About Air and Water

2012-05-09T16:17:00.002-05:00

BY MEAD GRUVER - Associated Press - Friday, May. 04, 201

CHEYENNE, Wyo. — Wyoming's governor persuaded the head of the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency to postpone an announcement linking hydraulic fracturing to groundwater contamination, giving state officials - whom the EPA had privately briefed on the study - time to attempt to debunk the finding before it rocked the oil and gas industry more than a month later, an investigation by The Associated Press has found.

During the delay, state officials raised dozens of questions about the finding that the controversial procedure that has become essential to unlocking oil and gas deposits in Wyoming and beyond may have tainted groundwater near the gas patch community of Pavillion.

Gov. Matt Mead contacted EPA Director Lisa Jackson and persuaded her to hold off any announcement, according to state emails and an interview with the governor. The more than 11,000 emails made available to AP in response to a state records request show that Wyoming officials took advantage of the postponement to "take a hard line" and coordinate an "all-out press" against the EPA in the weeks leading up to the announcement Dec. 8.

Meanwhile, the chief state regulator of oil and gas development fretted over how the finding would affect state revenue.

And even as the state questioned the EPA's science, there were internal doubts about how effective those objections would be.

"It's already too late. The White House has already seen the report with conclusions," wrote Gary Strong, an engineer with the Wyoming Oil and Gas Conservation Commission, following a presentation by EPA deputy assistant regional administrator Martin Hestmark. The emails indicate that, at least in the minds of Wyoming officials, the federal agency was being pressed by the White House to release its report.

"Once local folks received data and it showed what it did they had the responsibility to take it to HQ and in fact it ended up with them in front of the White House. HQ and White House decided that now that data is released EPA must release conclusions quickly," wrote Tom Kropatsch, a natural resource analyst for the state Oil and Gas Conservation Commission, who also took the notes at a Nov. 16 EPA-state meeting.

But the state's questions did set the stage for additional groundwater and household well water sampling in the Pavillion area that began a couple weeks ago.

The struggle by both Wyoming officials and the EPA for message control shows the extent to which they fretted about the findings. Wyoming depends on oil and gas for its economic well-being while environmentalists have pushed the Obama administration to crack down on a process responsible for increasing U.S. onshore production.

The worry wasn't misplaced: Though the findings were unique to Pavillion, they ricocheted amid heightened scrutiny of fracking in other drilling regions including the Marcellus Shale states of New York, Ohio and Pennsylvania.

The emails also suggest an uneasy partnership now that the EPA and Wyoming, as well as U.S. Geological Survey and two American Indian tribes, say they are working together on further study of the Pavillion groundwater.

However, some recent re-sampling by the EPA of household well water in the Pavillion area took Mead and other state officials by surprise. They had presumed that only two monitoring wells the EPA had drilled to test for groundwater pollution would be retested this spring.

"I won't tell anybody not to test. But if you're going to test, you need to bring everyone in the process," Mead said in an interview Monday.

The EPA did not make Jackson available for an interview. EPA Region 8 Director Jim Martin said in a statement through spokesman Richard Mylott that the EPA "has been transparent and has relied on the best science" to inform Pavillion-area residents about their water.

Environmentalists including the Natural Resource Defense Council and Sierra Club have looked to the Obama administration EPA to get tougher on fracking, the practice of cracking open oil and gas deposits by pumping pressurized water, fine sand and chemicals down well holes. They maintain that fracking is a threat to clean groundwater.

The EPA study in the Pavillion area followed years of complaints from homeowners that their well water took on a chemical stink around the time that fracking picked up in their neighborhood about eight years ago. Environmentalists welcomed the draft report as validation of their concerns.

Wyoming is the third-ranked state for onshore gas production and ninth for onshore oil production. Nearly every new oil and gas well in Wyoming that isn't a coal-bed methane well is fracked.

In internal emails that followed the Nov. 4 briefing, state officials expressed support for fracking as critical to oil and gas extraction, a $7.7 billion a year industry in Wyoming that accounts for 20 percent of the state's gross domestic product.

"The limiting of the hydraulic fracturing process will result in negative impacts to the oil and gas revenues to the state of Wyoming. A further outcome will be the questioning of the economic viability of all unconventional and tight oil and gas reservoirs in Wyoming, across the United States, and ultimately in the world," wrote Tom Doll, supervisor of the Oil and Gas Conservation Commission, in a long email that circulated among top state officials.

Wyoming's top state regulator of oil and gas development, including essentially all fracking in the state, Doll was a district manager for Tulsa, Okla.-based Williams Production Company until 2008.

The spark for Doll's missive was the closed-door meeting at Wyoming Department of Environmental Quality headquarters in Cheyenne two days earlier. EPA administrator Martin briefed Wyoming officials about what the EPA was about to announce based on its research in Pavillion. Doll took part by phone.

"Contaminants present at high concentrations in the deep monitoring wells are likely a result of hydraulic fracturing," read a "Key Findings" slide in an EPA PowerPoint shown at the meeting. Each slide was marked "Confidential-Do Not Disclose."

The public announcement more than a month later stated that the groundwater "contains compounds likely associated with gas production practices, including hydraulic fracturing."

The EPA also suggested at the private meeting that gas development likely had contaminated household well water in the Pavillion area but that current data did not definitively support such a link. The EPA has made no such claim in public to date.

Emails show that Mead sought to reach Jackson within hours. Mead confirmed that he got her to hold off on the findings report until state officials could review the data.

"When I talked to Lisa Jackson they were going to release the findings regardless. That wasn't even the question. The question was on the timing of it. We wanted a chance to see what are they basing this on," Mead told the AP.

"She said, 'Well, maybe we can hold off a couple weeks to give you guys this data.'"

The EPA released raw data on pollution in the two monitoring wells at a public meeting in Pavillion on Nov. 9, five days after the private state briefing. Among the pollutants was the carcinogen benzene as high as 50 times the EPA limit. The EPA showed a PowerPoint similar to the one shown at the private meeting but without announcing any findings. There was no "Key Findings" slide.

Releasing the data and findings outside of the purview of two "working groups" angered state regulators. The working groups made up of state and EPA officials had been examining the Pavillion pollution for the better part of a year.

Wyoming didn't take the news from the private EPA briefing sitting down.

The state could "get ahead of the curve" by assigning its own experts to review the data, suggested John Corra, the environmental quality director."Sort of an all out press," Corra wrote to Doll and others Nov. 7.

Doll suggested to Corra and others in a Nov. 19 email that Wyoming take "a hard line" after one EPA official told them to drop their concerns.

"EPA has not substantially defended their explanation, the data is questionable on many levels, and EPA has ignored our alternative explanations," Doll wrote.

Dozens of questions from state regulators followed. They included why the monitoring well water samples had high pH readings. The EPA report referred to the high pH and mentioned the detection of potassium hydroxide, a basic chemical used in fracking.

Pavillion residents didn't hear about the finding before the public announcement, said John Fenton, chairman of Pavillion Area Concerned Citizens.

Fenton said he was unhappy that regulators hadn't kept local residents fully apprised of the latest developments concerning their water supply. Yet he held EPA in higher regard than the state officials he said ignored Pavillion for years, prompting residents to request the EPA investigation.

"Those of us living out here, we don't trust the state," he said.

State officials actively kept the media in the dark about the upcoming EPA announcement, even as reporters questioned them about the data.

"My sense is that the reporter was searching for a conflict to write about, and I tried to head that off," Corra wrote Nov. 29 to several other state officials about one reporter's questions.

