U.S. Congressman Tim Murphy says the federal Environmental Protection Agency should do a better job of communicating with the Pennsylvania Department of Environmental Protection.
At a Natural Gas Caucus hearing, DEP Secretary Michael Krancer said contact from the EPA has been limited to press releases, where the agency expresses its concerns about the enforcement of Marcellus Shale drilling regulations.
Murphy says the EPA has not responded to his communications in months and did not show up at the hearing.
“The EPA feels the need to continue to state that they’re going to do something, and yet we’re not sure what their concerns are,” says Murphy. “So, we did not hear from the EPA. I’m still waiting to hear, from my March question, what concerns they have about any of Pennsylvania’s regulations or enforcement thereof.”
The Republican lawmaker says the DEP is better suited to deal with drilling issues unique to Pennsylvania, and the EPA should bring any concerns straight to the state department.
Showing posts with label EPA. Show all posts
Showing posts with label EPA. Show all posts
Monday, June 6, 2011
Tuesday, May 3, 2011
Sierra Club Takes Stand on Mercury Pollution
Pittsburgh Councilwoman Natalia Rudiak teamed up with the Sierra Club to push for the Environmental Protection Agency regulating mercury pollution. Rudiak, and other council members and staff submitted hair samples as part of a nationwide program by the Sierra Club to raise awareness about the dangers of mercury. The element is a neurotoxin that can be detected in human hair.
Rudiak says coal-fired power plants are the main source. "They release things like mercury and arsenic into the air. And these pollutants actually rain down into our lakes and our streams. And they are eaten by fish, which consequently, we eat as well."
Michelle Naccarati-Chapkis, Executive Director of Women for a Healthy Environment, says mercury is know to pose health risks. "Mercury at high levels may damage the brain, kidneys and the nervous system. Mercury in the mother's body passes to the fetus via the placenta. According to the CDC and the EPA, at least one in twelve and as many as one in six American women have enough mercury in their bodies to possibly put a baby at risk."
The EPA is considering enacting tighter regulations for mercury and other air toxins. The Sierra Club and PennFuture will be sending a bus of people to Philadelphia on May 24th to for public testimony. The Sierra Club pressed the state to begin regulating mercury in 2006, but the Pennsylvania Supreme Court ruled that it needed to be done nationally.
Wednesday, April 27, 2011
EPA Update on Gas Well Leak
A spokesman for the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency says Chesapeake Energy Inc. has informed them that the company has sent the requested information about the spill of thousands of gallons of fracking water at a Marcellus Shale drilling site in Bradford County.
David Sternberg told WDUQ News this morning that Chesapeake Energy has told the agency that they overnighted a CD with the information that was requested. The EPA had wanted the information by yesterday but Sternberg says even though they haven't received the data yet, the agency considers the company "to be in compliance" with the request.
David Sternberg told WDUQ News this morning that Chesapeake Energy has told the agency that they overnighted a CD with the information that was requested. The EPA had wanted the information by yesterday but Sternberg says even though they haven't received the data yet, the agency considers the company "to be in compliance" with the request.
EPA Still Waiting for Info on Marcellus Well Leak
The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency had wanted Chesapeake Energy to supply information by Tuesday, April 26 on the discharge of thousands of gallons of fracking fluid from a Marcellus Shale natural gas well in Bradford County. The chemically-treated wastewater spilled for more than 20 hours before it was contained but not before some flowed across farm fields and into a creek.
E.P.A. spokesman David Sternberg said as of 4 p.m. yesterday, the company had not provided the EPA with the requested information about the fracking fluids used in the drilling process; the water, land and air affected by the release; and, any private well, surface water and soil sampling data collected before and after the April 19 incident.
Sternberg said the company indicated it would provide the data...."We will evaluate this information promptly in consultation with the PA-DEP (Pennsylvania Department of Environmental Protection) and take whatever action is needed to protect public health and the environment."
Sternberg says the agency has directed Chesapeake to provide more extensive information by May 9th regarding the timeline of the incident, source of the discharge, substances placed into or returned from the wells at the site; whether radiological compounds were present in the fracking water or sediment; effects on drinking water supplies; any other leaks, spills or releases at the site; each chemical brought to the site; and, any wastewater storage at the site.
And if the company doesn't comply by May 9th? "It would be premature to comment on potential violations and the potential of future enforcement actions. As a matter of policy, we don't comment on potential enforcement matters until they're filed or initiated."
E.P.A. spokesman David Sternberg said as of 4 p.m. yesterday, the company had not provided the EPA with the requested information about the fracking fluids used in the drilling process; the water, land and air affected by the release; and, any private well, surface water and soil sampling data collected before and after the April 19 incident.
