Conserve & Restore West Virginia Rivers & Streams & Wetlands

Description ~ Join WV Rivers for a Live Legislative Update. We’ll have an in depth discussion on our water policy priorities and what we can expect for the remainder of the 2022 session. A Q&A will follow the presentation.

Time ~ Feb 24, 2022 07:00 PM in Eastern Time

Join WV Rivers for a Live Legislative Update on Thursday, February 24 at 7:00pm on Zoom. We’ll have an in depth discussion on our water policy priorities and what we can expect for the remainder of the 2022 session. A Q&A will follow the presentation.

Register for the Legislative Update Here ASAP

Make a Donation in Support of Conserving & Restoring WV’s Exceptional Rivers & Streams

>>> WEST VIRGINIA RIVERS COALITION
3501 MacCorkle Ave SE #129, Charleston, WV 25304
304-637-7201 | wvrivers@wvrivers.org

######++++++######++++++######

SEE ALSO: Week 6 of the WV Legislative Session: Fair Courts, Justice, Water, and more!

Capital Eye V.15 N.6 ~ West Virginia Citizen’s Action Group

In this February 21st edition of the Capital Eye weekly newsletter update:

– Mushroom Session; – Judicial Power Grab Would Weaken West Virginians’ Say-So on the Courts; – Smart Justice Advocacy Day is Almost Here; – Meet Carey Jo; – WVNOW Legislative Action Alert 2.21.22; – Jo’s Fight for Coverage During COVID; – Keeping your Activist Heart Happy: A Series – part 3.

#######+++++++#######+++++++#######

SEE ALSO: Legislative Updates WVEC February 18, 2022

GREEN, Volume 32 Issue 6 ~ West Virginia Environmental Council

We just completed week six of the Legislature! Tuesday was the last day to introduce bills in the House and this Monday, February 21, will be the last day to do so in the Senate. We have compiled a list of bills we are watching, both good and bad, and will continue to update this list as we go. We also hosted our virtual E-Day event on Wednesday, and you can find the link to our livestream in the article below. Check out the other articles to see what’s happening!

WV Rivers Coalition opposes radical changes

From the West Virginia Rivers Coalition, February 28, 2019

The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) has released a proposed rule that will dramatically reduce the scope of waters protected by the Clean Water Act. This proposal is the worst rollback of Clean Water Act protections in history. The proposal redefines what waters are federally protected, limiting Clean Water Act protections to wetlands with a “continuous surface connection” to larger lakes, streams, or rivers and removing federal protections for rain and snow dependent streams. By the EPA’s own estimate, it would remove protections from 51% of our nation’s wetlands and 18% of streams, making it easier to pollute, pave over or build on them, and states may no longer be required to clean up polluted wetlands.

The proposal also allows the agencies to adopt a far worse final rule later. For instance, the proposal invites input on whether EPA should also exclude seasonal streams from federal protection, in addition to rain-dependent ones. If the final rule also excludes intermittent streams in addition to ephemeral, that would threaten at least 70% of our nation’s stream miles, over 9 million stream miles.

With many Americans dealing with unsafe drinking water, now is not the time to cut back on clean water enforcement. We need more—not less—protection for clean water.

There are no waters that are safe to pollute. We all know wetlands flow into streams, which flow into small rivers, into bigger rivers, and ultimately the ocean. We urge you to comment in opposition to this rule, telling the Trump Administration that America needs a strong Clean Water Act that protects our drinking water and our way of life.

This is the biggest weakening of the Clean Water Act in history.

This sweeping reinterpretation of the Clean Water Act could remove federal pollution safeguards for many important streams that do not flow year-round, called ephemeral streams. By EPA’s own estimates, this accounts for 18% of streams in the United States. The proposal would also allow the agency to adopt a far worse final rule later. For instance, the proposal invites input on whether EPA should also exclude seasonal streams from federal protection, in addition to rain-dependent ones

The new proposal will mean that at least half of America’s wetlands will no longer be protected by the Clean Water Act. The proposal restricts Clean Water Act protections to wetlands with a “continuous surface connection” to larger lakes, streams or rivers. The proposal would exclude not only so-called isolated wetlands, but floodplain wetlands as well, except those floodplain wetlands that have an uninterrupted surface water connection to a perennial or seasonal waterbody. Floodplain wetlands like bottomland hardwood wetlands that are connected by periodic surface flows and shallow groundwater connections (most wetlands) would not be covered if the surface connection is severed by manmade or natural features like levees, berms, roads, etc. By EPA’s own estimate, this means that at least 51% of America’s wetlands will no longer be federally protected under the Clean Water Act.