Another state regulator suggested that Wyoming officials keep in mind how they're perceived while they questioned the EPA data.

"This could go on for a long time, during which we'll likely continue to be in an adversarial discussion with EPA, the public and the press," the Department of Environmental Quality's groundwater chief, Kevin Frederick, wrote to Corra on Dec. 2. "Is there a way to shift the focus of discussion to show the State in a more positive light while the present uncertainties continue to simmer?"

The additional sampling since agreed to has extended the study of the Pavillion groundwater. Peer review of the sampling results, set to begin this spring, now is scheduled for this fall.

Follow Mead Gruver on Twitter: http://www.twitter.com/meadgruver

Read more here: http://www.star-telegram.com/2012/05/03/3933449/ap-exclusive-wyo-got-epa-to-delay.html#storylink=cpy

Gas Drilling Industry files law suit opposing Arlington's Fire Fee

2012-05-09T15:55:00.000-05:00

http://www.star-telegram.com/2012/05/07/3943109/arlington-faces-lawsuit-over-fee.html

BY SUSAN SCHROCK

sschrock@star-telegram.com

ARLINGTON -- Two natural gas well trade organizations filed suit Monday in a District Court in Tarrant County to prevent Arlington from implementing what they deem an unnecessary and discriminatory new tax on gas wells.

Last month, the City Council unanimously approved a $2,397 annual fee per well to pay for more firefighters, training and equipment, which Fire Chief Don Crowson said the city needs to prevent and better respond to gas well emergencies. The fee, the first of its kind in the Barnett Shale, is expected to generate an estimated $800,000 for the Fire Department's gas well emergency preparedness and response program.

The Texas Oil & Gas Association and the Texas Independent Producers and Royalty Owners Association argue that the city, which has more than 300 gas wells, is trying to unfairly "expand its revenues by taxing a single industry."

"It's seven times higher than any other permit fee they charge to a particular business," said Justin Furnace, president of the royalty owners association. "We're really left with no alternative but to seek relief from the court."

The associations call the Fire Department's gas well program, which will add a layer of inspections at well sites, unnecessary given the industry's safety record in the Barnett Shale. The suit says that while the Fire Department responds to tens of thousands of service calls annually, the city has had only three natural gas well incidents in six years and that those releases were handled by the companies, not firefighters.

The city has also repeatedly turned down well operators' offers of free training, Furnace said.

"The industry has a terrific record when it comes to public safety in the city of Arlington," Furnace said, adding that companies have their own emergency responders available around the clock. "To the extent that extra training is needed, we stand ready as an industry to provide that training free of charge to the city."

Advanced training

Crowson defended his program Monday, saying first responders need training in an urban environment that is more advanced than the cursory gas well site awareness classes being offered by the industry. Though the fee has not been implemented, the Fire Department has hired a gas well safety and security inspector and a captain to oversee the preparedness and response program.

Dozens of firefighters are also expected to undergo industry-specific training in Houston this summer to learn how to protect the community during gas well fires or other incidents, he said.

"At the end of the day it's my team that is responsible for public safety. The only way we can do that is to properly equip and train our team to do those things that keep the public safe," Crowson said. "Awareness-level training does not come anywhere close to matching our need to deal with an emergency. We need to know more than just what elements are on a pad site."

The Fire Department also plans to use the fee to pay for six additional firefighter positions and to train and equip 42 current firefighters to create two gas well emergency response teams.

The council approved the program despite opposition from Chesapeake Energy, XTO Energy and Quicksilver Resources. Representatives from those companies told the council that they were concerned that the Fire Department's program could lead to "potentially unsafe measures, unreasonable costs and additional burdens that may prohibit the industry from quickly and safely managing any unforeseen or unplanned critical incident."

Crowson said that the program was reviewed by the city's legal department and two outside legal teams and that they determined that the city has jurisdiction to implement to an industry-specific fee for additional public safety expenses.

Unattractive for drilling

The associations say the new fee will make Arlington unattractive to natural gas operators and could cost the community jobs and mineral rights revenue, Furnace said.

"My hope is they understand that tens of thousands of jobs are created up there through the oil and gas industry. It affects thousands of mineral owners anytime one of these fees are assessed this way," he said.

The lawsuit says that Arlington has one of the highest gas well permit fees in North Texas and that the city collected more than $1.7 million in fees from natural gas well operators in 2011. The city also collected more than $105 million in bonuses and royalty payments for gas well leases on public lands, according to court documents.

While the Fire Department plans to charge drillers nearly $2,400 per well to cover public safety risks, it charges other businesses that store, haul or handle hazardous materials no more than $350 in permit fees per year.

"There is simply no justification, no reasonable basis, for singling out natural gas well operators among similarly situated businesses when it comes to the potential dangers and hazards they pose to public health and safety," the suit says.

Susan Schrock, 817-709-7578

Twitter: @susanschrock

Did Chesapeake Energy underreport personal use of company jets?

2012-05-09T15:34:00.003-05:00

Did Chesapeake Energy underreport personal use of company jets?

Energy Future Holdings (Parent Company of Oncor/Luminant - TXU) on shaky financial ground

2012-04-29T14:04:00.001-05:00

Ring fence at Oncor might collapse in a stiff wind Read more here: http://www.star-telegram.com/2012/04/19/3898463/ring-fence-at-oncor-might-collapse.html#storylink=cpy

Dallas Observer Sums up Industry Assault on Dr. Al

2012-04-28T15:01:00.000-05:00

Dallas Observer Sums up Assault on Dr. Al

How one Parker County Man's Flaming War sparked a battle between Texas and the EPA

2012-04-28T14:48:00.000-05:00

How One Parker County Man's Flaming Water Sparked a War between Texas and the EPA

2012-04-28T14:41:00.000-05:00

ALERT- IMPORTANT ACTION NEEDED:
THIS IS THE FIRST TIME THAT A PETITION HAS BEEN EMBEDDED ON ABOUT AIR AND WATER:
Dr. Al, the regional 5 Director for the Environmental Protection Agency is under attack.
Recently the EPA linked fracking with ground water contamination.
Now there are outcries calling for his removal. They claim it is not connected. I believe it is because the EPA is now a functioning agency doing it's job. Please petition the President to keep Dr. Al on the job with the team he has assembled which are focused on protecting the people, animals and environment.

Change.org|The Proven Petition Site

Independent test results show fracking flowback emissions are dangerous toxics, not "steam"

