Public Hearing - Proposal to Drain the West Branch for Fracking Water

[mob201]

There's an emergency public meeting in Trenton on a proposal to remove .25 million gallons of water per day from the West Branch, for use in fracking in Delaware and Broome counties.

Evidently a company called XTO Energy is trying to sidestep the moratorium on gas drilling in New York. The Delaware River Basin Commission is holding a public meeting to hear from concerned citizens about an application to drain 250,000 gallons of water per day from Oquaga Creek, a WBD tributary.

But they're holding this meeting in TRENTON, NEW JERSEY, hundreds of miles from the communities that will be directly affected.

Many of the people who visit this site live far enough south that they could reasonably attend this meeting.

Fishermen: Come out and stand up for water quality and the conservation of trout streams in New York.

Here's the call to action from the Delaware Riverkeeper Network:

EMERGENCY: Tell DRBC - No water withdrawal for gas drilling in NY!

The Delaware River Basin Commission (DRBC) plans to vote on a water withdrawal application by XTO Energy (a subsidiary of ExxonMobil Corp.) for natural gas development in Broome and Delaware Counties, New York at their regularly scheduled meeting Wednesday, May 11, 2011. They have set a public hearing on the application at the 1:30 pm meeting, West Trenton Volunteer Fire Company, 40 W. Upper Ferry Rd., West Trenton, N.J.

XTO Energy wants to take 0.25 million gallons of water per day from Oquaga Creek, a native trout stream that flows to the West Branch of the Delaware River in Broome and Delaware Counties to develop gas wells they plan to drill there. The withdrawal site is on land owned by the Town of Sanford, which has given them access. There is no permit required by NY State; the DRBC provides the only review of this withdrawal.

Approval of this application is SO WRONG for many reasons including: wrong for the Oquaga Creek and the Delaware River; wrong because there is a moratorium on drilling in the Delaware River Watershed and on horizontal drilling/hydrofracking in New York; wrong because the public is shut out of the process...

Please ATTEND the DRBC May 11 Hearing, tell DRBC to hold a Hearing in the Broome County area and extend the public comment period to at least 60 days, and send a letter NOW to the DRBC by going to our website – we only have a few days!

To send a letter: Act Now | Delaware Riverkeeper Network | Urgent Help Needed

How can the DRBC approve this water withdrawal during its gas drilling moratorium, while its draft gas rules are pending and while New York has a hold on its generic permit for hydraulically fractured-horizontally drilled gas wells while it completes its environmental review? How can they justify pushing this approval ahead when the rules could very well change how this application will be treated? XTO has no permits for gas wells and has not justified its need for any water, much less 250,000 gallons of water every day from this cold water stream. What’s the rush?

DRBC is ignoring the communities who will be most immediately affected by this withdrawal. There is no hearing scheduled in the Oquaga Creek area, in Broome or Delaware Counties where the water would be taken from and the wells would be drilled. Trout fishermen who love this creek and spend lots of time on it have no idea what’s coming. It takes 4 hours to get to West Trenton from Sanford, NY; it not reasonable to expect people to make this trip.

The only other DRBC approved water withdrawal for gas development had a 60+ day public comment period and a Public Hearing in the Upper Delaware last year, near the withdrawal location. One daytime Hearing in West Trenton with only 10 working days notice before a vote is cast deprives everyone, all 15 million of us who drink Delaware River water, of a way to meaningfully participate. We must demand fairness!

New York State is supposed to protect Oquaga Creek, a trout stream, by applying “special requirements to sustain waters that support these valuable and sensitive fisheries resources under NYSDEC Protection of Waters regulations” (DRBC Docket D-2010-022-1, XTO, p. 2). Where is this protection?

How will this withdrawal affect the trout, benthic life, and water quality of this richly diverse creek and of the downstream West Branch and main stem Delaware that need the cold fresh flows of the Oquaga to support stream life and water supplies downstream? Neither New York nor the DRBC has analyzed this or supplied an answer. This is flat out wrong.

Speak out now to demand: No water withdrawal, a fair hearing and comment process for all those affected, and protection for the Oquaga Creek!

