Posts Tagged ‘water’

This month’s Marcellus Educational Webinar program hosts Dana Aunkst and Eugene Pine from DEP discussing new regulations for natural gas drilling.

As the natural-gas drilling boom into the deep Marcellus Shale formation has unfolded, state regulators have become increasingly aware of pollution risks to ground and surface water, and they have scrambled to develop regulations to protect precious natural resources.

Two experts with the Pennsylvania Department of Environmental Protection will offer a look at the current situation in a free web-based seminar presented by Penn State Cooperative Extension at 1 p.m. on Nov. 18, titled “Pa. DEP Regulatory Update.” Dana Aunkst, director of DEP’s bureau of water standards and facilities regulation, and Eugene Pine, professional geologist manager with the agency, will present details about the current regulatory environment.

“A properly cased and cemented oil and gas well is critical to protecting fresh groundwater, public health, safety and the environment,” explained Pine. “Many of the regulations governing well construction were promulgated in 1989 and remain largely unchanged.

“New well drilling and completion practices used to develop Marcellus shale wells, as well as recent impacts to drinking water supplies and the environment by both ‘traditional’ and Marcellus shale wells, prompted the department to reevaluate existing requirements.”

With the continued development of the oil and gas industry, the potential exists for natural gas to migrate from the wellbore by either improperly constructed wells or older, deteriorated wells, according to Pine. “This migration could adversely affect underground sources of drinking water and pose a threat to public safety and the environment,” he said. “Accordingly, DEP has revised Chapter 78, Subchapter D, for its well-drilling and operation regulations.”

Pine’s webinar presentation will explain how his department is making changes to the regulations, and will detail the proposed and final rulemaking process (timeframes, public-comment periods, etc.). “I will generally explain where we are in this process and then highlight the more significant revisions to the existing regulations,” he said. “The regulatory revisions emphasize, and are intended to strengthen, proper well drilling, construction and operational practices.”

Aunkst, on the other hand, will talk about new treatment standards for gas well wastewater. “In 2010, the Pennsylvania Environmental Quality Board amended Chapter 95 of Title 25 of the Pennsylvania Code to include new treatment requirements for total dissolved solids,” he said. “This final form rulemaking ensures the continued protection of this commonwealth’s water resources from new and expanded sources of TDS.”

Most importantly, Aunkst noted, the final-form rulemaking guarantees that state waters will not exceed a threshold of 500 milligrams per liter. “In doing so, the final-form rulemaking assures the continued use and protection of drinking water intakes on streams throughout this commonwealth,” he said. “That provides the required protection of our aquatic life resources and maintains continued economic viability of the current water users.”

Based on stakeholder comments received during an extensive public and stakeholder participation process, the final-form rulemaking adopts a combination of recommended approaches for addressing these larger loadings of TDS, Aunkst pointed out. This combination of approaches includes an industrial sector-based regulation along with a watershed-based analysis.

“The sector-based piece focuses on the natural-gas industry, mandating the treatment of wastewater,” he said. “In addition, this treatment must be performed at a centralized wastewater treatment facility to the standards in the proposed rulemaking. This approach sets treatment requirements for natural-gas well wastewaters, based on available, proven treatment technologies for this industry and takes cost into consideration.

“These requirements will assure that any threat of water pollution from this rapidly growing industry is prevented in accordance with the Pennsylvania Clean Streams Law.”

Aunkst’s webinar presentation will provide background on the need for the new regulation, a history of the development of the regulation and a summary of the current status of implementation of the new requirements.
Information about how to register for the webinar is available athttp://extension.psu.edu/naturalgas/webinars. Online participants will have the opportunity to ask the speaker questions during the session.
The webinar “Pa. DEP Regulatory Update” is part of an ongoing series of workshops and events addressing issues related to the state’s Marcellus Shale gas boom, which can be viewed at Penn State Cooperative Extension’s natural-gas website, http://extension.psu.edu/naturalgas.
Previous webinars, which covered topics such as water use and quality, zoning, gas-leasing considerations for landowners and implications for local communities, can be viewed online athttp://extension.psu.edu/naturalgas/webinars.
Additional one-hour webinars will be held at 1 p.m. on the following dates:
–Dec. 16: “Plumbing the Depths in Pa.: A Primer on Marcellus Shale Geology and Technology.”  Presenter: Mike Arthur, Penn State Marcellus Center for Outreach and Research.
–Jan. 20, 2011: “Marcellus Shale Legislation: What Was Accomplished in the 2009-10 Session and What Issues Remain to be Addressed.” Presenter: Ross Pifer, Dickinson School of Law, Penn State.
–Feb. 16, 2011: “Dealing with Gas Tax Issues: What You Need to Know.” Presenter: Mike Jacobson, Penn State School of Forest Resources.
–Mar. 17, 2011: “Natural Gas Well Development and Emergency Response and Management.” Presenter: Craig Konkle, Lycoming County Office of Emergency Management.

