Bromide linked to oil/gas “brines”

Dr. Conrad Voltz, formerly of the Center for Environmental Health and Justice at U Pitt, testified in front of a Senate subcomittee today.   (4/11/11)

From a study he and his students did at a treatment plant that only handled “brine” from oil and gas operations in Pennsylvania, they found amongst 8 other effluents at levels that exceed standards:

Bromide, which forms mixed chloro-bromo byproducts in water treatment
facilities that have been linked to cancer and other health problems were found in
effluent at 10,688 times the levels generally found acceptable as a background in
surface water.

On March 7, 2011 Melody Kight at SUNY-ESF presented the initial
findings of her research on identifying flowback fluid contamination.

“It’s very difficult to distinguish” the source of elevated chlorides
in well or surface water, whether they’re from road salt, frack fluid,
or other sources of NaCl (salt).  Her studies indicate that the Na:Cl
ratio is at approximately 1:1 in all of them.  Therefore, a different
ratio must be used to “fingerprint” frack fluid contamination.

Parker in 1978 characterized Appalachian Basin formation brine.  He
found that as NaCl precipitates out of solution, bromide remains
dissolved in the brine.

Therefore, Ms. Kight rationalized, the Br:Cl ratio is the key.  Her
studies, using water samples from the PADEP and various calculating
and modeling software, showed that salty water from frack fluid and
from other sources have different Br:Cl ratios.

Bromide has a 0.01 mg/L detection limit.  Ms. Kight calculated that a
solution contaminated with as little as 0.0015% frack fluid could be
fingerprinted in this way.

http://sites.google.com/site/melodykight/home/research/abstracts

Ms. Kight is known to be a vocal supporter of natural gas drilling, but her research may prove useful.  Landowners should ensure their water, both pre- and post- drilling, has been checked for bromide.

Volunteer fishing enthusiasts look for unknown trout streams and test water quality

Volunteer fishing enthusiasts look for unknown trout streams and test water quality.

 

PGe
Article Tools
E-mail article
Print article
Digg this
del.icio.us
Stumble It!
Reddit
Facebook
MySpace
About the Author
John Hayes

John
Hayes
412-263-1991Call 412-263-1991
Outdoors editor John Hayes grew up in Pittsburgh’s eastern suburbs in a culture steeped in hunting, fishing, camping and hiking. At his first job in journalism, he cofounded the locally published “Outdoor Odyssey” magazine. Since then, he has worked as editor of City Paper, RockFlash and The Saltsburg Press, and edited a regional monthly newsletter for Trout Unlimited. A staff member at the Post-Gazette since 2000, he’s written news articles, features, entertainment critiques and outdoors stories, and coordinated Web and print programs for teen writers. His work has won Golden Quill, Keystone and Sigma Delta Chi awards.
More »
Hunting/Fishing
Volunteer fishing enthusiasts look for unknown trout streams and test water quality
Sunday, April 10, 2011
By John Hayes, Pittsburgh Post-Gazette
Bob Donaldson/Post-Gazette
Sean Brady of Observatory Hill, who says he’s “addicted to fly fishing,” tests the water of Pine Creek in Hampton.

In some Pennsylvania watersheds, the only thing separating Marcellus Shale drilling crews from a fortune underground could be brook trout.

Tomorrow in Harrisburg, the Pennsylvania Fish and Boat Commission will vote on the designation of 98 streams statewide as Naturally Reproducing Wild Trout Waters, following the recent discovery there of trout populations, some by volunteer anglers working in a program that trains them to do stream surveys.

The Wild Trout designation would trigger further state Department of Environmental Protection testing and possible issuance of land use restrictions in those watersheds that could limit development, including drilling.

Sixteen of the small streams and tributaries recommended for protection are located in Westmoreland, Fayette and Somerset counties. One more is in Cambria.

PG VIDEO: BASELINE READINGS ON STREAMS

As more than 800,000 Pennsylvania fishing license holders prepare for the opening of trout season on April 16 in most of the state, some angler volunteers are searching vulnerable waterways for unrecorded trout colonies, or charting baseline water conditions in Marcellus drilling zones that could be used for reference in potential pollution emergencies.

John Arway, executive director of the Fish and Boat Commission, said the water monitoring is not intended to thwart gas drilling — it’s a means of conducting “necessary research in tough economic times,” and couldn’t be done without help from citizen scientists.

“We don’t have enough eyes and ears out there. I don’t have enough biologists to monitor all of the water that we need to check to protect the resource,” he said.

Two separate volunteer water-monitoring projects with roughly the same goals are under way in Pennsylvania. One is run by Fish and Boat, the other by Washington, D.C.-based Trout Unlimited, a nonprofit cold-water conservation group with chapters in Pennsylvania. The nascent projects still lack focus and coordination in some areas, but the parallel projects are to intersect later this year and become a volunteer-based research tool of the Fish and Boat Commission.

