Dear Friends & Concerned Citizens ~~ April 27, 2020

*Please note that this alert contains a petition that is new and has not yet been shared. The previous alert was about sending in hearing requests for this facility.*

During a global pandemic, after the public was asked to stay at home, three companies proposed barge loading/unloading facilities along the Ohio River for radioactive oil & gas waste. If permitted, these facilities would put the drinking water for millions of people at risk. The waste, which contains radioactive materials, heavy metals and toxic chemicals, would be transported along the river from unknown locations for disposal or reused for more oil & gas operations.

Millions get their water straight from the river and many towns and cities along the Ohio River also get their drinking water from shallow aquifers that are highly susceptible to Ohio River contamination.

Tell Army Corp and Coast Guard we do not want ANY oil & gas waste being shipped along the Ohio River.

CLICK HERE to sign the petition.

Submit individual comments. HERE are instructions on how to submit comments to the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers and U.S. Coast Guard about these facilities.

A map of the three facilities that are proposed: 4K Industrial in Martins Ferry, OH, Deep Rock in Marietta, OH and Fountain Quail in Meigs County, OH, is shown below:

CLICK HERE to sign the petition.

Learn more about the details of these projects by clicking HERE.

Please let us know if you have any questions about any of this. You can reply to this email and we will get your message. We will keep everyone updated on if we get a public hearing or comment period extension for this permit or not. We have submitted over 50 requests so far. We have until the end of April to get requests in. We want to make sure that citizens have an opportunity to be heard and have their questions answered.

Yours truly, Concerned Ohio River Residents

Ohio River Islands -- National Wildlife Refuge

Ohio River in Marshall, Wetzel and Pleasants Counties Targeted in Proposal

From an Article by Casey Junkins, Wheeling Intelligencer, August 26, 2014

Gov. Earl Ray Tomblin believes leasing several miles worth of mineral rights located beneath the Ohio River for Marcellus and Utica shale drilling for at least a 20 percent share of the royalties will provide the state a financial windfall without disturbing the environment.

The West Virginia Division of Natural Resources wants a driller to pay at least 20 percent of production royalties for extracting minerals beneath the Ohio River.

A legal notice indicates the Division of Natural Resources – which is an arm of the Department of Commerce – is seeking bids for drilling into the oil and natural gas producing formations underlying the Ohio River in Marshall, Wetzel and Pleasants counties. Secretary of Commerce Keith Burdette is a member of Tomblin’s cabinet.

“The proposed development is in the best economic interests of the state and will not unreasonably disrupt use and enjoyment of the Ohio River or the division’s opportunities to develop other mineral interests in the area,” Tomblin stated in a letter to DNR Director Frank Jezioro.

Drilling is prevalent in Marshall, Wetzel and Pleasants counties, where firms may bid for the mineral rights by the September 25th application deadline. Officials will open the bids at 1 p.m. September 26th (Friday).

Tomblin’s letter states he wants a driller to proceed without deducting production costs from the state’s revenue. In many drilling contracts, the company is allowed to reduce payments to the property owner by making deductions for certain costs associated with getting wells online.

“The lessee shall be liable for royalty payments on mineral interests lost or wasted because of negligence or failure to comply with the lease or the law,” Tomblin added.

In addition to the 20 percent royalty, state officials are seeking a per-acre lease payment, as the procurement document states the contract will go to the highest bidder.

Any potential driller would likely reach the minerals by horizontal drilling, as the company could set up a rig about one mile from the river. Contractors can drill more than one mile deep before turning the bit horizontally to reach the oil and natural gas beneath the river.

NOTE: Drilling for oil & gas under the Ohio River, now being promoted by the Governor of West Virginia, is a flagrant act of disregard for the people, for the natural environment and for the lands along the River.   This is an idea that has not been explored with the people or the Legislature.  The federal government has not examined this question to see whether there will be impacts for other states and the natural environment.  One can assume that the oil and gas industry has walked into the Governor’s office and said, this is what we want to do!

