Marcellus question: Who will pay to monitor gas drilling?

October 10, 2009
By Tom Wilber
twilber@gannett.com

And now for a little homework ...

The state is asking local government agencies to regulate key aspects of the natural gas industry, raising yet more questions about who will pay for manpower to oversee multinational energy companies setting up shop in Southern Tier's backyards.

The industry's effect on water resources and roads are included in a report released Sept. 30 by the Department of Environmental Conservation outlining environmental concerns from full-scale Marcellus Shale development.

Risks to water, the report says, include turbidity, methane contamination and, to a lesser degree, potential for hazardous chemicals to breach well-bore casings or spill while being handled or disposed of on the surface.

To deal with those threats, the state is calling on local health departments to oversee a testing program of private wells in drilling zones. Testing would begin before drilling starts, and continue for a year after it ends.

DEC would also require drilling companies to work out a plan with local governments to minimize traffic problems and cover damage to roads caused by fleets of heavy equipment, water tankers and drill rigs caravanning from site to site.

The industry's promise of affluence, supporters say, will help the struggling economy and bolster the tax base. Yet officials have yet to figure out how to pay to oversee an onslaught of permitting and drilling activity - mostly in the Southern Tier - that is expected to begin next year.

The county is looking at a 3.9 percent tax hike and job cuts to help balance next year's budget. Gov. David Paterson has ordered state agencies to cut operating expenses 11 percent.

"How will we pay? That is a concern," said Broome County Legislator Stephen Herz, D-Windsor, a member of the Finance Committee.

A proposal to steer industry fees and taxes into the state's general fund died in Albany earlier this year. Assemblywoman Donna Lupardo, D-Endwell, favors a plan to raise permit fees and earmark them for regulatory staffing. So does the industry.

Yet that plan is yet to materialize.

"There will have to be money to pay for staff time, no matter where it comes from," said Chip McElwee, executive director of the Broome County Soil & Water Conservation District, an agency that works with landowners to preserve water resources.

Who pays for what?

The state suspended permitting for the Marcellus last summer in order to take a closer look at an industry expected to change the Southern Tier's economic and physical landscape.

Results arrived last month via the 809-page draft called the Supplemental Generic Environmental Impact Statement. While the proposal lays the ground rules for Marcellus development, it's only one piece of a complicated regulatory puzzle.

Local governments must provide the missing pieces, including the wherewithal to protect water and roads.

The clock is ticking.

The public comment period ends Nov. 30. As of Friday, representatives from industry and government said they are still reading through it. Hard copies were not available at public places, and the DEC still hasn't scheduled public meetings to review it.

While the review proposes a regulatory framework, it does not address costs.

County health agencies, the plan says, would take on a "primary role" in overseeing a program to review water data at private wells within 1,000 to 2,000 feet of a drilling rig, before, during and up to a year after operations. Counties also would flag problems and investigate complaints.

Drilling companies are responsible for testing and sending results to the health department and residents for interpretation.

County officials are still trying to determine how that translates into staffing needs.

Here are the numbers they will work with:

The Marcellus is capable of supporting between 2,000 and 4,000 gas wells in Broome County, based on an economic development report commissioned by the legislature. Each gas well has the potential for producing water testing at multiple spots for years.

How much oversight would that require?

"We have to see how it fits in with our resources," said Robert Denz, director of environmental health for the Broome County Department of Health.

Tough sell

As a preliminary step, the county added $28,000 to the Health Department's budget for 2010 to pay for an additional part-time position to respond to complaints involving drilling's effect on private water supplies. Denz said he did not know whether this would be enough without further evaluating the DEC's proposal.

Any staff additions might be a tough sell, however, given the budget problems.

"Nobody has come to grips with it yet," said Herz, who, as a member of landowner coalition dealing with energy companies, has been following the issue closely. "We are looking at a budget in the county that is pretty harsh."

