Westmoreland County Landfill taking Drilling/Fracking wastes

From an Article by Reid Frazier, StateImpact Pennsylvania, October 14, 2020

The Pennsylvania Department of Environmental Protection fined a Western Pennsylvania landfill that accepts solid fracking waste $59,000 for multiple violations over the past year. It’s the latest in a series of legal actions against the landfill.

According to a consent order signed Oct. 7, the Westmoreland Sanitary Landfill in Rostraver failed to maintain up-to-date records, operated beyond permitted hours, and failed to maintain roads on multiple occasions between July 31, 2019, and Sept. 24, 2020.

The agency said the landfill also allowed spills and leaks of leachate — wastewater that seeps through the landfill and must be treated before it’s disposed of.

The landfill accepts oil and gas drilling waste, which is high in salts, metals, and radioactive materials, and many of these pollutants have ended up in the leachate.

Last year, Pennsylvania’s Attorney General’s office said it was investigating the landfill’s handling of its waste, and a judge ordered the landfill to stop sending its leachate to a nearby treatment plant.

That plant, which failed several state water quality tests, found high levels of contaminants common in fracking waste in the leachate it was receiving from the landfill.

In February, the DEP fined the landfill $24,000 for improper disposal of the leachate.

The latest fine is for new violations, which include the landfill’s trucks tracking mud on nearby roads, failing to put adequate soil cover on top of waste, including drilling waste, and failing to maintain equipment.

The department has ordered the landfill to come up with a plan to fix the violations.

West Virginia news of May 30, 2014

StateImpact Pennsylvania is a collaboration among WITF, WHYY, WPSU, and The Allegheny Front. Reporters Anne Danahy, Reid Frazier, Rachel McDevitt and Susan Phillips cover the commonwealth’s energy economy.

#. #. #. #. #. #. #. #. #. #. #.

See also: Pennsylvania Regulators Won’t Say Where 66% of Landfill Leachate w/ Radioactive Material From Fracking is Going…”It’s Private” — From Joshua Pribanic and Talia Wiener for the Public Herald, August 5, 2020

In Pennsylvania, the final destination of 66 percent of liquid waste from 30 municipal landfills accepting fracking’s oil and gas waste remains unknown. Oil and gas waste from fracking contains high concentrations of Technically Enhanced Naturally Occurring Radioactive Materials (TENORM), and wherever this radioactive TENORM waste is stored, rain carries water-soluble radionuclides such as Radium-226 through the landfill to create what’s known as leachate – the landfill’s liquid waste. This TENORM-laden leachate is commonly sent to Waste Water Treatment Plants (WWTPs) that are not equipped to remove it before it’s dumped into rivers.

THIRD FIVE-YEAR REVIEW REPORT FOR ORDNANCE WORKS DISPOSAL AREAS SUPERFUND SITE MONONGALIA COUNTY, WEST VIRGINIA

Smokestacks of Morgantown Ordnance Works

DATE: September 12, 2016 (Five year intervals)

§ EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

USEPA Region III, conducted this Third Five-Year Review (FYR) of the remedial actions implemented at Operable Unit 1 (OU-1) of the Ordnance Works Disposal Areas (ODWA) Superfund Site (also known as the Morgantown Ordnance Works Site or MOW), located in Morgantown, Monongalia County, West Virginia. The purpose of this FYR was to determine if the remedial actions that have been implemented are protective of human health and the environment. The review process consisted of the following activities: notification and involvement of stakeholders, review of existing and relevant documentation and data, identification and review of recent and new information, and an assessment of Site conditions. This report documents the review process and presents the findings, conclusions, and recommendations. It is important to note that Operable Unit 2 of this Site was addressed under removal authorities. Since all of the contaminated material was removed, no operation and maintenance (O&M) of OU-2 is required and it is therefore not part of this Five-Year Review.

This FYR concludes that the remedy is protective of human health and the environment. The PRPs have implemented the remedy at Operable Unit One in accordance with the remedial action objectives of the 1999 ROD, and it is currently functioning as intended. The landfill has not been found to be a significant source of contamination to the groundwater in the area and the COCs identified in the 1999 ROD have not been detected in groundwater samples during this FYR period. The multi-layer RCRA landfill cap was determined to be effective in containing hazardous waste materials, the treatment wetland ponds appeared to be functioning as intended, and Site access restrictions were found to be functional. Institutional controls are in place to prohibit disturbing the landfill cap, use of groundwater, and non-commercial use of any kind within OU1. Operation and Maintenance including annual inspections, leachate monitoring and treatment wetland monitoring are performed pursuant to the 2012 Operation and Maintenance Plan. Additionally, results of this FYR report indicate that the remedial action objectives for the selected remedy have been achieved.