To sign up in advance to speak at the May 11 Hearing contact paula.schmitt@drbc.state.nj.us or phone Ms. Schmitt at 609-883-9500 ext. 224 and say you want to speak on the XTO proposed Docket.

Public comment can be submitted now by email or hard mail and verbal comment can be made at the Public Hearing. You can send the sample letter below with a click or write your own in the space provided. But please act now as the time is very short! This withdrawal must be stopped!

Carol Collier, Executive Director
Commission Members
Delaware River Basin Commission
P.O. BOX 7360
West Trenton, NJ 08628-0360
paula.schmitt@drbc.state.nj.us

Re: XTO Energy, Inc., D-2010-022-1

Dear Ms. Collier and Commission Members,

I oppose the approval of XTO Energy’s (ExxonMobil Corp.) application for a water withdrawal of 0.25 million gallons of water per day from the Oquaga Creek in Broome County, NY for gas drilling in Broome and Delaware Counties.

The DRBC is analyzing the impacts of gas drilling and has a drilling moratorium in place while developing gas regulations that could affect this withdrawal proposal; New York Department of Environmental Conservation is in the midst of conducting an environmental review of the gas development practices that this water would be used for. It is untimely and irresponsible to approve this withdrawal while these deliberations are ongoing.

The people in Broome and Delaware Counties have an undeniable stake in this creek, its watershed and the region. This withdrawal and the drilling it will support will indelibly change that area. Yet you are refusing to hold a Hearing there. This is unacceptable and denies many people of their right to participate in the decision making process. I request that you set a Public Hearing in the Oquaga Creek region, just as you had a local hearing for the West Branch Lackawaxen River withdrawal in 2010. Further, you have only given 10 working days notice of your proposed approval; this deprives everyone, including the 15 million people who ultimately rely on the Delaware River for drinking water, of a meaningful public process.

The fresh water flows of this vibrant creek provide essential habitat for trout and other special species and the watershed provides groundwater supplies that could be impacted by this depletive withdrawal. The Oquaga is an important recreational resource and feeds healthy cold water flows to the West Branch and main stem Delaware, supporting the exceptional water quality of the Delaware River. Who says gas drilling is more important?

We respectfully request that this approval not be approved, that a meaningful public participation process be scheduled, that the Oquaga Creek be protected, and that the moratorium remain in place on gas drilling in the Delaware River Watershed.

Thank you for the opportunity to comment.

Sincerely,


Tracy Carluccio
Deputy Director
Delaware Riverkeeper Network
300 Pond Street, 2nd Floor
Bristol, PA 19007
Phone: 215 369 1188 ext 104
Cell: 215-692-2329
Fax: 215 369 1181
www. delawareriverkeeper.org
Remember the River
www.delawareriverkeeper.org/remember

To remind us all to Remember the River in every decision we make;
And to hold our elected officials accountable to do the same.

 

[tomfly]

"But they're holding this meeting in TRENTON, NEW JERSEY, hundreds of miles from the communities that will be directly affected."


How convenient

 

[Pete]

Please don't make several identical topics....
All our members have access to all the open forums, regardless of location.

The other two copies were removed.

 

[MACFLY]

When is the meeting?

 

[Future Fanatic]

"But they're holding this meeting in TRENTON, NEW JERSEY, hundreds of miles from the communities that will be directly affected."


How convenient

No kiddin'. I would have liked to go and stick up for the locals...

.39cfs.... Draining? Really?

Hey Mob, seeing that you seem to be up on what goes on with the DRBC, do you know how to find out what permits that they HAVE approved for water withdrawls over the years?

 

[brachycentrus]

Here is the posted docket #
http://www.state.nj.us/drbc/dockets/D-2010-022-1.pdf

On the same day, they will be discussing and possibly be voting on the replacemnt or extension of the current FFMP.

It is open to the public.

 

[Future Fanatic]

Evidently a company called XTO Energy is trying to sidestep the moratorium on gas drilling in New York.

How are they "sidestepping" ?

