iPhone app iPad app Android phone app Android tablet app More

Dimock, Pennsylvania: Water Tested As EPA Heightens Scrutiny

First Posted: 03/ 5/2012 1:36 am Updated: 03/ 8/2012 12:23 am

DIMOCK, Pa. (AP) — Tugging on rubber gloves, a laboratory worker kneels before a gushing spigot behind Kim Grosso's house and positions an empty bottle under the clear, cold stream. The process is repeated dozens of times as bottles are filled, marked and packed into coolers.

After extensive testing, Grosso and dozens of her neighbors will know this week what may be lurking in their well water as federal regulators investigate claims of contamination in the midst of one of the nation's most productive natural gas fields.

More than three years into the gas-drilling boom that's produced thousands of new wells, the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency and the state of Pennsylvania are tussling over regulation of the Marcellus Shale, the vast underground rock formation that holds trillions of cubic feet of gas.

The state says EPA is meddling. EPA says it is doing its job.

Grosso, who lives near a pair of gas wells drilled in 2008, told federal officials her water became discolored a few months ago, with an intermittent foul odor and taste. Her dog and cats refused to drink it. While there's no indication the problems are related to drilling, she hopes the testing will provide answers.

"If there is something wrong with the water, who is responsible?" she asked. "Who's going to fix it, and what does it do to the value of the property?"

Federal regulators are ramping up their oversight of the Marcellus with dual investigations in the northeastern and southwestern corners of Pennsylvania. EPA is also sampling water around Pennsylvania for its national study of the potential environmental and public health impacts of hydraulic fracturing, or fracking, the technique that blasts a cocktail of sand, water and chemicals deep underground to stimulate oil and gas production in shale formations like the Marcellus. Fracking allows drillers to reach previously inaccessible gas reserves, but it produces huge volumes of polluted wastewater and environmentalists say it can taint groundwater. Energy companies deny it.

The heightened federal scrutiny rankles the industry and politicians in the state capital, where the administration of pro-drilling Gov. Tom Corbett insists that Pennsylvania regulators are best suited to oversee the gas industry. The complaints echo those in Texas and in Wyoming, where EPA's preliminary finding that fracking chemicals contaminated water supplies is forcefully disputed by state officials and energy executives.

Caught in the middle of the state-federal regulatory dispute are residents who don't know if their water is safe to drink.

EPA is charged by law with protecting and ensuring the safety of the nation's drinking water, but it has largely allowed the states to take the lead on rules and enforcement as energy companies drilled and fracked tens of thousands of new wells in recent years.

In Pennsylvania, that began to change last spring after The Associated Press and other news organizations reported that huge volumes of partially treated wastewater were being discharged into rivers and streams that supply drinking water. EPA asked the state to boost its monitoring of fracking wastewater from gas wells, and the state declared a voluntary moratorium for drillers that led to significant reductions of Marcellus waste. Yet a loophole in the policy allows operators of many older oil and gas wells to continue discharging significant amounts of wastewater into treatment plants, and thus, into rivers.

The state's top environmental regulator, Michael Krancer, says Pennsylvania doesn't need federal intervention to help it protect the environment. He told Congress last fall that Pennsylvania has taken the lead on regulations for the burgeoning gas industry.

"There's no question that EPA is overstepping," Katherine Gresh, Krancer's spokeswoman, told the AP. "DEP regulates these facilities and always has, and EPA has never before shown this degree of involvement."

The American Petroleum Institute urged the Obama administration last week to rein in the 10 agencies it says are either reviewing, studying or proposing regulation of fracking.

"The fact is that there is a strong state regulatory system in place, and adding potentially redundant and duplicative federal regulation would be unnecessary, costly, and could stifle investment," API Vice President Kyle Isakower said in a statement.

EPA says public health is its key focus and insists it is guided by sound science and the law.

"We have been clear that if we see an immediate threat to public health, we will not hesitate to take steps under the law to protect Americans whose health may be at risk," said Terri White, an EPA spokeswoman in Philadelphia.