For more information, contact John Turack, extension educator in Westmoreland County, at 724-837-1402 or by e-mail at jdt15@psu.edu.

From Penn Live, Jeff Mulhollem

Originally Posted At: PSU.edu

DIMOCK TWP. – A wealth of gas beneath this small Susquehanna County community has brought it a new industry, a national reputation for bad luck and a host of polarizing issues: the risks and damage to water, soil and air; the fair rate for leased land; the condition of the roads and the shape of the economy.

But nothing has defined the division in Dimock Township like a line that exists, for now, only on paper: a proposed $11.8 million water main to bring fresh water to 18 families with methane linked to gas drilling in their wells – a pipe that will travel along Route 29, the thoroughfare that cuts the township in two.

For the group of citizens and businesses called Enough Already that formed this month to oppose the line, the project represents a big-government solution that penalizes many taxpayers for the benefit of a few and threatens to drive away the gas companies that have brought them money or jobs.

For the residents who need the line – those whose water has been contaminated with methane the state found seeping from faulty natural gas wells – the opposition is an attack on their health and safety that comes after they have waited two years for clean water.

“To have neighbor go against neighbor – our own neighbors are doing this,” said Norma Fiorentino, the retired nurse whose water well first drew the state’s attention to the methane problem when the concrete slab above it was blown apart in January 2009.

“This is a real stab in the back for us,” she said. “That was not our fault this happened.”

‘We’re fed up’

Enough Already’s two dozen core members met for the first time in early October, days after Department of Environmental Protection Secretary John Hanger announced a plan to use public financing to build the 12.5-mile waterline then sue to get the money back from Cabot Oil and Gas Corp., the company deemed responsible for the contamination.

The group declared its opposition to the line in an ad in the Mulligan’s Shopping Guide, a Susquehanna County advertising publication, on Oct. 13. It began posting fliers with the same logo – a blue pipe labeled “water line” crossed out in red – in businesses and on public bulletin boards along the proposed route from Montrose to Dimock.

Dan and Gretchen Backer posted the fliers in the windows at the Inn at Montrose, the hotel and restaurant they bought and expanded since 2008 to serve the gas workers.

Gretchen Backer summarized the group’s position: The state has “gone amok” by siding with families who are suing Cabot for contamination the driller says it did not cause and using the opportunity to demand a “handout” from a wealthy company in order to expand a public utility.

“There’s just enough flags that say this is ridiculous,” she said.

Before the lunch rush last Tuesday, she and Dan Backer sat at a table in the tavern they renovated entirely except for the original bar made from wood reclaimed from a bowling lane.

The couple touts the fact that they have benefited from the influx of industry, and they think not enough is said about the good influence of gas drilling.

“Enough Already is enough with the negativity,” Dan Backer said. He fears the combination of state enforcement actions against the gas industry and a public perception of Dimock as a “wasteland” will kill the new opportunities.

“If they left, we’re done. We fold,” he said. “We can’t survive serving steaks and cheeseburgers.”

At Lockhart’s – a combination tag and title business, gas station and diner about 2½ miles south on Route 29 – the Enough Already flier was posted last week on a cork board below another advertising a chicken-and-biscuit dinner.

Don Lockhart, the owner of the business for 26 years, sat on a stool at the lunch counter, where he keeps a petition asking the state infrastructure investment authority to deny financing for the project.

“They’re going to shove this water down everybody’s throats,” he said. The affected residents should have clean water, he said, but the state should consider the impact on people who are not involved with the problem and think of less-intrusive options, like building a reservoir closer to the affected homes.

“All you’re getting is the ‘wah, wah’ part of this,” he said. “You’re not getting any common sense. All you hear about is ‘these poor people.’ The people, we’re fed up.”

Residents without businesses also have signed on with the group, including at least three who have had replacement water provided by Cabot because they believe drilling has damaged the quality or quantity of water in their wells.

Martha Locey, a 78-year-old woman who lives on her family’s farm in Hop Bottom, gave $20 – the money she had in her purse during the group’s first meeting – to help pay for the Enough Already ad. Her farm’s two water wells have had methane in them since they were drilled in the 1940s and 1970s, she said, and signed an affidavit for Cabot testifying to that fact.

“I came out with the truth, because I know it has been in the water,” she said.

The company has used evidence of pre-existing methane to help prove its case that it did not cause the problems in the Dimock wells. It also paid Dr. Robert W. Watson, an emeritus professor of petroleum and natural gas engineering at Penn State University, about $25,000 to review its materials and well-completion records. Watson concluded that Cabot’s wells did not cause methane to seep into aquifers.

DEP counters Cabot’s evidence with a photographic record of methane bubbling out of the company’s gas wells, documentation of excessive well pressures, and isotopic analysis – a kind of chemical fingerprinting – that matches the gas in the affected water supplies with the gas coming from Cabot’s wells.

Hanger has explained that the waterline is the only remedy that will guarantee the families clean water – now and in the future – because there is no certainty that methane will stop migrating from Cabot’s wells.