 

[I tie `um]

"Brother Harold camping said that May 21st is Judgement Day and the end of the world is October 21st"


And Driving was not an issue when it came to marching on Washington to stop the war in Nam, or for the Farmers in the Midwest. So why is it an issue Now?

Remember Buy American for America I tie`um

---------- Post added at 02:25 PM ---------- Previous post was at 01:55 PM ----------

Just do it

---------- Post added at 03:43 PM ---------- Previous post was at 02:25 PM ----------

The meeting is at 11:00 A.M. Not 1:30 P.M. like the letter says.........Thanks Hope to see ya there

 

[Future Fanatic]

Don't forget to attend to this one, Mob.

---------- Post added at 07:13 PM ---------- Previous post was at 05:51 PM ----------

Gosh mob, I see you posted, wasn't there a meeting that you wanted us all to go to today? Done already? How did it go?

I do have to point out some things about this original post.

First the hyperbole. They are not asking to DRAIN the system. I calculated (tell me if I'm wrong; I know you will) that the withdrawl would amount to .39 cfs over 24 hours.

When he wrote: "There's an emergency public meeting in Trenton..."
He meant to say " There's a regularly scheduled meeting where many companies and municipalities are asking the DRBC to increase their water withdrawls and ability to dump wastewater, of which XTO energy is just one, a SMALL one... Here, take a look... golf courses, Dupont... http://www.state.nj.us/drbc/commeet.htm "

When he wrote: "Evidently a company called XTO Energy is trying to sidestep the moratorium on gas drilling in New York." he obviously made a mistake OR wanted you to believe that the evil gas companies were trying to do something under handed... Giving him the benefit of the doubt, he was just plain wrong. There is no moratorium on gas drilling in NY. Companies are not allowed to use hydraulic fracturing in horizontally drilled wells. They can still fracture vertical wells in NY.

Shouldn't drilling companies be treated like every other law abiding business asking for a withdrawl of water from the watershed?

 

[Future Fanatic]

Ok, all sarcasm aside, could someone come up with an explanation to this?:

I went to this link: DRBC - Next Commission Meeting and Public Hearing to see what other requests were being looked at during this meeting of the DRBC. On the list were these:

Exelon Generation Company, LLC – Schuylkill, D-2010-040 CP-1. An application for the approval of an existing combined discharge of up to 231.84 mgd of NCCW and traveling screen backwash from the Schuylkill Generating Station (SGS) via Outfall No. 001. Outfall No. 001 discharges to the tidal portion of the Schuylkill River at River Mile 92.47 – 5.6 (Delaware River – Schuylkill River) in Water Quality Zone 4 in the City of Philadelphia, Pennsylvania.

Lafarge North America, D-1974-189-2. An application for approval of a GWD and SWWD project to supply up to 70.68mgm of water to the applicant’s cement manufacturing plant from existing Wells Nos. 1 and 2 and an existing surface water intake on the Lehigh River. The withdrawals are used for processing and non-contact cooling. The project withdrawals were previously approved by Docket No. D 1975-115 issued for the cooling water discharge on August 27, 1975. Consistent with current DRBC practice, a separate withdrawal docket is now required. The project wells and quarry are completed in the Jacksonburg Formation. The project is located in the Coplay Creek and Lehigh River Watersheds in Whitehall Township, Lehigh County, Pennsylvania within the drainage area of the section of the non-tidal Delaware River known as the Lower Delaware, which is classified as Special Protection Waters

Exelon Generation Company, LLC – Schuylkill Generating Station, D-1964-074 CP-2. An application for a decrease in the approved surface water withdrawal (SWWD) allocation associated with Intake No. 1 to 5,180 mgm, of which 2,483 mgm would be for use at the Schuylkill Generating Station (SGS). Intake No. 1 supplies water to the Grays Ferry Cogen Facility (GFCF) and the Tri-Gen Corporation Facility (Tri-Gen) as well as to the SGS. The three facilities are located adjacent to one another on a Schuylkill River site formerly owned and operated by the Philadelphia Energy Company (PECO). The GFCF and Tri-Gen generating stations and subsidiary water allocations were approved on June 28, 1995 by Dockets Nos. D-95-32 and D-95-10, respectively. DRBC staff evaluated the current and 10-year projected uses for all three facilities. The current average and maximum SWWDs are 2,982 mgm and 4,473 mgm, respectively. The 10-year combined maximum SWWD is estimated to be 5,180 mgm, less than the 8,277 mgm formerly approved by DRBC in the facilities’ three separate dockets. The SGS is located in the City of Philadelphia, Pennsylvania

