Gas drilling gap ‘on the ground’

Increased regulation; inadequate enforcement

By SANDY LONG

UPPER DELAWARE RIVER REGION — Based on testimony received at its meeting on July 15 regarding Chesapeake Appalachia’s proposed surface water withdrawal for natural gas exploration in Buckingham Township,Wayne County, PA, the Delaware River Basin Commission (DRBC) is preparing changes to that docket. It will accept new testimony on the revised docket at a hearing scheduled for September 23 at the Pennsylvania Power and Light Environmental Education Center in Hawley, PA, according to DRBC executive director Carol Collier.

Collier announced the news at the Upper Delaware Council’s (UDC) meeting in Narrowsburg, NY on August 6.

“There are a lot of issues to address,” said Collier. “Our intent is not to stop drilling, but to ensure that it doesn’t harm the water resources of the basin.” The regular commission meeting of September 22 will move to October 22. The revised docket will be available on the DRBC website ( www.state.nj.us/drbc/ ). The commissioners will receive the testimony from the September 23 meeting and will have the chance to review the information and be prepared to act on it on October 22, according to Collier.

In addition to Chesapeake’s proposed water withdrawal at the Cutrone property on the West Branch of the Delaware River, Collier noted that the DRBC has several other docket applications in-house.

Those include the Andrews Forest Products water withdrawal site on the East Branch of the Delaware River in the Village of Hancock being proposed by Chesapeake Appalachia; the Matoushek/Stone Energy Corporation gas well in Clinton Township; a proposed Stone Energy Corporation water withdrawal site on the upper reaches of the West Branch of the Lackawaxen River; and a proposed Arbor Operating water withdrawal site in Bucks County in southeast Pennsylvania.

Collier also reported that pre-application discussions are underway with XTO Energy for a number of surface water withdrawals and with Pennswood Oil and Gas for its Stockport and Preston sites in Pennsylvania. “We understand that the New York Department of Environmental Conservation (DEC) has 12 applications from Chesapeake in-house now,” she added.

Collier told the council that the DRBC is preparing enhanced regulations to specifically address oil and gas.

The DRBC is handling the process as three separate pieces: water withdrawal, well-pad approval and wastewater management. “We are looking at the withdrawal sites and the potential impact to the river or the tributary, with the amount of water and timing of the withdrawal,” she explained. “The next step would be the well pad approval. This whole area is within the special protection waters because the water quality is so good. We will be looking at non-point source control, storm-water management, erosion control. We’re not going to overlap with what the state does in terms of casing wells, but there are certain water-related issues that we want to look at.

“Thirdly is the wastewater. We are assuming that most of the wastewater is going to go out of the basin to facilities approved in the Susquehanna Basin or to the west or underground injection. So all the water is consumptive, which is something else we need to consider. That will all be part of how we develop these regulations,” she said.

The UDC agenda included consideration and, ultimately, unanimous approval of its comment letter to the DRBC regarding Chesapeake’s proposed withdrawal (see highlights section below ). During discussion, the issue of the cumulative effect of multiple withdrawals came up repeatedly. “When you have more than one company working—there’s Hess, there’s Stone, there’s Chesapeake—that’s a lot of people wanting to take a million gallons a day,” said Dolores Keesler, Damascus Township representative.

Collier responded, “We’re putting together a database so that for each watershed, we will have the amount of water withdrawn to make sure that cumulatively we will not have any problem with passby flows or other issues that are on that river. It may be that during low-flow times, we will have to regulate who takes what when.”

“If they brought water in by rail, would that obviate the need for a withdrawal permit from DRBC?” asked John McKay, Lackawaxen Township representative.

“They wouldn’t have to do this first part of our process, but they’d still have to get a well-pad permit and, as part of that, they would have to tell us where the water is coming from and we would want to make sure it’s a valid water source,” said Collier.

“You’re going to have regulations on them poking holes in the ground and killing our aquifer, right?” asked Charlie Wieland, Town of Tusten representative.

“If they regulate it correctly, they won’t kill any aquifers,” said Collier.

“No, they’ll draw it dry,” responded Weiland. “That’s in your control, right?”

“Absolutely,” said Collier.

Closing the enforcement gap

Even as efforts to establish adequate regulatory requirements are underway, concerns are being expressed about the ability to enforce those regulations.

“Who will be overseeing what’s going on while they’re drilling or drawing the water out?” asked Keesler. “Are there enough people at the DRBC to be checking all these sites to see how much they’re withdrawing and whether it’s being done correctly?”