He also dismissed the conclusions reached by Watson.

“No surprise that his report supports the company that is paying him,” he said in an e-mail.

‘Stirring up trouble’

The most visible battle in Dimock has been the one waged between DEP and Cabot in press releases, public announcements, letters and ads.

Hanger sees evidence of Cabot’s influence in the formation of Enough Already, an accusation the group and Cabot both deny.

“For Cabot to constantly stir up trouble is very disappointing,” Hanger said. “They are doing everything to deflect attention from their own failings and creating distractions from the real issue here, which is they drilled bad wells.”

The businesses hosting the Enough Already petition are either Cabot contractors or frequently do business with the company or its workers, he pointed out. One business, listed on the ad as Guy Parrish’s, is hired by Cabot to deliver replacement water to families affected by the stray methane.

Cabot spokesman George Stark said the driller “does business with many Susquehanna County companies, having invested nearly a billion dollars in the region. Cabot did not ask businesses to participate in any organization or group in Susquehanna County, or anywhere else for that matter.”

Harold Lewis, a resident who has worked delivering water to the affected homes, built a large handmade sign with the words “water pipe line” crossed out in black in his front yard just beyond a telephone pole wrapped with four No Trespassing signs.

The anti-waterline sign faces across the road toward two homes with tainted water.

“It’s nothing against the neighbors or anything like that,” he said in a hallway of Elk Lake High School after a meeting organized by Enough Already on Thursday night. “It’s against the pipeline.”

The Lewis family also had replacement water supplied by Cabot for several months after they noticed an odor in their well water. Lewis said he was just “nervous in the beginning,” but tests show the well water is fine.

“I know all the neighbors think I’m mad at them – I’m not,” he said. “They’re probably mad at me now.”

The meeting on Thursday was punctuated with shouts from members of the audience, many from outside the town or county, who wore blue ribbons in support of the affected families in Dimock.

As the meeting ended, those wearing blue ribbons looked warily across the auditorium as those without ribbons were being interviewed for television. On the other side of the room, audience members sympathetic to Enough Already mumbled on their way out the doors that the families’ complaints were “all about the money.” Others said the families were “pumping chemicals into their own wells.”

Lynn Senick, a Montrose resident and critic of the industry, stood outside and touched the ribbon on her lapel.

“I hate the divisiveness and the lies,” she said. “I hate that the DEP, their authority is being flouted and challenged. I don’t like to walk down the street and feel like I can’t talk to certain people, or that because I have this” – she pointed to her ribbon – “now I’m an enemy.”

Residents who will be served by the waterline also recognized the stakes are higher than hurt feelings.

“If we have regulations and laws but DEP won’t hold the gas companies responsible, we might as well have no DEP,” said Victoria Switzer, one of the affected residents, who paused in the hall after apologizing to the presenters for the heckling from the families’ out-of-town supporters.

“No laws, no regs, just gas,” she said. “Welcome to Dimock.”

llegere@timesshamrock.com

View article here.

Copyright: The Citizens Voice

Government agencies dispel myths on water usage in the Marcellus, while MSC operators continue to recycle what they have, pursue sustainable means for what they need

Seven seconds.

The time it takes for food to pass from your mouth to your stomach. The length of an average play in the NFL. And, in case you’re counting, the amount of time that has elapsed since you started reading this email. You know what else? Every seven seconds, the Susquehanna River deposits two million gallons of water into the Chesapeake Bay – equivalent to the amount that producers of clean-burning natural gas from the Marcellus Shale withdraw (and pay for) over the course of a 24-hour day.

Two-million gallons sounds like a lot, doesn’t it? Well, consider this: All told, the Susquehanna and its surrounding watershed convey more than 26 billion gallons of waterthrough the Commonwealth every single day – which means the two-million gallons associated with the Marcellus in Pennsylvania account for roughly 0.0125 percent of the basin’s total supply. By contrast, 325 million of those 26 billion gallons – 1.5 percent – go toward meeting the general water needs of the state and its citizens; basically the stuff we use for drinking, showering, dishes and laundry. About 150 million more are claimed each day for power generation. And then there’s the 50 million gallons a day used for “recreation.” Think ski slopes in the winter, golf courses in the summer, and Crocodile Mile all year long.

As with most issues related to the Marcellus, applying the relevant context is key to understanding the relevant substance. And to its credit, the Susquehanna River Basin Commission (SRBC), which oversees and regulates water withdrawals throughout the river’s expansive basin, hasn’t let the politically charged nature of the Marcellus debate get in the way of getting out the facts. Just this past weekend, in fact, SRBC’s Jim Richenderfer was asked by the Williamsport Sun-Gazette whether he thought natural gas exploration posed a threat to local water supplies. Here’s what he had to say:

“There is no danger the gas industry will drain the basin of its water,”Richenderfer said. … According to Richenderfer, the gas industry is removing about 2 million gallons of water per day from the watershed, though it is permitted to remove 25 to 30 million gallons. That is a drop in the bucketcompared to the amount of water flowing out of the watershed at any given moment, he said.