While officials work on the funding puzzle, the state's regulatory proposal is finding general support among drilling industry leaders and bitter criticism from advocacy groups.

Adam Flint, a member of the Binghamton Regional Sustainability Coalition, said officials are too quick to embrace economic promises of Marcellus development without assessing the costs.

"People are playing fast and loose with the figures," he said. "The reports are not spelling out who pays."

The state report lays the groundwork for drilling to begin. Industry supporters see that as encouraging.

"It seems that the state set the conditions so that actual production could proceed, even under tightly defined parameters," said Chris Tucker, a spokesman for Energy In Depth, a national trade group. "That's why we support this and they (opponents) do not. There is no way to split the baby on this."

Full-scale Marcellus production is on the Southern Tier's threshold. When it arrives and how it unfolds depends largely on how the regulations are crafted. That, in turn, depends on how the public and officials respond to the state's proposal.

They have homework to do in the next few weeks.

Additional Facts
Why it matters
The Marcellus shale runs from the Southern Tier of New York, through the western portion of Pennsylvania into the eastern half of Ohio and through West Virginia. Many gas production companies are now interested in the Marcellus, so they are approaching land-owners with offers to lease the rights to natural gas deposits below houses and farms.

The implications for residents of the region are significant. Gas-leases can generate income for residents, but might create costs for local governments that could be charged with some of the responsibilities for oversight. Gas-drilling in other areas has prompted issues related to pollution, noise, and safety.

http://www.pressconnects.com/article/20091010/NEWS01/910100362/Marcellus+question++Who+will+pay+to+monitor+gas+drilling

NUCLEAR POWER: No More Reactors at North Anna

Comment: This is a scary article; the State of Virginia did not enforce the law for a corporation!!!Why??? Because Corporations dictate to the most States!!! So if uranium mining is approved, will the country of Canada dictate to the State of Virginia??? Will Virginia let Canada ruin our water, air & land ......it looks like to me....... $$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$

LOUIS ZELLER TIMES-DISPATCH COLUMNIST
Published: May 24, 2009

The recent ruling of the Circuit Court of the City of Richmond was short and to the point:

"Virginia law requires regulation of Dominion's thermal pollution discharge because the exception for waste treatment simply doesn't apply here." With this ruling, a decades-old viola tion of the law was ended. The impact of the decision could benefit the many thousands of people who use Lake Anna annually.

Dominion's permit violated the law.

In 2007 the Virginia Water Control Board approved a permit for Dominion Virginia Power to discharge hot water from its North Anna nuclear power plant into Lake Anna. The permit was illegal for several reasons.

First, under the U.S. Clean Water Act, Virginia must protect water quality of the lake, but the state failed to limit hot water discharges flowing from the North Anna nuclear reactors directly into Lake Anna.

Second, heat is a pollutant and the maximum water temperature in cooling lakes is set by federal law: 89.6 degrees Fahrenheit. Lakeside residents report that water temperatures reach dangerous levels in the summer, as high as 104 degrees. The Blue Ridge Environmental Defense League and others have documented the serious harm to Lake Anna caused by excessive heat levels.

Third, the state water board applied the wrong law and analysis in concluding that part of Lake Anna was entitled to an exemption for waste treatment facilities. Dominion can no longer rely upon this error to exceed water quality standards at Lake Anna.

Finally, the state water board violated federal law when it applied a less protective Virginia law. The granting of federal authority to any state to enforce the Clean Water Act and issue permits comes with a floor below which no state may go. Virginia's environmental agencies are no exception.

Dominion has tried to argue that since it built the dam years ago, it should be able to do whatever it wants with the "hot side" of the lake. But it does not matter who created the lake. Lake Anna is public "waters of the United States" and is governed by the Clean Water Act.

It does not matter that the permit has been granted many times before. Committing an error more than once does not justify the original error. What matters is that Virginia is bound to enforce water quality standards. These standards include the limitation of heat pollution to all of Lake Anna.

