EPA HAS FILED NOTICE TO APPROVE WASTE WATER INJECTION SITE ON FORT BERTHOLD RESERVATION: PUBLIC COMMENTARY PERIOD ENDS ON MAY 3
4-30-14
By Deborah LaVallie
Christa Monnette
The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency has filed a notice to approve an application from Slawson Exploration Co., Inc., for an 'exemption' for an Underground Injection Control Program Class II injection well for saltwater disposal at the Big Bend 1-5 SWD commercial injection well on the Fort Berthold (ND) reservation south of New Town on the New Town peninsula. The proposed major modification would correct the depth for the Inyan Kara Formation.
The EPA will be taking public comments until May 3. All comments received within the thirty (30) day period will be considered in the Final decision. The decision may be to issue, modify, or deny the aquifer exemption request. The Final decision shall become effective thirty (30) days after issuance unless no commenters requested changes to the aquifer exemption, in which case the exemption shall become effective immediately upon issuance.
The EPA will be taking public comments until May 3. All comments received within the thirty (30) day period will be considered in the Final decision. The decision may be to issue, modify, or deny the aquifer exemption request. The Final decision shall become effective thirty (30) days after issuance unless no commenters requested changes to the aquifer exemption, in which case the exemption shall become effective immediately upon issuance.
Liquid wastes generated during the production of oil and gas operations in the Bakken and Three Forks formations would be disposed of at the well site. The EPA has determined that the wastes produced have no secondary use and the waste water injection well would not endanger the underground drinking sources in the vicinity. Permitted wastes include fluids produced during the drilling, completion, testing or stimulation of wells or test holes to oil and gas operations.
The Three Affiliated Tribes of the Fort Berthold reservation have been consulted to ensure that sites of historic or cultural significance are being protected. Currently, there are no disposal wells located on the New Town peninsula and Slawson’s closest disposal well to the area is approximately 12 miles northeast, necessitating truck hauling traffic to travel through the east side of New Town, ND. The majority of the water will be pipelined to the site, with the remaining water trucked. This commercial injection well will help reduce truck traffic, decreasing emission pollution and increasing road safety, according to the EPA Notice of Intent to Approve.
https://www.facebook.com/photo.php?fbid=545687042214311&set=p.545687042214311&type=1&theater
The EPA is granting these aquifer exemptions in areas experiencing water shortages and being affected by drought according to a Pro Publica report. The report accused federal officials of sacrificing and polluting the aquifers that provide fresh drinking water for many by releasing toxic material into the underground reservoirs, and that portions of at least 100 drinking water aquifers have been written off because exemptions have allowed them to be used as dumping grounds, which seems to conflict with the EPA's mandate to protect water that may be used for drinking purposes. Applicants for exemptions must persuade the government that the water is not being used as drinking water and that it never will be.
There are deep concerns about the exemptions and whether the waste will flow outside the zone of influence over time. Due to the increase in domestic oil production there has been a surge of exemption applications and political pressure not to block or delay them. The report found the EPA has not even kept track of exactly how many exemptions it has issued, where they are, or whom they might effect. While injection into a source of drinking water is prohibited by The Safe Drinking Water Act there was no water monitoring or long term study being done, while many areas are being stripped of protection by the EPA, and becoming contaminated. Also, there are little or no obligations to protect the surrounding water. Once an exemption is issued it becomes permanent. There has never been a reversal.
Water moves regionally northeastward through the deeply buried lower Cretaceous aquifers according to the USGS (United States Geological Survey) Groundwater Atlas, and some of the water moves hundreds of miles from aquifer recharge areas around structural uplifts on the west to discharge areas in North and South Dakota. One of the best known artesian aquifers in the Nation is the Dakota aquifer, also known as the Inyan Kara aquifer, which is in the Lower Cretaceous rocks that are exposed on the flanks of the Black Hills Uplift and extend more than 300 miles across South Dakota in the subsurface. (fig. 37) Water in the Dakota aquifer moves hundreds of miles from recharge areas to places where the water discharges upward to shallower aquifers, surface-water bodies, or wells. Locally, in parts of the Williston Basin in extreme northeastern Montana, the aquifer is more than 5,500 feet below the land surface and contains brine.
Director of the North Dakota Industrial Commission's Mineral Resources, Lynn Helms has stated that North Dakota is currently injecting 468,000 barrels of saltwater a day into the Dakota Formation and that the state could require approximately 1,600 additional saltwater disposal wells, estimating roughly 10,000 barrels of saltwater a day. Concerns about inevitable leaks and seepage of the wastewater wells and how this process may affect the Dakota Aquifer and the future quality of water throughout North and South Dakota go unheeded as the Bakken 'oil boom' continues to produce at a fast and furious pace, not to mention the fact that the proposed wastewater injection site at Fort Berthold is located near Lake Sakakawea and the Missouri River.