2012-04-24T14:08:00.001-05:00

By Earthworks - April 24, 2012 Texas town ignores own test results to allow fracking to continue in violation of city ordinances, endangering local residents Colleyville, TX, April 24 -- Today Colleyville and Southlake residents, and Earthworks’ Oil & Gas Accountability Project released results from local residents’ privately-funded air testing of Titan Operations’ “mini-frack” on the border of both communities. The tests, performed by GD Air Testing Inc. of Richardson, TX, prove emissions released during fracking and flowback contain dangerous levels of toxic chemicals.
“We paid for tests because we can’t depend on the city or the fracking industry,” said Colleyville resident Kim Davis. She continued, “The tests confirmed our worst fears, while Colleyville ignored their own tests to let fracking continue. Apparently the city represents Titan and the gas industry instead of local residents.”
Colleyville City ordinances expressly prohibit the release of any gases: “No person shall allow, cause or permit gases to be vented into the atmosphere or to be burned by open flame.”
The community-funded test results, which detected twenty-six chemicals, also showed carbon disulfide, a neurotoxin at twice the state level for short-term exposure. Benzene, a known carcinogen, and Naphthalene, a suspected carcinogen, were both over state long-term exposure levels by more than 9 times and more than 7 times, respectively. Carbonyl sulfide, dimethyl disulfide and Pyridine were all detected above safe limits for long-term exposure.
Gordon Aalund, an MD with toxicology training who lives in Southlake and practices emergency medicine said, “Exceeding long and short term exposure limits to these toxics places us all at increased and unneeded risk.” He went on to say, “When your government fails to protect you and the company cannot be trusted, private citizens are forced to act.”
The Colleyville results indirectly confirm the suspicions of Arlington-area residents about air pollution from ongoing Chesapeake Energy fracking and flowback operations in their neighborhood since December 2011. Residents who experienced health impacts were told by Chesapeake that flowback emissions were only “steam”. When challenged to substantiate its claims with public testing, the company failed to respond.
“It’s great that concerned citizens in the Colleyville-area have the wherewithal to pay for their own testing when government fails to do its job. But I live in southeast Arlington, where our community doesn’t have the resources to do government’s job for it,” said Arlington resident Chuck Harper. He continued, “Why isn’t TCEQ doing these tests? If the watchdog isn’t watching, who do we turn to for protection?”
“It’s state and local failures like these that make plain the need to close fracking loopholes in federal environmental laws,” said Earthworks’ Oil & Gas Accountability Project organizer Sharon Wilson. She continued, “When TCEQ can’t be bothered to protect their own citizens, when cities ignore their own laws, when companies lie to communities left, right and center, there’s nowhere else to turn.“
### FOR MORE INFORMATION:
Colleyville Town Ordinance (Prohibition of gas venting at pages 3.1-17 and 3.1-10): http://bit.ly/Colleyville-Gases-Code
GD Air Testing Inc. results:
http://www.earthworksaction.org/library/detail/titan_air_testing_data_1
http://www.earthworksaction.org/library/detail/titan_air_testing_data_2
http://www.earthworksaction.org/library/detail/titan_air_testing_data_3
Background/analysis of GD Air Testing Inc. results:
Map:
http://www.earthworksaction.org/library/detail/titan_air_samples_map
Violations indicated in test results:
http://www.earthworksaction.org/library/detail/titan_list_of_compounds
Wilma Subra analysis of test results:
http://www.earthworksaction.org/library/detail/titan_energy_mini_frack_in_colleyville_southlake_texas
Earthworks is a nonprofit organization dedicated to protecting communities and the environment from the impacts of irresponsible mineral and energy development while seeking sustainable solutions.

EPA Issues Updated, Achievable Air Pollution Standards for Oil and Natural Gas

2012-04-19T13:53:00.001-05:00

FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE
EPA - Washington, D.C., April 18, 2012

EPA Issues Updated, Achievable Air Pollution Standards for Oil and Natural Gas

Half of fractured wells already deploy technologies in line with final standards, which slash harmful emissions while reducing cost of compliance

WASHINGTON – In response to a court deadline, the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) has finalized standards to reduce harmful air pollution associated with oil and natural gas production. The updated standards, required by the Clean Air Act, were informed by the important feedback from a range of stakeholders including the public, public health groups, states and industry. As a result, the final standards reduce implementation costs while also ensuring they are achievable and can be met by relying on proven, cost-effective technologies as well as processes already in use at approximately half of the fractured natural gas wells in the United States. These technologies will not only reduce 95 percent of the harmful emissions from these wells that contribute to smog and lead to health impacts, they will also enable companies to collect additional natural gas that can be sold. Natural gas is a key component of the nation’s clean energy future and the standards released today make sure that we can continue to expand production of this important domestic resource while reducing impacts to public health, and most importantly builds on steps already being taken by industry leaders.

"The president has been clear that he wants to continue to expand production of important domestic resources like natural gas, and today’s standard supports that goal while making sure these fuels are produced without threatening the health of the American people," said EPA Administrator Lisa P. Jackson. "By ensuring the capture of gases that were previously released to pollute our air and threaten our climate, these updated standards will not only protect our health, but also lead to more product for fuel suppliers to bring to market. They're an important step toward tapping future energy supplies without exposing American families and children to dangerous health threats in the air they breathe.”

When natural gas is produced, some of the gas escapes the well and may not be captured by the producing company. These gases can pollute the air and as a result threaten public health. Consistent with states that have already put in place similar requirements, the updated EPA standards released today include the first federal air rules for natural gas wells that are hydraulically fractured, specifically requiring operators of new fractured natural gas wells to use cost-effective technologies and practices to capture natural gas that might otherwise escape the well, which can subsequently be sold. EPA’s analysis of the final rules shows that they are highly cost-effective, relying on widely available technologies and practices already deployed at approximately half of all fractured wells, and consistent with steps industry is already taking in many cases to capture additional natural gas for sale, offsetting the cost of compliance. Together these rules will result in $11 to $19 million in savings for industry each year. In addition to cutting pollution at the wellhead, EPA’s final standards also address emissions from storage tanks and other equipment.

Also in line with the executive order released by the president last week on natural gas development, the rule released today received important interagency feedback and provides industry flexibilities. Based on new data provided during the public comment period, the final rule establishes a phase-in period that will ensure emissions reduction technology is broadly available. During the first phase, until January 2015, owners and operators must either flare their emissions or use emissions reduction technology called “green completions,” technologies that are already widely deployed at wells. In 2015, all new fractured wells will be required to use green completions. The final rule does not require new federal permits. Instead, it sets clear standards and uses enhanced reporting to strengthen transparency and accountability, and ensure compliance, while establishing a consistent set of national standards to safeguard public health and the environment.

An estimated 13,000 new and existing natural gas wells are fractured or re-fractured each year. As those wells are being prepared for production, they emit volatile organic compounds (VOCs), which contribute to smog formation, and air toxics, including benzene and hexane, which can cause cancer and other serious health effects. In addition, the rule is expected to yield a significant environmental co-benefit by reducing methane, the primary constituent of natural gas. Methane, when released directly to the atmosphere, is a potent greenhouse gas—more than 20 times more potent than carbon dioxide.

During the nearly 100-day public comment period, the agency received more than 150,000 comments on the proposed rules from the public, industry, environmental groups and states. The agency also held three public hearings. The updated standards were informed by the important feedback received through the public comment period, reducing implementation cost and ensuring the achievable standard can be met by relying on proven, cost-effective technologies and processes already in use.

http://www.epa.gov/airquality/oilandgas/actions.html

Environmental Groups Praise EPA’s First-Ever Clean Air Protections for Fracking

Joint statement by Sierra Club * Earthjustice * Clean Air Task Force * Environment America * Earthworks * Clean Water Action - April 18, 2012
Agency Takes Important First Step to Protect Air Quality and Public Health

Washington, D.C., April 18—Today environmental groups praised the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency’s (EPA) vital updates to nationwide air quality protections to include oil and natural gas production. This is the first federal safeguard aimed at curbing air pollution from hydraulic fracturing or ‘fracking.’

The EPA’s New Source Performance Standards (NSPS) and National Emission Standards for Hazardous Air Pollutants (NESHAPS) will benefit the health of Americans and our environment in many ways. The updated standards will result in major reductions in emissions of volatile organic compounds (VOCs), toxic benzene and methane, a highly potent contributor to climate disruption. These pollutants are known to cause asthma attacks, hospital admissions, emergency room visits, cancer and even premature death.