So, what next? Once the court enters an order, Dominion's permit will be set aside and the Virginia State Water Control Board will have to evaluate the adverse impacts of hot water discharges to Lake Anna from two nuclear reactors. The board will have to bring the permit into compliance with the law. Meanwhile, the plant will continue to operate, producing electric power. Plant workers will continue to draw paychecks. Dominion will continue to pay taxes to Louisa County. The people living on Lake Anna will continue about their business.

What will not happen? Dominion will not put a fence around the lake. Such a move would be impractical, counterproductive, and would not address the problem of hot water in the lake. Dominion can continue to monitor lake conditions and maintain lake water levels. Nothing in the court's decision prohibits the company from acting in a responsible manner, working for the common good, and doing the right thing.

Indeed, if Dominion were to do something rash, that would be purely Dominion's decision. It would not result from the court's ruling. Dominion can and should continue both to operate its facility and to comply with the law. There should be no disruption of residents' and visitors' ability to enjoy all of Lake Anna.

Dominion's proposal to add a third nuclear reactor to the North Anna plant is not directly affected by the court's decision; it was not part of the lawsuit.

However, one question is inescapable: If two reactors on Lake Anna strain its ability to provide enough cooling water, what would a third reactor do? In response to water quality problems, Dominion has already trimmed its proposal by eliminating its plans for a fourth unit. This decision was smart, practical, and necessary. If Dominion cannot operate two nuclear reactors within federal requirements, a third is out of the question.

Armed with the Richmond Circuit Court's decision, Virginia's Department of Environmental Quality and the State Water Control Board now have the opportunity to improve conditions at Lake Anna.

Dominion Virginia Power may appeal this decision, but the Blue Ridge Environmental Defense League plans to continue its campaign to end Virginia's breach of the law, to protect public health, and to improve environmental quality.

Louis Zeller is science director of the Blue Ridge Environmental Defense League. Contact him at bredl@skybest.comor

http://www.timesdispatch.com/rtd/news/opinion/commentary/article/ZELLER524_20090522-203709/269405/

Governor visits Grants

Comment: Gov of New Mexico, leave the Native Americans land alone, NO URANIUM MINING!!!

RICHARDSON SUGGESTS TALK IS NEEDED

By Donald Jaramillo
Beacon publisher/managing editor
djaramillo@cibolabeacon.com
Published Friday, April 24, 2009 9:18 AM MDT

GRANTS - “Do you want a dialogue with the Native Americans?” Governor Bill Richardson asked a group of county residents at a meeting with the state leader at the Cibola County Complex on April 23.

“My office can help. I encourage a dialogue between Cibola County officials and Native Americans.” The issue being discussed at the time Richardson made these remarks was the Mount Taylor Traditional Cultural Property designation and uranium mining.

A large portion of Mount Taylor could become a permanent traditional cultural property if voted in favor of in June by a state preservation agency. The application for the designation was made by several tribes including Acoma and Laguna.

Uranium has become a hot topic in Cibola County since mining companies are once again interested in extracting the ore from the Grants Mineral Belt when the price per pound skyrocketed last year to over $100 a pound. Today, the per pound price is $54, according to Pay Dirt, a mining industry magazine.

Nearly a hundred people packed the Cibola County Commission room for the meeting with Richardson including state representatives, county officials and city officials.

“Your office can be the bridge,” said state representative Ken Martinez to Richardson. “I don't believe the bridge is not too big at this point.”

On the issues Richardson thinks compromises can be made, he said at the meeting. “For example we recently designated the Pecos State Park and in the park is a cave that is sacred to Jemez Pueblo. The state has a nice new park and they can still visit the cave regularly.”

Mining company representative and longtime resident Joe Lister remarked that he has made efforts since January 2008 to meet with the tribes but to no avail.