The EPA investigations are being conducted amid reports of possibly drilling-related contamination in several Pennsylvania communities.

In recent years, methane migrating from drill sites into private water supplies has forced scores of residents to stop using their wells and rely on deliveries of fresh water. Some residents complain the state agency has failed to hold drillers to account.

In heavily drilled Washington County, near the West Virginia border, EPA staff are inspecting well pads and natural gas compressor stations for compliance with water- and air-quality laws. In Dimock, a village about 20 miles south of the New York state line, EPA stepped in after a gas driller won the state's permission to halt fresh water deliveries to about a dozen residents whose wells were tainted with methane and, the residents say, heavy metals, organic compounds and drilling chemicals.

Dimock holds the distinction of being Pennsylvania's top gas-producing town, yielding enough gas in six months to supply 400,000 U.S. homes for a year. Some residents contend their water wells were irreversibly contaminated after Houston-based Cabot Oil & Gas Corp. drilled faulty gas wells that leaked methane into the aquifer 7/87/8— and spilled thousands of gallons of fracking fluids that residents suspect leached into the groundwater.

Cabot first acknowledged, then denied responsibility for the methane it now contends is naturally occurring. It also asserts that years of sampling data show the water is safe to drink.

The EPA looked at the same test results and arrived at a different conclusion.

The well water samples "led us to conclude that there were health concerns that required action," White said. EPA said its tests showed alarming levels of manganese and cancer-causing arsenic and that Cabot's own tests found minute concentrations of organic compounds and synthetic chemicals, suggesting the influence of gas drilling.

Cabot says its drilling operations had nothing to do with any chemicals that have turned up in the water. It points to a Duke University study last year that found no evidence of contamination from fracking.

Yet the company racks up state violations at a far higher rate than its competitors in the Marcellus — 248 violations at its wells in Dimock alone since late 2007 — most recently last month, when the company was flagged for improper storage, transport or disposal of residual waste. State regulators levied more than $1.1 million in fines and penalties against the company between 2008 and 2010. And it is still banned from drilling any new wells in a 9-square-mile area of Dimock.

While EPA agreed last month to deliver water to four homes along Carter Road, the agency said the tests did not justify supplying water to several other residents who had been getting their water from Cabot and who have filed suit against the company.

The plaintiffs still don't trust their wells, instead relying on water from the nearby Montrose municipal supply.

Twice a day, six days a week, Carter Road resident Ray Kemble drives about eight miles to a hydrant in Montrose, fills a 550-gallon tank strapped to the back of a donated truck, and delivers water to as many as five homes — including his own. Anti-drilling groups are footing the bill, estimated at $500 per week.

Kemble said his well water turned brown and became unusable in 2008, shortly after the gas well across the street was drilled and fracked.

At his home, he filled a large plastic container dubbed a water buffalo from the tank on the truck.

"Never had a problem before until Cabot came in," Kemble said.

Also on HuffPost:

FOLLOW HUFFPOST GREEN

DIMOCK, Pa. (AP) — Tugging on rubber gloves, a laboratory worker kneels before a gushing spigot behind Kim Grosso's house and positions an empty bottle under the clear, cold stream. The process is r...
DIMOCK, Pa. (AP) — Tugging on rubber gloves, a laboratory worker kneels before a gushing spigot behind Kim Grosso's house and positions an empty bottle under the clear, cold stream. The process is r...
Filed by James Gerken  | 
 
