation go, the amount of government revenue you collect could actually be more,” she said.

The pipeline infrastructure in the Northeast is old and difficult to tap, requiring much investment. In West Virginia, where taxes there are 10 percent higher, “you see dramatically low investment,” Banaszak said.

Copyright: Times Leader

By Steve Mocarskysmocarsky@timesleader.com
Staff Writer

SCRANTON – U.S. Sen. Robert Casey wants the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency to investigate and respond to groundwater contamination that the state has linked to a natural gas well in Susquehanna County.

In a letter to EPA administrator Lisa Jackson, Casey noted that natural gas drilling in the Marcellus Shale region has led to job creation, strengthened the state economy and reduced dependence on foreign oil.

However, Casey writes, “the highly variable and unpredictable nature” of hydraulic fracturing (fracking) “that can lead to the contamination of drinking water is of great concern.” He noted the gas and oil industry is exempt from complying with the federal Safe Drinking Water Act.

Casey said there are many reasons for requesting EPA involvement, including recent incidents in the state that “raise the question of whether the necessary steps have been taken to protect Pennsylvania families and communities against the detrimental side effects of drilling.”

He pointed to methane gas infiltration into private water wells in Dimock Township and noted that several wells have exploded because of a suspected buildup of natural gas.

Casey said the state Department of Environmental Protection fined Cabot Oil & Gas Corp. $240,000, ordered the plugging of three natural gas wells believed to be the source of the contamination, prohibited Cabot from drilling in the vicinity for one year and required Cabot to install permanent water treatment systems in affected homes.

Casey also noted that, according to DEP, between 6,000 and 8,000 gallons of fracking fluid leaked from a pipe at a drill site and contaminated the surrounding area and a wetland in Susquehanna County in two separate spills on the same day in September 2009 – one in the afternoon that leaked 25 to 50 barrels of fluid, another in the evening that leaked 140 barrels.

“I commend DEP for taking action, but I remain concerned that the current status of federal and state oversight of gas drilling may be inadequate” to protect families living near drilling sites, Casey wrote.

The senator asked for a meeting with appropriate EPA officials to discuss natural gas drilling and whether the agency could investigate water and environmental contamination. He said he hopes Science Advisory Board officials would also attend the meeting to discuss the scope, timing and methodology of a congressionally mandated study the EPA has launched on hydraulic fracturing.

An EPA spokeswoman said officials are reviewing Casey’s letter and expect to respond in the near future.

Steve Mocarsky, a Times Leader staff writer, may be reached at 970-7311.

Copyright: Times Leader

Sporting groups, conservationists and anti-drilling neighbors protest the large-scale gas exploration.

MICHAEL RUBINKAM Associated Press Writer

PLEASANT MOUNT, Pa. — A few hundred yards from Louis Matoushek’s farmhouse is a well that could soon produce not only natural gas, but a drilling boom in the wild and scenic Delaware River watershed.

Energy companies have leased thousands of acres of land in Pennsylvania’s unspoiled northeastern tip, hoping to tap vast stores of gas in a sprawling rock formation — the Marcellus Shale — that some experts believe could become the nation’s most productive gas field.

Plenty of folks like Matoushek are eager for the gas, and the royalty checks, to start flowing — including farmers who see Marcellus money as a way to keep their struggling operations afloat.

“It’s a depressed area,” Matoushek said. “This is going to mean new jobs, real jobs, not government jobs.”

Standing in the way is a loose coalition of sporting groups, conservationists and anti-drilling neighbors. They contend that large-scale gas exploration so close to crucial waterways will threaten drinking water, ruin a renowned wild trout fishery, wreck property values, and transform a rural area popular with tourists into an industrial zone with constant noise and truck traffic.

Both sides are furiously lobbying the Delaware River Basin Commission, the powerful federal-interstate compact agency that monitors water supplies for 15 million people, including half the population of New York City. The commission has jurisdiction because the drilling process will require withdrawing huge amounts of water from the watershed’s streams and rivers and because of the potential for groundwater pollution.

The well on Matoushek’s 200-acre spread in the northern Pocono Mountains in Wayne County is up first. The commission is reviewing an application by Stone Energy Corp. of Lafayette, La., to extract gas from the well — the first of what could be thousands of applications by energy companies to sink wells in an area roughly the size of Connecticut.

Stone Energy’s application has already generated more than 1,700 written comments to the DRBC. The company, which paid a $70,000 penalty for drilling the Matoushek well without DRBC approval in 2008, has already received a permit from the Pennsylvania Department of Environmental Protection.