What It Could Mean:

>>> Commercial developers would no longer need to obtain a permit before paving over or building on many wetlands — increasing flooding and damaging wildlife habitats.

>>> Oil spills or pipeline breaks into these streams or wetlands could no longer be considered violations of the Clean Water Act.

>>> Fecal matter from factory farms could overflow into unprotected streams without fear of federal consequences.

>>> Industrial facilities could discharge chemicals into unprotected streams without paying Clean Water Act fines.

>>> Water treatment plants might be able discharge partially treated sewage into streams without adhering to federal water quality standards.

>>> States may no longer be required to clean up polluted streams or wetlands;

>>> If an agency fails to take action, the public could no longer use citizens’ suits under the Clean Water Act to protect their waters.

You can and should reply and comment by April 15th here.

Comments filed to WV-DEP by 20 organizations on March 4, 2019

Re: 401 Water Quality Certification Program Submitted via: WQSComments@wv.gov

West Virginia Rivers Coalition, on behalf of our members and the 19 organizations signed below, respectfully submit the following comments on the proposed modifications to the West Virginia 401 Water Quality Certification for U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (USACE) Nationwide Permits. We oppose the proposed changes to the standard and special conditions, which weaken protections for West Virginia’s rivers and streams.

The public notice of the proposed modifications was inadequate. The public must receive adequate notice of the DEP’s proposed modifications. With the September 2018 NWP 401 Certification proposed modification, the DEP posted the public comment period on the DEP Public Information Office’s news webpage. The January 2019 proposal was not listed on the Public Information Office’s news webpage. Furthermore, there was no record of the public notice posted to the DEP Public Notice Mailing List. The notice was placed on DEP’s 401 Water Quality Certification webpage, but that does not satisfy the public notice requirements.

The modifications may weaken or eliminate protections for every Nationwide Permit as applied in West Virginia. We are adamantly opposed to the proposed revisions to Standard Condition 22, which allows DEP to waive any of the standard or special conditions of the State 401 Water Quality Certification applicable to Nationwide Permits.

This modification is overly broad and vague. It applies to every nationwide permit. It does not provide any specifics regarding guidelines as to when waiving a condition is appropriate. And it does not specify what public process, if any, will be undertaken to ensure that waivers of standard or special conditions will undergo public notice, scrutiny, and comment.

The modification cites Section 401(a) of the Federal Water Pollution Control Act [33 U.S.C. § 1341(a)]; however, this section of the Act grants the State the authority to waive a certification if not acted on within a year. It does not give the State the authority to waive special or standard conditions within the certification.

The modifications allows for waivers of Individual 401 Certification under Nationwide Permit 12. We are adamantly opposed to the proposed changes to Nationwide Permit 12 West Virginia 401 Water Quality Certification Special Conditions, appearing under 12.A.

The relevant underlined added language reads:
“The Secretary of the West Virginia Department of Environmental Protection, in the Secretary’s sole discretion, reserves the right to require an individual water quality certification for any of the following facilities or impacts:”

This added language changed from the original language:
“Individual State Water Quality Certification is required:”

By making this change DEP opens the door to allow waivers of the Individual 401 Certification. This could be done without any public scrutiny or input, which is unacceptable. The change would cut the public out of any decision making processes.

The Individual 401 Certifications on NWP 12 were subjected to public notice and comment, and stakeholders had the opportunity to seek administrative and judicial review of them. The proposed change enables the state to unilaterally waive those requirements for an individual permit now and deprives stakeholders of the opportunity for public participation or to seek administrative or judicial review.

Moreover, because the special conditions on NWP 12 are now conditions of the nationwide permit itself, DEP does not have the authority under federal or state law to unilaterally waive those requirements for an individual 401 permit.