Hardy Allen of Mount Taylor Millwork said, “They (the tribes) don't have to contact us for casinos at the foothills of Mount Taylor. It's a one way street.”

Richardson advised the group that his administration has approved nine permits and that he is in favor of uranium mining as long as it is environmentally safe and mining companies give more money to the state. (SOUNDS LIKE OUR LAME DUCK GOV - URANIUM MINING HAS NEVER BEEN DONE SAFELY, THE GOV OF NM - SHORT MEMORY OF THE PAST URANIUM MINING IN HIS STATE!!)

Real estate businessman Howard Michael said, “While New Mexico is turning industry away other states are rolling out the red carpet.”

James Martinez of the Juan Tafoya Land Corporation, also at the meeting, said, “If we are constantly dragging out our permits these companies will go elsewhere.

We had a mine and mill on our land 25 years ago��-we are not pendejos, we want clean water also. We don't want the Native Americans telling us what to do on our private land.”

The meeting lasted an hour and fifteen minutes and many other issues were spoken on besides TCP and uranium. A follow up story on the meeting will be in Tuesday's Beacon.

http://www.cibolabeacon.com/articles/2009/04/24/news/doc49f1ce8f383e0599085379.txt

NC House Committee to debate mountaintop mining ban

Julie Rose
Tuesday April 21, 2009

Today a committee of North Carolina lawmakers will debate a ban on importing coal that is mined from Appalachian mountaintops. Duke Energy strongly opposes the measure. WFAE's Julie Rose reports:

Mountaintop coal removal requires blowing up several hundred feet on the top of a mountain, and it can devastate communities like Peachtree, West Virginia where Bo Webb lives.

"I live beneath a mountaintop removal site and it's gotta stop," says Webb. "My family's health, our safety's at risk, they're destroying all of our communities in southern West Virginia for a lump of coal."

Webb joined several hundred protesters in Uptown Charlotte yesterday opposing Duke Energy's plans to build a new coal-fired unit and continue using coal mined from mountaintops. Duke Energy spokeswoman Marilyn Lineberger says about half of its coal comes from mountaintop removal, because it is low in sulfur as most of Duke's power plants require.

Under the Appalachian Mountains Preservation Act, North Carolina companies like Duke and Progress Energy would not be able to renew their mountaintop coal contracts once they expire.

Lineberger says Duke Energy only supports a federal solution to the problem of mountaintop removal - not a state ban.

"That would not stop the practice of mountaintop mining," says Lineberger. "All that would do is make our customers a captive audience for markets that we would have to go outside, investing millions and millions of dollars in retrofits."

Of the 50 states, North Carolina and Georgia are the two largest consumers of coal mined from mountaintops. A version of the ban has been introduced in both states.

Today's hearing is only the first of many hurdles the measure will have to clear before it would become law.

More info:

The Appalachian Mountains Preservation Act (HB 340) is sponsored by Rep. Pricey Harrison (D-Guilford). It will be heard by the House Standing Committee on Environment and Natural Resources Tuesday, April 21 at 12 p.m. in Room 643 of the Legislative Office Building, Raleigh.

http://www.wfae.org/wfae/1_87_316.cfm?action=display&id=4960

House votes to ban coal mining near streams

Comment: All of waterways need protection from Pollution from mining!

Associated Press - April 14, 2009 4:15 AM ET

NASHVILLE, Tenn. (AP) - The House has voted to ban coal mining within 100 feet of Tennessee streams.

The bill is part of Democratic Gov. Phil Bredesen's legislative package and was carried by House Democratic Caucus Chairman Mike Turner of Old Hickory and Republican House Environment Chairman Joe McCord of Maryville.

The House passed the measure to ban mining coal or dumping debris within 100 feet of the center of streams on a 76-19 vote. McCord says the bill writes into law the rules already enforced by the state.

The companion bill is awaiting a full Senate vote.

Read HB2300 at http://www.capitol.tn.gov/