1.0 INTRODUCTION

The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (USEPA), Region III, with assistance from the West Virginia Department of Environmental Protection (WVDEP), conducted this Third Five-Year Review (FYR) of the Ordnance Works Disposal Areas Site (OWDA or Site), pursuant to the Comprehensive Environmental Response Compensation, and Liability Act (CERCLA), Section 121(c), National Oil and Hazardous Substances Contingency Plan (NCP) Section 300.400(f)(4)(ii), and OSWER Directives 9355.7-02 (May 23, 1991), 9355.7-02A (July 26, 1994), and 9355.7-03A (December 21, 1995). The Comprehensive Five-Year Review Guidance, EPA 540-R-01-007 (USEPA, 2001), was consulted in preparation of this FYR. This is a post- Superfund Amendments and Reauthorization Act of 1986 (SARA) remedial action, enforcement- lead response action, statutory review. The triggering action for this statutory review is the signature date of the Second Five Year Review, September 16, 2011.

This document will become part of the Site file and is the Third FYR for the OWDA Site. This review evaluated the OU-1 remedial measures at the OWDA. The review process consisted of the following activities: (1) notification and involvement of stakeholders, (2) review of existing and relevant documentation and data, (3) identification and review of recent and new information, and (5) an assessment of current Site conditions.

This report presents the methods, findings, conclusions, and recommendations for the FYR of the former OWDA. The purpose of the FYR is to ensure that a remedial action remains protective of human health and the environment and is functioning as designed.

1.1 PURPOSE

The primary purpose of this FYR was to evaluate whether the response actions undertaken at OU-1 are functioning as intended and remain protective of human health and the environment. Another objective was to identify and provide recommended remedies for any issues of concern associated with the implemented response actions. Section 121(c) of CERCLA, as amended by SARA, and §300.430(f)(4)(ii) of the NCP mandate that a post-SARA remedial action be reviewed no less often than every five years after initiation of the remedial action at sites where hazardous substances, pollutants, or contaminants remain at levels above those that allow for unlimited use and unrestricted exposure. This is the Third FYR for the OWDA Site.

1.2 SITE OVERVIEW

The OWDA is part of the former Morgantown Ordnance Works (MOW), and is located approximately one mile southwest of the city of Morgantown, West Virginia, along the west bank of the Monongahela River (See Figure1). The OWDA Site is often referred to as the MOW Site. The OWDA Site is located within a 670 acre industrial park known as the Morgantown Industrial Park which is owned by Enroute Properties, Inc. The property which comprises the OWDA OU-1 Site is currently owned by the Morgantown Industrial Park Associates (MIPA) which are the previous owners of the Morgantown Industrial Park (MIP). For the purposes of environmental investigation and remediation, OWDA is made up of three segments:

A. OU-1 encompasses a small portion of the MIP formerly used for disposal of tar and other wastes;
B. Two tracts of land currently owned and operated by Crompton Corporation (purchased from General Electric (GE) Company in 2003). The tracts are known as the North Plant and South Plant. Crompton/GE properties are not covered under the Superfund Program, but are covered by Resource Conservation Recovery Act (RCRA) Corrective Action authorities.
C. Operable Unit 2 (OU-2) covers all other parts of MIP, including abandoned production areas, never used parts of the property (undeveloped woodlands), and currently leased parcels.

1.3 CURRENT STATUS OF OPERABLE UNITS

All OU-1 remedial action work has been completed as part of the overall requirements of the Administrative Order for Remedial Design and Remedial Action, Docket No. III-90-27-DC, signed by USEPA on June 20, 1990. The named Respondents are Rockwell International Corporation, Olin Corporation, GE Specialty Chemical, Inc., and Morgantown Industrial Park Associates, Limited Partnership (MIPA).

OU-2 encompasses all other parts of the MIP. OU-2 is not included within the Site’s NPL boundary. OU-2 comprised the remainder of the property, not including the currently active Crompton/GE Facility, and was addressed through a removal action performed in 1997 that included the following actions:

• Removal of water/debris from on-site sumps and pits;
• Off-site disposal of soils/sediments;
• Backfilling and re-vegetation of excavated areas; and
• Elimination of physical hazards.

USEPA has indicated that it does not expect further CERCLA responses for OU-2, as documented in the OU-1 ROD:

“EPA does not anticipate further CERCLA response actions within OU-2 of the OWDA, expansion of the NPL listing to include OU-2, or issuance of a ROD for OU-2. Although cleanup actions deemed necessary by EPA at the GE properties within OU-2 will likely occur under RCRA, the Agency has reserved its right to perform or require CERCLA response actions in connection with such properties.”

As of the date of this FYR, the GE properties are being addressed through EPA’s RCRA corrective action program. Since all of the contaminated material was removed, no operation and maintenance (O&M) of OU-2 is required and it is therefore not part of this Five-Year Review. Actions taken to address OU-2 are documented in the August 20, 1997 Final Report, Morgantown Ordnance Works, OU-2 Removal Action Report.

>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>

TABLE 1 — OWNERSHIP and ACTIVITY

1940 – 1945
E.I. Dupont de Nemours under lease to U.S. Government produced hexamine from ammonia and methanol

1945 – 1950
Sharon Steel and Heyden Chemical leased property for coke plant and ammonia production

1951 – 1958
Olin Mathieson leased property and produced ammonia, methyl alcohol, formaldehyde, hexamine and ethylene diamine

1958 – 1962
Facility remained idle

1962 – 1978
Purchased and operated by Morgantown Ordnance Works, Inc. Leased to Sterling/Rockwell. 1964, Borg Warner purchase

1978 – 1982
Purchased and operated by Princess Coals, Inc.