The proposed aquifer exemption and associated Major Permit Modification are open to comment from any interested party. Persons wishing to comment on any aspect of proposal are invited to submit comments, IN WRITING, within 30 days of the Date of Publication, to:
Craig Boomgaard
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
UIC Unit, 8P-W-UIC
1595 Wynkoop Street
Denver, Colorado 80202-1129
Telephone: 1-800-227-8917 ext. 312-6794, Email: boomgaard.craig@epa.gov
http://www2.epa.gov/sites/production/files/2014-03/documents/bigbenduic_classiipermitapplicationpubnoticend22184-08837_0.pdf
http://www2.epa.gov/region8/notice-intent-approve-aquifer-exemption-big-bend-1-5-swd
http://www.propublica.org/article/poisoning-the-well-how-the-feds-let-industry-pollute-the-nations-undergroun
http://pubs.usgs.gov/ha/ha730/ch_i/I-text.html
FAILURE OF NORTH DAKOTA TO 'REGULATE' THE FLARING OF NATURAL GAS IN THE BAKKEN: WHAT A WASTE!
4-18-14
http://www.propublica.org/article/poisoning-the-well-how-the-feds-let-industry-pollute-the-nations-undergroun
http://pubs.usgs.gov/ha/ha730/ch_i/I-text.html
FAILURE OF NORTH DAKOTA TO 'REGULATE' THE FLARING OF NATURAL GAS IN THE BAKKEN: WHAT A WASTE!
4-18-14
By Cedar Gillette
Companies who are fracking in the Marcellus shale and the Eagle Ford shale are only fracking for natural gas and instead of flaring it off are capturing it because that is all they are fracking for in those shale formations. So, why are some of these same companies who are also fracking the Bakken and the Three Forks shale only capturing the oil, but flaring off the natural gas?
This makes zero sense to me.
State regulators have given companies a loophole to continually apply for flare permits instead of following their own laws like "NDCC 38-08003 Waste of oil and gas is prohibited." The North Dakota regulators of oil and gas have looked the other way for years now, since the oil boom has started. It is a shame. No one should be seeing the Bakken formation light up from outer space.
Air pollution is causing many health issues for people that live in the Bakken like difficulty breathing, pleurisy, increased use of nebulizers, headaches and loss of sense of smell that the state government and health department have chosen to ignore.
The point being, the practice, not the policy because flaring is breaking the law. The practice of flaring has failed North Dakotans, not just as a health hazard but also a loss of millions of dollars every year. It makes zero sense that the amount of flaring in North Dakota equals heating 500,000 homes PER DAY.
Follow your own rules. Don't bend them for industry-only prosperity. If you did follow your own rules for more responsible drilling and capturing practices in the first place, then you wouldn't have been sued by your own citizens to make you comply.
The time to flare is over.
Be responsible to your citizens.
Public comments will be taken until 5 PM on April 21 on the illegal practice of flaring. Please submit your comments to brkadrmas@nd.gov. The above comments were sent by Cedar Gillette.
FRACKING THE FOOD CHAIN:
LIVESTOCK BEING AFFECTED IN AREAS OF 'FRACKING'
Photo Credit: Jacki Schilke
"This cow on Jacki Schilke's ranch in northeast North Dakota lost most of its tail, one of many ailments that afflicted her cattle after hydrofracturing, or fracking, began in the nearby Bakken Shale."
"In the midst of the domestic energy boom, livestock on farms near oil- and gas-drilling operations nationwide have been quietly falling sick and dying. While scientists have yet to isolate cause and effect, many suspect chemicals used in drilling and hydrofracking (or “fracking”) operations are poisoning animals through the air, water or soil."
"Exposed livestock “are making their way into the food system, and it’s very worrisome to us,” Bamberger said. “They live in areas that have tested positive for air, water and soil contamination. Some of these chemicals could appear in milk and meat products made from these animals.”
"Drilling and fracking a single well requires up to 7 million gallons of water, plus an additional 400,000 gallons of additives, including lubricants, biocides, scale- and rust-inhibitors, solvents, foaming and defoaming agents, emulsifiers and de-emulsifiers, stabilizers and breakers. At almost every stage of developing and operating an oil or gas well, chemicals and compounds can be introduced into the environment."
"After drilling began just over the property line of Jacki Schilke’s ranch in the northwestern corner of North Dakota in 2009, in the heart of the state’s booming Bakken Shale, cattle began limping, with swollen legs and infections. Cows quit producing milk for their calves, they lost from 60 to 80 pounds in a week and their tails mysteriously dropped off. Eventually, five animals died, according to Schilke."
"Ambient air testing by a certified environmental consultant detected elevated levels of benzene, methane, chloroform, butane, propane, toluene and xylene -- and well testing revealed high levels of sulfates, chromium, chloride and strontium. Schilke says she moved her herd upwind and upstream from the nearest drill pad."
"Veterinarians don’t know how long chemicals may remain in animals, farmers aren’t required to prove their livestock are free of contamination before middlemen purchase them and the Food Safety Inspection Service of the U.S. Department of Agriculture isn’t looking for these compounds in carcasses at slaughterhouses."
"Documenting the scope of the problem is difficult: Scientists lack funding to study the matter, and rural vets remain silent for fear of retaliation. Farmers who receive royalty checks from energy companies are reluctant to complain, and those who have settled with gas companies following a spill or other accident are forbidden to disclose information to investigators. Some food producers would rather not know what’s going on, say ranchers and veterinarians."