As SRBC’s Richenderfer alluded to in his comments above, Marcellus producers are permitted by SRBC to withdrawal as many as 30 million gallons of water a day. So why are they currently only drawing about one-fifteenth of that amount?

Glad you asked. For starters, we simply don’t need as much water to do the job these days as might have been required in the past. Chalk that one up to advances in water recycling. Remember: Three years ago, very little of the water being produced at the wellsite was being re-used. Today? Many of the large operators are recycling 100 percent — and across the entire Coalition, that number is nearing 70 percent and rising each month.

Some of those operators recycle that water right at the wellsite; others take it to local (but strictly regulated) facilities to do this work for them. Yesterday’s Williamsport paper goes into a bit more detail on the basic mechanics involved in treating this water before it’s eventually re-used again by operators:

Trucks drive to a spill-proof concrete pad at the back of the building, hook up to an inbound receptacle and unload the wastewater, which is filtered to remove items such as stones, mud and other debris. The water then is filtered through a silt sack and stored in a lined concrete pit. … According to Larson engineer Quay Schappell, every truck that pulls into the facility has to complete a manifest showing the well from which its load was taken.

But of course, recycling is only one-half of the equation. The other key consideration relates to finding the most responsible and sustainable ways to access the water we need without adversely affecting ground or surface reservoirs. Most folks think that 100 percent of the water used in the development of the Marcellus Shale comes from surface sources like lakes, streams, ponds and rivers. But that’s never been true in the past, and it’s certainly not true today.

Just look around the Commonwealth for yourself. A story this week in the Centre Daily Times highlights an effort by MSC member Exco Resources to secure “400,000 gallons per day from the University Area Joint Authority’s beneficial reuse recycled wastewater” – literally taking already-used, about-to-be-discharged wastewater off the hands of local water authorities, and paying them for the right to do it.

Now look up along the Northern Tier, where Seneca Resources Corporation, another MSC member, announced earlier this fall that it was utilizing water from abandoned coal mines to conduct its fracturing operations in Tioga Co. Here, Seneca effectively killed two birds with one stone: Not only did the move allow the company to reduce its intake of freshwater, it also had the effect of greatly reducing discharges of mine water into local waterways – a release point that DEP had previously identified as the fifth most severe in the state. Less water means less traffic on the roads. Good for the environment, right? It’s also good for business:

By using the mine run-off water instead of fresh water resources, Seneca estimates it is saving $120,000 per well it drills. In addition to monetary savings, this method also reduces the truck traffic on the roads, saving wear and tear on roads. It’s too soon to tell what positive effects the removal of mine water will have on the local trout population.

Of course, the further east you venture along the Northern Tier, the closer you get to the boundaries of another interstate watershed commission that’s found itself in the news plenty over the past several months. Now we’re talking about the Delaware River Basin Commission (DRBC), which just this week announced yet another delay in promulgating new rules governing the permitting of Marcellus operations in the eastern sixth of the Commonwealth. Previously scheduled to be released in September, and then in October,DRBC now says they’ll be sent around sometime in November. Or maybe later.

But you know what? Let’s also give credit where credit’s due. Late last month, DRBC executive director Carol Collier addressed an annual meeting of energy producers in New Paltz, N.Y., using the occasion to dispel the myth that DRBC was anti-Marcellus, and outright dismissing the notion that water withdrawals associated with shale development were of even mild concern to her or her Commission.

According to Collier, more than 8 billion gallons of water are withdrawn from the Delaware River watershed every day — for a host of industrial, consumer and agricultural needs. The way the DRBC sees it, Marcellus development has the potential to account for 7 to 13 million gallons of water withdrawn a day – meaning that shale development, at maximum, would account for just 0.15 percent of water usage in the basin. You’ve heard of theMarcellus Multiplier, right? Now meet the Marcellus Rounding-Error.

Interestingly enough, some observers predict that eventually producers may able to tap the Marcellus using very little (or perhaps even no) water at all. Until then, every single member of the MSC is committed to doing more with less, and applying the best and most innovative technologies available to ensure the water we do use is used right – and secured in the most responsible, sustainable way possible.

Copyright http://marcelluscoalition.org/

The state Department of Environmental Protection and Cabot Oil and Gas Corp. traded barbs Tuesday about the scope, cause and solution for methane contamination in 18 residential water wells in Dimock Township.

The state agency and the natural gas drilling company have been arguing via press releases and advertisements since late last month when DEP announced that Pennsylvania American Water Co. will construct a new, 5.5-mile water main from its Lake Montrose treatment plant to provide water to the affected families, and Cabot would be made to pick up the tab.

“DEP was forced to take action since Cabot continues to deny responsibility for the contamination, despite overwhelming evidence of its responsibility,” DEP Secretary John Hanger said in a letter released widely on Tuesday and circulated over the weekend in Susquehanna County.