1982 – Present
Purchased and operated by Morgantown Industrial Park Associates (MIPA), Limited Partnership

################################

Morgantown Ordnance Works Panoramas, 1940-1942 – Pieces of History, National Archives, 2018

Panoramic photograph of the construction of Morgantown Ordnance Works looking southeast at the plant, 10/9/1942. (National Archives Identifier 74627974)

https://prologue.blogs.archives.gov/2018/03/05/morgantown-ordnance-works-panoramas-1940-1942/

Blue Ridge Landfill In Estill County KENTUCKY

From an Article by Bill Estep, Lexington Herald – Leader, July 18, 2020

A Kentucky man has been charged with illegally shipping tons of radioactive waste to a landfill in Estill County KY that was not equipped to handle it.

A federal grand jury indicted Cory David Hoskins Thursday on five charges of mail fraud, based on checks he received through the mail as part of the alleged crime, and 22 charges of “willfully and recklessly” violating safety regulations on shipping hazardous materials in 2015.

Hoskins operated companies called Advanced TENORM and BES LLC, both based in West Liberty, in Morgan County. TENORM stands for “technologically enhanced naturally occurring radioactive material.” The material is a byproduct of hydraulic fracturing, or fracking, to recover oil and natural gas, and is classified as hazardous because of low-level radioactivity.

Hoskins allegedly told a West Virginia company called Fairmont Brine Processing, LLC, that Advanced TENORM could safely transport, treat and dispose of sludge from its operations.

Hoskins told the West Virginia company that his company included engineers, nuclear physicists with doctorates and other experts. That was a lie, the indictment said.

Hoskins also lied and said he would haul the sludge in trucks that complied with U.S. Department of Transportation rules on transporting hazardous materials, according to the indictment.

Hoskins “did not keep the promises” he made to the West Virginia company because it would have been more expensive and time-consuming to haul the waste in compliance with federal safety rules, the indictment said.

Hoskins allegedly hired trucking companies and drivers from the Ashland area and elsewhere that didn’t have the proper certification to haul hazardous waste, and didn’t tell the drivers and carriers what they were hauling was radioactive.

He also didn’t put required notices on the trucks and shipping containers to describe the hazardous sludge. One purpose of those labels is to let police, firefighters and emergency workers know what’s in a truck in case of an accident.

Hoskins drew up shipping manifests that said the material he was having hauled was not hazardous, and misled the landfill about the waste, the indictment charged.

The Herald-Leader reported in 2017 that Hoskins arranged for the shipment of more than 1,000 tons of low-level radioactive waste from West Virginia and Ohio to be dumped in landfills in Estill and Greenup counties. However, the indictment against Hoskins only mentions 22 shipments to the Estill County landfill between July 22, 2015 and Aug. 27, 2015.

The illegal diposal of the waste caused concern in Estill County — the landfill is near schools — but state officials said in 2016 that there was not an imminent health threat from the material.

The state proposed a settlement in 2018 under which the radioactive material would be left in the Blue Ridge Landfill in Estill County with a cap over it. A challenge to the plan by a citizens group is pending.

The indictment includes a request for a judgment of $127,110 against Hoskins if he is convicted, representing the amount he grossed from alleged illegal activity.

The maximum sentence on the mail-fraud charges against Hoskins would be 20 years. The charges on violating hazardous-materials safety rules are punishable by up to five years.

###########################

See also: “Disequilibrium of Naturally Occurring Radioactive Materials (NORM) in Drill Cuttings from a Horizontal Drilling Operation,” Environmental Science & Technology Letters, American Chemical Society, December 21, 2016

Report finds additional radioactive materials in gas-well drill cuttings

Let’s protect Oglebay Park, Wheeling Park, schools, hospitals, farms and residences

From an Article by Casey Junkins, Wheeling Intelligencer, February 5, 2018

WHEELING — Marcellus and Utica shale drilling continues throughout the Upper Ohio Valley. Wheeling leaders plan to enter a new lease to pay them more than $2 million up front, plus 18.5 percent of production royalties.

About $2 million up front plus a steady stream of production royalties for years to come should flow into the Friendly City, as Wheeling leaders plan to lease Marcellus and Utica shale natural gas fracking rights on approximately 336 acres of property.

“While we understand that gas drilling can be controversial, we feel that we wouldn’t be acting in the most financially responsible manner if we passed up on over $2 million in up-front money that can be used for paving, playgrounds, economic development and other city functions,” Wheeling Vice Mayor Chad Thalman said.

Thalman and other members of Wheeling City Council are expected to pass a resolution allowing City Manager Robert Herron to enter the lease agreement with Canonsburg, Pa.-based American Petroleum Partners. The vote is expected after a public hearing on the matter, set for noon Tuesday on the first floor of the City-County Building, 1500 Chapline St.