Exempting dry ditch crossing methods and large rivers from the 72-hour requirement does not consider impacts on aquatic life. The proposed change to the Special Condition C under Nationwide 12 allows for the exemption of the 72-hour crossing time restriction for dry crossing methods and large navigable river crossings. The longer crossing time does not consider the effects on aquatic life. The effect of dewatering the stream bed for prolonged periods on aquatic life was not taken into consideration when proposing this modification.

In its biological opinion for the Atlantic Coast Pipeline, the US Fish and Wildlife Service lists dewatering of mussel beds and increased sedimentation as two of the threats leading to the decline of Clubshell mussels. Clubshell mussels are also listed as species of concern for three water crossings on the Mountain Valley Pipeline. Candy Darters are also known to inhabit the Greenbrier and Gauley River Watersheds and were just recently listed under the Endangered Species Act with designated habitat where the Mountain Valley Pipeline proposes to cross the Gauley River and the Atlantic Coast Pipeline proposes to cross the Greenbrier River. The impacts of dewatering the streambed for prolonged periods on species of concern, such as Candy Darters and Clubshell mussels, must be taken into consideration prior to removing the 72-hour requirement.

The change to the 72-hour requirement affects other agency decisions. DEP relied on the 72- hour stream crossing condition when issuing the State General Water Pollution Control Permit for the Atlantic Coast and Mountain Valley Pipelines. On both projects in its response to comments for why an anti-degradation review is not needed, DEP states, “The Stormwater Pollution Prevention Plan (SWPPP) for this project requires that additional protective measures will be employed at crossings of and in proximity to Tier 3 and trout streams. The additional measures include… stream crossings in these areas will be completed within 72 hours once the crossing has begun…” By exempting large rivers and dry crossing methods from the 72-hour stream crossing condition, DEP would also invalidate the protections afforded streams under the General Stormwater Construction Permit and undermine its own rationale of why an anti-degradation review is unnecessary.

Other state agencies rely on the special conditions included within the Nationwide Permits. WVDNR refers to the condition requiring crossings to be completed in 72 hours in its spawning waiver approvals, and assumes when issuing those waivers that the applicant will comply with the 72-hour restriction. Allowing an exemption to this condition would therefore undermine WVDNR’s spawning waiver approvals. Changing this condition to allow longer crossing durations during which the stream bed is dewatered for prolonged periods would have detrimental effects on aquatic life, especially in areas where WVDNR relied on this rule to allow construction during the spawning season.

Modifications would allow structures that prevent fish movement between upstream and downstream for an undetermined length of time, as long as the structure is not permanent. The proposed modification to Special Condition L under Nationwide 12 would allow temporary structures that prevent fish passage. There is no specific timeframe for how long fish movement can be prevented as long as it is eventually restored. This change could have detrimental effects on fish species, including sensitive species such as the native brook trout and the endangered candy darters.

Fish movement ranges from short daily movements to seasonal migrations. The degree of fish movement depends on water levels, river flows and temperature. Fish need unimpeded movement in a waterway to access seasonal food sources, breeding areas, various habitat types and drought refuges. Structures that prevent fish movement may impact the fish’s ability to find adequate food, escape poor habitat conditions, or reach spawning grounds. Severing the connectivity of aquatic habitat for prolonged periods can prevent fish from migrating to various areas in the stream that are used during their different life stages. Migration barriers have the potential to restrict available habitats, interrupt seasonal movement patterns, and lead to individual losses due to isolation events. Structures preventing fish movement for long periods of time can alter the biology of the stream. These structures may also exacerbate flooding issues during high flow events.

Modifications undermine the Secretary’s position that NWP 12 Special Conditions are needed to prevent impacts. In the Secretary’s letter to staff regarding the Mountain Valley Pipeline 401 Waiver, he endorses the conditions put in place by the agency when certifying the 404 permit by stating:

“That 401 Certification had several conditions to ensure that temporary impacts to West Virginia’s waters would be minimized, and mitigation would be provided for permanent impacts. Importantly, during the same period of time that the WVDEP was working on this MVP individual certification, it was also developing special conditions for the reissuance of the USACE nationwide permit… The special conditions West Virginia included in it is certification on the newly reissued Nationwide 12 permit (in April 2017) largely mirrored the conditions that West Virginia had previously placed (in March 2017) on the MVP’s 401 Individual Certification… Because the newly issued Nationwide 12 permit included updated state conditions that were similar to those contained in MVP’s previous individual 401 Certification, WVDEP determined it was unnecessary to repeat them in an Individual Certification. As a result, it waived the 401 Certification…To be clear – by waiving the 401 Individual Certification, we are not abandoning our duty to protect the water quality of West Virginia. In fact, the new Nationwide 12 permit is 401 certified by West Virginia and includes state specific conditions relative to pipelines. Combined with the state Construction Stormwater Permit, we are in a stronger position to effectively regulate all pipeline construction in West Virginia.”