 
  • Comments
  • 64
  • Pending Comments
  • 0
  • View FAQ
Comments are closed for this entry
View All
Favorites
Recency  | 
Popularity
Page: 1 2  Next ›  Last »  (2 total)
05:30 PM on 03/07/2012
All of this talk about well water testing is making me thirsty! I have been reading a lot about this and it has really got me thinking about buying a water filter for my home faucet!
06:56 AM on 03/06/2012
Seamus McGraw does a good job of examining all of the issues surrounding fracking in Pennsylvania in his book 'The End of Country.'
http://failuremag.com/index.php/feature/article/fracking_the_marcellus_shale/
D-Driller
my micro-bio is empty
12:28 AM on 03/06/2012
It would be helpful if the EPA were to push for a law that makes oil and gas companies sample neighboring wells BEFORE they drill. This would give a baseline, and allow for investigators to know exactly where the pollutants, if any, come from. The gas companies are not always honest, but individuals are not always honest either. Let's hold everyone to a higher standard.
This user has chosen to opt out of the Badges program
photo
yeti7
don't need no stink'n badges
08:35 AM on 03/06/2012
don't know about private wells but aren't public wells tested and issue a public report yearly for the community?
D-Driller
my micro-bio is empty
08:40 AM on 03/06/2012
They are, and that's a good point - I am curious what those well tests show.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
docsong
just waisting time?
12:05 AM on 03/06/2012
there is no save way to fract in the long run, even if water tables are not contaminated right after fracking, geological conditions can change anytime (earthquakes) even minor quakes can cause future contamination.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
Jeff4141
08:56 PM on 03/05/2012
If our state regulators claim the water is OK to drink, but the EPA claim it is not,...well, welcome to Pennsylvannia,...

New York,...keep your wits about you, or you could be next!
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
repugnicansfearme
Ronald Reagan=worst president in history
08:33 PM on 03/05/2012
Have you seen the laughable Chevron "We Agree" ads on TV? What a freaking laughfest. They have a Chevron "scientist"- then geekier, the better, and then ACTORS on the other split screen. When the actors start to say something like "I really like clean water"-- the geek cuts in "WE MAKE SURE ALL WATER IS CLEAN WHEREVER WE OPERATE"- It's a malevolent, cheap, disgusting, lying, cheating, smarmy way to operate. It makes me sick to my stomach.
01:57 AM on 03/06/2012
Like the 63 meters of water that will inundate the planet in the next 100 years????.
06:19 PM on 03/05/2012
History has taught us that preventive ideas often never work until there is a major catastrophic event and that will happen for sure. There is nothing more important for the survival of humanity then water and with blinders on their eyes and lobbyist with millions of dollars the road is paved for a horrendous event to happen sadly.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
brutusmojo
live w/motherearthnot juston her
05:32 PM on 03/05/2012
It takes water to frack.Everyone understands this goes someplace.The council rushed into this with their palms up.Shell made guarantees they knew were not possible to keep.Not to worry they said,we use bacteria to clean any spill.Well they sprung a leak like I knew they would,played it down till they couldn't any more.said they underestimated the spill..Water polluted the ground,then the water table.Any body know how to clean the underground water tables?...Shell doesn't.
This user has chosen to opt out of the Badges program
02:43 PM on 03/05/2012
What I can see happening is the E companies paying a lot of money (more than anyone has that is trying to sue) to battle this in court, and will say that science can't prove that the pollution was caused directly by fracking, and they'll be off the hook and continue to pollute with no consequences (other than legal costs, of course).
01:27 PM on 03/05/2012
They don't want to tell us whats in the fracking fluid ok fine. But we should mandate some kind of tracer be put in it so we can see where its going and to make sure it stays where they say it is.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
grappler1987
Heaven is a gift, not a reward
12:18 PM on 03/05/2012
"The state says EPA is meddling. EPA says it is doing its job."

Did the EPA test before the wells were drilled? A baseline sample would be nice.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
Left on Red
Micro Bio 201 T-Th 1 - 2:30 Lab W 1-5 Dr. Price
02:40 PM on 03/05/2012
If there are petrochemicals in the water now, it is reasonable to assume that they weren't put there by the residents.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
grappler1987
Heaven is a gift, not a reward
02:48 PM on 03/05/2012
What about natural gas in the water? Or other natural substances like arsenic and mercury?
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
Jeff4141
09:02 PM on 03/05/2012
Nobody needs a baseline to analyze the current state of the water. The most important thing to understand is if the water is sufficiantly polluted to render it unable to drink.

The testing may uncover gas, it may also uncover fracking chemicals. If chemicals are found, they certainly weren't present before drilling began.