This is a totally separate deal from the one in which the city joined with the Wheeling Park Commission several years ago to lease fracking rights at Oglebay Park to Chesapeake Energy. Chesapeake later sold most of its West Virginia operations to Southwestern Energy Co. for $5 billion.

“It it currently estimated that the city would receive approximately $2 million in up-front payments for this lease, plus future royalty payments,” Mayor Glenn Elliott said.

“I recognize that there are those in our community who have serious concerns about or are deeply opposed to natural gas fracking. As a private citizen, I, too, share some of those concerns,” Elliott added. “But as mayor, I have to weigh the pros and cons of any decision like this from the perspective of what’s best for the city’s taxpayers.”

According to the resolution, council will allow Herron to enter a deal with American Petroleum Partners. Its CEO is Varun Mishra.

To date, the only companies actually to drill and frack horizontal shale wells in Ohio County are Chesapeake and its successor, Southwestern.

Elliott said the drilling and fracking would take on about 336 acres of city-owned property, a significant portion of which is “under old city landfills.” One of these is the former North Park Landfill, which operated from 1971-83.

“Most of the city property being leased is the old abandoned city landfills. Almost half of the acres are outside of city limits,” Thalman added.

Thalman said the city will receive about $6,000 for each acre leased to APP, in addition to 18.5 percent of production royalties once the natural gas starts pumping.

Almost exactly eight years ago, former Mayor Andy McKenzie and fellow city council members voted to allow Chesapeake Energy to draw natural gas from the Oglebay Park property. At that time, with the Marcellus and Utica shale play in its infancy, terms of this deal paid Wheeling just $750 per acre and 14 percent of production royalties.

In early 2010, the Wheeling Park Commission and the city each gained $386,629 in lease payments from Chesapeake as part of the drilling contract for the Oglebay land.

Chesapeake’s original drilling plans called for the closure of the Oglebay Stables, with the company’s drilling pad to be established nearby at a point between W.Va. 88 and GC&P Road. However, park commissioners quickly filed objections with the West Virginia Department of Environmental Protection regarding the drilling project, primarily questioning Chesapeake’s plans for water usage and the disposal of fracking fluid, among several other concerns.

Eventually, after months of negotiations, Chesapeake eventually built drilling sites off the Oglebay surface property.

Because of continuous advances in horizontal drilling, a rig positioned on the surface can drill a well long enough to reach a natural gas deposit as far away as 2 miles or more. Typically, companies working in the Marcellus and Utica shale field drill vertically into the earth for more than a mile to reach the shale formation. From that depth, they then drill vertically into the rock to prepare for fracking, which is formally known as hydraulic fracturing.

Once contractors move the rig on to another drilling operation, the frack crew arrives at the well. Officials estimate it takes up to 10 million gallons of water to frack a single well, along with about 4 million pounds of sand, in addition to the chemical cocktail.

Frackers blast these materials deep into the earth at a force as high as 10,000 pounds per square inch to shatter the rock in order to release the oil or natural gas.

In all, the EPA identified 1,076 chemicals that have been used in fracking, although the majority are of those were rarely identified at individual sites. The vast majority of the substances are found in items such as soda pop, detergent and hair dye.

“Drilling is already happening all around us and considering that this lease does not allow any rigs on city property, I don’t anticipate problems from leasing this property,” Thalman said.

Reviewing a Pennsylvania TENORM Study

From an Article by Juliana Henao, FracTracker Alliance, June 16, 2015

Technologically-enhanced, naturally-occurring radioactive materials, also known as TENORM, are produced when radionuclides deep in the earth are brought to the surface by human activity such as oil and gas drilling. The radioactive materials, which include uranium (U), thorium (th), potassium-40 (K-40) and their decay products, occur naturally in the environment. These materials are known to dissolve in produced water, or brine, from the hydraulic fracturing process (e.g. fracking), can be found in drilling muds, and can accumulate in drilling equipment over time.

According to the EPA, ~30% of domestic oil and gas wells produce TENORM. Surveys have shown that 90% of the wells show some TENORM concentrations, while others have nothing at all. However, with increasing natural gas exploration and production in Pennsylvania’s Marcellus Shale, there is a parallel increase in TENORM. According to Dr. Marvin Resnikoff, an international expert on radiation, drilling companies and geologists locate the Marcellus Shale layer by way of its higher level of radiation.

Bringing more of this TENORM to the surface has the potential to greatly impact public health and the environment. Since 2013, the Pennsylvania Department of Environmental Protection (PA DEP) has been gathering raw data on TENORM associated with oil and gas activity in the state. The study was initiated due to the volume of waste containing high TENORM concentrations in the state’s landfills, something that is largely unregulated at the state and federal level.  In January 2015, the PA DEP released a report that outlined their findings and conclusions, including potential exposures, TENORM disposal practices, and possible environmental impacts.

Radioactivity Study Overview

This review touches on the samples tested, the findings, and the conclusions drawn after analysis. The main areas of concern included potential exposure to workers, members of the public, and the environment.

The samples gathered by the DEP came from 38 well sites, conventional and unconventional, by testing solids, liquids, ambient air, soils, and natural gas near oil and gas activity in Pennsylvania. All samples contained TENORM or were in some way impacted by TENORM due to oil and gas operations. The samples were mainly tested for radioactive isotopes, specifically radium, through radiological surveys.