< P.S. Let’s talk about earthquakes for a start!  Also, drilling and fracking above or near the Ohio River will result in hundreds of acres of disturbed land,  toxic chemical leaks, increased water pollution run-off, contaminated storm water, as well as significant air pollution from diesel trucks, pumps and/or compressors, gas leaks and flares.  The chances of fires, explosions, fish kills, worker injuries, and public health exposures are very real. >

Contact the Governor:  Gov. Earl Ray Tomblin, Office of the Governor, State Capitol, 1900 Kanawha Blvd. E.,  Charleston WV 25305

Gas Well Development

Gas drilling boom accelerates with little study of public health effects

Article by Lisa Song and Jim Morris, InsideClimate News, Charleston Gazette, March 5, 2014

A new study has underscored just how little is known about the health consequences of the natural gas boom that began a decade ago, when advances in high-volume hydraulic fracturing, or fracking, and directional drilling allowed companies to tap shale deposits across the United States. “Despite broad public concern, no comprehensive population-based studies of the public health effects of [unconventional natural gas] operations exist,” concluded the report published Monday in the peer-reviewed journal Environmental Science & Technology.

Last week, InsideClimate News, the Center for Public Integrity and The Weather Channel reported on the health data gap in the Eagle Ford Shale, where a lack of air monitoring and research is aggravated by a Texas regulatory system that often protects the gas and oil industry over the public. Scientists interviewed for the series said the uncertainties persist across the country. In the words of one expert, scientists “really haven’t the foggiest idea” how shale development impacts public health.

Gas and oil production releases many toxic chemicals into the air and water, including carcinogens like benzene and respiratory hazards like hydrogen sulfide. While residents near drilling areas in Texas reported symptoms that are known to be caused by these chemicals, including migraines and breathing problems, it was impossible to link them to the drilling boom because no studies could be found that prove cause and effect.

The new study, led by John Adgate at the Colorado School of Public Health, examined available research on the environmental, social and psychological impacts of shale gas drilling. It was the first time anyone had tried to tackle the question in a systematic way, Adgate said. The researchers found that much of the existing work “isn’t explicitly tied to health.” Many studies analyzed the level of pollutants in the air or water, but didn’t track how the exposures are connected to local health trends. Other studies used health surveys, but didn’t compare the respondents’ results with the health of the larger surrounding community.

What’s needed, Adgate said, are comprehensive studies that examine possible connections between chemical exposures and community health trends. But these types of studies require substantial funding and good baseline data, both of which are hard to obtain.

“You’re not going to find anything if you don’t look, and some people think we shouldn’t be looking, or that it’s not worth looking,” he said. “We do know a lot of these things are hazardous, and we just need to develop a system [that] provides people with a reasonable level of certainty [on the] effects, or lack thereof.”

Health impacts will vary based on local geology, weather patterns, operator practices and other factors, Adgate said, so it would make sense to set up a study that tracks people from different parts of the country.

Regulators are well aware of the knowledge gap. In 2012, the Government Accountability Office — the investigative arm of Congress — reviewed more than 90 studies from government agencies, the industry and academic researchers and concluded that oil and gas development “pose inherent environmental and public health risks, but the extent of these risks is unknown, in part, because the studies GAO reviewed do not generally take into account the potential long-term, cumulative effects.”

On the issue of air pollution, the GAO said the studies “are generally anecdotal, short-term, and focused on a particular site or geographic location. [They] do not provide the information needed to determine the overall cumulative effect that shale oil and gas activities have on air quality.”

Bernard Goldstein, a professor emeritus at the University of Pittsburgh and a co-author of the paper, pointed to a need for well-designed studies in large populations. Scientists could analyze a community before, during and after drilling begins, or compare the health of residents in communities close to and far from a shale play, he said.

Both Adgate and Goldstein cited major barriers in funding. “There hasn’t been a lot of money thrown at this problem,” Adgate said. “It’s a contentious issue as everybody knows, and nobody’s stepped up to say we’re going to fund independent research.”