The measure will also benefit the gas industry –EPA projects that capturing more methane and other gasses to send to market will save an estimated $30 million annually.

Today’s announcement by the EPA is a major step forward. However, the two-year delay in reducing pollution from wellheads is an unnecessary setback because industry can meet those standards now. The environmental community is committed to working with EPA to strengthen the public health and air quality safeguards to protect families who live near existing fracking sites.

The EPA proposed the updated safeguards in July 2011. Since the proposal, environmental groups submitted more than 156,000 comments and turned out hundreds of supporters of strong standards to hearings in Pittsburgh, PA, Denver, CO, and Arlington, TX.

In response to EPA’s announcement, environmental leaders released the following statements:

“EPA Administrator Lisa Jackson is taking an important first step in closing loopholes for the natural gas industry and addressing dangerous air quality levels in and near frack-fields across the country,” said Michael Brune, Executive Director of the Sierra Club. “The natural gas industry dumps massive amounts of air pollutants into our air every day, sickening families and children. An industry that touts its ability to efficiently drill thousands of wells thousands of feet into the earth is crying wolf when it claims it can’t build enough tanks to capture wellhead pollution. It’s time we clean up the natural gas industry’s dirty and reckless practices.”

“From Colorado to Pennsylvania, the gas industry is making a killing from drilling, and at the very least they should cut dirty and dangerous air pollution that threatens our families’ health,” said John Rumpler, senior attorney for Environment America. “EPA’s action today is a breath of fresh air for every man, woman, and child living in the shadow of the gas drilling boom.”

“Left to its own devices, the oil and gas industry has turned the clear skies over Wyoming as smoggy as the car-choked highways of Los Angeles. For decades, industry had a free pollution pass. Thanks to a court victory, that changes today,” said Earthjustice President Trip Van Noppen. “There is more work to be done to protect Americans living near oil and gas fields from cancer and other unacceptable health threats, but this rule from EPA is an important first step.”

“The stories of families hurt by gas drilling’s air pollution were essential to the adoption of these new public health safeguards,” said Bruce Baizel, senior attorney for Earthworks. “Hopefully this much-needed first step will soon be expanded to better protect the families that illustrated the need for the new rules in the first place.”

"These important rules start to cut down on air pollution that harms people living near wells, creates smog, and warms the climate," said David McCabe, senior scientist with Clean Air Task Force. "They are a solid start, but we need to keep working to reduce pollution from the gas industry all the way from the well to the customer. People who live near compressors and equipment already in use need to see their air cleaned up as well. Unfortunately these rules won't do that."

“Our members in Pennsylvania, Texas, and Colorado have suffered because state regulators haven’t acted to control oil and gas operations, so these standards are a win-win-win,” said Lynn Thorp, Clean Water Action National Campaigns Director. “They protect people from air pollution, help curb climate change and save the industry money. People expect the federal government to use their authority to protect their health, their drinking water and the air they breathe and this is a good first step.”

http://www.earthworksaction.org/media/detail/environmental_groups_praise_epas_first_ever_clean_air_protections_for_frack

Westchester Gasette: Oh, My.

2011-09-22T19:08:00.000-05:00

Westchester Gasette: Oh, My.: So here's Part 2 of that story about an Arlington Church's business deal with Chesapeake: Wednesday, August 31, 2011 High Point Church...

Westchester Gasette: What the Quack is Going On?

2011-09-22T19:07:00.000-05:00

Westchester Gasette: What the Quack is Going On?: The 5,000-member High Point Church was founded in 2000 by Simons and his wife, April, whose brother is Joel Osteen , well-k...

Fracking near dams could cause catastrophic event per US Army Corps Engineers

2011-09-08T14:04:00.000-05:00

Fracking near dams could cause catastrophic event per US Army Corps Engineers

Westchester Gasette: It's a Hurricane

2011-08-28T19:00:00.000-05:00

Westchester Gasette: It's a Hurricane: A LANDMAN on the Arlington, TX City Council?? Or What Is It, Pray Tell? The Councilman does have a very nice résumé. Here's how you,...

Westchester Gasette: It's a Hurricane

2011-08-28T18:59:00.000-05:00

Westchester Gasette: It's a Hurricane

Natural gas fields have provided a fount of cash for Texas cities Second of two parts Read more: http://www.post-gazette.com/pg/11066/1130239-84.stm#ixzz1Fw4LbYBB

2011-03-07T11:23:00.004-06:00

By Bill Toland - Pittsburgh Post-Gazette - Monday, March 07, 2011
Note by Faith Chatham: I have read a lot of coverage on gas drilling in the Barnett Shale. Mr. Toland's 2 part series is the best articles I have read in years and can serve as a primer of what resident's need to know when the land man starts showing up in their neighborhood. I am excerpting some of his second article below but recommend that you click on the READ MORE LINK and read the entire article.

Talk of the town
Despite success stories, people remain wary about urban gas drilling, and it's hard to overstate the degree to which gas drilling dominates the news cycles.

The local newspaper, the Fort Worth Star-Telegram, runs a weekly report on all the newly active rigs in the 24-county area -- usually there are several dozen new rigs put up each week. In a three-day span three months ago, the newspaper and TV news reported on the city school district's ongoing gas lease negotiations, city council's long-debated air quality study, lawsuits over polluted water wells, and an early morning gas leak (and resulting vapor cloud) at an XTO Energy well site north of Fort Worth.

Some in Fort Worth object to urban drilling notionally, concerned about long-term water quality and health effects. But others object to the way they've been treated by the industry and its "landmen" -- the free-agent real estate negotiators who gather signatures on behalf of drillers, bundling them and then selling the waivers, titles and leases to energy companies.

The process sometimes pits neighbors against one another.

"I would describe myself as very pro-drilling, pro-oil, pro-gas," said Laura Reeves, a Fort Worth resident who lives in an impeccably decorated townhome and can't remember the last Democrat she voted for.

"I have friends who work for Chesapeake. I know people who need their jobs. I don't disagree with drilling for gas. I disagree with drilling for gas in the middle of a (populated area)."

Chesapeake Energy wants to drill on a vacant tract of land to the immediate south of her new, gated townhome community. Her complex, and that empty tract --being called "Westridge" by Chesapeake -- are just a few hundred yards west of Como, a historically black neighborhood. Mrs. Reeves says the industry has tried to take advantage of the poverty levels in Como.

The landmen wanted Mrs. Reeves and neighbors to sign waiver agreements, allowing Chesapeake to drill within Fort Worth's prescribed setback radius if city council subsequently approves the variance request. The "setback" is the minimum distance that a well must be from the nearest home; in order to drill inside the city's 600-foot setback radius, an energy company has to get enough neighbors to sign waiver agreements, and it often sweetens the pot with waiver bonuses.

The waiver payments are thank-you notes written in cash, because the people who sign the waivers -- townhome residents, renters, business owners -- often won't see any other money from the drilling. They won't get royalties, because most don't own any mineral rights, and they won't receive a surface lease payment, because the drilling isn't happening on their property.

The first offer that Mrs. Reeves received from the landman that knocked on her door in autumn 2009? Sign the waiver and she gets $74.

Small potatoes to her -- but more attractive to those living in poverty, she said. Waiver bonuses can increase dramatically if you live closer to a drilling site, or if you live in a more well-to-do neighborhood, but generally landmen want to get the best lease and waiver terms, at the lowest price, for the companies they represent.

"You may as well sign," the landman told her, because "78 percent of your neighbors have signed." Turns out only three of her 70 fellow townhome owners had signed waivers, she said.