The PA DEP concluded in the cases of well sites, wastewater treatment plants (POTW), centralized wastewater treatment plants, zero liquid discharge plants, landfills, natural gas in underground storage, natural gas fired power plants, compressor stations, natural gas processing plants, radon dosimetry (the calculation and assessment of the radiation dose received by the human body), and oil and gas brine-treated roads that there is little potential for internal radiation exposure to workers and members of the public. In spite of this, each section of the report typically concluded with: however, there is a potential for radiological environmental impacts…

Examples of these findings include:

There is little potential for radiological exposure to workers and members of the public from handling and temporary storage of produced water on natural gas well sites. However, there is a potential for radiological environmental impacts from spills of produced water from unconventional natural gas well sites and from spills that could occur from the transportation of this fluid.

There is little potential for radiological exposure to workers and members of the public from sediment-impacted soil at landfills that accepted O&G waste for disposal.  However, there may be a radiological environmental impact to soil from the sediments from landfill leachate treatment facilities that treat leachate from landfills that accept O&G waste for disposal.

Radium 226 was detected within the hydraulic fracturing fluid ranging from 64.0-21,000 pCi/L. Radium-228 was also detected ranging from 4.5-1,640 pCi/L. The hydraulic fracturing fluid was made up of a combination of fresh water, produced water, and reuse flowback fluid. There is little potential impact for radiological exposure to workers and members of the public from handling and temporary storage of flowback fluid on natural gas well sites. However, there is a potential for radiological environmental impacts from spills of flowback fluid on natural gas well sites and from spills that could occur from the transport of this fluid.

Nine influent and seven effluent leachate samples were collected at the nine selected landfills.  Radium was detected in all of the leachate samples. Radium-226 concentrations were detected in produced water samples ranging from 40.5 – 26,600 pCi/L. Radium-228 concentrations were also detected ranging from 26.0 – 1,900 pCi/L. The Ra-226 activity in unconventional well site produced water is approximately 20 times greater than that observed in conventional well site produced water. The ratio of Ra-226 to Ra-228 in unconventional well site produced water is approximately eight times greater than that found in conventional well site produced water.  (Sections 3.3.4 and 3.6.3) (PA DEP TENORM study report section 9.0)

According to Melody Fleck from Moshannon Group- Sierra Club Executive Committee:

While the report comprehensively covers the processes from drilling to end users, the number of samples collected and analyzed are very sparse for a state-wide study. Just to give an idea, only 8 well sites were sampled during the flowback phase and of the 8 only 4 had enough volume to analyze. Of 14 drill mud samples collected, only 5 were analyzed as liquids, and alpha & beta analysis was only done on one sample.

Obtaining the proper sample size is often a major barrier for field studies. Additional research needs to be conducted with a larger sample size and more rigorous exposure monitoring to determine specific risk metrics for workers and the public.

Current Handling of TENORM

From drilling to distribution, there are many topics of concern associated with TENORM; however, we will focus on the current treatment of TENORM waste, the release of data, and the transparency of this issue.

On a federal level, there are no specific regulations governing many aspects of TENORM, such as sludge or solids containing TENORM from water treatment plants. Additionally, if concentrations of U or Th make up less than .05% by weight, they are seen as an “unimportant quantity” and are exempt from NRE regulation. Currently, 13 states regulate TENORM with varying degrees of standards. Hazardous waste facilities in each state can choose to accept TENORM materials as long as they don’t exceed certain concentrations.

Today, about 12 of PA’s 50 landfills accept such radioactive waste from oil and gas activity at a 1:50 dilution ratio (related to their other intake sources). Under RCRA’s Land Disposal Restrictions, “dilution is prohibited as treatment for both listed and characterized wastes.”

According to the DEP report, hydraulic fracturing produces an enormous stream of waste by-products. Safe disposal of this waste has not yet been devised. A few of the conclusions concerning TENORM disposal and treatment in the report listed some areas of concern, identified below:

Filter cake [1] and its radiological environmental impact if spilled, and
The amount of radioactive waste entering the landfills in PA, which reached 430,317 tons in the first 10 months of 2014.

In unison with the conclusions were recommendations, where the report “recommends considering limiting radioactive effluent discharge from landfills, and adding radium-226 and radium-228 to annual sample analysis of leachate from landfills.” Additionally, the report states that if something such as filter cake spills, it will bring into question the safety of long-term disposal and suggest a protocol revision.

Public Health Concerns

The report identified two places where there is a higher than average radioactive exposure risk for workers and community members of the public: specifically at centralized wastewater treatment plants and zero liquid discharge plants that treat oil and gas wastewater. An additional unknown is whether there is a potential inhalation or ingestion hazard from fixed alpha and beta surface radioactivity if materials are disturbed. As a general precaution, they recommend the evaluation of worker’s use of protective equipment under certain circumstances.