Fish and Boat’s five-year Trout Management Plan, launched last year, calls on volunteers to provide data on 45,513 streams statewide that have never been visited by the agency’s biologists. Through the Unassessed Waters Program, volunteer students and interns at Lycoming and Kings’ colleges in central Pennsylvania take a day of training before heading out to headwaters and tributaries in specific watersheds in search of several things — most importantly, wild trout.


» A website for ongoing coverage, resources, comments and more.


If Fish and Boat commissioners designate a stream section as Wild Trout Waters, DEP staffers collect additional data on invertebrates and determine if the waters will be classified a High-Quality Cold-Water Fishery (which restricts development in the watershed) or Exceptional Value Fishery (which mandates more stringent restrictions).

“Originally the program was designed to look at waters where urban development growth was highest,” said Dave Miko, Fish and Boat chief of fisheries management, who wrote the state’s Trout Management Plan. “When the Marcellus Shale industry boomed, we re-prioritized those waters with [potential drilling] activity, as well as urban growth areas. … These are waters we certainly want to go look at because we feel those waters are most at risk of degradation.”

Trout need cold water. In particular, Pennsylvania’s official state fish and only stream trout native to its waters, the brook trout (Salvelinus fontinalis), thrives in about 54 degrees. Since the sealing of many coal mines in the state, lots of small streams that 20 years ago ran red or white with toxins are now healthy enough to attract caddis, mayflies and brook or brown trout. The discovery of reproducing populations of wild trout presents a clear and unmistakable indicator of clean water, an invaluable resource.

Of prime concern to the Fish and Boat Commission are potentially high-value cold-water tributaries that flow into warm-water streams or rivers with lower water-quality ratings. The unassessed tributaries, which potentially hold trout, currently get the lower classifications and lesser protections of the waters they flow to.

The easiest way to prove fish are making babies is to identify the presence of two year-classes of a species. Under the assessment program, volunteers are trained in the use of electro-fishing devices.

“Find trout smaller than 6 inches long and 12 inches long in the same place and you know you have multiple year-classes,” said Mr. Miko. “That means they’re reproducing.”

As part of Fish and Boat’s Trout Management Plan, the Unassessed Waters Program is funded through existing resources including grants, angler licensing and permitting fees. Last year, the program’s volunteers sampled more than 65 waterways. Fifty-five percent contained reproducing populations of brown or brook trout, prime indicators that could trigger DEP involvement if the Fish and Boat commissioners change those streams’ designations tomorrow.

By next year, said Mr. Miko, the expanding program will work with nine training campuses statewide, including the University of Pittsburgh, Duquesne University and the Western Pennsylvania Conservancy.

Trout Unlimited takes a different route to the same destination.

Essentially a Washington lobbying firm funded through dues paid by chapter members, TU has no official position on Marcellus Shale drilling. But with Pennsylvania’s 52 chapters — the largest state council in TU — the regional issue has piqued the interest of the group’s leadership, which recently hired Dave Sewak of Windber, near Johnston, to coordinate its volunteer-based water monitoring program, Coldwater Conservation Corps. In southwest Pennsylvania, TU’s Penn’s Woods West, Forbes Trail and Chestnut Ridge chapters participate.

Mr. Sewak, who worked on community conservation projects at the state Department of Conservation and Natural Resources, visits the chapters to explain the program and trains volunteers to use $300 monitoring kits provided by TU national. Each kit includes a GPS unit for precise marking of locations, pH strips for measuring acidity and alkalinity, items for measuring and recording data, and one LaMotte Tracer Pocket Tester, which measures temperature, conductivity and total dissolved solids. Volunteers also take water samples that are analyzed at Dickenson College in Carlisle, south of Harrisburg, for barium and strontium, signature elements of hydraulic fracturing fluids used in Marcellus Shale drilling. Volunteers are coached to bracket a drilling location with samples taken upstream and downstream of the site.

It’s not easy — volunteers are required to return to the same sites multiple times, log precision data and adhere to a rigorous data collection protocol.

“Development is moving very rapidly, and the state just doesn’t have the wherewithal to keep track of everything, especially in rural areas,” Mr. Sewak said. “Our guys are trained to know the whole [drilling] process. We put together a conservation success index based on solid science. They’ll be testing throughout the year and have a real good idea of what the stream should look like.”

It doesn’t always work that way. Some volunteers say they wish they were given more direction.

“There isn’t much action guidance on this program,” said Monty Murty of Laughlintown, president of Forbes Trail Trout Unlimited of Ligonier. He completed the Coldwater Conservation Corps training, and plans to begin testing as soon as Westmoreland County creeks drop to normal levels.

“They leave it up to the chapters to identify the most risky sites for Marcellus Shale impact,” he said. “At our next meeting, Step 1 will be to review maps in our area and prioritize sites to test baselines.” Nevertheless, he said, “It’s good work. Something that has to be done.”