GenOn Energy, Inc., D‑1987-26-3. An application to renew DRBC approval of discharges of treated industrial wastewater effluent from the Titus Generating Station (TGS) to the Schuylkill River as follows: the TGS IWTP via Outfall 002; coal-ash leachate from the Beagle Club Ash Disposal (BCAD) site via Outfall 004; and combined NCCW, intake screen backwash, and stormwater via Outfall 001. The applicant has requested that the intermittent discharge from Outfall 004 continue to have an effluent limit of 3,500 mg/l of TDS as a monthly average. Effluent limits for the existing NCCW discharge (Outfall 001), IWTP (Outfall 002) and BCAD site (Outfall 004) will continue to be based on average annual flows of 1.469 mgd, 2.149 mgd and 1.007 mgd, respectively. The IWTP is hydraulically designed for 3.2 mgd. The TGS facilities will continue to discharge to the Schuylkill River. The project is located in Cumru Township, Berks County, Pennsylvania

U.S. Steel, D-1978-068-3. An application to renew DRBC approval for the discharge of up to 0.163 million gallons per day (mgd) of treated sanitary wastewater from the applicant’s wastewater treatment plant (WWTP) via Outfall No. 203 and 3.75 mgd of treated industrial wastewater and non-contact cooling water (NCCW) from the applicant’s industrial wastewater treatment plant (IWTP) via Outfall No. 103 as well as to continue a TDS Determination that allows TDS effluent concentrations of up to 1,100 mg/l as a monthly average; 2,200 mg/l as a daily maximum; and 2,750 mg/l as an instantaneous maximum, via combined Outfall No. 003. Internal Outfalls Nos. 103, 203, and 303 (stormwater only) will continue to discharge to the Delaware River via combined Outfall No. 003. The combined discharge from the applicant’s WWTP and IWTP is made via Outfall No. 003 to the tidal region of Water Quality Zone 2 of the Delaware River at River Mile 127.0. The WWTP and IWTP are located in Falls Township, Bucks County, Pennsylvania.


My point is why would someone who is truly concerned with the environment send out a call to like minded people to go to a meeting to fight to stop .25mgd from being taken from the watershed when these examples are vastly larger amounts? 5180 million gallons a month for an electric company? 70 mgm for a cement producer? No call for action on those, but 8 mgm must be stopped?

Seriously, what would the reasoning be?

 

[Rusty Spinner]

My point is why would someone who is truly concerned with the environment send out a call to like minded people to go to a meeting to fight to stop .25mgd from being taken from the watershed when these examples are vastly larger amounts? 5180 million gallons a month for an electric company? 70 mgm for a cement producer? No call for action on those, but 8 mgm must be stopped? Seriously, what would the reasoning be?

Let's see, I'll take a poke at this one: because the cement company won't see some of that water contaminate our drinking water supplies with strontium, barium and other nasties?



How'd I do?

 

[AKSkim]

Seriously, what would the reasoning be?

To outrage you.

I can see they did a fine job of it too....

 

[mob201]

No, you're right FF - I couldn't go. I live a LONG way from the meeting and have a 9-month old son to take care of on Wednesday nights. Which is why I publicized the meeting on this forum, hoping that fly fishermen who live closer to Trenton could go. Obviously the desire for guys to attend the meeting also explains the hyperbole of my original post (guilty as charged on that one).

But you're missing the point completely. Before this proposal, there has been only ONE other proposal approved by the DRBC for water withdrawal for gas development. The proposal in question had a 60-day public comment period and a public meeting near the Upper Delaware, in the heart of the communities that are likely to be affected.