Sternberg said the company indicated it would provide the data...."We will evaluate this information promptly in consultation with the PA-DEP (Pennsylvania Department of Environmental Protection) and take whatever action is needed to protect public health and the environment."
Sternberg says the agency has directed Chesapeake to provide more extensive information by May 9th regarding the timeline of the incident, source of the discharge, substances placed into or returned from the wells at the site; whether radiological compounds were present in the fracking water or sediment; effects on drinking water supplies; any other leaks, spills or releases at the site; each chemical brought to the site; and, any wastewater storage at the site.
And if the company doesn't comply by May 9th? "It would be premature to comment on potential violations and the potential of future enforcement actions. As a matter of policy, we don't comment on potential enforcement matters until they're filed or initiated."
Tuesday, April 26, 2011
EPA Wants Answers About Frack Spill In Bradford County
The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency has sent an "information request" directing Chesapeake Energy Corp. to provide information about the discharge of thousands of gallons of hydraulic fracturing (fracking) fluids from a natural gas well last week in Leroy Township, Bradford County.
The EPA says the state is in the lead in responding to this incident but the federal agency wants by the end of today information on the chemically-treated water used in the drilling process; the effect on water, land and air by the release; and any private well, surface water and soil sampling data collected in the area before and after the April 19 incident.
“We want a complete accounting of operations at the site to determine our next steps in this incident and to help prevent future releases of this kind,” said EPA Regional Administrator Shawn Garvin.
According to Garvin, Chesapeake has until May 9 to provide extensive details about the incident:
• Timelines, sources of discharge and the extent of environmental impact
• Substances placed into or returned to the surface from the wells at the site
• Whether radiological compounds are or were present in the fluids or sediment generated
• Results of any subsequent sampling data
• Effects on any drinking water supplies
• All permits or water quality standards that may have been violated
• Any other leaks, spills or releases that have occurred at wells on the drilling site
• The history of drilling operations at the well site
• Each chemical brought to the site, including type and quantities and storage, management and handling practices
• Any temporary wastewater storage impoundments on the site
• Processing of wastewater from wells at the site
The EPA says the state is in the lead in responding to this incident but the federal agency wants by the end of today information on the chemically-treated water used in the drilling process; the effect on water, land and air by the release; and any private well, surface water and soil sampling data collected in the area before and after the April 19 incident.
“We want a complete accounting of operations at the site to determine our next steps in this incident and to help prevent future releases of this kind,” said EPA Regional Administrator Shawn Garvin.
According to Garvin, Chesapeake has until May 9 to provide extensive details about the incident:
• Timelines, sources of discharge and the extent of environmental impact
• Substances placed into or returned to the surface from the wells at the site
• Whether radiological compounds are or were present in the fluids or sediment generated
• Results of any subsequent sampling data
• Effects on any drinking water supplies
• All permits or water quality standards that may have been violated
• Any other leaks, spills or releases that have occurred at wells on the drilling site
• The history of drilling operations at the well site
• Each chemical brought to the site, including type and quantities and storage, management and handling practices
• Any temporary wastewater storage impoundments on the site
• Processing of wastewater from wells at the site
Thursday, March 17, 2011
New EPA Rule Would Scale Back Mercury Emissions
The Environmental Protection Agency has drafted a new rule that would require power plants to make major cutbacks on emissions of mercury, arsenic and other toxins.
Though not finalized, environmental groups lauded the proposed regulation, called the Mercury and Air Toxics Rule.
PennEnvironment Field Director Adam Garber says the EPA is estimating the standard would reduce mercury emissions by about 91% from major polluters like power plants, especially coal-fired plants.
Mercury has been shown to cause neurological damage to unborn children, and several of the other air toxins addressed by the rule are tied to cancer and asthma.
Garber says the energy industry has fought the regulation for years and will probably continue to debate it in a series of public hearings this summer.
He says if the public comment phase goes smoothly, the regulation should be in place late this year or early in 2012.
Though not finalized, environmental groups lauded the proposed regulation, called the Mercury and Air Toxics Rule.
PennEnvironment Field Director Adam Garber says the EPA is estimating the standard would reduce mercury emissions by about 91% from major polluters like power plants, especially coal-fired plants.
Mercury has been shown to cause neurological damage to unborn children, and several of the other air toxins addressed by the rule are tied to cancer and asthma.
Garber says the energy industry has fought the regulation for years and will probably continue to debate it in a series of public hearings this summer.
He says if the public comment phase goes smoothly, the regulation should be in place late this year or early in 2012.