Eager gas companies have leased more than 300 square miles of watershed land, conservation officials estimate.

“This is certainly just the start. There’s a lot of acreage out there, and a lot of people interested in leasing their land,” said Tracy Carluccio, deputy director of the anti-drilling Delaware Riverkeeper Network.

The Marcellus Shale is a rock formation 6,000 to 8,000 feet beneath Pennsylvania, New York, West Virginia and Ohio, including about 36 percent of the Delaware River basin. New drilling techniques now allow affordable access to supplies in the Marcellus and other shales in the U.S. that once were too expensive to tap.

Energy companies combine horizontal drilling with hydraulic fracturing, or “fracking,” a technique that injects vast amounts of water, along with sand and chemicals, underground to break up the shale and release the gas.

While gas companies refuse to identify the chemicals they use — claiming that is proprietary information — critics cite contamination problems in other natural gas drilling fields. They worry that unregulated fracking can taint drinking water, deplete aquifers and produce briny wastewater that can kill fish. In Dimock, Pa., about 40 miles west of the Matoushek well but outside the Delaware basin, state environmental regulators say that cracked casings on fracked wells have tainted residential water supplies with methane gas.

The Environmental Protection Agency announced last month that it will study the impact of fracking on the environment and human health. The EPA said in 2004 there was no evidence that fracking threatens drinking water quality, but critics, including a veteran engineer in the Denver regional EPA office, argued that report’s methodology was flawed.

The industry contends environmental concerns are overblown. It says the drilling techniques are safe and that there has never been a proven case of groundwater contamination caused by fracking — in part because fracking occurs far below the water table. Congress exempted hydraulic fracturing from federal oversight in 2005.

Dozens of people told the DRBC at a recent public hearing why they oppose the watershed drilling. A few supporters called it an economic boon and a property-rights issue.

Richard Kreznar, who owns property in the Pennsylvania riverfront community of Damascus, said gas drilling primarily benefits large landowners and exploration companies.

“After the Delaware River and the stream next to my house are messed up, what compensation will I get? Who will put it back together again?” he asked DRBC staff.

Lee Hartman, the Delaware River chairman for Trout Unlimited, worries that large water withdrawals required for fracking will create low stream flows in the Delaware’s tributaries, damaging fish habitat. For the Matoushek well, Stone Energy wants to take 700,000 gallons a day from the Lackawaxen River’s narrow west branch.

Hartman and others say the DRBC should first study the cumulative environmental impacts of drilling in the Delaware watershed, and pass drilling regulations, before it allows any gas extraction to take place. The agency has asked for $250,000 in federal funds for a study, but commissioners have not said whether they will wait before voting on Matoushek’s well.

Opponents say they will sue if Stone Energy’s application is approved.

Downstream communities that rely on the Delaware for drinking water are worried about the coming gas boom. New York City Mayor Michael Bloomberg opposes any drilling in the watershed, while the Philadelphia City Council has asked the basin commission for an environmental study.

New York state regulators have put a moratorium on drilling in the Marcellus region, saying they won’t approve permits until they are finished drafting new regulations.

Back in northeastern Pennsylvania, Matoushek, 68, a semiretired farmer who signed a lease with Stone Energy three years ago, said he is counting on royalty checks from gas production to help fund his golden years and secure the land for future generations of his family. As far he’s concerned, the benefits far outweigh any theoretical harm.

Copyright: Times Leader

Industry may pay to upgrade plants that handle waste water from process.

By Rory Sweeneyrsweeney@timesleader.com
Staff Writer

The state is contending with a multibillion-dollar water-treatment problem, and the growing gas-drilling industry might be part of the solution.

A roughly $7.2 billion deficit exists for repairing or upgrading waste-water treatment facilities in the state, according to a task force created by Gov. Ed Rendell to solve water-infrastructure issues. Gas companies might help defray that cost as more wells are drilled because the companies will need treatment facilities for waste water.

The process to drill gas and oil wells, called hydraulic fracturing or simply “fracing,” involves shooting sand and water down a well to fracture the rock containing the oil or gas.

The contaminated water is separated out and can be stored and reused, but must eventually be treated. The state Department of Environmental Protection categorizes it as industrial waste, agency spokesman Mark Carmon said.