“Since that announcement was made, Cabot has launched a public relations campaign and much misinformation has been brought forth concerning who will be party to that solution and who will end up paying for it.”

In a press release also sent Tuesday, Cabot spokesman George Stark said that water tests performed by Cabot and DEP showed only four of the 18 water wells have methane at levels exceeding the 28 milligrams per liter limit suggested by the U.S. Department of the Interior’s Office of Surface Mining. He also said the company, which maintains it did not cause the methane contamination, has provided “substantial and persuasive proof that methane gas has been present in water wells in and around the Dimock area for generations.”

Hanger said in an interview Tuesday that Cabot “unfortunately” continues to deny responsibility and the company’s data “must be examined through that prism.”

The state’s environmental oversight agency determined that excessive pressures and faulty casings in 14 of Cabot’s natural gas wells caused methane from a rock layer above the Marcellus Shale to seep into residential water supplies.

The state’s evidence includes video recordings of gas bubbling between the casing in Cabot’s wells and high pressure readings “that could only exist in wells that are leaking,” as well as isotopic analysis – a form of chemical “fingerprinting” – that matched the gas found in five homes to the gas leaking from nearby Cabot wells.

Hanger said DEP testing since April has shown as many as 18 affected supplies. DEP will continue water tests until the Nov. 1 deadline for Cabot to rid the water of gas.

“We, of course, would be delighted, as the families would be, if in fact some of the gas went away,” he said. “We have seen declines at some properties, but not at all. We’ll do some more testing and frankly we’ll make our own judgments based on our own data.”

In the open letter to Susquehanna County residents, Hanger said PENNVEST, a state agency which finances water and sewer projects, will be asked to provide the $11.8 million for the water line project, and then the state will “aggressively seek to recover the cost of the project from Cabot.”

“No one in Dimock or Susquehanna County will pay for it and local taxes will not be increased as the result of it,” he said.

Besides the affected residents, others who live on Route 29 between Montrose and Dimock will have the option to tap into the water line if they choose, Hanger said, adding that the line should boost the value of homes and businesses nearby.

Stark called the project an “unwarranted burden on the taxpayers of Pennsylvania.”

“Given the science and our findings, we question how the secretary could spend the 12 million of taxpayer dollars,” he said in an interview. “He’s going to sue us to get it back. I’m not certain that a court will find in favor of the commonwealth.”

The public feud between Cabot and DEP was joined by a group of Susquehanna County residents and businesses called Enough, Already! last week, when the group bought an ad in the Mulligan’s Shopping Guide criticizing the waterline as a “terrible, big government decision” that is “expensive and unnecessary.”

The group asks residents to sign petitions, hosted at eight area businesses, telling PENNVEST to deny an application by DEP to fund the line.

Many of Cabot’s positions were echoed in the ad, which Cabot and members of Enough, Already! said the company did not place, write or pay for.

llegere@timesshamrock.com

eskrapits@citizensvoice.com

View article here.

Copyright:  The Times Tribune

Submitted by Readers
September 18, 2010

In a recent column (“Gas drilling’s threat to our water,” Sept. 12), Edward Smith makes claims about Marcellus Shale natural gas production that aren’t supported by facts.

Hydraulic fracturing, a 60-year-old technology that’s been used more than 1.1 million times since its inception in the 1940s, has never contaminated groundwater. A top Department of Environmental Protection official confirmed that “no one’s ever documented drinking water wells that have actually been shown to be impacted by fracking.” And a top Environmental Protection Agency official recently testified that “he hadn’t seen any documented cases that hydro-fracking was contaminating water supplies.”

Smith writes that “government needs to know the chemicals used in fracking.” But DEP already lists these additives on its website. Truth is, more than 99.5 percent of these fluids are made up of water and playground sand.

Readers should also know that advancements in technology have allowed Marcellus producers to recycle more than 60 percent of the water used in the process; many companies are recycling 100 percent.

It’s difficult to reconcile Smith’s call for a moratorium, and the need to deliver clean-burning Marcellus gas to Pennsylvanians – which is already helping to lower energy costs for Pennsylvanians and creating tens of thousands of jobs during one of the most difficult economic periods in our lifetime.

We do agree with Smith’s statement, “It must be done with every care and protection for our water and citizens.”

That’s not only our goal, it’s our expectation.

Kathryn Klaber

President and Executive Director, Marcellus Shale Coalition

Canonsburg, Washington County

Copyright: http://tribune-democrat.com

A licensed geologist from Tunkhannock says people living near natural gas drilling operations should have their well water tested prior to drilling activities, but he warns that not everyone who offers testing services is qualified to take water samples.

Citing his bachelor’s degree in earth and space science, master’s degree in geology, professional geologist license, water system operator licenses, sewage enforcement officer certification and other credentials, George Turner says he’s come across some water testers who “don’t know anything about anything and they’re claiming they know how to test groundwater.”

