An exemption by another name

Critics respond to gas meeting

By FRITZ MAYER

ROCK HILL, NY — Is fracking exempt from one of the nation’s most important environmental laws?

According to the industry group Independent Oil and Gas Association of New York (IOGA), the answer is a simple “no.”

Literature handed out by IOGA at a meeting at Bernie’s Holiday Restaurant in Rock Hill on September 8 says, “Hydraulic fracturing was never regulated under the Safe Drinking Water Act (SWDA), and, by that definition, could never have been granted an ‘exemption’ from it.”

However, as Bruce Ferguson, a member of Catskill Citizens for Sustainable Energy, pointed out, the language of the 2005 Energy Policy Act uses the word “exclude” in explaining that fracking will not be covered by the SWDA.

Furthermore, the proposed legislation now pending in Congress, called the Fracturing Responsibility and Awareness of Chemicals (FRAC) Act, which was created to reverse that specific portion of the 2005 energy act related to hydraulic fracturing, states within the language of the law itself that its purpose is to “amend the Safe Drinking Water Act to repeal a certain exemption for hydraulic fracturing.”

Critics say that the insistence of the notion that there is no fracking exemption from SWDA is a case of obfuscation. Wes Gillingham, the program director of Catskill Mountainkeeper, said, “They’re stretching the truth and trying really hard to prevent the FRAC Act from becoming law.”

Another claim made by IOGA at the meeting that had critics’ jaws dropping was that the open pits related to gas drilling are only used to store fresh water and nothing else. It is generally common knowledge among those who are familiar with the industry that this is simply not the case.

Here is a sentence from Pete Grannis, commissioner of the New York State Department of Environmental Conservation, at a hearing of the New York State Assembly on October 15, 2008: After fracking, “the fluids that come back out of the ground need to be properly managed and stored. Lined pits or stainless steel tanks are usually used for fluid storage...”

Moreover, at several local gas meetings last year, a great deal of time was used to discuss whether drillers might agree to replace open pits with closed containers. This was because the material in the pits is considered to be toxic. If the pits were used to hold only fresh water, the issue would not be controversial.

Regarding another issue, the IOGA literature claimed that a 2004 study by the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) concluded that fracking was a safe procedure and needed no further study. However, the IOGA literature omits the following information: that, in 2004, Weston Wilson, an Environmental Protection Agency whistleblower, denounced the findings of the study as “unsupportable;” that various organizations and lawmakers claim the office of then Vice President Dick Cheney exerted influence to have the conclusions of the study altered; and that in May 2009 EPA administrator Lisa Jackson said that the agency needed to once again review the safety of fracking in light of the growing instances of contamination around the country.

Gillingham noted that the IOGA meeting was not targeted at people who already had researched and studied the gas drilling issue, but instead was targeted at residents who might not yet know much about it. In this regard, the meeting seemed to be a success. Because while many critics were exasperated by the information put forward, others were eager to hear the information IOGA had to offer.

In fact, the majority of the 80 or so people on hand showed by their applause that they looked favorably on the prospect of gas drilling coming to Sullivan County, and more than a few indicated they wanted to find out how they might get a gas lease.