"The National Cattlemen’s Beef Association, the main lobbying group for ranchers, takes no position on fracking, but some ranchers are beginning to speak out. “These are industry-supporting conservatives, not radicals,” said Amy Mall, a senior policy analyst with the environmental group, Natural Resources Defense Council. “They are the experts in their animals’ health, and they are very concerned.”
"Last March, Christopher Portier, director of the National Center for Environmental Health at the U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, called for studies of oil and gas production’s impact on food plants and animals. None is currently planned by the federal government."
"This report was produced by the Food & Environment Reporting Network, an independent investigative journalism non-profit focusing on food, agriculture, and environmental health. A longer version of this story appears on TheNation.com."
Read More:
http://openchannel.nbcnews.com/_news/2012/11/29/15547283-livestock-falling-ill-in-fracking-regions?lite
http://www.thenation.com/article/171504/fracking-our-food-supply#
http://www.thenation.com/article/171504/fracking-our-food-supply#
"Jacki Schilke and her sixty cattle live in the top left corner of North Dakota, a windswept, golden-hued landscape in the heart of the Bakken Shale. Schilke’s neighbors love her black Angus beef, but she’s no longer sharing or eating it—not since fracking began on thirty-two oil and gas wells within three miles of her 160-acre ranch and five of her cows dropped dead. Schilke herself is in poor health. A handsome 53-year-old with a faded blond ponytail and direct blue eyes, she often feels lightheaded when she ventures outside. She limps and has chronic pain in her lungs, as well as rashes that have lingered for a year. Once, a visit to the barn ended with respiratory distress and a trip to the emergency room. Schilke also has back pain linked with overworked kidneys, and on some mornings she urinates a stream of blood."
"Ambient air testing by a certified environmental consultant detected elevated levels of benzene, methane, chloroform, butane, propane, toluene and xylene—compounds associated with drilling and fracking, and also with cancers, birth defects and organ damage. Her well tested high for sulfates, chromium, chloride and strontium; her blood tested positive for acetone, plus the heavy metals arsenic (linked with skin lesions, cancers and cardiovascular disease) and germanium (linked with muscle weakness and skin rashes). Both she and her husband, who works in oilfield services, have recently lost crowns and fillings from their teeth; tooth loss is associated with radiation poisoning and high selenium levels, also found in the Schilkes’ water."
"State health and agriculture officials acknowledged Schilke’s air and water tests but told her she had nothing to worry about. Her doctors, however, diagnosed her with neurotoxic damage and constricted airways. “I realized that this place is killing me and my cattle,” Schilke says. She began using inhalers and a nebulizer, switched to bottled water, and quit eating her own beef and the vegetables from her garden. (Schilke sells her cattle only to buyers who will finish raising them outside the shale area, where she presumes that any chemical contamination will clear after a few months.) “My health improved,” Schilke says, “but I thought, ‘Oh my God, what are we doing to this land?"
"In addition to the cases documented by Bamberger, hair testing of sick cattle that grazed around well pads in New Mexico found petroleum residues in fifty-four of fifty-six animals. In North Dakota, wind-borne fly ash, which is used to solidify the waste from drilling holes and contains heavy metals, settled over a farm: one cow, which either inhaled or ingested the caustic dust, died, and a stock pond was contaminated with arsenic at double the accepted level for drinking water."
"Cattle that die on the farm don’t make it into the nation’s food system. (Though they’re often rendered to make animal feed for chickens and pigs—yet another cause for concern.) But herd mates that appear healthy, despite being exposed to the same compounds, do: farmers aren’t required to prove their livestock are free of fracking contaminants before middlemen purchase them. Bamberger and Oswald consider these animals sentinels for human health. “They’re outdoors all day long, so they’re constantly exposed to air, soil and groundwater, with no break to go to work or the supermarket,” Bamberger says. “And they have more frequent reproductive cycles, so we can see toxic effects much sooner than with humans.”
"Ever since a heater-treater unit, which separates oil, gas and brine, blew out on a drill pad a half-mile upwind of Schilke’s ranch, her own creek has been clogged with scummy growth, and it regularly burps up methane. “No one can tell me what’s going on,” she says. But since the blowout, her creek has failed to freeze, despite temperatures of forty below. (Testing found sulfate levels of 4,000 parts per million: the EPA’s health goal for sulfate is 250 parts per million.)"
"Ordinarily, Schilke hauls her calves to auction when they’re eight months old. “Buyers come from everywhere for Dakota cows,” she says. The animals are then raised on pasture or in feedlots until they are big enough for slaughter. No longer Schilke cattle, they’re soon part of the commodity food system: anonymous steaks and chops on supermarket shelves. Now, Schilke is diffident about selling her animals. “I could get good money for these steers,” she says, cocking her head toward a pair of sleek adolescents. “They seem to be in very good shape and should have been butchered. But I won’t sell them because I don’t know if they’re OK.”
"Nor does anyone else."
Read More:http://www.thenation.com/article/171504/fracking-our-food-supply#
No comments:
Post a Comment