In western Pennsylvania, where many shallow wells exist, privately operated treatment facilities handle such waste, but none has so far in the northeast area, said Stephen Rhoads, president of the Pennsylvania Oil & Gas Association.

Exploring the Marcellus Shale, which runs from upstate New York into Virginia, including the northern edge of Luzerne County, generally requires far more water than shallow wells because the wells can be 8,000 feet deep

Companies working in this region have reused the water in multiple wells and then shipped it to the facilities out west, Rhoads said, but “obviously, moving it across the state with the fuel prices the way they are, is not economically” viable. The water can also be injected deep into the ground, but no one has sought such a permit in this region, Carmon said.

That leaves sending the water to public facilities, but since many of them are already near or at capacity, the industry is considering paying to upgrade plants. About 30 of the largest regional treatment facilities have been notified by DEP that they might be approached with the idea and that they’d first need to modify their liquid discharge permits and receive approval from the agency, Carmon said.

The idea hasn’t escaped the gas companies.

“We’ve talked about that in various areas throughout the state,” said Rodney Waller, of Range Resources Corp. “We’re investigating that, but … there’s nothing on the horizon.”

Upcoming events

• 10:30 a.m. today the state Department of Environmental Protection, Department of Conservation and Natural Resources, Pennsylvania Fish and Boat Commission, Susquehanna and Delaware river basin commissions, and county conservation districts are meeting in Harrisburg with industry members to discuss environmental regulations.

• 7 p.m. June 23 the Penn State Cooperative Extension is holding a gas-lease workshop for landowners at the Lake-Lehman High School.

Rory Sweeney, a Times Leader staff writer, may be reached at 970-7418.

Copyright: Times Leader

Elected official who held hearing in area last week on natural gas drilling says he was responding to pro-energy group attack.

By Steve Mocarskysmocarsky@timesleader.com
Staff Writer

A state representative says he was unfairly attacked in a press release by a pro-energy group after holding a public hearing in the Back Mountain last week.

State Rep. Camille “Bud” George, majority chair of the House Environmental Resources and Energy Committee, issued a rebuttal Friday, saying that “money and misinformation are the hallmarks of a gas industry attack titled, ‘Rep. George’s Fact-Free Fact-Finding Mission.’”

Energy In Depth sent the press release to media outlets on Thursday, a day after George convened a committee hearing at 1 p.m. in the Lehman Township Municipal Building to hear testimony on the impact of Marcellus Shale drilling and proposed legislation that would put more environmental safeguards in place.

State Rep. Phyllis Mundy, D-Kingston, invited George to have a hearing in her district, where EnCana Gas & Oil USA plans to drill the first natural gas exploratory well in Luzerne County in May or June. The well will be drilled in Lehman Township.

Area residents and lawmakers are concerned for many reasons, including the fact that the drill site would be less than two miles from the Huntsville and Ceaseville reservoirs, which supply drinking water to nearly 100,000 area residents.

Energy In Depth’s press release classified the hearing as a “pep rally staged by anti-energy activists and like-minded public officials in Northeast Pennsylvania.”

“Characterized as a ‘field hearing’ by … George, who held the event as far away as he could from his home in Clearfield County, the forum included representatives from the Sierra Club and Clean Water Action league, as well as testimony from a local podiatrist and someone describing himself as a ‘naturalopathic’ physician. The only thing missing? Anyone in possession of real, genuine facts related to responsible gas exploration in the Commonwealth,” the release stated.

In response, George said the most troubling aspect of “the attack by Energy In Depth, whose members include the Pennsylvania Independent Oil and Gas Association, is its slur of concerned lawmakers and citizens of Northeastern Pennsylvania as anti-energy activists.”

George noted that the committee had a hearing on Feb. 18 in Clearfield County, where the president of the Marcellus Shale Coalition and executives from some of the leading gas companies in Pennsylvania, including Range Resources and Chesapeake Energy, testified. He also participated two weeks ago in a House Democratic Policy Committee hearing in Ebensburg that included testimony from Chief Oil & Gas and Chesapeake. Ebensburg is in the Altoona area.

“The industry has not been an unwanted stranger at hearings,” George said.

Energy In Depth’s press release then listed quotes – pulled from a story in The Times Leader – of people who testified and rebutted them with quotes from gas industry representatives, a state Department of Environmental Protection fact sheet and Gov. Ed Rendell.

Energy In Depth pointed to testimony from Mundy in which she said she supports House Bill 2213 “which would among other things … require full disclosure of the chemicals used in hydraulic fracturing.”

