Local agencies allow gas drilling exemption

State could force companies to name chemicals

By TOM KANE

REGION — The environmental agencies of New York and Pennsylvania are not requiring gas drilling companies to list the fluids used in the drilling technique called fracturing or fracking, even though there has recently been a groundswell of criticism of the practice across the nation.

Geologists and engineers are saying that toxic fluids are being used and that they have contaminated the drinking water in many areas of the country.

The reason the agencies are not requiring disclosure is that the Energy Policy Act of 2005 exempts the procedure from the requirements of the Safe Drinking Water Act that regulates other drilling techniques. Fracking is a method of forcing fluids under great pressure to fracture rock formations deep in the ground, which, it is claimed, contain large quantities of natural gas.

The energy bill followed a closed-door meeting held by Vice President Dick Cheney with a number of people from the energy industry professionals and lobbyist who sought the adoption of the exemption over gas drilling, claiming that regulations of the new method would hurt the industry.

With the help of Cheney, Halliburton and the other major gas producing companies have successfully gotten the EPA to declare the patented formula for the fluids as “proprietary” and therefore private.

EPA study deemed flawed

According to an EPA study that was released in June of 2007, it was concluded that “the injection of hydraulic fracturing fluids into coal methane wells possess little or no threat” to drinking water supplies and “does not justify additional study at this time.”

The EPA study has come under sharp attack within the agency. One of the environmental engineers on the study, Weston Wilson, a 30-year veteran of the EPA in Denver, stated that, the “EPA produced a final report that I believe is scientifically unsound and contrary to the purposes of the law.” Wilson, who sought whistle-blower protection, also stated before Congress that “this study was hijacked.” The EPA’s ruling “may result in danger to public health and safety,” he said.

In addressing the recent complaints from landowners in Texas, Colorado, Alabama and other parts of the country, U.S. Congressman Henry Waxman (D-CA), who chairs the Committee on Oversight & Government Reform, has been conducting hearings to investigate the allegations of contamination to the drinking water caused by toxic fluids that are added to enhance drilling.

“Many people who live near oil and gas operations experience symptoms resembling those that are caused by the toxic substances found in oil and gas or the chemical additives used to produce them,” said Amy Mall, of the National Resources Defenses Council (NRDC) at the Waxman hearings.

At the hearings, scientists from the communities and from the companies have come down on opposing sides on the contamination issue, one side stating that there is, and the other that there isn’t contamination.

According to Karen Lightfoot, a staff member for Waxman’s committee, the states may require hydraulic fracturing companies to disclose the chemicals they use in the fracturing fluids if state law allows it. “It is my understanding that there are no states that require this,” she said.

Regulating agencies

Neither the DEP nor the DEC gas and oil bureau’s staff are aware of any interest in passing such a law in either state. “If there was any movement to pass such a law, we would have to be contacted about it,” said Jack Dahl, director of the DEC’s Bureau of Gas and Oil Regulation. “So far, we have received no indication that there is interest in passing such a law.”

The DEC said it had no regulation requiring the drilling companies to list the fluids they use in fracking before they begin drilling.

“The drilling companies in our area do not use the toxic fluids mentioned at the Waxman committee hearings,” DEC’s Dahl said. “The companies we talked to said that they use only water and sand.”

“If we find evidence that they are using things like diesel, our inspectors will stop them,” Dahl said.

Some landowners have objected that the agency has to wait until the drilling has begun and are relying on a finite number of inspectors. “I can tell you that our experience has been that the companies in our state do not use these toxic fluids. I know these companies well and I don’t believe they are lying to us.”

The DEP says that the agency has laws and regulations in place to protect water supplies.

“We will investigate every water-supply complaint and if the results of that investigation are that an oil and gas company is responsible, they will be ordered to replace the water supply,” said Joseph Umholtz, DEP engineer of the Bureau of Oil and Gas Management (BOGM) in an email statement.

Umholtz wrote that the agency has drilling and casing regulations in place in the regulations that are designed to protect the fresh water zones from contamination using the vertical drilling process. The DEP has not required the companies to list the fracking fluids before drilling starts.

“No one, to the best of my knowledge, is using diesel fuel to frack in PA,” Umholtz wrote.

“As to what additives are in the fracking fluid, the company’s PPC [Preparedness, Prevention and Contingency] plan is really the best source of information on that at the moment. We are gathering our own samples to see if anything unusual turns up,” he wrote.

Opponents’ reaction

“It’s outrageous that this exemption for fracking is granted by the EPA,” said Pat Carullo, spokesman for the Damascus Citizens for Self Government and Friends. “All the protections that our government has assembled over the last four or five decades have been dismantled by corporate interests. Look what Rachel Carson had to do to have DDT outlawed. She was vilified by the industry even though birds, like the American bald eagle, were becoming extinct. In a culture like ours where checks and balances have been dismantled, it is the responsibility of the people to speak out and defend the environment.”