Volunteer water monitor Sean Brady of Observatory Hill said he got involved because he’s “addicted to fly fishing.” With a biology degree and a background as assistant executive director at Venture Outdoors, he’s Riverlife Pittsburgh’s development director and a Penn’s Woods West Trout Unlimited member. Having completed training, he sees the Coldwater Conservation Corps as potentially useful, but says it remains “very focused on the details, but kind of unclear on where they want us to go and what to test.”

That could change later this year. Bob Weber, head of Fish and Boat’s Unassessed Waters Program, said he’s had discussions with Mr. Sewak on bringing the citizen science programs together. “I’m going to use [the TU program] to collect water samples in a lot of these streams, to help me to prioritize where to send sampling crews, and Dave [Sewak] will be the liaison between the Fish and Boat Commission and the TU chapters,” he said.

Steve Forde, a spokesman for the Marcellus Shale Coalition, said he wasn’t aware of the details of the volunteer testing programs, but in general the industry would welcome it.

“I think we have shown over several years we embrace added transparency on a variety of levels,” he said. “We are a highly regulated, highly transparent and consequently highly sophisticated industry, particularly when it comes to water quality.”

Mr. Arway said he believes gas can be extracted from Marcellus Shale without polluting water resources.

“Most operators,” he said, “want to do this well and safely.”

Forbes Trail Trout Unlimited members will choose assessment sites at their next meeting, 7 p.m. April 20 at the Winnie Palmer Nature Reserve in Latrobe, 724-238-7860.

 

First published on April 10, 2011 at 12:00 am

Read more: http://www.post-gazette.com/pg/11100/1138295-358.stm#ixzz1J8SQ2XZf

Residents: dozens of wells in Bradford County have been contaminated – News – Daily Review

Residents: dozens of wells in Bradford County have been contaminated – News – Daily Review.

Pennsylvania Limits Authority of Oil and Gas Inspectors

Pennsylvania Limits Authority of Oil and Gas Inspectors

And the Philadelphia Inquirer wrote today:
Pennsylvania environment chief now must approve any shale-drilling citations

In an unprecedented policy shift, inspectors in Pennsylvania have been ordered to stop issuing violations against drillers without prior approval from Gov. Corbett’s new environmental chief.

The change, ordered last week in response to complaints by the drilling industry and its supporters in the Pennsylvania legislature, dismayed ground-level staff in the Department of Environmental Protection and drew a chorus of outrage from environmental advocates.

“I could not believe it,” said John Hanger, the last DEP secretary under Gov. Ed Rendell. “It’s extraordinarily unwise. It’s going to cause the public in droves to lose confidence in the inspection process.”  The order applies only to enforcement actions in the Marcellus Shale….

read more: fully story =  http://www.philly.com/philly/news/118971044.html

This outrageous news follows hard on the heels of President Obama’s speech indicating his support for natural gas extraction, which means fracking with all its environmental destruction and harms to public health.  Natural gas stocks rose overnight.  But read this cogent analysis of the President’s “non-plan”:
Protectors, this news is a call to action.
1.  HOLD THE DATE: Saturday April 23rd, “River to River” march here in Philatelphia (Schuylkill to Delaware) to protect our waters — to reclaim our democracy and express our outrage about horizontal hydrofracking and the “Gasocracy” trying blatantly to take over our state.  We the people need clean air, water, earth: we won’t stand for this!
2.  USE TODAY’S NEWS AS AN ORGANIZING TOOL:  don’t “read it and weep,” get angry and organized.  Make your personal plan to get five, fifty, or 500 more people, businesses, and organizations to comment to the DRBC between now and April 12th using our new letter HERE: (Finally, it’s easy)! http://tinyurl.com/46lbsg6
Forward widely!  We will print and HAND DELIVER ALL E-LETTERS directly to the DRBC as long as they come in by April 12th midnight.
We can then galvanize all these letter-writers to speak out in an organized way to protect the whole state and region!
3.  FYI: where POW will be tonight, 7 pm, Drexel: (you can pick up lit. from our table here if you want to do outreach):  http://www.revbilly.com/events/drexel
Closing thought for the day from Protecting Our Waters organizers Gerald Kaufman, a former Pennsylvania legislator himself:
“This is important. Reading this [Obama’s non-plan] and the morning Inky regarding the DEP shale inspectors needing to get permission from the Secretary’s office to issue a violation is energizing me. I think back to the 60s and 70s and how we were able to impact the direction of the country because we were so well organized. We had mass involvement in the civil rights, anti war and women’s movements and it was the beginning of the environmental movement. Now we have a country ruled by the oligarchs and the only movement involving large numbers is the Tea Party. So instead of feeling depressed I feel energized and and am happy to be part of a larger movement that POW represents. I think the DEP article today is a great organizing tool.”   –Gerald Kaufman


Iris Marie Bloom
Director, Protecting Our Waters
www.protectingourwaters.com

c (215) 840-6489
protectingourwaters@gmail.com

MARCELLUS SHALE: THE GOOD, THE BAD AND THE UNKNOWN NYS Grange Apr. 11 at 7pm

MARCELLUS SHALE: THE GOOD, THE BAD AND THE UNKNOWN

LESSONS LEARNED FROM BRADFORD COUNTY PENNSYLVANIA

An educational seminar on natural gas exploration is scheduled for

Monday April 11th, from 7pm to 9pm at the New York State Grange Headquarters in Cortland, NY.