Further, if Dick Cheney didn't sneak this one by and make hydrofracturing exempt from the clean waters act (it seems ridiculous to even say that out loud), then the EPA would have been there to establish a baseline.

I pray for PA.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
grappler1987
Heaven is a gift, not a reward
11:01 AM on 03/06/2012
Exactly, but what if the original drinking water was unsafe for drinking ... say too much arsenic or mercury which can be naturally present. What if testing uncovers natural gas in the water? How would they now know that it wasn't naturally present before? Natural gas in water is a common problem, but easy to fix.

Pre-testing before drilling should be mandatory.
10:55 AM on 03/05/2012
On one hand, as a New Yorker I am not pleased with the current ban on fracking. I use alot of natural gas for heating, hot water and indirectly, electric.

On the other hand, Pennsylvania is the current test bed for the fracking process and let them work out the bugs before they start fracking the southern tier.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
grappler1987
Heaven is a gift, not a reward
12:25 PM on 03/05/2012
Yeah, I use a lot of natural gas for heating and hot water too. Most of my electric is nuclear but I know many new power plants (even solar) are using natural gas. (Solar plants use it at night.)
This user has chosen to opt out of the Badges program
10:10 AM on 03/05/2012
marcellus is way too shallow to drill in this northern tier of PA and southern tier of NY...duke study demonstrated much horizontal fracking in this area is occurring at less than 2900 feet below drinking water aquifers....and natural fissures abound in the area forming conduits to the drinking water aquifers....and much drinking water in the area has explosive levesl of natural gas in it....grandparents and grandchild were blown up from this shale gas a few years ago in PA....ban fracking in this sensitive area....
10:40 AM on 03/05/2012
"and natural fissures abound in the area forming conduits to the drinking water aquifers.."

So for millions of years the natural gas could not seep thru these natural fissures yet the fracking fluids could rise up 2900 ft and contaminate the aquifers?

That doesn't make sense.
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
personal beliefs
Things never go according to plan, so plan accordi
11:13 AM on 03/05/2012
OkieMon loves to spew propaganda.
This user has chosen to opt out of the Badges program
11:59 AM on 03/05/2012
duh...the gas is locked in that shale...that is why it is fracked....plus biogenic methane from bacteria in the earth does migrate in these fissures....
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
personal beliefs
Things never go according to plan, so plan accordi
11:14 AM on 03/05/2012
the duke study also couldn't find a link between drilling and tainted water tables.
This user has chosen to opt out of the Badges program
11:58 AM on 03/05/2012
give it time.....the VOCs like benzene are present in much much much less concentrations than methane and migration is concentration dependent...
This user has chosen to opt out of the Badges program
12:01 PM on 03/05/2012
the study absolutely found a connection....81% of drinking water wells around frack sites were tainted specifically with shale natural gas....
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
Patricia Holman
10:10 AM on 03/05/2012
lets keep it simple--go outside to any concrete surface..find a crack...pour lots of water into ONLY the crack...watch later as the area around the crack shows wetness. ok...the water has spread around and down thru the concrete...oversimplyfied for sure but basically the same processes at work as fracking. they are 'fracking' the people even far away from the drill sites....
10:46 AM on 03/05/2012
Now do the same test on a vertical concrete surface such as a wall. How far would the water seep up against gravity?
This user has chosen to opt out of the Badges program
photo
bbrecht
"pray for the dead, fight like hell for the liv
10:00 AM on 03/05/2012
"The heightened federal scrutiny rankles the industry and politicians in the state capital, where the administration of pro-drilling Gov. Tom Corbett insists that Pennsylvania regulators are best suited to oversee the gas industry. "

Well of course the state is rankled! Gawd forbid they should be asked to be transparent and accountable in their oversight. They don't want anyone coming in and testing and discovering that under their watch aquifers were destroyed. If this isn't cause for the EPA to step in then I don't know what is.

What is the future of Dimmock without a safe source of drinking water? How many generations will be without? Was it worth it for a year of gas?