But because landmen aren't employed by the energy companies, and because there is no state board that licenses or regulates these middlemen, punishing them for misrepresentations is difficult, according to foes.

"I realized some of them had signed the waiver and didn't have a clue what they signed," said Mrs. Reeves. "They felt stupid because they just believed what the landmen told them."

When Mrs. Reeves and others tried to fight off the Chesapeake project -- organizing community meetings, attending city council hearings, going door-to-door in Como -- she says she was caricatured by some in the energy industry as a bored, blonde housewife.

"I was insulted," she said. "They were counting on me, the white blonde, not [setting] foot in a black neighborhood."

But she did, and for a time, it appeared that the drilling project near Como would be rebuffed; Chesapeake withdrew its drilling request last August. In February, though, landmen made headway with one of the neighbors to the west of the Westridge site, a prominent businessman, and Chesapeake now intends to drill a few hundred feet to the west of its original location.

Ms. Knowles, the master's student -- whose boss, state Rep. Lon Burnam, called for a moratorium on new Texas drilling permits -- said the landmen are often accused of misrepresenting the degree of neighborhood unanimity as well as the scope of the drilling projects. They say that the rigs will be up for only a few months, which is often true.

What they don't say is that the rigs can return again and again to drill new wells, as long as they have an active lease. Or that a "few months" of disruption can turn into a few years, or that your home value could decline.

"Nothing can be done if they lie, cheat or steal," she said.

Gas lines another issue
Another thing that landmen may or may not bring up is the issue of gas lines. To get the raw gas to market, the energy companies or subcontractors will also eventually have to build "gathering" lines from the pads to the nearest processing plant.

In Texas, energy companies and private pipeline owners are treated more or less like public utilities, and they have the ability to condemn pieces of private property, if need be, in order to lay the gathering lines.

"That creates a whole new issue," said Democratic state Sen. Wendy Davis, a former Fort Worth city councilwoman.

"You get lines crisscrossing all over your city ... and once you've laid a line that's carrying natural gas, you can't develop it" or put other utilities beneath it, like electric or sewage. "The most you can do is put a surface parking lot on it."

And that's just the lines they know about. Pipeline maps and surveys have proven unreliable, and records from the Texas Railroad Commission, which issues the operating permits for the raw gas lines, are often incomplete, critics say.

"There are lines all over the place that really no one at the city levels were ever told," Ms. Davis said. "And we may find that it inhibits" future development -- or, worse, could cause an accident when someone tries to dig a backyard swimming pool and finds that the gathering line is not where the pipeline company thinks it is.

Add the 360,000 miles of gathering line in Texas to the 20,000 Barnett gas wells, all of it being monitored by just a handful of state inspectors, and people have good reason to worry. "Who can feel safe [when] that's the way it's functioning?" Ms. Davis said. "You can't trust these companies to self-police."

Read more article part 2: http://www.post-gazette.com/pg/11066/1130239-84.stm#ixzz1Fw5uh7LH

Texas Legislature 2011 Senate Committee Appointments - Contacts

2011-03-02T17:05:00.001-06:00

By Martha Estes - 2011 Texas Senate Committees
Committee of the Whole Senate (600)
Cmte. Link: http://www.legis.state.tx.us/Committees/MembershipCmte.aspx?LegSess=82R&CmteCode=C600 &
Bills: http://www.legis.state.tx.us/Reports/Report.aspx?ID=committee&LegSess=82R&Code=C600 &
Meetings: http://www.legis.state.tx.us/Committees/MeetingsByCmte.aspx?Leg=82&Chamber=S&CmteCode=C600
Clerk: Patsy Spaw Phone: (512) 463-0100 Office: CAP 2E.22

Administration (C500)
Cmte. Link: http://www.legis.state.tx.us/Committees/MembershipCmte.aspx?LegSess=82R&CmteCode=C500 & Bills: http://www.legis.state.tx.us/Reports/Report.aspx?ID=committee&LegSess=82R&Code=C500 &
Meetings: http://www.legis.state.tx.us/Committees/MeetingsByCmte.aspx?Leg=82&Chamber=S&CmteCode=C500
Clerk: Kara Crawford Phone: (512) 463-0350 Office: EXT E1.714

Agriculture & Rural Affairs (C505)
Cmte. Link: http://www.legis.state.tx.us/Committees/MembershipCmte.aspx?LegSess=82R&CmteCode=C505 &
Bills: http://www.legis.state.tx.us/Reports/Report.aspx?ID=committee&LegSess=82R&Code=C505 &
Meetings: http://www.legis.state.tx.us/Committees/MeetingsByCmte.aspx?Leg=82&Chamber=S&CmteCode=C505
Clerk: Ashley Patton Phone: (512) 463-0340 Office: SHB 455

Business & Commerce (C510)
Cmte. Link: http://www.legis.state.tx.us/Committees/MembershipCmte.aspx?LegSess=82R&CmteCode=C510 &
Bills: http://www.legis.state.tx.us/Reports/Report.aspx?ID=committee&LegSess=82R&Code=C510 &
Meetings Link: http://www.legis.state.tx.us/Committees/MeetingsByCmte.aspx?Leg=82&Chamber=S&CmteCode=C510
Clerk: Kimberly Selinger Phone: (512) 463-0365 Office: SHB 370

Criminal Justice (C590))
Cmte. Link: http://www.legis.state.tx.us/Committees/MembershipCmte.aspx?LegSess=82R&CmteCode=C590 &
Bills Link: http://www.legis.state.tx.us/Reports/Report.aspx?ID=committee&LegSess=82R&Code=C590 &
Meetings Link: http://www.legis.state.tx.us/Committees/MeetingsByCmte.aspx?Leg=82&Chamber=S&CmteCode=C590
Clerk: Michaela Bernacchio Phone: (512) 463-0345 Office: SHB 470

Economic Development (525)
Cmte. Link: c
Bills Link: http://www.legis.state.tx.us/Reports/Report.aspx?ID=committee&LegSess=82R&Code=C525 &
Meetings Link: http://www.legis.state.tx.us/Committees/MeetingsByCmte.aspx?Leg=82&Chamber=S&CmteCode=C525
Clerk: Colby Karhan Phone: (512) 463-1171 Office: SHB 340

Education (C530)
Cmte. Link: http://www.legis.state.tx.us/Committees/MembershipCmte.aspx?LegSess=82R&CmteCode=C530 &
Bills: http://www.legis.state.tx.us/Reports/Report.aspx?ID=committee&LegSess=82R&Code=C530 &
Meetings: http://www.legis.state.tx.us/Committees/MeetingsByCmte.aspx?Leg=82&Chamber=S&CmteCode=C530
Clerk: Holly Mabry Phone: (512) 463-0355 Office: SHB 440

Finance (540) (Sub-Committees: Medicaid C542 & Public Education Funding C543)
Cmte. Link: http://www.legis.state.tx.us/Committees/MembershipCmte.aspx?LegSess=82R&CmteCode=C540 &
Bills: http://www.legis.state.tx.us/Reports/Report.aspx?ID=committee&LegSess=82R&Code=C540 &
Meetings: http://www.legis.state.tx.us/Committees/MeetingsByCmte.aspx?Leg=82&Chamber=S&CmteCode=C540
Clerk: Stephanie Hoover Phone: (512) 463-0370 Office: EXT E1.038