The seminar will focus on the issues associated with natural gas production in shale formations and lessons learned by our neighbors in northern Pennsylvania (PA).

With over 400 wells, Bradford County, PA is considered to be at the forefront of development in the Marcellus shale “natural gas play”. When the race for natural gas development in shale formations came to PA, the State and Bradford County were not as prepared as they would like to have been. The PA Department of Environmental Protection was quick to issue permits for extracting gas through the use of horizontal hydrofracturing. Horizontal hydrofracturing brought a wide range of opportunities and impacts to the local communities.

With the current moratorium on horizontal hydrofracturing in New York State, local communities have an opportunity to hear firsthand what is happening in northern PA in order to be better prepared for natural gas development, should it come here. With over 30 years of experience at the Bradford County Conservation District, Manager Mike Lovegreen knows every nook and cranny of his county and has seen firsthand the impact this industry can have on small rural communities. Mike will be discussing his experiences relating to the natural gas industry and what the Conservation District and local municipalities roles are regarding issues such as water quality monitoring, roads, economic development, etc. He will discuss the importance of maintaining a good working relationship between local government, the gas industry and the community. All landowners, local officials and community members are invited to attend this informational seminar focusing on Bradford County’s experiences with the natural gas boom of recent years.

This seminar is sponsored by the Cortland County Soil and Water Conservation District (SWCD) and is free and open to the public. If you have any questions about the seminar or any of the services or programs provided by the SWCD please call 607-756-5991 or visit the SWCD website at http://www.cortlandswcd.org.

=========================================================

Previous presentation

Mike Lovegreen, Bradford County Conservation District Manager, spoke at the Otsego County Water Quality Coordinating Committee meeting on Tuesday, February 22 on first-hand experiences there. He had a lot of interesting things to say — some expected, some not. The boom town information is worth a look. Please see the article in the current issue of OCCA’s newsletter, “The Lookout.” A video is available, and there is a link to his PowerPoint presentation on the OCCA website homepage.

===============================================

Comment:

Most of what has happened in Pennsylvania is a good lesson – in what not to do:

1. The major assets – the gas wells themselves – are tax exempt from property (ad valorem) tax in Pa.

The schools, counties, towns get nothing from them = zero.

Pa. is perhaps the only (?) state that exempts gas wells from local property tax.

Payoffs in Harrisburg that keep it this way.

No money for regulation, no money for EMS, for roads, nada

2. The product – natural gas –  is tax exempt under Pa. law – one of only 2 states (with gas production) that exempts it

Because Pa. has the best politicians that money can buy. No money for regulation, for roads, for nada

3. Since most of the producers, suppliers and crews are from out of state,  most of the money leaves the state tax free


4. The fracking flowback ends up on the roads and rivers in Pa. because there is no safe place to dispose of it in Pa.

The closest disposal wells are across the state line in Ohio.

So it gets dumped illegally or sold as “de-icer”. They catch some dumpers – most they don’t.

“Recycling/re-use” simply increases the toxicity with  each pass.

“Processing” simply separates the toxic radioactive sludge from the toxic radioactive water.


So far as shale gas development is concerned, Pa. is a bad joke.

More like a 3rd world country.

Suggest you treat any “expert” from Pa. accordingly. . .

James Northrup

DEP Shuts Down Potter County Gas Well Pre-Construction Site Over Violations, Impacting… — WILLIAMSPORT, Pa., March 23, 2011 /PRNewswire-USNewswire/ —

DEP Shuts Down Potter County Gas Well Pre-Construction Site Over Violations, Impacting… — WILLIAMSPORT, Pa., March 23, 2011 /PRNewswire-USNewswire/ —.

DEP Shuts Down Potter County Gas Well Pre-Construction Site Over Violations, Impacting Public Water Supply

.translangcomp { float: left; clear: left; margin-top: 15px; margin-left: 90px; }

1

0

0

WILLIAMSPORT, Pa., March 23, 2011 /PRNewswire-USNewswire/ — The Department of Environmental Protection has ordered Chesapeake Energy to cease work on a natural gas drilling well pad for failing to comply with regulations and impacting one of Galeton Borough Water Authority’s water sources.

The well pad was in the site-preparation phase, which occurs before any well construction or drilling activities take place.