Thursday, January 6, 2011
EPA: Homer City Power Plant Violates Clean Air Act
The Department of Justice and the Environmental Protection Agency have filed suit in federal court in Pittsburgh against current and former owners and operators of the coal-fired Homer City Generating Station in Indiana County for violation of the Clean Air Act. The power plant is operated by EME Homer City Generation L.P. and owned by 8 limited liability corporations. Prior owners Pennsylvania Electric and New York State Electric & Gas were also cited in the complaint.
E.P.A. spokeswoman Bonnie Smith says the owners and operators violated the Clean Air Act by making major modifications to the boiler units at the plant without obtaining the required permits and without installing the best pollution controls....
"If a power plant installs best available control technology, they would be using scrubbers that could reduce as much as 95% of the sulfur dioxide and particulate emissions coming out of a stack, coming out of a power plant."
Smith says in 2009 the Homer City plant emitted 96,000 tons of sulfur dioxide...
"If you removed 95% (from the Homer City plant) , you would be reducing by 1% all of the sulfur dioxide emitted in the United States."
The E.P.A. is asking federal court to force the owners and operators to comply with the Clean Air Act and apply for the proper permits. Smith says their penalty policy would allow for fines ranging from $27,000 to $37,000 per day over the course of several. If those fines are sought and granted, they could total in the tens of millions of dollars.
A spokesman for Edison Mission Energy told the Pittsburgh Tribune-Review that the violations occurred before the current owners bought the plant in 1999.
However, the lawsuit also lists violations from March 2004 till the present.
E.P.A. spokeswoman Bonnie Smith says the owners and operators violated the Clean Air Act by making major modifications to the boiler units at the plant without obtaining the required permits and without installing the best pollution controls....
"If a power plant installs best available control technology, they would be using scrubbers that could reduce as much as 95% of the sulfur dioxide and particulate emissions coming out of a stack, coming out of a power plant."
Smith says in 2009 the Homer City plant emitted 96,000 tons of sulfur dioxide...
"If you removed 95% (from the Homer City plant) , you would be reducing by 1% all of the sulfur dioxide emitted in the United States."
The E.P.A. is asking federal court to force the owners and operators to comply with the Clean Air Act and apply for the proper permits. Smith says their penalty policy would allow for fines ranging from $27,000 to $37,000 per day over the course of several. If those fines are sought and granted, they could total in the tens of millions of dollars.
A spokesman for Edison Mission Energy told the Pittsburgh Tribune-Review that the violations occurred before the current owners bought the plant in 1999.
However, the lawsuit also lists violations from March 2004 till the present.
Tuesday, May 18, 2010
Consent Decree for Natrona Steel Plant
The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Allegheny Health Department and the Department of Justice have reached a settlement with Allegheny Ludlum for alleged Clean Air Act violations at the company's Natrona silicon steel production plant. EPA Regional Administrator Shawn Garvin says the settlement will bring cleaner air to Allegheny County....."“We’re pleased that we could resolve these issues without further litigation, meaning nearby communities will benefit sooner from improved air quality.”
As part of the settlement, Allegheny Ludlum will pay a $1.6 million penalty to be divided equally between the federal government and the Allegheny County Health Department for its Clean Air Fund. The company has agreed to permanently cease steel making operations at its Natrona plant by no later than November 30, 2010. Allegheny Ludlum had already planned to shut down the Natrona facility and consolidate operations at its nearby Brackenridge plant.
Health Department spokesman Guillermo Cole says this agreement means a long-term commitment to cleaner air and continuing operations..."the output (from the consolidation) will be about the same and will lead to a dramatic reduction in emissions and result in cleaner air for the residents in the area."
Cole says this case dates back to "a significant number of complaints by residents" in 2007 about particulate pollution from the plant. The settlement is subject to a public comment period and final approval by federal court.
As part of the settlement, Allegheny Ludlum will pay a $1.6 million penalty to be divided equally between the federal government and the Allegheny County Health Department for its Clean Air Fund. The company has agreed to permanently cease steel making operations at its Natrona plant by no later than November 30, 2010. Allegheny Ludlum had already planned to shut down the Natrona facility and consolidate operations at its nearby Brackenridge plant.
Health Department spokesman Guillermo Cole says this agreement means a long-term commitment to cleaner air and continuing operations..."the output (from the consolidation) will be about the same and will lead to a dramatic reduction in emissions and result in cleaner air for the residents in the area."
Cole says this case dates back to "a significant number of complaints by residents" in 2007 about particulate pollution from the plant. The settlement is subject to a public comment period and final approval by federal court.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)