The DEP has previously relied on and endorsed the conditions under the 401 Certification for nationwide permits. It is problematic for DEP to change its course now in what appears to be a move to accommodate non-compliant plans and permits of certain projects.

Proposed modifications do not maintain the water’s designated use as required by law. State water quality standards are the basis for controlling pollutants in West Virginia’s water resources. The standards consist of designated beneficial uses, water quality numeric and narrative criteria, an anti-degradation policy, and other general policies on implementation. The water quality standards and criteria ensure that the beneficial uses are maintained and protected. DEP is mandated by the Requirements Governing Water Quality Standards Rule – Title 47CRS2 to maintain the rivers designated use; including public water supply and recreation. The proposed modifications do not ensure that the waterbodies’ designated uses will be maintained.

The Mountain Valley Pipeline proposes to cross the Gauley and Greenbrier Rivers, and the Atlantic Coast Pipeline proposes to cross the Buckhannon River, rivers that also serve as the source water for public water supplies directly downstream of the crossing locations. Exempting these river crossings from the Special Condition C would put undue hardships on the water treatment facilities by requiring the facilities to filter excess sediment in the source water for a duration of approximately 4 to 6 weeks or longer. The rivers’ designated use would not be maintained as a public drinking water source. Exemptions to the 72-hour condition do not ensure that the beneficial uses will be maintained and protected as required under the Clean Water Act.

The Greenbrier, Gauley, Buckhannon and Elk Rivers are popular recreational destinations for boating, swimming and fishing. The proposed modifications to Special Conditions C and L would impact the recreational use of these rivers. Allowing pipeline construction for an unrestricted duration coupled with impoundments that impede the flow will have detrimental effects on the recreational use of the impacted sections of these rivers. No recreation can occur during construction and the construction could last the majority of the popular recreational season. DEP’s proposed modifications to the special conditions do not maintain the rivers’ designated use for recreation.

The proposed modifications are untimely, unlawful and unnecessary. The DEP issued its recertification of the 401 for nationwide permits in 2017. Nationwide recertification is only necessary every five years. These modifications must wait until the 2022 recertification period. Opening the recertification process prematurely sets a precedent and disrupts the regulatory framework that industry, environmental organizations, state regulatory agencies, and other stakeholders rely on for continuity, transparency and certainty.

DEP has provided no justification for the proposed modifications to ensure that projects will still be able meet the state’s water quality standards. Likewise, the proposed modifications do not protect the rivers’ and streams’ designated uses. DEP cannot lawfully modify regulations without justification simply because the companies are not able to comply.

These modifications are not necessary for DEP to enable a company to use the most environmentally protective methods available. The agency has the authority now to deny large construction projects coverage under nationwide permits and require individual 401 Water Quality Certifications. Instead of following through with the proposed modifications, DEP should use individual 401 Water Quality Certifications to provide stream and wetland protections tailored to each project.

>>> Signed, Angie Rosser, West Virginia Rivers Coalition, plus 19 other organizations

Stream & wetlands disturbances are severe and long lasting

Prepared by the West Virginia Rivers Coalition, Fact Sheet, 2/19

Background Information Summary

The WV Department of Environmental Protection (WV-DEP) agreed to permit the construction of the Mountain Valley Pipeline and Atlantic Coast Pipeline through streams and wetlands according to a Nationwide 12 permit issued by the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers. In 2017, WV-DEP established certain special conditions that must be followed for projects subject to a Nationwide 12 permit to protect the environment. Now, WV-DEP is proposing to change those conditions and are accepting public comment on proposed modifications through March 4, 2019. Comment here.