In conducting site-preparation activities at the Beech Flats well pad in West Branch Township, Potter County, Chesapeake failed to implement the required erosion and sediment controls. As a result, a significant amount of sediment and silt discharged from the site into a stream that is a tributary to a water source serving Galeton‘s system. The Galeton Water Authority has been forced to use another permitted water source to serve its customers.

“In order to protect human health and the environment, we ordered Chesapeake to stop all construction activity,” DEP North-central Regional Director Nels Taber said. “They must begin corrective action on this site immediately.”

By March 29, the company must correct the existing violations at the site and review and revise, as appropriate, its Erosion and Sediment Control Plan to prevent future damage. DEP will not permit Chesapeake to resume construction at the site until all terms of the order are met.

After a routine site inspection March 8 and a March 10 meeting with Chesapeake, DEP issued a notice of violation for several infractions of the Clean Streams Law and Oil and Gas Act. The company did not respond to the notice. During follow-up inspections March 21 and 22, staff discovered the additional violations and impacts that resulted in the March 22 order.

For more information about DEP, visit www.depweb.state.pa.us.

Media contact: Katy Gresh, +1-412-442-4203

SOURCE Pennsylvania Department of Environmental Protection

Back to topRELATED LINKS
http://www.depweb.state.pa.us

 

EPA BEGINS INVESTIGATION OF PENNSYLVANIA

EPA BEGINS INVESTIGATION OF PENNSYLVANIA


EPA sends letter to PA regarding drinking water.
PA has 30-days notice about waste treatment / records:
http://www.damascuscitizens.org/EPA-to-PA.pdf

NYS Proposed Water Withdrawal Legislation Mar. 2011

water withdrawal legislation A5318A-S3798

Dear Colleagues,

The Sierra Club Atlantic Chapter has serious concerns that, with little public debate, major changes to New York’s water laws are being proposed.

Water Withdrawal Permitting bills A5318A and S3798 do not address key issues relating to high-volume hydraulic fracturing or how to equitably allocate water among competing water users.

We are calling for hearings on the proposed legislation to address these and other issues.

The bill is on the agenda for this Tuesday’s (3/15/11) Assembly Environmental Conservation Committee meeting, so urgent action is needed to help distribute this advisory now and outreach to Albany legislators on Monday (3/14/11) to prevent the bill from moving out of committee before hearings are held.

Calls to Albany legislators should be made on Monday, March 14th.

Our priority is to reach out to Assembly EnCon members (including Barbara Lifton and Gary Finch) expressing the need for a hearing to address our questions and concerns. Please find below:

  • Please call members of the Assembly EnCon committee  (attached list) today (3/14/11) and ask for public hearings on Water Withdrawal Legislation A5318A and S3798.
  • Environmental Conservation Committee Members: Chair, Robert Sweeney

Members: Thomas Abinanti,William Barclay, Daniel Burling, Robert Castelli, John Ceretto, William Colton, Jane Corwin, Marcos Crespo, Steven Cymbrowitz, Gary Finch, Deborah Glick, Aileen Gunther, Sean Hanna, Ellen Jaffee, Brian Kavanagh, George Latimer, Barbara Lifton, Peter Lopez, Donna Lupardo, Daniel O’Donnell, Crystal Peoples-Stokes, Joseph Saladino, Teresa Sayward, Michelle Schimel
http://assembly.state.ny.us/comm/?sec=mem&id=15 (click on this link and enter the name of the assembly member and click on “contact”  Phone numbers are in the attachment below.

  • Read the longer list of concerns (also Atlantic Chapter brochure attached)
  • We suggest you also request an in-district appointment with Assembly members for either Thursday or Friday and
  • follow up with phone calls.Thanks for helping to protect the precious waters New York State.Best regards,
    Gusti Bogok, Co-chair
    Sierra Club Atlantic Chapter Gas Drilling Task Force

HEARINGS NEEDED ON PROPOSED WATER WITHDRAWAL LEGISLATION

  • The New York State legislature is considering significant changes to New York’s water laws.
  • These changes need public debate as they do not address the vast amounts of water used in high-volume hydraulic fracturing or how to equitably allocate water among competing water users.
  • For these reasons and others, the Sierra Club is calling on the NYS legislature to hold hearings on the proposed water withdrawal legislation, A5318A and S3798.