Government Organization (565)
Cmte. Link: http://www.legis.state.tx.us/Committees/MembershipCmte.aspx?LegSess=82R&CmteCode=C565 &
Bills: http://www.legis.state.tx.us/Reports/Report.aspx?ID=committee&LegSess=82R&Code=C565 &
Meetings: http://www.legis.state.tx.us/Committees/MeetingsByCmte.aspx?Leg=82&Chamber=S&CmteCode=C565
Clerk: Jessica Schleifer Phone: (512) 463-1818 Office: SHB 630

Health & Human Services (610)
Cmte. Link: http://www.legis.state.tx.us/Committees/MembershipCmte.aspx?LegSess=82R&CmteCode=C610 &
Bills: http://www.legis.state.tx.us/Reports/Report.aspx?ID=committee&LegSess=82R&Code=C610 &
Meetings: http://www.legis.state.tx.us/Committees/MeetingsByCmte.aspx?Leg=82&Chamber=S&CmteCode=C610
Clerk: Mason Moses Phone: (512) 463-0360 Office: SHB 420

Higher Education (560)
Cmte. Link: http://www.legis.state.tx.us/Committees/MembershipCmte.aspx?LegSess=82R&CmteCode=C560 &
Bills: http://www.legis.state.tx.us/Reports/Report.aspx?ID=committee&LegSess=82R&Code=C560 &
Meetings: http://www.legis.state.tx.us/Committees/MeetingsByCmte.aspx?Leg=82&Chamber=S&CmteCode=C560
Clerk: Gonzalo Serrano Phone: (512) 463-4788 Office: SHB 320

Intergovernmental Relations (C520) (Subcommittee C523 on Flooding & Evacuations)
Cmte. Link: http://www.legis.state.tx.us/Committees/MembershipCmte.aspx?LegSess=82R&CmteCode=C520 &
Bills: http://www.legis.state.tx.us/Reports/Report.aspx?ID=committee&LegSess=82R&Code=C520 &
Meetings: http://www.legis.state.tx.us/Committees/MeetingsByCmte.aspx?Leg=82&Chamber=S&CmteCode=C520
Clerk: Tiffany White Phone: (512) 463-2527 Office: SHB 475

International Relations & Trade (545)
Cmte. Link: http://www.legis.state.tx.us/Committees/MembershipCmte.aspx?LegSess=82R&CmteCode=C545 &
Bills: http://www.legis.state.tx.us/Reports/Report.aspx?ID=committee&LegSess=82R&Code=C545 &
Meetings: http://www.legis.state.tx.us/Committees/MeetingsByCmte.aspx?Leg=82&Chamber=S&CmteCode=C545
Clerk: Natalie Fontenot Phone: (512) 463-0385 Office: SHB 335

Jurisprudence (C550)
Cmte. Link: http://www.legis.state.tx.us/Committees/MembershipCmte.aspx?LegSess=82R&CmteCode=C550 &
Bills: http://www.legis.state.tx.us/Reports/Report.aspx?ID=committee&LegSess=82R&Code=C550 &
Meetings: http://www.legis.state.tx.us/Committees/MeetingsByCmte.aspx?Leg=82&Chamber=S&CmteCode=C550
Clerk: Katie Qualls Phone: (512) 463-0395 Office: SHB 350

Natural Resources (580)
Cmte. Link: http://www.legis.state.tx.us/Committees/MembershipCmte.aspx?LegSess=82R&CmteCode=C580 &
Bills: http://www.legis.state.tx.us/Reports/Report.aspx?ID=committee&LegSess=82R&Code=C580 &
Meetings: http://www.legis.state.tx.us/Committees/MeetingsByCmte.aspx?Leg=82&Chamber=S&CmteCode=C580
Clerk: Tatum Reagan Phone: (512) 463-0390 Office: SHB 325

Nominations (C572)
Cmte. Link: http://www.legis.state.tx.us/Committees/MembershipCmte.aspx?LegSess=82R&CmteCode=C572 &
Bills: http://www.legis.state.tx.us/Reports/Report.aspx?ID=committee&LegSess=82R&Code=C572 &
Meetings: http://www.legis.state.tx.us/Committees/MeetingsByCmte.aspx?Leg=82&Chamber=S&CmteCode=C572
Clerk: Bogan Durr Phone: (512) 463-2084 Office: EXT E1.716

Open Government, Select (585)
Cmte. Link: http://www.legis.state.tx.us/Committees/MembershipCmte.aspx?LegSess=82R&CmteCode=C585 &
Bills: http://www.legis.state.tx.us/Reports/Report.aspx?ID=committee&LegSess=82R&Code=C585 &
Meetings: http://www.legis.state.tx.us/Committees/MeetingsByCmte.aspx?Leg=82&Chamber=S&CmteCode=C585
Clerk: Phone: Office: Not yet available.

Redistricting, Select (C625)
Cmte. Link: http://www.legis.state.tx.us/Committees/MembershipCmte.aspx?LegSess=82R&CmteCode=C625 &
Bills: http://www.legis.state.tx.us/Reports/Report.aspx?ID=committee&LegSess=82R&Code=C625 &
Meetings: http://www.legis.state.tx.us/Committees/MeetingsByCmte.aspx?Leg=82&Chamber=S&CmteCode=C625
Clerk: Stephanie R Hoover Phone: (512) 463-8802 Office: SHB 460

State Affairs (570)
Cmte. Link: http://www.legis.state.tx.us/Committees/MembershipCmte.aspx?LegSess=82R&CmteCode=C570 &
Bills: http://www.legis.state.tx.us/Reports/Report.aspx?ID=committee&LegSess=82R&Code=C570 &
Meetings: http://www.legis.state.tx.us/Committees/MeetingsByCmte.aspx?Leg=82&Chamber=S&CmteCode=C570
Clerk: Erin Fry Phone: (512) 463-0380 Office: SHB 380

Transportation & Homeland Security (C640)
Cmte. Link: http://www.legis.state.tx.us/Committees/MembershipCmte.aspx?LegSess=82R&CmteCode=C640 &
Bills: http://www.legis.state.tx.us/Reports/Report.aspx?ID=committee&LegSess=82R&Code=C640 &
Meetings: http://www.legis.state.tx.us/Committees/MeetingsByCmte.aspx?Leg=82&Chamber=S&CmteCode=C640
Clerk: Tulsi Reddy Phone: (512) 463-0067 Office: SHB 450

Veteran Affairs & Military Installations (C650)
Cmte. Link: http://www.legis.state.tx.us/Committees/MembershipCmte.aspx?LegSess=82R&CmteCode=C650 &
Bills: http://www.legis.state.tx.us/Reports/Report.aspx?ID=committee&LegSess=82R&Code=C650 &
Meetings: http://www.legis.state.tx.us/Committees/MeetingsByCmte.aspx?Leg=82&Chamber=S&CmteCode=C650
Clerk: Felicia Wright Phone: (512) 463-2211 Office: SHB 345

Texas' electric deregulation cost is tallied in study

2011-02-22T20:58:00.000-06:00

By Jack Z. Smith - The Fort Worth Star-Telegram - Tuesday, February 15, 2011

A report released Monday concludes that electric deregulation has cost Texas residential consumers more than $11 billion in higher rates and that the operator of the state's major power grid, the Electric Reliability Council of Texas, has been poorly managed and industry-dominated.

The 101-page report, "The Story of ERCOT," is the result of a research project of the Steering Committee of Cities Served by Oncor and the Texas Coalition for Affordable Power, which works with 158 cities and other governmental entities to buy electricity in bulk.

