The Pittsburgh Tribune-Review reports that Allegheny County Health Department Air Quality Program subcommittee may conduct a preliminary vote today on whether to require developers to notify them at certain stages of drilling to allow the county to conduct air monitoring. The Pennsylvania Department of Environmental Protection and the Pennsylvania Independent Oil and Gas Association both submitted comments to the proposal and questioned the Health Department’s plan. Although Allegheny County has special jurisdiction over air quality within its limits, but it is uncertain whether it would allow the county to regulate drilling activities in light of Act 13, which the state enacted last year.
UPDATE: The Tribune-Review reports that the Air Quality Program Regulation subcommittee gave preliminary approval to the proposed rules yesterday.
After taking his oath as the 51st Auditor General of Pennsylvania on January 15, 2013, Eugene DePasquale announced that one of his “first official duties as auditor general will be to initiate a performance audit of the Pennsylvania Department of Environmental Protection to make sure our constitutional right to pure water is not being compromised by natural gas drilling.” The following day, Mr. DePasquale called and sent a letter to DEP Secretary Michael Krancer to inform him of the performance audit of the years 2009 through 2012 for the DEP’s water programs related to the “adequacy and effectiveness of DEP’s monitoring of water quality as potentially impacted by shale gas development activities, including but not limited to systems and procedures for testing, screening, reporting and response to adverse impact such as contamination.” Mr. DePasquale’s letter also indicated that the performance audit will review the “adequacy and effectiveness of DEP’s monitoring of the handling, treatment, and disposal of waste” from shale gas development activities. The Post-Gazette has more.
On January 14, 2013, the United States Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) finalized amendments to the National Emissions Standards for Hazardous Air Pollutants (NESHAP) for stationary reciprocating internal combustion engines (RICE). In addition to amending several rules governing the operation of emergency engines, EPA’s final rules creates a new subcategory for existing 4-stroke spark ignition RICE with more than 500 horsepower that are area sources and where the engines are located in “remote” areas. This new subcategory covers the type of engines commonly used for natural gas production and transmission.
For engines in remote areas, the rule establishes management practices and associated testing and monitoring requirements. Additionally, for engines in populated areas, operators are required to install catalytic controls, conduct performance tests on the catalyst, and implement certain measures to control the catalyst inlet temperature. The final rule will be effective 60 days after publication in the Federal Register.
On January 9, 2012, the Pennsylvania Department of Environmental Protection released a final White Paper regarding the use of “mine-influenced water” in oil and natural gas operations. According to the White Paper, mine-influenced water “may include water contained in a mine pool or a surface discharge of water caused by mining activities that pollutes, or may create a threat of pollution to, waters of the Commonwealth,” and it “may also include surface waters that have been impacted by pollutional mine drainage.” The White Paper outlines (1) the process for DEP review and evaluation of proposals for use of mine-influenced water, (2) the storage options (impoundments, pits, tanks, etc.) for mine-influenced water prior to use by the oil and gas industry for natural gas well development, and (3) the DEP’s “potential solutions” to long-term liability issues related to the use of mine-influenced water. The DEP has set up a webpage on its Bureau of Abandoned Mine Reclamation website regarding the White Paper, including a searchable database of mine-influenced water discharges in Pennsylvania.
An anticipated decision by the U.S. Coast Guard will determine when oil and gas producers can start transporting “frack water” by barge through West Virginia for treatment. “Frack water” is water containing chemicals used by oil and gas production companies in the hydraulic fracturing process. According to the West Virginia State Journal, if the Coast Guard designates the “frack water” as a hazardous material, then additional regulation and safety measures will be required before barge transportation can begin. As treatment of “frack water” occurs in centrally-located facilities, oil and gas operators must ship the frack water for treatment. Barge transportation has been identified as a cost-effective method to get the frack water to treatment facilities.
The Pennsylvania Department of Environmental Protection recently published three important notices in the Pennsylvania Bulletin affecting the oil and gas industry. They are:
- The final Erosion and Sediment Control General Permit-2 (ESCGP-2) for Earth Disturbance Associated with Oil and Gas Exploration, Production, Processing or Treatment Operations or Transmission Facilities, which includes several supporting documents and a policy document.
- A final technical guidance document regarding the Department’s “Policy for NPDES Permits for Stormwater Discharges Associated with Construction Activities at Oil and Gas Wells (Document No. 550-2100-008)”).
- A notification regarding “Emissions and Source Reporting Requirements for Natural Gas Operations” pursuant to the Pennsylvania Air Pollution Control Act.
The ESCGP-2 notice includes detailed information regarding the DEP’s plan for the proposed transition from the current ESCGP-1 (which expires on April 12, 2013) to the new ESCGP-2. In the notice regarding emissions and source reporting requirements for unconventional natural gas operations, the DEP identified sources subject to reporting, which include: “compressor stations; dehydration units; drill rigs; fugitives, such as connectors, flanges, pump lines, pump seals and valves; heaters; pneumatic controllers and pumps; stationary engines; tanks, pressurized vessels and impoundments; venting and blow down systems; well heads; and well completions.” Complete source reports are due by March 1, 2013, and annually on March 1 thereafter.
The American Petroleum Institute (API) filed a petition for writ of certiorari asking the U.S. Supreme Court to hear its challenge to the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency’s (U.S. EPA) 2010 revised standard for nitrogen dioxide (NO2) emissions. The petition states that Supreme Court review is appropriate as the case “presents a question regarding the limits of the Environmental Protection Agency’s authority to set National Ambient Air Quality Standards.”