“We’re developing these regulations now and we’ll require a data form showing what water is being withdrawn and where it is going,” responded Collier. “Our intent is that as part of the fees from the gas well driller, we will be hiring or contracting with some people to have more inspections. We also are counting on the state, because we don’t have the expertise for the construction of the well and casing. They do have inspectors on the site when that’s being drilled.”

“They [the states] don’t think they have the money for the inspectors, either,” replied Keesler.

Dennis DeMara of the PA Department of Conservation and Natural Resources (DCNR) responded, “There has been some discussion that the additional folks that DEP hired probably aren’t adequate to cover the sites; and there is the issue with the conservation districts where DEP has taken over that function. It was brought up at a legislative breakfast last week in Pike County, of working on a relationship where conservation districts would play a role. This is just in the discussion stage, but it would be a combination of someone from DEP and the technicians from the conservation districts.”

Town of Cochecton representative Larry Richardson asked if there is an auditing mechanism that accounts for where the wastewater is taken.

“Especially if it’s going out of the basin, we want documentation of where the water is coming from, what well pad it is being used on and where it is going after that,” said Collier. “They have to tell us that in the docket. The question we’re dealing with as we develop these regulations is, ‘How do you know that on the ground?’ We’re still trying to figure out the best mechanism for that.”

“There seems to be a gap between the regulations that are proposed and the on-the-ground enforcement,” said Susan Sullivan, a Tusten resident.

“We could track back to determine if the water went where it was supposed to,” said Collier. “Other than that, we do not have the manpower to ride on the trucks,” said Collier. “We really do need eyes and ears on the ground, so if you do see or document something, please contact the DRBC.”

Keesler drew attention to a letter submitted by the Reverend Jean Blackie, pastor of the Damascus United Methodist Charge, asking if the UDC has any watchdog authority related to natural gas extraction.

UDC chairperson George Fluhr responded, “We don’t have enforcement powers. Everything that’s being done is being done by the townships through zoning and permits, and by the state agencies and the DRBC, and every time there is an application to one of them, this council has the opportunity to comment, as we did tonight. We influence the decisions of the agencies who are making them. We gather information, but we are not the people who make the rules. We can pass along information that’s brought to us, and we can speak with 13 municipalities behind us and say, ‘This appears to be a problem, will you please look into it.’”

In other matters, the UDC heard DeMara report that the Pike County Commissioners announced the acquisition of two Pennsylvania properties that DCNR helped to acquire: a 90-acre parcel along the Delaware River known as the Santos Farm, and the 708-acre Plotnik parcel in Westfall Township. DCNR has also worked with the Delaware Highlands Conservancy to produce the new brochure, “Shop Local, Save Land” a timber products resource guide ( www.shoplocalsaveland.com ).

DCNR is currently involved with the Pocono Forest and Waters Conservation Landscape Initiative to conserve land, connect trails and conserve water resources. In addition, seismic testing will be conducted by ARM Geophysics of Hershey, PA beginning in mid-August to evaluate the viability of carbon sequestration in the state.

Sandy Schultz, assistant superintendent of the National Park Service (NPS), Upper Delaware, noted that due to the recent high-water conditions on the river, the NPS is considering issuing a mandatory lifejacket requirement such as that recently issued in the Delaware Water Gap National Recreation Area in an attempt to avoid future drownings. Shultz handed out drowning statistics and a chart depicting their locations since 1980. “A substantial number of people who drown are swimmers, and not in vessels,” she noted.

Highlights of UDC’s comment letter on proposed Docket No. D-2009-20-1

• The UDC states it shares the concerns of the National Park Service (NPS), Upper Delaware, regarding species of concern and water intake specifications; flow needs; pass-by flow; impacts on recreation; the lack of a non-point source pollution control plan; and the need for a cumulative impacts analysis. It quotes the NPS letter of July 14: “This proposed development brings a potentially large amount of industrial activity associated with shale-gas extraction into the sensitive headwaters area of the Delaware River Basin drainage which makes up the Special Protection Waters of this Basin.”

• Three endangered aquatic species and one invasive species necessitate attention. “This issue should be carefully looked at as millions of gallons of water are to be withdrawn and moved to other locations in New York and Pennsylvania,” the letter reads.

• The letter questions how the proposed withdrawal will impact the Flexible Flow Management Plan and how it will affect the flow target at the Montague gage. It urges provisions to ensure that water temperatures will not be adversely impacted and asks, “What will the accumulative impacts be as more proposals for withdrawals are made in the future?”

• The letter suggests that all water withdrawal and metering reporting data be immediate and available online.