Although research has not come to a consensus regarding a safe level of radiation exposure, it should not be assumed that any exposure is safe. Past research has evaluated two types of radiation exposure: stochastic and non-stochastic, both of which have their own risks and are known to be harmful to the human body. The EPA has defined stochastic effects as those associated with long-term, low level exposure to radiation, while non-stochastic effects are associated with short-term, high-level exposure. From past scientific research, radiation is known to cause cancer and alter DNA, causing genetic mutations that can occur from both stochastic and non-stochastic exposure. Radiation sickness is also common, which involves nausea, weakness, damage to the central nervous system, and diminished organ function. Exposure levels set by the EPA and other regulatory agencies fall at 100 millirem (mrem) per year to avoid acute health effects. As a point of reference, medical X-rays deliver less than 10 mrem, and yearly background exposure can be about 300 mrem.

In the report, Radiological Dose and Risk Assessment of Landfill Disposal of TENORM in North Dakota, Argonne National Laboratory researchers suggest that the exposure to workers be limited and monitored. In many of their studies, they found the doses exceed the 100 mrem/year level in the workers when the appropriate attire is not worn during working hours, which raised some concern.

The DEP deems certain radiation levels “allowable”, but it should be noted that allowable doses are set by federal agencies and may be arbitrary. Based on the PA DEP’s report, consumers of produced gas can get up to 17.8% of their yearly radiation allowance, while POTW workers could get up to 36.3% of their yearly allowable dose. According to the Nuclear Information and Resource Service, radiation bio-accumulates in ecosystems and in the body, which introduces a serious confounder in understanding the risk posed by a dose of 17.8% per year.

Transparency of Radiation Risk

The DEP has been gathering data for their TENORM report since 2012. In July of 2014, Delaware Riverkeeper Network filed a Right-to Know request to obtain the information that the DEP had collected in order for their expert to analyze the raw data. The department refused to release the information, insisting that “the release of preliminary invalidated data, including sample locations, could likely result in a substantial and demonstrable risk of physical harm, pose a security risk and lead to erroneous and/or misleading characterizations of the levels and effects of the radioactive risks.” Essentially, the DEP was equating the risks of radioactive material to the risks of releasing raw data — two incomparable risks. DRN appealed, claiming that they simply sought the raw information, which is presumed public unless exempt, and would have no risk on the public. PA DEP was ordered to release their records to DRN within 30 days.

Conclusions

One observation that you could take from this report is the lack of regulatory advancement. The study is filled with suggestions, like:

>>> Radium should be added to the PA spill protocol to ensure cleanups are adequately characterized,
>>> A limited potential was found for recreationists on roads with oil and gas brine from conventional natural gas wells–further study should be conducted, and
More testing is needed to identify areas of contamination and any area should be cleaned up.
>>> Intent doesn’t make the changes; action does. Will any regulations change, at least in Pennsylvania where radioactive materials are returning to the surface on a daily basis? There seems to be no urgency when it comes to regulating TENORM and its many issues at the state level. Are workers, citizens, and the environment truly being protected or will we wait for a disaster to spur action?

Footnotes:

[1] This is the residue deposited on a permeable medium when a slurry, such as a drilling fluid, is forced against the medium under pressure. Filtrate is the liquid that passes through the medium, leaving the cake on the medium.

Fracking Wastes Fill WV Landfills Under New Rule

From the Article by Matthew Barakat, Houston Chronicle, December 7, 2013

McLEAN, Va. (AP) — A memo released quietly by regulators earlier this year has carved a major loophole in West Virginia’s rules restricting the amount of waste that can be accepted by the state’s landfills, all with the intent to ease a burgeoning problem caused by the boom in gas drilling, environmentalists say.

The new rule specifies that landfills can accept unlimited amounts of solid waste from horizontal gas drilling, more commonly known as hydraulic fracturing or fracking. The rule carves out an exception to a decades-old state law that limited landfills’ intake to only 10,000 or 30,000 tons a month, depending on their classification.

In the industry, the drilling waste is called “drill cuttings,” a sludgy mix of dirt, water, sand and chemicals dredged up in the drilling process.

While much of the environmental concern over fracking has been focused on groundwater or air pollution, little attention has been paid to solid waste.

But the new rules in West Virginia, announced to landfill owners in a July 26 memo from the state’s Department of Environmental Protection, are further proof of the boom in drilling on the Marcellus Shale, a resource-rich rock formation running under Pennsylvania, Ohio and parts of West Virginia that has become one of the most productive gas drilling fields in the world thanks to fracking technology.

West Virginia passed legislation in 2011 that requires the drill cuttings from fracking operations to be disposed of in a landfill, but the law made no provision for generating extra landfill capacity.

Tom Aluise, spokesman for the Department of Environmental Protection, said the new rules are the best way to accommodate two conflicting laws: one that strictly regulates the intake of solid waste and one that requires massive amounts of waste to be disposed of in landfills.

“This is not a carte blanche, unrestricted ‘exception’ to the tonnage limits,” Aluise said in an email. He noted that the DEP is requiring landfills to build a separate cell for the drill cuttings, or to seek a new permit to upgrade from a Class B to a Class A landfill, which is allowed to accept larger amounts of waste.