The state Department of Environmental Protection and the Penn State Cooperative Extension recommend that people living near future drilling sites have “baseline water testing” done in the event a drilling company causes or allows their well water to be contaminated.

Baseline testing data gathered before drilling could prove that a well was not contaminated prior to drilling activities.

Turner admitted that holding a geologist license isn’t necessary for properly taking samples of well water, but he believes the minimum requirement should be a bachelor’s degree in some environmental field and a few years of experience sampling in the field.

Showing various bottles and vials he uses to collect water samples, Turner explained that some chemicals must be added to collection containers before well water is put into them.

For example, nitric acid in one container, he said, keeps metals from precipitating out from inside the container. Sulfuric acid is added to a glass container that will hold water to be tested for oil and grease.

“The preservatives prevent anything in the water from separating out before it gets analyzed. You can’t use glass containers for the metals because some metals can leach out of the glass. You can’t use plastic containers for the volatile organics because plastic has volatile organics in it that would leach out into the water,” Turner said.

Turner shared some stories of private water samplers he, his customers or his fianc�e have come across.

One man said he had a degree from Harvard and used Penn State recommendations on what should be tested for.

But, Turner pointed out, when drilling into the Marcellus Shale took off in the region about a year and a half ago, Penn State’s list of things to be tested for did not contain methane gas.

“My God, that’s what these people are drilling for. That’s a no-brainer.”

Lead or sodium weren’t on the list, either.

“The Marcellus Shale that they’re drilling into is a marine-derived shale and, as such, is full of salt. And anything coming up out of it is going to be loaded with salt, or sodium. So the first three things you have to test for – and none of them is more important than the other – are methane gas, sodium chloride and barium sulfate,” Turner said.

Barium sulfate is added to drilling mud in large quantities to increase its density, he said.

“Penn State has since revised the list and it’s more along the lines of what I test for. Methane gas is on there now,

Turner said another water sampler told a group of people it wasn’t necessary to pay for a test for methane gas.

“He said all you have to do is light a match and if it doesn’t burn, that’s proof there’s no methane in your drinking water. Can you imagine going into court with that as proof there’s no methane in your drinking water?” Turner said.

Bryan Swistock, a Penn State water resources extension associate, acknowledged that early on in the process of developing testing recommendations, Penn State’s recommendations were “based on what we knew at the time” and did not include some things such as methane.

He pointed out, however, that methane was intentionally left off the list because tests for it were expensive, and there was and still is no standard sampling protocol for methane.

Swistock said it would be appropriate for a water sampler to have at least a bachelor’s degree. He also noted that Penn State has published a list of accredited testing laboratories as well as a sub-list of laboratories that also collect samples of well water that are all approved by the state Department of Environmental Protection.

He also said it’s in a laboratory’s best interest to ensure its water samplers are properly trained, “or they won’t look very good if a case goes to court.” But, he said, customers should not expect to have to pay an exorbitant fee for just for water sampling in addition to the cost of testing the water.

Turner also said a customer told him about someone sent by a natural gas company to collect well water samples. The sampler told the woman she was an environmental lawyer, yet she left vials of water samples from another residence in the back of her pickup truck while she conducted sampling inside the residence, Turner said.

That, Turner said, broke the chain of custody necessary for a strong case in court.

And, Turner noted, unqualified samplers would be “torn apart” by an attorney if a well contamination case went to court.

He also described sampling methods that caused possible cross-contamination. Turner said it would be in a gas company’s best interest to have a sampler cross-contaminate a water sample to make it appear that a well was contaminated before drilling began. That’s why he recommends private water sampling even if a gas company sent someone out to collect water samples.

Mark Carmon, a spokesman for the state Department of Environmental Protection, said that just as unscrupulous people without proper contracting experience or knowledge will converge on an area after a flood offering to perform repairs, the same thing could be happening with water samplers in natural gas drilling areas.

“In my own personal opinion, I would be a little leery of someone knocking on your door. But I would start asking questions such as who you’re certified by, what you’re certified for and then ask to see it in writing,” Carmon said.

Copyright The Times Leader PETE G. WILCOX/THE TIMES LEADER

Send Question/Comment to the Publisher

By Elizabeth Skrapits (Staff Writer)
Published: August 2, 2010

JACKSON TWP. – Just as individual property owners are testing their drinking water wells before natural gas drilling starts, Pennsylvania American Water Co. has established a baseline to ensure nothing affects the quality of water the company provides to its thousands of customers.

After giving The Citizens’ Voice a tour of the Ceasetown Reservoir’s filtration plant last week, Pennsylvania American Water representatives explained what the company is doing to augment its water quality monitoring to prevent contamination from natural gas drilling.

Although no gas wells are planned near the Huntsville or Ceasetown reservoirs in Jackson and Lehman townships, Encana Oil & Gas USA Inc. has leased mineral rights to land close to both reservoirs and is preparing to drill an exploratory well in Lake Township, not far from the Lehman Township border.