Key Revisions Proposed by the WV-DEP

The following proposed modifications raise concerns for our rivers and streams:

>>> Allowing exemptions to the 72-hour stream crossing restriction. This condition helps to minimize impacts to water quality and aquatic life. Prolonged dewatering of streambeds can have severe impacts to the life in a stream. Agencies like WV Division of Natural Resources rely on this 72-hour restriction to determine if construction during fish spawning seasons will have ill-effects on fish populations.

>>> Allowing temporary impediments to fish passage. This condition helps to minimize impacts to fish species by preventing structures that impede fish passage. WV-DEP is changing this condition to allow structures to impede fish passage as long as they are not permanent; however the length of time that fish passage will be prevented is not defined.

>>> Waiving the requirement for an individual water quality certification for large pipelines. This condition is in place to assure that stream and wetland crossings for large-scale pipelines (over 36” in diameter) get the careful analysis and individualized plans required to better ensure protection of water quality.

>>> Allowing for the removal of any permit conditions with no public scrutiny. Standard and special permit conditions are in place to make sure that when a nationwide permit is used there is a baseline of protections that will be enforced. These conditions become meaningless if the regulatory agency is allowed to remove or waive them, especially without any requirement for public notice and comment.

The WV-DEP states the modifications are necessary so that companies are not prevented from using more environmentally protective methods. This simply is not true. WV-DEP currently has the authority to reject coverage of large-scale projects under a one-size-fits-all Nationwide permit, and can instead come up with protective methods customized to the needs of the project through an individual permit.

How to Comment to the WV Department of Environmental Protection

Comments can be submitted online here, via email at WQSComments@wv.gov, or by mail to:

401 Water Quality Certification Program
ATTN: Nancy Dickson, WV-DEP
601 57th Street SE
Charleston, WV 25304-2345

NOTICE:  Water Quality Monitoring Program Underway for Snapshot Day

From the West Virginia Rivers Coalition, September 14, 2016

We are so excited to offer a volunteer opportunity as part of Trout Unlimited’s and WV Rivers’  WV/VA Water Quality Monitoring Program! We are hosting a one day Watershed Snapshot Day for folks to help us collect water quality samples in the Monongahela National Forest (MNF). No prior water quality monitoring experience is needed.  

The event is limited to 35 participants, please register by September 23. 

Register here: http://goo.gl/forms/DiFbNOixn63caLFl1.

Watershed Snapshot Day brings together volunteers from throughout West Virginia to collect water quality data and samples within the Monongahela National Forest (MNF), providing a “snapshot” of water quality conditions within the forest. This data helps establish baseline conditions in advance of any potential development within or adjacent to the forest, including pipelines and shale gas development. Snapshot Day is a great opportunity to meet other volunteers and explore a beautiful part of West Virginia.

Registration begins at 9:45am and the day will wrap-up around 4:30pm. We’ll provide you with an event t-shirt and bagged lunch for the field. We’ll have a BBQ picnic when you get back! 

Here’s How it Works

In the morning, we will assign groups of 2-4 volunteers with their monitoring routes, which will consist of 4-8 sites. We’ll provide detailed directions on how to get to each monitoring location. Before folks start monitoring, we’ll hold a mini-training on the sample collection protocols. The monitoring groups will then fan out to collect data from throughout the MNF. We’ll have dinner ready as groups return. We’ll be meeting at the Stuart Recreation Area right on Shaver’s Fork near Elkins, WV. This is a beautiful part of the state and a great time to visit. 
  
You can find further information and registration instructions here.
 
Please don’t hesitate to call or email Jake Lemon, Trout Unlimited’s Eastern Shale Gas Monitoring Coordinator, if you have any questions, 814-779-3965, jlemon@tu.org.

Marcellus/Utica region streams highly vulnerable

Study indicates gas drilling can impact rivers, streams & wetlands

From an Article by Elizabeth Krapits, Citizens Voice News, November 16, 2015

Depending on where and how it’s done, natural gas drilling does have the potential to impact Pennsylvania’s waterways, an independent study reveals.

Kenneth M. Klemow, professor of biology and environmental science and director of the Institute for Energy and Environmental Research at Wilkes University, was one of the contributors to a new study examining how natural gas development affects surface water, such as creeks, streams and rivers.

