Showing posts with label Chief Oil and Gas. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Chief Oil and Gas. Show all posts

Thursday, July 5, 2012

More Water Concerns with Drilling

Starrucca Viaduct, Lanesboro PA
A week after the Susquehanna River Basin Commission (SRBC) suspended water withdrawals I decided to drive through the northern tier of Pennsylvania to check on the rivers. The water is so low that some smaller creeks are nearly dry and farmers are irrigating their fields and row crops. It looks like August, not the beginning of July - and while not "technically" a drought, it's getting close in some parts of the state.

That same day, July 3 the American Water Works Association released a statement calling for more regulatory oversight of hydro-fracking operations. They call on the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) to use the authority of the Safe Drinking Water Act to regulate oil and gas well construction and operation - including hydro-fracking- through the Underground Injection Control (UIC) Program. They also ask EPA to use its existing authority under the Clean Water Act to regulate discharges from oil and gas wells. While the group supports sound federal energy policies, it clearly states that oil and gas development (including fracking) "must provide appropriate protection of our nation's ground water and surface water resources."

Meanwhile, the residents in Leroy Township (Bradford County, PA) are dealing with another spill - 4,700 gallons of hydrochloric acid at the Yoder well operated by Chief Oil and Gas. So far it's been contained, say the folks from Chief and PA's Department of Environmental Protection, with no runoff getting into Towanda Creek.


Friday, January 7, 2011

Chief Gathering LLC Slapped with Fine, Surrenders Permit

Today the Pennsylvania Department of Environmental Protection (DEP) announced that it has fined Chief Gathering LLC, of Dallas, Texas (a subsidiary of Chief Oil and Gas) a $34,000 fine for illegally discharging industrial waste in Lycoming County.

In August 2010 Chief was conducting hydrostatic testing at a pipeline project. Hydrostatic tests involve placing water in a natural gas pipeline at the required pressure to ensure there are no leaks before it is placed into service.

During those tests Chief discharged more than 25,000 gallons of hydrostatic testing water into the Big Run watershed – after an earlier notification in which Chief indicated to DEP that no discharge would occur. According to DEP none of the discharged water reached any nearby surface streams

A DEP investigation also revealed numerous other violations including:
  • Failure to minimize the flow rate from the discharge point and allowing the formation of a 150-foot erosion channel;
  • Failure to submit accurate, detailed Notice of Intent project information;
  • Discharging hydrostatic test water with a total chlorine residual greater than 0.05 parts per million;  
  • Allowing an unknown industrial waste to co-mingle in five storage tanks with the hydrostatic test water, which was subsequently discharged; and
  • A failure to monitor the discharge for the specified effluent parameters at the minimum frequency required.
In conjunction with the enforcement action, Chief voluntarily surrendered its discharge permit in early December.

Wednesday, July 7, 2010

PennDOT Allows Use of State Highway Right-of-Ways for Gathering Pipelines

Photos provided by Kelly Finan.
 
Six months ago, when Chief Oil & Gas approached landowners in Hop Bottom, PA about leasing land for a gathering pipeline, a number of residents weren't interested. Long-time resident Linda Lewis was adamant that she didn't want gas drilling on her land - and she certainly didn't want pipelines running through her land. Neither did her neighbor, Lynn Butler.

Now Chief Oil & Gas has set out lines of bright orange plastic cones along State Route 2002, pounded stakes flagged with neon surveyor’s tape, and laid out a line of 12-inch pipeline sections along the side of the road. This gathering line will transport the gas produced at three wells to a compressor station.

Before it gets to that compressor station, the gas will travel across Lewis's front yard and within feet of Butler's barn. And that's got both women, and a bunch of neighbors, pretty riled.

Why couldn't they run the pipeline beneath the abandoned field across the road from her, Lewis wonders. "Nobody lives there; it's been empty for the last 40 years." She says she's called Chief Oil & Gas numerous times, but they still have yet to return her calls.

Now Lewis wonders how – and whether – she can prevent the gas drilling company from installing what she sees as a potential explosion hazard so close to her home. She also wonders how Pennsylvania Department of Transportation (PennDOT) can so cavalierly give away rights to put in a pipeline on what she clearly thinks is her land.


PennDOT feels they are simply doing their job. The state owns the right of way, says spokes-person Karen Dussinger, explaining that right-of-ways may extend anywhere from 25 feet to 50 feet or more from the center of the road. The state allows DOT use of the right-of-way through an easement. PennDOT, in turn, permits certain utilities – gas, water, sewer, aerials, communication and power companies – to use the land beside the state highways.


"We cannot deny anybody access as long as they meet our permit requirements," Dussinger said.

Lewis and her neighbors wonder whether Chief Oil & Gas actually meets those permit requirements. According to Robert Kretschmer, one of the permit managers at PennDOT, Pennsylvania Code, Chapter 459 provides regulatory guidance on issuing those permits. Its title is “Occupancy of  Highways by Utilities” – and that’s the very question Hop Bottom residents are asking DOT: is a drilling company putting in a gathering line considered a utility?

This is not a trivial question, because utilities may obtain property through eminent domain – something pipeline companies in Texas have been using for a number of years. But at least eminent domain would mean being reimbursed for the use of your land. It would also mean public hearings – and an opportunity to challenge the proposed pipeline.

Lewis and her neighbors had no opportunity to challenge Chief’s pipeline plans. There was never any public conversation about the project. 

“That’s because public hearings and notification of property owners along the right-of-way are not required,” Kretschmer said. PennDOT accepts Chief's status as a utility because they ultimately serve the public, no matter that the neighbors see it serving the corporation.

Dussinger adds that if the facility in any way directly or indirectly results in service to the public or any part thereof, the "serving the public" requirement is met.  The facility distributes gas to their plants for removal of impurities and then is delivered directly to homes or businesses through local distribution lines.  And that, says PennDOT, indirectly results in service to the public.

note: comments from Dussinger and Kretschmer come from telephone conversations in the course of investigating this issue.