Pennsylvania American Water Production Manager Mark Cross said the company has met with Encana and showed the gas company maps to indicate where the reservoirs’ watershed is and where future drilling activity could affect them.

“We had a lot of conversations with them to say this is a concern to us, and we need ongoing communication, and we need to know what your plans are,” he said.

Pennsylvania American Water also shared its watershed maps with the state Department of Environmental Protection, Cross said. Although there is no legal requirement to notify water companies when drilling permits are issued, DEP will take the watershed maps into consideration, and Pennsylvania American Water is also keeping up “ongoing dialogue” with the state agency, he said.

“Our focus is we want to know what’s going on out there, we want constant communication, we want to know what is in place out there, what their mitigation measures are, what spill control and response plans they have,” Cross said. “And it’s worked very well. They’ve been very cooperative, both DEP and Encana.”

‘Constantly monitored’

When people in Ashley, Conyngham Township, Courtdale, Edwardsville, Hanover Township, Hunlock Township, Larksville, Nanticoke, Plymouth, Plymouth Township, Pringle, Salem Township, Shickshinny and Wilkes-Barre City turn on their taps, the water probably comes from the Ceasetown Reservoir, which is fed by Pikes Creek.

Pennsylvania American Water’s 70,000 customers served by the Ceasetown Reservoir have their water treated at a facility in Jackson Township. A similar facility treats the water from the nearby Huntsville Reservoir, which serves about 29,000 customers. Huntsville serves Dallas, Kingston Township, Swoyersville, West Wyoming and Wyoming.

The “raw water” from the reservoir is piped into the facility in a 42-inch main, where chemicals are added to coagulate the small particles and make them easier to remove, Cross said.

The water then goes through a series of filters, which include irregularly shaped plastic beads that gather impurities, and layers of sand and gravel. The water is treated with chlorine to disinfect it and lime to adjust the pH level, then it is sent to a series of storage tanks and pump stations for distribution to customers.

Ceasetown’s facility handles a normal flow of 9 million gallons a day, Plant Supervisor Sean Sorber said. During droughts, Harveys Creek is used as an emergency source, but that hasn’t been necessary for about 10 years, Cross said.

“Ceasetown Reservoir is a very good source, very good quality,” he said.

Cross said the water is “constantly monitored” at the plant, and physical tests are done in its lab. A sink in the lab has a series of specialized faucets, each pouring water in a different stage of treatment. Every shift at the plant runs a minimum of two series of 15 tests – about 100 a day – Sorber said.

Because of impending natural gas drilling, Pennsylvania American Water instituted an additional set of parameters, Cross said.

Several months ago full baseline testing started at Pikes Creek, Harveys Creek, the Huntsville Reservoir in several locations, and the raw and treated water at the Huntsville and Ceasetown plants, he said. The water is tested at the plant and in the watershed for substances including volatile organic compounds, methane and total dissolved solids – extremely tiny particles of minerals or organic matter.

“We ran a full series of baseline tests – VOCs, metals, methane – on all of the sources in this Luzerne, Lackawanna and Susquehanna county area that are subject to any possible drilling,” Sorber said. “So we have a good baseline of what we currently have, and those tests will be run periodically also, as activity increases.”

Conductivity tests are one way to measure the amount of total dissolved solids, or TDSs. Changing levels of TDSs could signify a lot of things, including the water is being affected by natural gas drilling. Sorber took a sample of untreated water from one of the faucets and placed a probe in the plastic cup, then checked the meter. It was normal.

“If we see something jumping up, that will be an indication for us there’s something going on. It’s a very straightforward test,” he said.

Besides monitoring and testing, Pennsylvania American Water is active in trying to get Pennsylvania legislation changed, according to PAWC Communications Director Terry Maenza.

Two things the company would like to see changed are adding a requirement for drinking water utilities to be notified of any nearby natural gas drilling permit applications, and to have the buffer zone outside which drilling is allowed increased from 100 feet to 2,500 feet.

“We’re being as vigilant as we possibly can be, just to keep an eye on what’s proposed and before activity takes place, what safeguards are going to be in place,” Maenza said.

Contact the writer:  eskrapits@citizensvoice.com, 570-821-2072

View article here.

Copyright:  Citizens Voice 

Agency convenes hearing in Canonsburg tomorrow to discuss scope of upcoming hydraulic fracturing study. But has EPA forgotten about its 2004 report?

Tomorrow night in Canonsburg, the EPA will convene its third public hearing on its upcoming study on hydraulic fracturing, a key technology that’s been used to produce energy in Pennsylvania for more than a half-century, but one that’s become especially important lately as efforts to convert the enormous potential of the Marcellus into jobs and revenues for Pennsylvanians move forward across the Commonwealth.