In contrast, the meeting to consider this proposal was hundreds of miles away from the area to be affected, received very little publicity and had a very short (10 day) public comment period, provoking reasonable charges that the public is being locked out of the process. As a community that stands to be heavily affected by any contamination of our trout streams, the point is that we should be keeping tabs on this process and getting our voices heard.

Do you disagree with this statement? I recently read a post in which you compared environmentalist film-makers to Nazi propagandists, so I'm kind of hesitant to even ask what you think, but why could you possibly be against a longer period of public comment? Why could you possibly be against a call for concerned fellow fishermen to attend a potentially important meeting?

I'm not going to toss around analogies about Nazi propagandists... I'll just say that your apparent interest in stifling public debate on this issue (on this forum and elsewhere) doesn't reflect well on your intentions.

 

[Future Fanatic]

Let's see, I'll take a poke at this one: because the cement company won't see some of that water contaminate our drinking water supplies with strontium, barium and other nasties?

How'd I do?

You get an A+ in the "ANTI avoid the obvious" department, but only a C- overall.

You addressed the cement producers 70,000,000 gallon withdrawl each month, sure. (BTW,why are you so concerned with Barium and Strontium?)

But what about the use of and eventual discharges of the others? Compare a .25 million gallon withdrawl per day(and eventual discharge) with the others in terms of impact on the system...

In NY, the DEC demands that before a drilling company can frack a well, the company MUST provide an acceptable method of "disposal" for the produced waste water. They must also provide the DEC with a "backup" method. What the DRBC would think about how PA monitors the companies' discharges that I listed, I do not know. Given what I have seen in the past from PA, I would think maybe the DRBC might have some reservations(and thus, so should people concerned with the environment in general) Like you Rusty.

SO, why did you not address the:

231,840,000 gallons a DAY of NCCW and traveling screen backwash from the Schuylkill Generating Station or

3,750,000 gallons a DAY of treated industrial wastewater and non-contact cooling water (NCCW) from the applicant’s industrial wastewater treatment plant or

4,500,000 gallons a DAY of treated industrial wastewater effluent from the Titus Generating Station (TGS) to the Schuylkill River as follows: the TGS IWTP via Outfall 002; coal-ash leachate from the Beagle Club Ash Disposal (BCAD) site via Outfall 004; and combined NCCW, intake screen backwash, and stormwater?

Do you know what is in coal ash leachate? I would think you do. I found one research paper that included this list:

"The detectable elements with the highest levels in the leachates included, in descending order, S, Ca, Na. K, B, Si, Mg, AI, Sr, Mo, Li, Ba, V, Cr, Zn, Mn, Co, Ni, and P."

Barium, Strontium AND Vanadium, Molyebdenum and Chromium. But, you addressed the cement plant.

Just to bring me back to my original point, why the race to stop a .25 million gallon withdrawl, when it is OBVIOUS that there are larger offenders to the environment(by what seems to be multiple orders of magnitude)? That's all...

 

[AKSkim]

I was just going over those numbers.

Filbin they don't amount to a hill of beans if that frack water makes it way into the aquifer.

 

[Future Fanatic]

I was just going over those numbers.

Filbin they don't amount to a hill of beans if that frack water makes it way into the aquifer.

"THE aquifer"? Which one would that be?
But, given that there is a mile or so of rock between the Marcellus shale and peoples' drinking water...

I don't know this, but maybe one or two of you do, since at least 4,500,000 gallons of waste water laden with coal ash leachate are discharged into the Schuylkill River each day, does that river flow into the D ABOVE or BELOW where Philadelphia gets its drinking water? Because people couldn't possibly drink water where coal ash leachate was present...I mean with all that Barium and Strontium and Vanadium and Chromium and Cobalt... Right Rusty?

 

[AKSkim]

"THE aquifer"? Which one would that be?

The one below the environment.

The one in the environment is the Delaware River, but I was speaking to the one below the environment the one you can't see, but is there never-the-less.

 

[Future Fanatic]

The one below the environment.

The one in the environment is the Delaware River...

And here I thought you'd a been rootin' for the frack water to kill the Didymo.