More Background:

Sierra Club, Atlantic Chapter Flyer on Water Withdrawal Legislation

The following are among the issues we would like our legislators to address:

  1. The current usage of large private users needs to be known. Since 2010, large water users have been required to file water withdrawal reports and the DEC has been required to disclose the reports pursuant to §15-3301 of the Environmental Conservation Law.  The DEC has not disclosed whether any entities have made the required filings and has not made the reports available.  Legislators need this information in order to properly evaluate the Legislation.
  2. An analysis of projected aquifer usage needs to be made with particular attention to the projected demands of high volume, hydraulic fracturing. Should permits issued be tied to a percentage of an aquifer’s capacity rather than a flat amount?
  3. An analysis of whether the proposed legislation will facilitate inter-basin transfers of waste water, including fracking flowback.
  4. An analysis of the impact permitting will have on the rights of non-permitted water users.  The proposed legislation will change New York’s water laws from a riparian rights to a regulated riparian system.  It needs to be understood whether the issuance of permits to large water users could hinder non-permitted users from having
    sufficient access to water in times of water scarcity. Will the issuance of water withdrawal permits restrict the DEC’s powers to address harmful water withdrawals?
  5. The need to allow private enforcement of permit conditions by parties harmed by the failure of a permit holder to comply with its permit conditions.
  6. The potential for abuse of eminent domain if municipalities are allowed to deplete potable water sources through sale of water to commercial buyers, and then use eminent domain to enlarge their water sources to compensate for those losses.
  7. The fiscal and public trust implications of whether or not fees are charged for permitting and for water usage.
  8. The DEC’s projections as to how many permits will be required and the additional staffing necessary to issue and provide oversight of the proposed permits.
  9. The need for more defined standards for the regulatory program in the proposed legislation. For example, §15-0503 of the Environmental Conservation Law relating to the issuance of permits for structures in water (dams and docks) included in the bill, contains much more specific standards for the issuance of permits.
  10. The environmental health and environmental justice consequences of issuing water withdrawal permits to large water users.
  11. The need to include language affirming the riparian rights in the bill. Language affirming riparian rights is contained in the Delaware River Basin Compact, the Susquehanna River Basin Compact and the Great Lakes/St. Lawrence River Basin Water Resources Compact.
  12. The need to more clearly define the state’s public trust obligations to hold the waters of the state in trust for all the residents of the state.

The bill will not allow drillers open access to water – that is the situation that currently exists in NY and what the bill will rectify. The bill will set up a regulatory system by which any large user would have to apply for a permit, comply with water conservation and efficiency standards, and be subjected to DEC oversight with public scrutiny and input.

Currently, those impacted by other users have to wait until harm can be proven – after the damage is done. This program allows for preemptive action so that we can actually protect rather than remediate.

Members of the Assembly Environmental Conservation Committee

Groups say facilities wrongly discharging drilling wastewater

Groups say facilities wrongly discharging drilling wastewater.

Groups say facilities wrongly discharging drilling wastewater

Organizations plan to file a lawsuit
Friday, March 11, 2011

Two municipal sewage treatment facilities that together discharge 150,000 gallons a day of Marcellus Shale wastewater into the Monongahela River watershed don’t have federal permits for such pollution discharges and should, according to two environmental organizations that say they will sue the facilities in federal court.

Clean Water Action and Three Rivers Waterkeeper on Thursday filed a “notice of intent to sue” against sewage treatment operations in McKeesport and Franklin, Greene County, claiming the facilities are in violation of the federal Clean Water Act.

The notice marks the first legal action challenging the widespread practice of discharging Marcellus wastewater through municipal treatment facilities that do not have permits to treat such waste.

The groups were critical of both the state Department of Environmental Protection and the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency for failing to enforce existing discharge permits, which limit the facilities to treating and discharging sewage waste water. At least 11 sewage treatment facilities in the state accept and discharge Marcellus wastewater.


 


“We cannot wait any longer to rely on the state and the EPA to act,” said Myron Arnowitt, state director of Clean Water Action. “These sewage plants have been illegally discharging gas drilling wastewater into our rivers since 2008 without a permit as required by the Clean Water Act.”

Mr. Arnowitt said the treatment facilities should immediately stop accepting the gas drilling wastewater or seek permission to amend their permits so they can legally do so.

The 18-page legal notice sent to the treatment plant and municipal officials in McKeesport and Franklin is a requirement of many federal environmental laws that include citizen suit provisions. It’s the first step toward filing a lawsuit and provides 60 days to negotiate a settlement before a lawsuit can be filed.

In response to water quality concerns, the DEP in 2008 limited the Municipal Authority for the City of McKeesport’s treatment and discharge of Marcellus Shale drilling wastewater to 1 percent of its total discharge, or an average of 102,000 gallons a day going into the Monongahela River. This year the authority’s Marcellus discharge is limited to 99,700 gallons a day, based on its average daily discharge in 2010.

The Franklin Township Sewer Authority in Greene County discharges an average of 50,000 gallons a day of Marcellus drilling wastewater into the South Fork of Ten Mile Creek, a tributary of the Monongahela River. That’s equal to 5 percent of the authority’s daily discharge, and allowed under a negotiated consent agreement with the state Department of Environmental Protection.

Those state-imposed treatment and discharge limits don’t address the main claim of the environmental groups: that their existing discharge permits haven’t been changed to allow them to accept the drilling wastewater and that the discharges are having a detrimental effect on water quality in the rivers.