In their paper, “Stream Vulnerability to Widespread and Emergent Stressors: A Focus on Unconventional Oil and Gas,” Klemow and five colleagues look at how vulnerable the bodies of water are in the six main shale plays across the U.S., including the Marcellus Shale.

“What we’ve developed is a predictive model,” Klemow said. “We have not proven anything about whether shale gas development is affecting streams or not.”

Watersheds are areas from which all the water beneath it or on it drains into the same place, whether creek, stream, river or lake. Surface water is used for drinking water, recreation, and feeds into fisheries, Klemow said.

Despite the importance of surface water and the fact that natural gas-related activity is increasing, there were no studies on whether the activity might contaminate streams. “That was the impetus, realizing there was a gap in the knowledge,” Klemow said.

In addition to Entrekin, other principals on the paper were Kelly O. Maloney of the U.S. Geological Survey’s Northern Appalachian Research Laboratory in Wellsboro, Tioga County; Katherine E. Kapo of Waterborne Environmental Inc. in Leesburg, Virginia; Annika W. Walters of the U.S. Geological Survey’s Wyoming Cooperative Fish and Wildlife Research Unit at the University of Wyoming in Laramie; and Michelle A. Evans-White of the Department of Biological Sciences at the University of Arkansas in Fayetteville.

The scientists pooled their data; Klemow said Wilkes supplied “quite a bit” collected by the Institute for Energy and Environmental Research.

“It was an exercise in going out online and getting whatever data we could about different watershed characteristics,” Klemow said. “For every watershed within the shale plays, we got a whole bunch of data: slopes, soils, type of vegetation, then things like land use.”

The bulk of the work involved using online databases and computer modeling with a geographic information system, or GIS. Klemow said Entrekin and Maloney, the lead authors, were the “GIS gurus,” so they did the bulk of the analysis in terms of crunching the numbers. The other authors provided interpretation and commentary.

What they found

In addition to the Marcellus, the researchers studied the Bakken shale, an oil-rich shale primarily being developed in North Dakota; the Fayetteville shale, a natural-gas shale in Arkansas; the Hilliard and Mowry shales in Wyoming and the oil- and gas-rich Barnett shale in Texas.

The study notes that “The fast pace and wide extent of unconventional oil and natural gas development raises concerns about its ecological effects.”

The researchers looked at the sensitivity of watersheds in the shale regions to impacts, and discovered that, of the six different plays, the Marcellus turned out to have the lowest, Klemow said. The others are in the central or southern part of the country where they don’t get as much rainfall. What makes the Marcellus region more resistant to impact is the fact that it gets a lot more rain than the other shales. But the Marcellus does have steep slopes and fairly loose soils and sediment.

The researchers next looked at exposure, a measure of the degree to which the watersheds could be affected by proximity to potential sources of pollution such as urbanized areas, farm land, coal mining or gas drilling — especially taking into account things like well pad density and access roads.

They found that despite its low sensitivity to impact, the Marcellus Shale has high exposure where drilling is heaviest, in northeastern and western Pennsylvania, Klemow said. A lot of shale gas development has already taken place, as well as many years of agriculture and mining. In the western part of the state there is also conventional oil and gas drilling, he said.

The researchers then took the sensitivity of each shale play, multiplied it by exposure, and came up with its vulnerability score, which is the amount of risk a particular watershed has.

Klemow said Northeastern Pennsylvania has a lot of watersheds classified as being highly vulnerable, mainly because they have high exposure rates.

Where the drilling is and how close it is to streams makes a difference. If you have a gas well that’s three miles away from the nearest stream, the chance of contamination is pretty low, Klemow said. But if it’s 300 feet from a stream, it’s going to be a lot higher. In other words, as Klemow puts it, it’s a highway with a lot of traffic on it, which makes it

“Wouldn’t pipelines raise the exposure level? The answer is, absolutely yes,” Klemow said. “But we couldn’t get any good pipeline data.”

What he hopes the study will lead to is the natural gas industry using best practices — such as being careful crossing streams — and having good regulations in place. It’s like if every motorist on the road drives safely, and there is good police enforcement, there won’t be as many accidents.

“One take-home is, this is now a predictive tool that hopefully regulatory agencies will be interested in, and hopefully the industry will be interested in this,” Klemow said of the study.