But I have to tell you, I don't think it would. PA has given us two instances where a fracturing fluid and water mixture has been released(due to accidents) into streams. Thousands of gallons nearly direct into water ways with no fish kills. I suspect Didymo could take it too. And when used fracturing fluid was put through a waste water treatment plant(which many antis told the world would kill the bacteria necessary to break down our human organic waste) there was no damage done. It seems this waste water is not the ticket to kill didymo. Sorry.

 

[AKSkim]

... to kill didymo. Sorry.

I thought we were talking about the environment.

Water, land, aqufiers, trees and all that.


... and they say I hijack threads.

 

[Future Fanatic]

I thought we were talking about the environment.

Water, land, aqufiers, trees and all that.


... and they say I hijack threads.

Have you become a stick in the mud, AK?

You've become serious or are just pretending to be. Hmmm...
There was a time that you scoffed at the idea of damage from the drilling industry...

But, just in case, I'll stop being flippant.

 

[tompg]

Why don't you go check out where the Schuylkill and the bid D converge. Then tell me if you would like your neighborhood to look (and smell) like that.

 

[AKSkim]

Then tell me if you would like your neighborhood to look (and smell) like that.

Were you standing up wind or down wind?

Or were you just in a swirling wind at the time?

 

[Future Fanatic]

Why don't you go check out where the Schuylkill and the bid D converge. Then tell me if you would like your neighborhood to look (and smell) like that.

But that wasn't the question... DO you have the answer? If it is so bad there, then are you implying that coal ash leachate makes the water so bad that people couldn't possibly drink it?

 

[tompg]

AK: Twirling always twirling.
FF: I don't have an exact answer but I would not drink or swim at the the junction of the Schuylkill and the Big D. I try to only speak of what I know. I know NYC has much better water the Philly. That's why Philly can only make a pretzel and not bagel or a cup of coffee.

 

[AKSkim]

(1) AK: Twirling always twirling.

(2) I try to only speak of what I know.

(1) I figured as much.

(2) Thank God (me) for the internet, otherwise you would still be a mute.

 

[tompg]

kang and kodos - Video - Sclipo

Skip to the 4:55 mark for twirling fun.

 

[Future Fanatic]

Rusty, you can stop looking:

On the city of Philadelphia's website, I found this:

"Drinking Water Quality

Philadelphia's drinking water is drawn from our two rivers, the Delaware and Schuylkill. From fighting fires, to cooking, to watering lawns, the Philadelphia Water Department is responsible for delivering reliable and safe water to more than 1.6 million people in Philadelphia and Lower Bucks County. Our three modern water treatment plants -- Baxter, Belmont and Queen Lane -- have a combined, design-rated capacity to treat 540 million gallons of water per day.

Throughout the water treatment process, our plant technicians analyze the water, monitoring its quality. Supported by the very latest in advanced chemical analysis equipment, our environmental laboratories examine over 12,000 samples of water each year collected from our reservoirs at more than 65 locations across the City. Each sample undergoes an average of five (5) tests to ensure that our customers enjoy safe water, free from contamination.

The Safe Drinking Water Act deals with the treatment and standards that ensure our tap water is safe and uncontaminated.

This Act passed, in 1974 and recently amended in 1996, directs the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) to issue national Primary Drinking Water Regulations for all public water systems having at least 15 service connections or regularly serving at least 25 people.

The Act sets standards aimed to control substances that can pose a threat to health when present in certain quantities in drinking water.

Since the Safe Drinking Water Act was passed more than 25 years ago, Philadelphia's unblemished record for drinking water quality has consistently met or has out-performed all physical, chemical, radiological and bacterial water quality standards established by the EPA.

The Philadelphia Water Department's three water treatment plants, Samuel S. Baxter, Queen Lane and Belmont, as well as our Bureau of Laboratory Services are responsible for ensuring the safety of Philadelphia's drinking water supply. "

Who would have thought the water would be such GOOD quality... I guess it must be pretty easy to get the nasty stuff from coal ash leachate (and thus, probably other things)out of the water.