Deregulation, it said, has resulted in higher rates for Texas power consumers rather than the lower rates forecast by lawmakers who passed the state law in 1999.

Before deregulation, Texas had cheaper rates than most states. Between 1999 and the first six months of 2010, however, Texas residential consumers "suffered greater increases [in electric rates] than residents in all but six other states," the report said.

"Had electric prices remained at the national average -- not below it, just at it -- Texas residential consumers would have saved more than $11 billion since the implementation of deregulation," the report said, citing data compiled by the U.S. Energy Information Administration.

The entire deregulated Texas market, commercial, industrial and residential, "would have saved $15.5 billion had prices remained at the national average," the report said.

However, the latest EIA data, for November, shows that Texas' average residential electric rate was 11.37 cents per kilowatt-hour, below the national average of 11.7 cents.

Read more in the Fort Worth Star Telegram

Read more:

Reading E-Mail while tap water burns

2011-02-13T12:38:00.001-06:00

Texas AG asks U.S. House to block regulation of greenhouse gas emissions

2011-02-11T12:23:00.001-06:00

By DAVE MICHAELS Washington Bureau The Dallas Morning News - Feb. 9, 2011
WASHINGTON — Texas Attorney General Greg Abbott asked Congress on Wednesday to block the regulation of greenhouse gas emissions, saying legislation would allow him to drop his lawsuits over the rules.
Abbott testified at a congressional hearing where Republican lawmakers grilled Environmental Protection Agency Administrator Lisa Jackson over her agency’s move to regulate climate-altering gases emitted by industrial facilities.
A Republican bill would overturn the EPA’s finding that greenhouse gas emissions endanger public health and would prevent the agency from using the Clean Air Act to address climate change.
Texas’ fossil fuel producers, utilities and other businesses stand to benefit if Republicans succeed in blocking regulation, although President Barack Obama would almost certainly veto the bill. Texas Republicans have been at the forefront of efforts to stymie the EPA.
Abbott has filed six legal challenges of EPA regulations that address climate change. One of the lawsuits challenges the decision to invalidate parts of Texas’ clean-air program over its refusal to award permits for greenhouse gas emissions.
“I am here to tell you that if your legislation passes, that will mean that Texas will be dismissing those six lawsuits against the EPA,” Abbott told the House Energy and Commerce Committee.
Jackson said the EPA was forced to take over parts of Texas’ clean-air program because the state failed to carry out its responsibilities. Under the Clean Air Act, the EPA sets thresholds for regulated pollutants, which states must enforce.
Texas’ refusal
While other states have challenged EPA regulation of greenhouse gases, Texas is the only state that refused to include greenhouse gases in its clean-air program. Jackson said businesses that wanted to build in Texas would have been unable to get permits without the EPA’s intervention.
“The Nucor steel facility just got a permit in the state of Louisiana,” Jackson told the committee. “If they wanted to build the exact same facility in Texas, they would need a permit for greenhouse gases — and they cannot get one because Texas refuses to consider those permits.”
Jackson also clashed with Texas Republicans on the committee over dozens of pollution permits that were invalidated when the EPA rejected three Texas permitting programs in September 2009. The EPA said the Texas programs failed to meet the standards set by the Clean Air Act.
Rep. Michael Burgess, R-Lewisville, complained to Jackson that Texas was singled out for disapproval, while other states with similar programs weren’t challenged.
“This appears to be Texas-specific,” Burgess said. “And if it is, that is wrong.”
But Jackson said EPA’s concerns with the quality of Texas’ clean-air programs went back to the Bush administration.
“When I became administrator, I found a situation where businesses in Texas have no certainty that the permits protect them from lawsuits for excessive pollution,” Jackson said. “The answer certainly could not have been to look the other way.”
Jackson testified on the same day that House Republicans unveiled their proposals for spending cuts, including a $1.6 billion budget cut for EPA in 2011. Such cuts could hurt the EPA’s ability to carry out its regulatory agenda.
‘Highhanded’ EPA
The agency has become a prime target for House Republicans who question the science of global warming and assert that EPA regulations create uncertainty for business.
“The EPA has been highhanded in Texas,” said Rep. Joe Barton , R-Arlington. “I don’t think the EPA had the authority to revoke these existing permits, and I think their [carbon dioxide] regulations are extremely onerous if implemented.”
Barton said the committee would probably approve the legislation, called the Energy Tax Prevention Act, in the next two months. Sen. James Inhofe , R-Okla., has sponsored the legislation in the Senate, where its path to passage is much less certain.
Some House Democrats, including Rep. Gene Green of Houston, said they disapproved of EPA regulation of greenhouse gases and preferred Congress to set standards. But it’s not clear that Green and other Democrats would vote for the GOP bill.
Much of Wednesday’s hearing revolved around Republicans and Democrats arguing about whether man-made activities are to blame for climate change.
Republicans faulted Democrats for ignoring the regulations’ impact on jobs and energy costs. Democrats blasted Republicans for trying to legislatively overturn the EPA’s finding that carbon dioxide and other greenhouse gases endanger public health.
“Politicians overruling scientists on a scientific question — that would become part of this committee’s legacy,” Jackson said.
Read more in the Dallas Morning News

EPA Office of Public Engagement Notice: EPA Submits Draft Hydraulic Fracturing Study Plan to Independent Scientists for Review

2011-02-08T11:38:00.000-06:00

From Larmett.John@epamail.epa.gov

Dear Friend:

The draft plan is open to public comment.

The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) submitted its Draft Study
Plan on hydraulic fracturing for review to the agency’s Science Advisory
Board (SAB), a group of independent scientists. EPA scientists, under
this administration and at the direction of Congress, are undertaking a
study of this practice to better understand any potential impacts it may
have, including on groundwater. EPA has held a series of public
meetings, with thousands in attendance, across the country and developed
a sound draft plan for moving forward with the study.

EPA is planning to host webinars on Tuesday, February 15th and
Wednesday, February 16th to walk interested stakeholders through the
content of the draft study plan. We will be e-mailing details on how to
participate in these webinars later this week.

Best wishes,
John Larmett
Senior Public Liaison Specialist
Office of Public Engagement
Office of External Affairs & Environmental Education
Office of the Administrator
(202) 564-7842 - Office
(202) 280-8246 - Blackberry

FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE
February 8, 2011

EPA Submits Draft Hydraulic Fracturing Study Plan to Independent
Scientists for Review

The draft plan is open to public comment

WASHINGTON – The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) today
submitted its draft study plan on hydraulic fracturing for review to the
agency’s Science Advisory Board (SAB), a group of independent
scientists. Natural gas plays a key role in our nation’s clean energy
future and the process known as hydraulic fracturing is one way of
accessing that vital resource. EPA scientists, under this administration
and at the direction of Congress, are undertaking a study of this
practice to better understand any potential impacts it may have,
including on groundwater. EPA announced its intention to conduct the
study in March 2010 and use the best available science, independent
sources of information, a transparent, peer-reviewed process and with
consultation from others. Since then, EPA has held a series of public
meetings across the country with thousands attending and the agency has
developed a sound draft plan for moving forward with the study.

The scope of the proposed research includes the full lifespan of water
in hydraulic fracturing, from acquisition of the water, through the
mixing of chemicals and actual fracturing, to the post-fracturing stage,
including the management of flowback and produced or used water and its
ultimate treatment and disposal.

