A Year End Present to the Fracking Industry?

A message from Stephen Kunz, Senior Ecologist at Schmid & Company, Inc.  

The Pennsylvania Department of Environmental Protection (PADEP) is proposing to modify and reissue Chapter 105 General Permit 8, as published in the Pennsylvania Bulletin on November 2, 2013. Public comments on this proposal are being accepted until January 10, 2014.This one is really important, so please take the time to submit comments.

The proposed GP-8  would allow, without technical review, virtually unlimited impacts to wetlands and streams from "temporary" activities, defined as up to two years, that currently need an Individual Permit, things like large-capacity (24-inch inside diameter) pipelines carrying "pollutional materials," which is undefined, but presumably includes fracking and flowback fluids.  

A temporary pipeline winds through a field in Sullivan County.  A. PINCA

As you may know, projects relying on Chapter 105 General Permits like this receive virtually no review by the PADEP.  Indeed, it actually is a "registration" process rather than an approval process.  If a project sponsor believes his proposed work meets the requirements of a General Permit, he simply registers to use it--on the "honor system"--and the PADEP returns a simple  "acknowledgment" that the registration was received.  No oversight, no public review, and GP registrations are no longer published in the Pennsylvania Bulletin.

The proposed modification of GP-8 seems to be a veiled attempt to create an umbrella General Permit that can authorize virtually unlimited impacts to wetlands and streams from a wide range of activities primarily associated with oil and gas operations, although of course it is not framed that way. 

I have already prepared and submitted  my comments  which I shared with the Citizens Advisory Council at their meeting in Harrisburg last month. I am encouraging others to prepare comments, too.  Feel free to modify or tailor my comments for your own use, and to circulate them as widely as possible.

Given the timing of the public comment period for this GP-8 rule change--at the end of the year when most people are busy with Holiday activities--I assume PADEP is doing its best to keep this one under the radar, and to give a nice present to the folks in the fracking industry.

Remember, you have until January 10, 2014 to submit your comments.

Comments can be emailed to: RA-GP8Comments@pa.gov      

or mailed to:

Kenneth Murin, Chief

Division of Wetlands, Encroachments, and Training

PADEP Bureau of Waterways Engineering and Wetlands

P.O. Box 8460

Harrisburg, PA 17105-8460     

Editor's note: Mr. Kunz's message was edited for for this article. 

                      Why the Fuss Over the Proposed GP-8?                                                                            By Ann Pinca 

               

Much as we would like to believe that best management practices are always used and that the oil and gas industry really does have safety, health, and environmental impacts as uppermost concerns in daily operations, our Pennsylvania experience tells us otherwise.

A 2010 article details several spills, including two by Range Resources that occurred while pumping flowback through temporary pipelines, resulting in thousands of gallons of wastewater spilling into creeks and causing fish kills. One spill took place at a tributary to Brush Run, a high quality stream in Washington County that DEP noted in documents required "special" protection. A recent article looks back to another spill in 2010 that "may or may not" have happened. The incident was only discovered through legal proceedings that turned up documents suggesting a possible cover-up of a spill that was never reported by a contractor working for Range.

Unfortunately, these are just a few examples of the many spills that take place during the course of unconventional natural gas extraction. While it is bad enough to have "temporary" pipelines full of toxic chemicals criss-crossing our state for up to two years at a time, it's even worse to think that the technical review of the siting, construction, and operation of these pipelines that could bear potentially devastating impacts will be lessened in any way. It is oversight, transparency, and consequences for wrong-doing that are in the best interests of Pennsylvania's people and environment, certainly not a watered-down honor system for an industry that has yet to prove it can be trusted.