The organization then pointed to a DEP fact sheet which states that drilling companies “must disclose the names of all chemicals to be used and stored at a drilling site … that must be submitted to DEP as part of the permit application process. These plans contain copies of material safety data sheets for all chemicals … This information is on file with DEP and available to landowners, local governments and emergency responders.”

But George said that “full disclosure of the chemicals – not just the trade names – and how they are used is not (now) required.”

“The precise chemical identities and concentrations and how and when they are employed can be crucial to emergency responders and remediation efforts after spills, and is at the crux of efforts to remove the infamous ‘Halliburton Loophole’ that exempts the industry from oversight by the Environmental Protection Agency,” George said.

“The gas industry can bloat campaign coffers with money, buy discredited and ridiculed studies and poison the debate by taking statements out of context. However, its ‘best management practices’ should never be taken at face value to be the best for Pennsylvania,” George said.

Steve Mocarsky, a Times leader staff writer, may be reached at 970-7311.

Copyright: Times Leader

By Steve Mocarskysmocarsky@timesleader.com
Staff Writer

As energy companies and lease holders extol the benefits and safety of natural gas drilling in the state, and environmentalists and people who live near drilling operations point to chemical spills, water pollution and noise, a congressman last week called for an effort from opposing sides in the energy debate to work together for compromise.

U.S. Rep. Joe Sestak, D-Delaware County, who is running for the U.S. Senate, came to The Peace and Justice Center in Wilkes-Barre on Wednesday to host a forum on Marcellus Shale development.

Panelists included James Shallenberger, a Pennsylvania-licensed geologist and senior project manager at consulting firm Princeton Hydro who spoke on behalf of the gas drilling industry; David T. Messersmith, an extension educator with Penn State Cooperative Extension in Wayne County who is an expert on Marcellus Shale; and Dr. Thomas Jiunta, a Lehman Township resident with a podiatry practice in Kingston who founded Luzerne County Citizens for Clean Water.

“There was a lot of passion in that room. … One side is saying one thing, one side is saying another. I want to be a person who brings people together for a principal compromise, not a compromise of principles,” Sestak said last week in a phone interview.

“I personally believe this is a great economic opportunity for our state, particularly if we are able to benefit by a proper excise tax and if we put the proper protections in place,” Sestak said.

Sestak also said a priority should be enabling community and area colleges to train people for gas industry jobs to ensure Pennsylvanians are getting jobs associated with the drilling industry, rather than leaving energy companies with no choice but to hire experienced people from out-of-state.

Sestak said he learned much about the economic benefits as well as the environmental problems associated with natural gas exploration when he visited several counties in which Marcellus Shale drilling has been ongoing while he was on the campaign trail.

He noted that former Sen. Rick Santorum and Sen. Arlen Specter voted for “the Halliburton Loophole,” which exempts the gas and oil industry from complying with the Safe Water Drinking Act. And he said he supports the “FRAC Act” – Fracturing Responsibility and Awareness of Chemicals Act, which would amend the Safe Drinking Water Act to include the gas and oil industry.

Steve Mocarsky, a Times leader staff writer, may be reached at 970-7311.

Copyright: Times Leader

The presence of an enormous volume of potentially recoverable gas in the eastern United States has a great economic significance. This will be some of the closest natural gas to the high population areas of New Jersey, New York and New England. This transportation advantage will give Marcellus gas a distinct advantage in the marketplace.

Gas produced from the shallower, western portion of the Marcellus extent might be transported to cities in the central part of the United States. It should have a positive impact on the stability of natural gas supply of the surrounding region for at least several years if the resource estimate quoted above proves accurate.
Copyright: Geology.com

Before 2000, many successful natural gas wells had been completed in the Marcellus. The yields of these wells were often unimpressive upon completion. However, many of these older wells in the Marcellus have a sustained production that decreases slowly over time. Many of them continued to produce gas for decades. A patient investor might make a profit from these low yield wells with slowly declining production rates.

For new wells drilled with the new horizontal drilling and hydraulic fracturing technologies the initial production can be much higher than what was seen in the old wells. Early production rates from some of the new wells has been over one million cubic feet of natural gas per day. The technology is so new that long term production data is not available. As with most gas wells, production rates will decline over time, however, a second hydraulic fracturing treatment could restimulate production.
Copyright: Geology.com

House committee members hear testimony on impact of gas drilling, proposed environmental safeguards.