Goldstein said the National Institute of Environmental Health Sciences — part of the National Institutes of Health — has started to fund some studies, but the results won’t emerge for years. Adgate suggested more public-private partnerships like the Health Effects Institute, an independent research organization that studies vehicular air pollution. It is jointly funded by the Environmental Protection Agency and the auto industry.

Goldstein, a doctor and toxicologist who served as an assistant EPA administrator under President Ronald Reagan, sees the lack of research as a failure of transparency. “The impression I have is, there’s at least some part of industry that believes it’s better not to have these studies, because they believe it will lead to toxic tort lawyers suing the industry.”

There seems to be little interest in obtaining better data, he said. Two years ago, he led a study that analyzed the membership of three advisory committees established by President Barack Obama and the governors of Maryland and Pennsylvania. All three groups were tasked with studying the impacts of shale gas, yet Goldstein and his colleagues found that none of the 51 members had a medical or health background.

“The current lack of almost any support for research directly related to the health effects of unconventional gas drilling is shortsighted and counterproductive,” he said in 2012 in testimony before the House Energy and Environment Subcommittee. “[The] only cost-effective time to make this investment is now….”

This report is part of a joint project by InsideClimate News, the Center for Public Integrity and The Weather Channel. Lisa Song is with InsideClimate News and Jim Morris is with the Center for Public Integrity. InsideClimate News is a nonprofit, nonpartisan news organization that covers clean energy, carbon energy, nuclear energy and environmental science. More information is available at http://insideclimatenews.org/.

Prof. Ben Stout of Wheeling

Lawmakers hear from both sides on fracking water recycling plant

From the Article by Casey Junkins, Wheeling Intelligencer, November 20, 2013

Charleston, WV – Ben Stout took his fight against the GreenHunter Water natural gas frack water recycling plant to Charleston on Tuesday, as he testified to the West Virginia Joint Legislative Oversight Commission on State Water Resources.

On the other side of the debate, GreenHunter Vice President of Operations Rick Zickefoose also spoke before the special committee of the state Legislature. He took the place of John Jack, vice president of Business Development for GreenHunter, who had been on the commission’s schedule.

“I want to make sure that legislators are aware of this. This should not be taken lightly. I don’t think that a facility like this belongs near a residential area. Too many people are too close – and the stuff is way too nasty,” Stout, a Wheeling Jesuit University biology professor, said prior to his official testimony. “This stuff is hazardous waste.”

“We were invited to give an overview of what we do,” Zickefoose said of the session. “This was just an informational session for us to show them what is involved.”

However, Stout remains resolute in his opposition. He said arsenic, barium and bromides are some of the potentially hazardous compounds Stout said GreenHunter could be trucking into the site at North 28th Street in the Warwood section of Wheeling.

The company also continues seeking permission from the Coast Guard to place the waste on Ohio River barges that would be loaded in Warwood at a rate of about one per week.

Stout has said he does not believe the West Virginia Department of Environmental Protection will oversee the project.

Jack said the DEP will do a “walk-through” inspection of the plant once it is up and running. However, DEP officials recently said GreenHunter does not need a permit from the agency.

“We just need to get some factual information out there. Let the Legislature make their own decision,” Stout said. “Our first-responders don’t know what is in these trucks.”

Officials with the Nuclear Regulatory Commission said the brine GreenHunter wants to recycle in Warwood can contain radioactive radium and radon. Even though radium, uranium and radon are considered radioactive, Jack said these elements will be minuscule in volume. He also said the company’s workers will wear radiation detectors while on the job.

“Radium, when concentrations greatly exceed hazardous waste standards, creates a problem,” Stout said.

Jack said approximately 30 trucks, each carrying about 100 barrels of brine water from local fracking operations, should arrive at the site each day once it is up and running.

He and other GreenHunter officials have also said they do not understand why there would be a problem with barging the waste, citing barges that carry coal on the river daily.

U.S. Coast Guard publishes proposed policy on moving frack wastewater by barge

Article by Emily DeMarco, PublicSource, November 1, 2013

The U.S. Coast Guard, which regulates the country’s waterways, will allow shale gas companies to ship fracking wastewater on the nation’s rivers and lakes under a proposed policy published on October 30th. The Coast Guard began studying the issue nearly two years ago at the request of its Pittsburgh office, which had inquiries from companies transporting Marcellus Shale wastewater.