API asserts that, by upholding U.S. EPA’s revised NO2 standard, the D.C. Circuit unlawfully authorized U.S. EPA to exercise boundless discretion in establishing an air quality standard. Section 109(b)(1) of the Clean Air Act requires U.S. EPA to determine that a contemplated air quality standard is “requisite to protect the public health.” API claims that the scientific justification for the revised NO2 standard is based on a “simulated world” and, thus, U.S. EPA failed to show that lowering the standard is “requisite” or necessary to protect the public health.
On December 11, 2012, seven states sent the United States Environmental Protection Agency a Notice of Intent to Sue the agency for failing to address methane, a greenhiouse gas (GHG), emissions from the natural gas industry. The states assert that, although the revised new source performance standards adopted in August 2012 will have the incidental benefit of reducing methane emissions, U.S. EPA’s “failure to consider directly controlling methane emissions resulted in the omission of controls for certain operations that emit large amounts of methane.” The states intend to file suit in a federal district court if U.S. EPA does not respond favorably within the allotted 60-day waiting period.
GHGs, which currently are being addressed under various permitting regimes, are not the only air-related subject of increased regulatory oversight. On December 20, 2012, 30 environmental groups petitioned U.S. EPA to require ozone monitoring in natural gas production areas.
The Pennsylvania House and Senate have announced new chairs for the state House and Senate Environmental Resources and Energy Committees. Rep. Ron Miller (R-York) will replace Rep. Scott Hutchinson as the majority chairman of the House Environmental Resources and Energy Committee, and Sen. Gene Yaw (R-23) will replace Sen. Mary Jo White as the majority chairman of the Senate Environmental Resources and Energy Committee. The committees focus on bills, polices and issues dealing with energy resources and development, including regulations, conservation, strategic reserves and standards, and public lands. The Post-Gazette has more.
On November 2, 2012, Ohio EPA reported that the air quality near a drilling site in Muskingum County, Ohio is within federal standards. Ohio EPA collected four months of data from a monitor that measured concentrations of particulate matter, various hydrocarbons, and methane. The agency explained that the only exceedance, which occurred on June 8, 2012, may have been caused by the construction of a nearby road on that particular date. Ohio EPA plans to continue monitoring air quality at well sites for at least two years.
Acknowledging the agency’s limited authority to regulate hydraulic fracturing under the principal environmental statutes such as the Safe Drinking Water Act and the Resource Conservation & Recovery Act, the United States Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) is now considering its authority under the Federal Insecticide, Fungicide & Rodenticide Act (FIFRA) to ensure that hydraulic fracturing is adequately regulated. Small quantities of antimicrobial chemicals are used in hydraulic fracturing operations to prevent algal and microbial growth that could impede the flow of oil or natural gas during the extraction process. Biocides commonly used in hydraulic fracturing fluid including, acrolein, dazomet, and glutaraldehyde are pesticides and therefore regulated under FIFRA. While EPA is only in the initial stages of weighing the risks associated with the use of antimicrobial chemicals in hydraulic fracturing, industry has raised several FIFRA compliance-related issues including, industry obligations under FIFRA, registration status of certain biocides, and enforcement liability.
The Indigenous Mineral Resources Incentives Development Act was signed into law by Pennsylvania Govenor Tom Corbett on October 9, 2012. The law allows the Pennsylvania Department of General Services to execute leases for the mining and removal of coal, oil, natural gas and other mineral resources underlying property owned by the state and the State System of Higher Education. The Pennsylvania Senate Republicans have a news release with an overview of the law and a description of how the lease profits are to be divided. The Marcellus Shale Coalition has a statement regarding the newly signed law. The Philadelphia Inquirer has more on the passage of the Act by the Pennsylvania Legislature in late September.
The Pennsylvania Department of Environmental Protection has provided E&P companies with information regarding a new requirement in Act 13 that unconventional well permit applicants submit a spill containment plan. According to the information from DEP, well permit applications submitted on or after October 14, 2012, must include a “Master Containment Plan.” The Master Containment Plan must be included in the first permit application made to each DEP regional office after that date. The information from DEP is available at its Act 13 Frequently Asked Questions page.
Babst Calland has more information in a recently posted Administrative Watch.
In July 2011, PIOGA filed a motion in the U.S. District Court for the Western District of Pennsylvania seeking to hold the United States Forest Service in contempt of court for allegedly failing to adhere to the Court’s December 2009 preliminary injunction order in the Minard Run, et al. v. United States Forest Service, et al. litigation. That order prevented the Forest Service from requiring mineral owners to prepare a NEPA document before the development of oil and gas rights in the Allegheny Forest. It also required the parties to revert to a drilling proposal process that they had used from 1980 until the litigation began in 2009.
Read more ›
Tags: Cracker plant,
Energy law,
Environmental law,
Fracking,
Gas drilling,
Natural gas,
Natural resources,
PA Act 13,
Pennsylvania,
Pipeline construction,
Shale gas,
Utica Shale
On Tuesday March 20, Williams Partners L.P., a Williams Companies, Inc. affiliate, announced an agreement to acquire Caiman Eastern Midstream LLC, a midstream subsidiary of Caiman Energy, for $2.5 billion. Caiman Eastern’s holdings include existing physical assets such as a gathering system, two processing facilities and a fractionator. Expansions to the gathering system, processing facilities and fractionator are currently under construction. An ethane pipeline is also planned. The physical assets are supported by long-term contracted commitments for 236,000 dedicated gathering acres from 10 producers in West Virginia, Ohio and Pennsylvania. Through this acquisition, Williams Partners is able to establish a major footprint in the liquids-rich area of Marcellus shale. In coordination with this acquisition, Williams Partners is also announcing its intention to participate in a new joint venture with Caiman Energy to develop midstream infrastructure in the natural gas liquids and oil-rich areas of the Utica Shale, primarily in Ohio and northwest Pennsylvania.