By Steve Mocarskysmocarsky@timesleader.com
Staff Writer

KINGSTON TWP. – Members of the state House of Representatives Environmental Resources and Energy Committee came to the Back Mountain on Wednesday to hear testimony on the impact of Marcellus Shale drilling and proposed legislation that would put additional environmental safeguards in place.

Testifying were representatives of two environmental groups, a local physician active in environmental issues and a resident of Dimock Township, Susquehanna County, where the state Department of Environmental Protection ordered a gas company to provide drinking water to residents after their wells were contaminated by methane.

State Rep. Camille “Bud” George, committee majority chairman, said the committee convened at the township municipal building at the invitation of state Rep. Phyllis Mundy, D-Kingston.

Mundy said she requested the hearing because she and many of her constituents “have serious concerns about the potential impact of Marcellus Shale drilling on our streams, our land and especially our drinking water,” noting that a proposed well site is less than two miles from the Huntsville and Ceasetown reservoirs.

Noting the contamination of drinking water in Dimock Township and a recent drilling-related mud spill in Clinton County, Mundy said there was “still time to put safeguards in place to protect the environment and the public health from the negative impacts” of gas drilling.

“That is why I strongly support Chairman George’s House Bill 2213, the Land and Water Protection Act, which would, among other things, require state inspections of well sites during each drilling phase and require full disclosure of the chemicals used in hydraulic fracturing,” she said.

The act would also:

• Extend from 1,000 feet to 2,500 feet the presumed liability of a gas well polluting a water supply.

• Update bonding requirements to cover the costs of decommissioning a well from a $2,500 bond to a $150,000 bond for a Marcellus Shale well and to a $12,000 bond for all other wells.

• Reaffirm that local government may regulate aspects of drilling within traditional powers, such as hours of operation.

Jeff Schmidt, Sierra Club state chapter director, said the club supports the bill and suggested adding some provisions:

• Require a drilling permit applicant to publish in a local newspaper and in the Pennsylvania Bulletin that a permit application was submitted to DEP.

• Require that erosion and sediment control and storm water discharge plans for drill sites be as stringent as requirements for all other earth disturbance activities, and require DEP to offer county conservation districts the opportunity to review those plans and fund the work.

Brady Russell, Eastern Pennsylvania director for Clean Water Action, said the gas industry will “cut corners” if not properly supervised. He made several recommendations, including requiring an inspector – or eco-cop – on each drill site to make sure drillers follow approved plans.

He also suggested requiring drillers to pay for pre- and post-drilling testing of nearby water sources.

Dr. Thomas Jiunta, a podiatrist from Lehman Township, where issuance of a drilling permit is expected to be approved next week, said that since he has been researching Marcellus Shale exploration, he has “gotten a lot of lip service from senators and representatives about how we need to do it right. Before I start, I just want to say that maybe, maybe – and this is the first time I’ve said this word – we need a moratorium to stop it until we get it right.”

Audience members burst into applause and cheers at Jiunta’s suggestion.

After sharing his concerns about an inadequate number of treatment plants capable of removing hazardous chemicals from water used in hydraulic fracturing and risks associated with storing those chemicals underground, Jiunta made several suggestions for the bill.

One is adding a requirement that recovered waste water from the fracturing process be stored in sealed tanks rather than in surface pits that have liners that he said could tear and overflow with heavy rain.

Dimock Township resident Victoria Switzer testified first that a gas company “landman” talked her and her “misinformed, uninformed and na�ve” family into leasing their land for $25 an acre and a 12.5-percent royalty minus transportation cost.

“We now sit in the middle of 63 natural gas wells. In spite of what has gone terribly wrong here, the 2010 plan calls for a doubling of their efforts,” Switzer said.

She said gas drilling has resulted in diminished or contaminated drinking water supplies, destruction of roads and bridges, increased traffic beyond road capacity; decreased air quality, loss of aesthetics and more.

Mundy said she can’t imagine what Switzer is going through.

“How do you like less government – fewer DEP employees, lower taxes, no severance tax? This is what we’ve got; let’s fix it,” Mundy said.

State Rep. Tim Seip, D-Pottsville, said a severance tax on gas extraction is necessary to fund more inspectors and conservation district work. He said the public should lobby their state senators to adopt the bill when it comes before them.

Asked if he thought a moratorium was possible in Pennsylvania, George said he thought, “It’s really going to help Pennsylvania if every place where there’s drilling we get this type of attention.”

Copyright: Times Leader