If the policy is approved, companies can ship the wastewater in bulk on barges on the nation’s 12,000 miles of waterways, a much cheaper mode than trucks or rail. The public will have 30 days to comment.

Under the policy, companies would first have to test the wastewater at a state-certified laboratory and provide the data to the Coast Guard for review. The tests would determine levels of radioactivity, pH, bromides and other hazardous materials.

In addition, the barges would also have to be checked for the accumulation of radioactive particles that might affect workers. If the test results meet the limits outlined in the policy, the companies would receive Coast Guard approval to ship the wastewater in bulk. It is unclear whether the barge companies would self-report the test results.

All records outlined in the proposed policy must be held by the barge companies for two years, but would be available to the Coast Guard. Normally, the information also would be available to the public under the Freedom of Information Act.

However, “the identity of proprietary chemicals may be withheld from public release,” the policy states.

Environmental groups, academics and the media have tried to get information about the chemicals used in fracking in the past. However, gas drilling companies have refused to release the specific amounts of chemicals they pump underground to release gas from the shale formation.

Benjamin Stout, a biology professor at Wheeling Jesuit University about 60 miles southwest of Pittsburgh, said the part of the policy about proprietary chemicals is worrisome to him because “it’s the easy out. “All they have to do is say ‘proprietary information’ and they don’t  have to do anything” in terms of releasing information to the public, he said.

(Stout is a board member of FracTracker, a non-profit that disseminates data about the shale gas industry. Both FracTracker and PublicSource are funded, in part, by the Heinz Endowments.)

The gas drilling industry already is exempt from a laundry list of federal regulations, including the Clean Air and Clean Water acts.

The Coast Guard’s letter accompanying the proposed policy specifically asks the public for comment on the disclosure of proprietary information. The full policy can be read on the Coast Guard’s website. All public comments will be posted at htttp://www.regulations.gov.

“We are required to take in consideration those comments before we move to the next step,” said Carlos Diaz, a spokesman for the Coast Guard. “Our role as a regulatory agency is to get it right.”

The question of moving the wastewater by barges has been controversial. Environmentalists said the possibility of a spill that could contaminate Pittsburgh’s rivers with chemicals isn’t worth the risk. But industry officials said barges are the safest, and cheapest, way to move the wastewater.

“Waterways are the least costly way of transporting it,” said James McCarville, executive director of the Port of Pittsburgh Commission, an agency that advocates for waterway transport. “We look forward to being able to get the trucks off the highways as quickly as possible.”

Stout counters that the risks on the water are huge. “If and when there’s a spill, that can’t be cleaned up,” he said. “That means it’s going to be in the drinking-water supply of millions of people.”

One of the companies interested in the policy is GreenHunter Water, which handles wastewater for major oil and gas companies. Jonathan Hoopes, president of GreenHunter, said the company is pleased that the proposed policy has been published.

“Now that we’ve seen the proposed policy letter, it allows us to do the research that we need to do to comply,” he said. “You’ll hear a lot more from a lot larger companies than GreenHunter in the near future about this,” he added.

Officials from the Marcellus Shale Coalition, which represents gas drilling companies, did not return a phone call requesting comment.

There is commercial interest in moving the wastewater from Pennsylvania via inland waterways to be stored, reprocessed or disposed of in Ohio, Texas, and Louisiana, according to the policy. If approved, the Coast Guard’s policy could be momentous for the gas-drilling industry, as the amount and transportation of wastewater is seen as a growing concern for both the industry and its critics.

Each barge could transport approximately 10,000 barrels of wastewater over the nation’s waterways.

Steve Hvozdovich, who is with the advocacy organization Clean Water Action, said his group plans to comment on the policy. “I’m a little disappointed to hear there’s only a 30-day public comment period,” he said. “Thirty days is not sufficient in my mind.”