About 500,000 people get their drinking water from the Mon.

“Their failure to follow proper procedures for authorization to discharge oil and as wastewater renders their discharge illegal,” the notice states. “Their failure to follow the requirements pertaining to the pretreatment program also leaves them in violation of the Clean Water Act.”

Joe Ross, executive director of the McKeesport authority, and George Scott, general manager of the Franklin facility, said Thursday afternoon they hadn’t seen the notice filing or been contacted by the environmental groups, so declined to comment.

Don Hopey: dhopey@post-gazette.com or 412-263-1983.
First published on March 11, 2011 at 12:00 am

Bromide: A concern in drilling wastewater

Bromide: A concern in drilling wastewater.

Bromide: A concern in drilling wastewater
Sunday, March 13, 2011

Ballooning bromide concentrations in the region’s rivers, occurring as Marcellus Shale wastewater discharges increase, is a much bigger worry than the risk of high radiation levels, public water suppliers say.

Unlike radiation, which so far has shown up at scary levels only in Marcellus Shale hydraulic fracturing wastewater sampling done at wellheads, the spike in salty bromides in Western Pennsylvania’s rivers and creeks has already put some public water suppliers into violation of federal safe drinking water standards.

Others, like the Pittsburgh Water and Sewer Authority, haven’t exceeded those limits but have been pushed up against them. Some have had to change the way they treat water.

Bromide is a salty substance commonly found in seawater. It was once used in sedatives and headache remedies like Bromo-Seltzer until it was withdrawn because of concerns about toxicity. When it shows up at elevated levels in freshwater, it is due to human activities. The problem isn’t so much the bromide in the river but what happens when that river water is treated to become drinking water.

Bromide facilitates formation of brominated trihalomethanes, also known as THMs, when it is exposed to disinfectant processes in water treatment plants. THMs are volatile organic liquid compounds.

Studies show a link between ingestion of and exposure to THMs and several types of cancer and birth defects.

“Our biggest concerns are about bromide, which has become a problem over the last six months or so,” said Stanley States, water quality manager with the Pittsburgh Water and Sewer Authority, which draws water from the Allegheny River for its 400,000 customers. “Trihalomethanes are strictly regulated because of the health risks. We’ve seen levels that are threatening the standards.”

The federal safe drinking water standard for THMs is 80 micrograms per cubic liter, and removing them from finished drinking water is difficult. Keeping bromide levels in raw water sources low is a much easier way to address the problem.

Mr. States said the elevated bromide levels in the river could be coming from municipal sewage treatment plants and brine treatment plants handling Marcellus Shale drilling and hydrofracking wastewater or from discharges by coal-fired power plants water discharges. He said four municipal sewage facilities and four brine treatment plants are handling and discharging Marcellus Shale wastewater upriver from Pittsburgh’s drinking water intake pipe in Aspinwall.

“Something’s changed and it could possibly be related to the treating of Marcellus Shale drilling wastewater,” Mr. States said. “There will be a lot more Marcellus Shale wells operating in the region before there are a whole lot less and our concern is in providing safe drinking water. We’re not anti-Marcellus Shale. We’re anti-bromide.”

Problem through the region

Pittsburgh is not alone. The Wilkinsburg-Penn Joint Water Authority issued a notice to its customers in January informing them of the bromide problem and said it was necessary to change its water treatment methods to stay in compliance with state and federal drinking water standards.

“Due to the sudden increase in bromide concentration in the Allegheny River, all water suppliers are beginning to have a problem controlling this trihalomethane formation,” the authority wrote on its Web page. “All water purveyors on the Allegheny River System are working together to try and find out the source of the elevated bromide levels.”

Mr. States said a study is under way on the Allegheny River and its tributaries to identify sources of bromide in the river.

The Department of Environmental Protection is participating in that river sampling study and another in the Monongahela River watershed.

Katy Gresh, a DEP spokeswoman, said the department plans to order the industrial brine plants, sewage treatment facilities and coal-powered power plants on the rivers to conduct sampling at their discharge pipes.

“We will get and review those results,” Ms. Gresh said. “If we can control the largest contributors, that will help solve the problem.”

Jeanne VanBriesen, a Carnegie Mellon University professor of civil and environmental engineering, said testing there showed an unusual spike in bromide levels in July and August. Although they’ve tapered a bit since then, they remain higher than normal, said Ms. VanBriesen, who has been studying water quality in the Monongahela River since fall 2009.

She said the two biggest sources of bromide in the watershed are Marcellus wastewater from sewage treatment facilities and wastewater from new smokestack scrubbers at coal-fired power plants. The plants cannot remove the bromide in wastewater.

Bromide levels vary in discharges from both sources, but bromide is generally found at higher concentrations in Marcellus wastewater.