But for those keeping tally at home, this new study by EPA isn’t the first time the agency has looked into the safety and performance of fracturing technology. In a report released by EPA in June 2004, federal officials found the fracturing of coalbed methane formations “poses little or no threat” to underground sources of drinking water – despite that fact that coal seams generally reside close to formations carrying drinking water underground. In remarks set to be delivered at tomorrow’s hearing, MSC president and executive director Kathryn Klaber lays out some additional details (and context) associated with this landmark study:

In that report — the product of an intensive, four-year course of study first initiated under the Clinton administration — EPA found “no evidence” suggesting the fracturing of shallow coalbed methane reserves posed a threat to underground drinking water supplies. Certainly you’re aware that coalbed methane strata residethousands of feet closer to the water table than shale formations, and that the technology used today to access clean-burning natural gas from these formations is much more advanced and sophisticated than what was available in the past.

For their part, natural gas critics contend that EPA’s 2004 study on fracturing’s application to coalbed methane reserves somehow isn’t relevant to the current conversation about the Marcellus Shale. Come again? If the fracturing of shallow coalbeds near the water table was found to be safe by EPA, how is it that the fracturing of deep shale formations is any less so? After all, we’re talking about shale strata that reside thousands and thousands of feet below both the water table and the coal beds themselves.

Thursday’s forum in Canonsburg is expected to address some of these questions, and more generally lay out the direction that EPA will take in engaging in its second study on hydraulic fracturing in 70 months. And you know what? It’s an effort we support in full. With fracturing, we’re talking about a technology that’s been deployed more than 1.1 million times in the 60-plus years in which it’s been in commercial use. And in all that time, not a single government regulator – including the EPA – has made a single claim suggesting it’s a threat to groundwater. Assuming this new study is science-based and peer-reviewed, there’s no reason to believe its findings will diverge from what the agency has consistently found in the past.

So what will the latest installment of EPA’s hydraulic fracturing study series look like when it hits the shelves sometime in the next two or three years? Tough to say for sure, but if it ends up drawing on the testimony of regulators in the states, experts in the field, and everyday Americans whose lives are being made better and more prosperous thanks to the once-in-a-lifetime opportunity of shale gas in America – it should be quite a page-turner indeed.

In the meantime, folks interested in coming out to tell EPA what they think of responsible shale gas development in Pennsylvania have a few outstanding tasks to complete before they arrive tomorrow night. First order of business: Register for the meeting, which is easily accomplished by navigating to this page. Second: Make sure to stock up on all the facts. MSC fact sheets have been developed on a range of topics likely to be addressed in some form – from the full disclosure of materials involved in the fracturing process, to the many ways in which natural gas can be used as a workhorse in PA to deliver a clean, secure and affordable energy future. The full arsenal can be accessed here.

So that should just about do it. Pre-registration for the event starts at 5:00 p.m. sharp, and the address for the Hilton Garden Inn is 1000 Corporate Drive in Canonsburg. Hope to see you out there.

Copyright: Marcelluscoalition.org

BY STEVE McCONNELL (STAFF WRITER)
Published: July 15, 2010

A company developing a railroad facility to serve the natural gas drilling industry is also seeking to withdraw 905,000 gallons of water a day from the Lackawanna River in Fell Twp. to support its operation.

Honesdale-based Linde Corp. began developing the Carbondale Yards Bulk Rail Terminal this year inside the Enterprise Drive business park to provide a transportation mode for materials and to mix fluids on-site that natural gas drilling companies use in the drilling process.

Susan Obleski, a spokeswoman with the Susquehanna River Basin Commission, which regulates surface water withdrawals in the watershed, said the commission is reviewing Linde’s application to see if flow meters, which measure the amount of water in the river at all times, will need to be installed around the withdrawal point as a way to mitigate potential impact to aquatic life, especially during drought conditions.

Linde officials have said they intend to mix the drawn water with sand and a chemical concentration to create a “drilling mud.”

The river withdrawal point, which is located near Linde’s facility, is also upstream from a stretch of the Lackawanna River from Archbald to Olyphant designated as wild, “trophy” trout waters with stringent fishing regulations enacted by the state Fish and Boat Commission.

Larry Bundy, a law enforcement assistant regional supervisor for the state Fish and Boat Commission, which also regulates state waters and aquatic wildlife, said Wednesday that he “wasn’t aware” of Linde’s application. However, he said his agency relies on the river basin commission’s biologists and staff to make determinations on whether water withdrawals may impact trout or other aquatic life.

“I haven’t seen any problems,” he said of other commission-approved water withdrawals in his Northeast Pennsylvania jurisdiction.

As of Monday, the river basin commission had only approved only one water source withdrawal for natural gas-related development projects in Lackawanna County – 91,000 gallons a day from the South Branch of Tunkhannock Creek in Benton Twp.

It has approved dozens of others throughout its 27,510-square miles jurisdiction, however, including 22 water withdrawal applications specifically for natural gas projects in Susquehanna County.

The Susquehanna River Basin Commission could vote on Linde’s application at its September meeting.

Contact the writer: smcconnell @timesshamrock.com

View article here.

Copyright:  The Scranton Times