See also: www.FrackCheckWV.net

“Make gas drillers pay for using, ruining water”

Letter to the Editor, Morgantown Dominion Post, Page 6-A, August 27, 2015

The 2000 Water Resources Group (a public-private partnership that assists government water officials) predicts that water demand will exceed supply by 40 percent in 15 years.  We are fortunate to live in a state with a plentiful supply.  By comparison, California is in its fourth year of a drought and water rationing is the law.

While our supply is abundant, we cannot take this resource for granted.  With our climate in flux, we should be doing everything we can to protect and preserve our water resources.  According to the West Virginia Water Resources Protection Act, “The waters of the State of West Virginia are claimed as valuable public natural resources held by the State for the use and benefit of its citizens.”  Citizens – that’s us.

So what are we doing with our plentiful and precious water? Besides drinking and recreating in it, we give it away to industry.  Extracting natural gas from the Marcellus and Utica shales is a water-intensive process.  Every time one of these wells is drilled and fracked, an average of 4 million gallons of water is used.

With approximately 1,200 active wells and more than 3,000 permitted, the gas industry needs a lot of water.  Environment America (a federation of state-based environmental advocacy organizations) estimates that West Virginia has used 17 billion gallons of water for hydraulic fracturing from 2005 – 2013.

In most cases, this water is sucked right out of our rivers and streams.  There are about 155 water withdrawal sites permitted in West Virginia. The water is mixed with a cocktail of chemicals and pumped underground to fracture the shale and permit the escape of natural gas.

Once a gas well has been drilled, the water resurfaces essentially as industrial waste.  This water is too polluted to return it to the rivers and streams from which it was taken.  So instead this toxic water is disposed of in underground injection wells in many cases.

Whey is the natural gas industry allowed to waste our water? These companies do not pay a cent for taking this water from our rivers and streams and ruining it.  It’s only fair that these companies compensate us for its use.  West Virginia citizens should not be required to give away such a vital resource to enhance the profits of gas companies.

It’s time for gas drillers and frackers to pay – even a very modest amount – for the water they take from West Virginians.  You want it? You use it? You spoil it? You should pay for it.

>>> Jim Sconyers, West Virginia Sierra Club, Terra Alta, Preston County, WV

Will you let this happen (again & again)?

It’s Not Water Under the Bridge

Editorial, Morgantown Dominion Post, February 27, 2015

You better believe history has a way of repeating itself. Take for instance our state leaders, and agencies, long history of allowing industry to have its way with our natural resources.

Never mind the collateral damage done to our environment, especially our water resources. At least it was that way until March 8, 2014, or so we thought.

That was the date when the state Legislature unanimously approved Senate Bill 373 in response to a massive chemical spill into the Elk River. That spill contaminated the water supply of 300,000 state residents in a nine-county region resulting in a tap water ban for nearly a week. But soon after that legislation was passed, some warned that protecting our water does not end with passing a bill.

Industry never sleeps and would keep the pressure on government through its well-financed lobby. As one WVU law professor put it at the time, “While you’re not paying attention, they are.” Guess what? We have not been paying attention.

This week the Senate Judiciary Committee unanimously advanced legislation to the Senate floor that basically guts SB 373. Though the new legislation — Senate Bill 423 — still requires all above-ground storage tanks to be registered with the state, it drops practically all regulation for about 36,000 of those 48,000 tanks.

The new bill purportedly targets tanks in zones of critical concern and a newly defined zone of peripheral concern to public water intakes, rather than protecting groundwater in general.

What that means is, if you rely on a private groundwater well or other such water supply you had better hope there are no above-ground storage tanks nearby. It also drastically reshapes how many industries need to apply for permits, allowing them to opt out of the separate permit process for their storage tanks if they already fall under some other regulatory tool.

Some have estimated that as a result of this provision, fewer than 100 tanks will be subject to the regular strict inspections.

The state Department of Environmental Protection (DEP) secretary was quick to point out recently that the bill the governor sought last year — SB 417 — was not as stringent as the one lawmakers ultimately passed. That was the legislation whose opening paragraphs talked about protecting industry, rather than our water resources. It was the one that died a quiet death once the public got a look at it and started to make some noise.