“It’s difficult to make a definitive statement about where it’s all coming from, but we do know it’s going into our drinking water treatment plants and affecting the treatment of our water,” Ms. VanBriesen said. “The most logical way to fix that is to reduce the amount of bromide in the rivers and creeks.”

Millions of gallons

Marcellus Shale drilling and hydraulic fracturing operations use an average of 4 million gallons of water to drill and “frack” each well. The drilling industry says it recycles approximately 70 percent of the wastewater from its well fracking operations, but millions of gallons are still funneled through 11 sewage treatment facilities and five brine treatment plants, then discharged into the state’s rivers and streams.

Together, the eight facilities on the Allegheny and its tributaries are allowed to discharge an average of 1.5 million gallons of Marcellus drilling wastewater and hydraulic fracturing fluid a day, according to state Department of Environmental Protection records. Marcellus discharges from three treatment facilities on the Monongahela River total 185,000 gallons a day. Another 650,000 gallons a day flow into the Ohio and its tributaries.

Drilling companies and the Marcellus Shale Coalition, an advocacy and lobbying organization representing most of the companies doing shale gas drilling in Pennsylvania, said the industry isn’t to blame for higher bromide levels.

“When you look at the amount of Marcellus Shale wastewater that is being discharged it’s low” compared to the river flows, said Matt Pitzarella, a spokesman for Range Resources. “So those [bromide] increases are not an impact of Marcellus Shale.” Range Resources recycled 90 percent of its wastewater last year and has set a goal of 100 percent for 2011.

“We certainly see this as a non-Marcellus issue,” said Steve Forde, a shale coalition spokesman, who cited a 2010 U.S. Geological Survey study that noted higher bromide levels nationwide, especially in urban areas. “Road salt use has been identified as one of the culprits for that.”

Ms. VanBriesen said that’s not likely because road salt contains more chloride and little bromide, and her water testing didn’t find a corresponding spike in chloride levels. Plus the bromide spike in the rivers first occurred in the summer.

“So to implicate road salt, well, I wouldn’t buy that,” she said. “The bromide spike happened in July and August when you wouldn’t be applying road salt. So that wasn’t a factor.”

Changing treatment process

Whatever the origin of the bromide spike, Jerry Schulte, manager of source water protection for the Ohio River Valley Water Sanitation Commission, said bromide is “absolutely an issue” for water treatment plants.

“We’ve identified bromide as a compound of concern,” Mr. Schulte said, adding that ORSANCO’s triennial review of pollution control standards in April will focus on developing a new, first-time standard for bromide in the watershed.

Discharges of bromides and bromide levels in rivers or streams are not now regulated by ORSANCO or by the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency.

The Josephine brine treatment facility, also known as Franklin Brine, on Blacklick Creek in the Allegheny’s watershed, discharges an average of 120,000 gallons a day of Marcellus wastewater that, at peak levels, contains high concentrations of bromide, chlorides and total dissolved solids, according to sampling done by the University of Pittsburgh’s Center for Healthy Environments and Communities.

“There’s pretty high bromide going into the creek. Certainly it is a public health threat,” said Conrad Dan Volz, director of the Center for Healthy Environments and Communities. “And to remove brominated THMs, that’s going to break the bank for public water systems.”

Water treatment plants can get around the bromide problem by changing their treatment methods — substituting chloramines for the chlorides they normally use in the disinfection process. That’s what the Wilkinsburg-Penn water authority did.

The chloramines produce different, less toxic, treatment byproducts, but those can produce other problems, including causing lead and copper to leach out of old water pipelines and into drinking water as happened in Washington, D.C., when it made such a switch in 2000.

Ms. VanBriesen said water utilities making such a change can add phosphate to their finished water to prevent lead from leaching out of the pipes.

Another way to avoid THMs, she said, is to change the way water utilities mix, aerate and store their finished water, and a number of suppliers are considering that.

One water treatment facility that has had problems with keeping THM concentrations in finished water below the 80 parts per billion federal standard is Beaver Falls, in Beaver County, which was required to notify its 50,000 customers in 22 municipalities of the problem for the first three quarters of 2010.

The authority changed its treatment methods, from chlorine to chloramines, which don’t form THMs, at a cost of approximately $15,000 last year. That allowed the water supplier to meet the standard for the last three months of the year, said Jim Riggio, general manager of the water system.

Although testing done by the state DEP hasn’t been able to pinpoint a cause of the higher bromide levels in the Beaver River, Mr. Riggio said they coincided with upriver discharges of treated Marcellus Shale fracking wastewater.

“We went from non-detectable levels of bromide to increased levels a couple of years ago,” Mr. Riggio said. “When I see the whole frack water thing taking off and the same time we start to have problems, well, until you can tell me different, that’s what I assume it is. And it seems like a lot of the water suppliers on the Beaver and Mon rivers had similar problems to what we did.”

 

Don Hopey: dhopey@post-gazette.com or 412-263-1983.
First published on March 13, 2011 at 12:00 am