Still, environmentalists see the new rule as obliterating the state’s carefully crafted rules on trash intake. And they say it’s being done for an industry that has a dubious environmental record.

Norm Steenstra, a legislative coordinator with West Virginia Citizen Action Group, said fracking waste is a particular concern because of its radioactivity. Studies by the U.S. Geological Survey have shown that Marcellus Shale happens to have higher levels of naturally occurring radioactivity than other shale formations, though there is great dispute as to whether the levels are potentially harmful to humans.

“Radioactivity is the gift that keeps on giving,” Steenstra said.

Issues revolving around fracking affect primarily the northern part of the state, under which the Marcellus shale formation runs. Six landfills in the state currently accept drill cuttings, according to the DEP, concentrated in and around the northern Panhandle.

In Wetzel County, on the border with southwestern Pennsylvania, a landfill once authorized to accept only 9,999 tons of solid waste each month took in more than 40,000 tons in October, according to the county’s Solid Waste Authority. roughly 75 percent of the volume was from drill cutting.

Ryan Inch, director of engineering at the Wetzel landfill and three others owned by J.P. Mascaro and Sons in Audubon, Pa., said he believes the concerns about radiation are a nonissue. In Pennsylvania, where landfills are required to monitor all incoming trash for radiation, he said his landfills have accepted nearly 2,500 truckloads of drill cuttings, and that only one triggered radiation detectors, finding levels just twice the level of background radiation.

He said it’s far more common for the detectors to be set off due to byproducts from nuclear medicine: if a someone blows their nose after receiving a radioactive dye injection as part of a medical test, for instance.

Inch also disputes that the July memo from the state gives landfills any more leeway than they already had. He said West Virginia law has always made an exception for drill cuttings, and they are not defined as “solid waste” under state law, and said the July memo merely clarifies the status quo.

Bill Hughes — chairman of the Wetzel County Solid Waste Authority, which is opposing the landfill’s expansion to accommodate fracking waste — insists drill cuttings are regulated under the solid waste law. He said he is also concerned about radiation and that the state needs to independently investigate whether the drill cuttings pose a public health risk. Unlike Pennsylvania, West Virginia does not require testing waste for radioactivity.

“Landfills have never seen a ton of waste they don’t want to take,” Hughes said. “Our state just sort of trusts the garbage guys.”

Corky Demarco, executive director of the West Virginia Oil and Natural Gas Association, said he believes the complaints about landfills are just a backdoor way of trying to rein in fracking operations.

“They’ve tried water and air, and that hasn’t worked” for environmentalists, Demarco said. “Now they’re going after the drill cuttings.”

From an Article of Forbes.com, April 24, 2013

A truck carrying drill cuttings from a hydraulic fracturing pad in the Marcellus Shale was rejected by a Pennsylvania landfill near the end of April after it set off a radiation alarm. The truck was emitting gamma radiation from radium 226 at almost ten times the level permitted at the landfill. The MAX Environmental Technologies truck was first quarantined at the landfill, which is operated by MAX, and then sent back to the fracking pad—Rice Energy‘s Thunder II pad in Greene County—to be redirected to a site that can accept higher levels of radiation.

“It’s low-level radiation, but we don’t want any radiation in South Huntingdon,” Tom Cornell, a township supervisor where the landfill is located, told the Pittsburgh Tribune Review. The cuttings in the truck were found to emit 96 microrem per hour of radiation, and the landfill is required to reject materials that emit more than 10 microrem. The EPA’s standard for air pollution is 10,000 microrem per year (also known as 10 millirem/year).

Originally this story stated the radiation level in the truck was below EPA’s air-pollution standard for radium-226. But Pennsylvania measures radiation in hourly emissions and EPA’s standard in terms of yearly emissions. The radiation level in the truck is roughly 84 times higher than EPA’s standard.

Radium 226 is a naturally occurring radioactive material that forms from the decay of uranium-238. It emits alpha and gamma radiation, and it tends to accumulate in bone if inhaled or ingested, according to EPA:

“Long-term exposure to radium increases the risk of developing several diseases. Inhaled or ingested radium increases the risk of developing such diseases as lymphoma, bone cancer, and diseases that affect the formation of blood, such as leukemia and aplastic anemia. These effects usually take years to develop. External exposure to radium’s gamma radiation increases the risk of cancer to varying degrees in all tissues and organs.”

Radium is a well known contaminant in fracking operations, particularly in the Marcellus Shale formation.

“The material in question was radium 226, which is what we expect from shale drill cuttings,” said John Poister, spokesman for Pennsylvania’s Department of Environmental Protection. “Every landfill in the state has radiation monitors, and this showed the system did work.” MAX has applied for a permit to accept a higher level of radiation at its South Huntingdon landfill.

Pennsylvania claims to be “the only state that requires through regulation that landfills monitor for radiation levels in the incoming wastes.”

The location of Rice Energy’s Thunder 2 well pad is just a few miles north of Monongalia County, WV, and a few miles east of Marshall and Wetzel counties in the far southwestern corner of Pennsylvania.