Something tells us the public needs to start making some more noise again — at SB 423. And if they don’t hear you now, you can always get their attention at the ballot box on November 8, 2016.

WVU CAC March 24 - 28

MFA exhibition focusing on Deckers Creek Watershed open March 24-28

MORGANTOWN, W.Va.– WVU Master of Fine Arts candidate Forrest Conroy will present his MFA thesis exhibition, focusing on the Deckers Creek Watershed, at the Creative Arts Center during March 24-28.

Titled “Watershed: A Call to Action,” the graphic design project will be on view in the Paul Mesaros Gallery. An opening reception for the exhibition will be held Thursday, March 27 at 6 p.m. All events are free and open to the public.

The goal of Conroy’s exhibition is to educate visitors and challenge people to see how their personal actions are connected to the health of their environment. The cornerstone project of his thesis work is CreekDog, a web application that allows citizens to report and track serious pollution issues throughout the Deckers Creek Watershed.

Industries that used the creek as a source of water power included a forge and iron furnace, grist mills, saw mills, and a pottery and a paper mill. Rapid industrialization in the first half of the 20th century took a heavy toll on the once-pristine creek, as water quality declined and aquatic life diminished. Recreational fishing and boating on the creek eventually ceased after acid mine runoff and open sewage fouled the water.

Friends of Deckers Creek (FODC), a community non-profit watershed association, organized in 1995 to start clean-ups of illegal dumps and to monitor water quality. In 1998, the state Department of Environmental Protection and federal Natural Resources Conservation Service committed $10 million to clean up acid mine drainage in the Deckers Creek Watershed, an effort that continues to be guided by FODC.

Conroy’s project was developed in partnership with Friends of Deckers Creek and is based on their Watershed Bill of Rights Program that calls citizens to take action. CreekDog takes this one step further by providing a tool that facilitates action between citizens and the public agencies responsible for addressing these issues.

“It is important that we find ways to educate and empower citizens to take an active role in protecting their environment and bettering their communities,” Conroy said. “The story of Deckers Creek is one of both immense beauty and complex environmental issues. People want to help and do the right thing. Many people either don’t know there’s a problem, or, if they do, don’t know how to solve it—but everyone plays a part. I hope that this exhibition helps to create an opportunity for people to make a difference.”

The CreekDog project is being funded, in part, by a grant from the Appalachian stewardship foundation. The Mesaros Galleries are open Monday through Saturday, from noon to 9:30 p.m. For more information on the event, contact Robert Bridges, curator of the Mesaros Galleries at 304-293-2312.

"Shale Perception" art works on display in Gettysburg, PA

Twenty “Shale Perception” Works on Display in Gettysburg, PA

From Article by Travis Kellar, Carlisle Sentinel, June 11, 2013

Robb Bomboy said fracking for natural gas in the state’s Marcellus Shale formations is “erasing” Pennsylvania woodlands. That led him to the creation of an art exhibit, “Shale Perception,” to draw attention to the impact of fracking on the environment. Bomboy said he started the project two years ago while on a camping trip in Sproul State Forest to document natural gas drilling sites. 

His exhibit opened June 4 in the main gallery of Harrisburg Area Community College’s Gettysburg campus, 731 Old Harrisburg Road, Gettysburg.Bomboy is an art and photography teacher at Cumberland Valley High School, Mechanicsburg, PA.

The exhibit, which includes of 20 large-scale nature photographs that are printed and mounted on canvases, will be on display from 9 a.m. to 9 p.m. Monday through Thursday until Sept. 5. Admission is free.

“‘Shale Perception’ is all about how we perceive the gas industry,” Bomboy said. “In our area, I feel it is ‘out of sight, out of mind.’ Yet all of the policy and regulations are made here in Harrisburg.”

The exhibit is not the only means Bomboy uses to draw attention to fracking. He installed nine carved figures at Wildwood Park in Harrisburg as part of the “Art in the Wild” exhibit. The exhibit is sponsored by the Dauphin County Parks and Recreation Department.

“They are generic effigies of the Moai statues on Easter Island,” Bomboy said. “I wanted to communicate the power of nature over man and the mutability of man’s works.” To learn more about Robb Bomboy and his art, including a look at “Shale Perception,” visit www.bomboyart.com.