The SAB plans to review the draft plan March 7-8, 2011. Consistent with
the operating procedures of the SAB, stakeholders and the public will
have an opportunity to provide comments to the SAB during their review.
The agency will revise the study plan in response to the SAB’s comments
and promptly begin the study. Initial research results and study
findings are expected to be made public by the end of 2012, with the
goal of an additional report following further research in 2014.

Hydraulic fracturing is a process in which large volumes of water, sand
and chemicals are injected at high pressures to extract oil and natural
gas from underground rock formations. The process creates fractures in
formations such as shale rock, allowing natural gas or oil to escape
into the well and be recovered. Over the past few years, the use of
hydraulic fracturing for gas extraction has increased and has expanded
over a wider diversity of geographic regions and geologic formations.

For a copy of the draft study plan and additional information:
http://yosemite.epa.gov/sab/sabproduct.nsf/02ad90b136fc21ef85256eba00436459/d3483ab445ae61418525775900603e79!OpenDocument&TableRow=2.1#2

More information on hydraulic fracturing:
www.epa.gov/hydraulicfracturing

Eight of Nine U.S. Companies Agree to Work with EPA Regarding Chemicals Used in Natural Gas Extraction

2010-11-09T18:28:00.003-06:00

In a press release dated November 9, 2010, the EPA announced that eight out of nine of the largest hydraulic fracturing companies in the United States have agreed to submit "timely and complete information to help the agency conduct its study on hydraulic fracturing." The lone hold-out, Halliburton, has been served a susponea.

EPA conducting congressionally mandated study to examine the impact of the hydraulic fracturing process on drinking water quality; Halliburton subpoenaed after failing to meet EPA’s voluntary requests for information

WASHINGTON – The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) today announced that eight out of the nine hydraulic fracturing companies that received voluntary information requests in September have agreed to submit timely and complete information to help the agency conduct its study on hydraulic fracturing. However, the ninth company, Halliburton, has failed to provide EPA the information necessary to move forward with this important study. As a result, and as part of the agency’s effort to move forward as quickly as possible, today EPA issued a subpoena to the company requiring submission of the requested information that has yet to be provided.

EPA’s congressionally mandated hydraulic fracturing study will look at the potential adverse impact of the practice on drinking water and public health. The agency is under a tight deadline to provide initial results by the end of 2012 and the thoroughness of the study depends on timely access to detailed information about the methods used for fracturing. EPA announced in March that it would conduct this study and solicit input from the public through a series of public meetings in major oil and gas production regions. The agency has completed the public meetings and thousands of Americans from across the country shared their views on the study and expressed full support for this effort.

On September 9, EPA reached out to nine leading national and regional hydraulic fracturing service providers – BJ Services, Complete Production Services, Halliburton, Key Energy Services, Patterson-UTI, RPC, Inc., Schlumberger, Superior Well Services, and Weatherford – seeking information on the chemical composition of fluids used in the hydraulic fracturing process, data on the impacts of the chemicals on human health and the environment, standard operating procedures at their hydraulic fracturing sites and the locations of sites where fracturing has been conducted.

Except for Halliburton, the companies have either fully complied with the September 9 request or made unconditional commitments to provide all the information on an expeditious schedule.

More information on the subpoena and mandatory request for information on Halliburton’s hydraulic fracturing operations: http://www.epa.gov/hydraulicfracturing

Rob Lawrence
Senior Policy Advisor - Energy Issues

lawrence.rob@epa.gov

214.665.6580 (Desk)
214.665.7263 (FAX)

Fracked: Barnett Shale drilling chemicals found in blood and organs

2010-09-26T12:54:00.000-05:00

Fracked: Barnett Shale drilling chemicals found in blood and organs

Massive ice island breaks off Greenland

2010-08-07T12:46:00.004-05:00

By CNN - August 7, 2010
(CNN) -- A piece of ice four times the size of Manhattan island has broken away from an ice shelf in Greenland, according to scientists in the U.S.
The 260 square-kilometer (100 square miles) ice island separated from the Petermann Glacier in northern Greenland early on Thursday, researchers based at the University of Delaware said.
The ice island, which is about half the height of the Empire State Building, is the biggest piece of ice to break away from the Arctic icecap since 1962 and amounts to a quarter of the Petermann 70-kilometer floating ice shelf, according to research leader Andreas Muenchow.

"The freshwater stored in this ice island could keep the Delaware or Hudson rivers flowing for more than two years. It could also keep all U.S. public tap water flowing for 120 days," Muenchow said.

Muenchow's team is studying ice in the Nares Strait separating Greenland from Canada, about 1,000 kilometers south of the North Pole.
Satellite data from NASA's MODIS-Aqua satellite revealed the initial rupture which was confirmed within hours by Trudy Wohlleben of the Canadian Ice Service, according to the University of Delaware website.
Muenchow said the island could block the Nares Strait as it drifts south, or break into smaller islands and continue towards the open waters of the Atlantic.

"In Nares Strait, the ice island will encounter real islands that are all much smaller in size," he said.

"The newly born ice island may become land-fast, block the channel, or it may break into smaller pieces as it is propelled south by the prevailing ocean currents. From there, it will likely follow along the coasts of Baffin Island and Labrador, to reach the Atlantic within the next two years."

Environmentalists say ice melt is being caused by global warming with Arctic temperatures in the 1990s reaching their warmest level of any decade in at least 2,000 years, according to a study published in 2009.
Current trends could see the Arctic Ocean become ice free in summer months within decades, researchers predict.

Read more on CNN

Denton repeals item in new gas well drilling ordinance

2010-08-03T17:37:00.001-05:00

By Lowell Brown - Staff Writer Denton Chronicle - Tuesday, August 3, 2010
Denton city leaders tweaked their new gas drilling ordinance Monday after having second thoughts about a fee for wells outside city limits.

The City Council voted 5-0 to repeal a $1,800 annual inspection and administration fee for natural gas wells in the city’s extraterritorial jurisdiction, or ETJ — land just outside the city where it has some limited powers. Council members Charlye Heggins and James King weren’t present for the vote.

The council approved the fee July 21 along with other drilling regulations in what city officials described as an interim ordinance that would apply until they could finish a comprehensive code review.

Energy industry representatives argued the fee was too high and questioned the city’s authority to expand its regulations outside city limits.

Council members voted to revoke the fee before it took effect at the request of city staff members but said they would revisit the issue in the second phase of the code overhaul.

City Attorney Anita Burgess said the action would allow the city time to make sure the fee was “tied to and consistent with” the city’s powers.

The city received “quite a few comments from the industry with regard to the assessment of these fees in the ETJ,” Burgess said during the meeting. “This is a little bit of a cutting-edge area and so it would be in the interest of the city to make sure that, as we proceed forward, we’re careful how we do it.”

Burgess said she remains confident that the city has the power to regulate the ETJ. The only question is the extent of that power, she said.

Council member Dalton Gregory, an advocate for stronger drilling regulations, said the city should be careful not to overcharge the industry.

At the same time, he said, inspection fees should be high enough to cover the city’s costs so taxpayers aren’t subsidizing drilling.

The new drilling rules are scheduled to take effect Wednesday. They include higher permit and inspection fees for wells within the city, stricter noise limits at drilling sites, and increased setbacks and screening between gas wells and structures such as homes and schools.

Council members, worried the city’s drilling rules were too lenient, passed the interim ordinance as an alternative to issuing a moratorium on new permits.

Mayor Mark Burroughs said he knew the swift approval process put a “healthy burden” on city staff and meant some regulations might need to be corrected along the way.

New study shows toxins travel more than a mile from natural gas compression stations

2010-07-17T12:20:00.002-05:00