“Should waste trigger a radiation monitor, the landfill must use a conservative and highly protective protocol that DEP developed to determine if the amount and concentration of the radioactive material can be accepted. This protocol ensures that the materials, such as Marcellus Shale drill cuttings and other sources of naturally occurring radiation in the waste stream, do not pose a risk to public health during disposal.”

Radium is also perceived as a threat to water quality. The brine that returns to the surface after hydraulic fracturing has been found to contain up to 16,000 picoCuries per liter of radium-226 (pdf). The discharge limit in effluent for Radium 226 is 60 pCi/L, and the EPA’s drinking water standard is 5 pCi/L.

In January the Pennsylvania DEP announced it would undertake a year-long peer reviewed study of radiation contamination associated with fracking wells.

“The agency will collect samples of flowback water, rock cuttings, treatment solids and sediments at well pads and wastewater treatment and waste disposal facilities,” according to a DEP news release. “The study will also analyze the radioactivity levels in pipes and well casings, storage tanks, treatment systems and trucks.”

The Preston County Solid waste Authority voted 3-0 to not change a site plan to allow for the development of a landfill that would have accepted Marcellus waste products.  The proposed 200 acre landfill would have been situated at the confluence of the Little Sandy and Big Sandy streams.  Approximately 30 local residents attended the PCSWA meeting.  None raised a hand when a show of hands was asked of those in favor of the landfill.

Friends of the Cheat Executive Director Amanda Pitzer shared the concerns of the FOC and the residents that the landfill would threaten the water quality of the streams.  Big Sandy is a tributary of the Cheat River and a popular boating and fishing stream.  After restoration efforts, the Big Sandy is close to being removed from the WVDEP’s list of impaired streams.

Full Story in Dominion Post (subscription required), July 7, 2011

WHEELING – With permission from the West Virginia Department of Environmental Protection, Chesapeake Energy is dumping waste at the Short Creek Landfill, according to the Wheeling Intelligencer. “The advantage of taking this waste to the landfills is there are protective liners in landfills and the leachate is collected and tested,” said DEP spokeswoman Kathy Cosco. “This is really drilling waste, which includes drill cuttings and the drilling mud that is used in the process.” 

During a recent federal court hearing in a case in which Wetzel County property owners Larry and Jana Rine are suing Chesapeake for allegedly dumping benzene and radioactive material into a large hole on the Rines’ property, Chesapeake attorney Timothy Miller noted Chesapeake has been taking drilling waste to the Short Creek Landfill on North Fork Road. Monitors for radioactive material are in place there.

Kosco said the DEP regulates West Virginia’s landfills but does not have a specific regulation for the disposal of drilling waste. She said the drill cuttings are classified as “special waste,” like gasoline contaminated waste resulting from highway accidents.  The DEP sent letters to landfills in 2009 to let them know they would need to modify their permits to accept the drilling waste. Testing for certain metals and petroleum hydrocarbons is required under the new regulations.

Dumping the waste in landfills may be a viable alternative for natural gas drillers because West Virginia’s public water systems are no longer able to accept drilling waste. According to the DEP, Wheeling-based Liquid Assets Disposal allegedly dumped briny wastewater from gas drilling sites at the Center Wheeling pollution plant from January 2009 to February 2010. During this time, LAD allegedly exceeded the 9,000-pound daily chloride limitation for Wheeling’s plant on about 50 occasions. This resulted in the DEP issuing a $414,000 fine against the city.

The lower Cheat River watershed is now challenged by an influx of Marcellus shale natural gas development.  An article and map have been prepared by the Friends of the Cheat (FOC) to illustrate how these sites are concentrated, many on quality streams.  As of early April, there have been over 50 Marcellus related gas permits issued in Preston County.

Also, construction has commenced on a natural gas gathering pipeline running south from the WV/PA line northeast of Bruceton Mills. Superior Appalachian Pipeline Company of Canonsburg, Pennsylvania, broke ground for a 16-mile natural gas project on March 1^st.  Superior said the area has had limited ability to transport natural gas, and the new pipeline will make that easier. 

Further, rumors of a commercial solid waste facility to accept the dried byproduct of produced water swirled last summer.  An article in the Morgantown Dominion Post on July 28, 2010 said that the rumors of a new landfill for Marcellus drilling wastes near Bruceton Mills had raised concerns among local citizens. And, on April 29, 2011 this same newspaper reported that a meeting was underway with the WV-DEP in Charleston to discuss such a landfill with an unidentified company.  It was reported that the WV Public Service Commission would not approve a landfill without the approval of the Preston County Solid Waste Authority. 

This region’s oil and gas inspector has over 5,000 wells on his roster and the development of many new wells is just getting started.  FOC works each day to remediate the impacts of pre-regulatory coal mine pollution. Over $50 million has been spent cleaning up these impacts in the Cheat River watershed and some 14 treatment systems have been installed.  The progress that has been made to clean up the Cheat River and Cheat Lake is now at stake.  “Let’s take our time and do it right this time,” said Amanda Pitzer, Executive Director of the Friends of the Cheat.  She said that “We can all wait. The gas will still be 8,000 feet under our beautiful mountain homes in the mean time.”