Southwest Pennsylvania EH Project Nov14 2014

Editor's Notes

1. Introduce self Here today to talk briefly about the OEC’s concerns and advocacy work surrounding shale gas development, also know as horizontal hydraulic fracturing or fracking for short.
2. So now I’d like to provide just a bit of background on the scale of the industry and the general environmental risks associated with it, before we jump into some of the risks and concerns specific to Ohio. First, many of you have probably been exposed to this map of the shale deposits throughout the US.
3. This map from a recent Columbus Dispatch article by Spencer Hunt also provides a nice visual of where the majority of wells are in Ohio, most concentrated in Carroll, Columbiana and Jefferson Counties (can add a note here about how many wells are permitted in the county in which you are presenting)
4. As with any industrial activity, the development of oil and gas involves risks to air, land, water, wildlife and communities. Many of you have probably seen these sorts of images depicting the new combination of horizontal drilling with hydraulic fracturing, or the use of sand, water, and chemicals injected at high pressures to blast open the shale rock and release the trapped gas. What industry will argue is that this technology has been around for 40 years. But that is not correct. While the use of hydraulic fracturing to drill vertical wells has been around that long, using the technique of hydraulic fracturing combined with horizontal drilling is very new and only began in 2011 in Ohio.
5. This map from a recent Columbus Dispatch article by Spencer Hunt also provides a nice visual of where the majority of wells are in Ohio, most concentrated in Carroll, Columbiana and Jefferson Counties (can add a note here about how many wells are permitted in the county in which you are presenting)
6. I want to speak briefly to general environmental concerns associated with fracking. First is the potential for water contamination, which could occur as a result of surface levels spills and accidents or through the migration of chemicals or methane. Jut a few highlights from the literature and news: a recent Cornell University study connected the death of over 100 cattle to exposure to fracking fluids. A Duke University study found methane concentrations 17x higher in drinking water wells within 1 km of fracking and shale gas extraction. Finally, Bob Downing with the Akron Beacon Journal conducted an investigation which found 1 million pounds of chemicals used at a single well site. (Industry claims that it’s no problem, because chemicals are only 1% of the solution. But how much is 1% of 5-7 million gallons? IT is 50,000 – 70,000 gallons of chemicals. Moreover, drillers are not currently required to reveal all of the chemicals contained in those products. )
7. In terms of air quality and air pollution, it is not a matter of “if” air emissions will occur, as they most certainly will occur. Averages from PA & WV show that it’s not uncommon for all stages of production to burn 29,000 gallons of diesel fuel in approximately 5 days. And diesel exhaust includes many harsh emissions such as benzene, formaldyhyde and 40 other toxins. Colorado school of public health engaged in a health impact assessment around air emissions from fracking in Colorado and Earthworks oil and gas accountability project has recently put together a health survey of citizens living near shale gas development sites in Pennsylvania. The findings from both reports are very concerning. (option to add additional slide in the future).
8. Also, most folks are probably aware of the series of earthquakes that occurred in Youngstown, Ohio, including a 4.0 magnitude earthquake on New Year’s Eve 2011, which was linked to the disposal of fracking fluids at nearby waste injection well. As a result of these quakes, the ODNR has issued a series of reforms to brine injection well regulations.
9. Even with few producing wells in the state of Ohio, incidents have already cropped up. The OEC assisted a gentleman in Harrison county in submitting a verified complain to the Ohio EPA regarding a white substance which was running out of an underground spring down the hill 75 ft. below the Dodson Well Pad. Two state regulatory agencies, plus the US EPA, are conducting remediation of over 200,000 gallons of brine (fracking waste) that were dumped into a storm drain which empties into the Mahoning River in Youngstown, Ohio (article date: Feb 6, 2013). A criminal investigation is also underway. And finally, we were made aware of “frack outs” or releases of bentonite clay slurry by Mark West Company during pipeline drilling in Harrison County. These frack outs caused clay slurry to accumulate in streams and wetlands, smothering out macroinvertebrates and negatively affecting aquatic life.
10. Even with few producing wells in the state of Ohio, incidents have already cropped up. The OEC assisted a gentleman in Harrison county in submitting a verified complain to the Ohio EPA regarding a white substance which was running out of an underground spring down the hill 75 ft. below the Dodson Well Pad. Two state regulatory agencies, plus the US EPA, are conducting remediation of over 200,000 gallons of brine (fracking waste) that were dumped into a storm drain which empties into the Mahoning River in Youngstown, Ohio (article date: Feb 6, 2013). A criminal investigation is also underway. And finally, we were made aware of “frack outs” or releases of bentonite clay slurry by Mark West Company during pipeline drilling in Harrison County. These frack outs caused clay slurry to accumulate in streams and wetlands, smothering out macroinvertebrates and negatively affecting aquatic life.
11. Halliburton delayed releasing details on fracking chemicals after Monroe County spill By Laura Arenschield The Columbus Dispatch  •  Monday July 21, 2014 5:16 AM A fracking company made federal and state agencies that oversee drinking-water safety wait days before it shared a list of toxic chemicals that spilled from a drilling site into a tributary of the Ohio River. Although the spill following a fire on June 28 at the Statoil North America well pad in Monroe County stretched 5 miles along the creek and killed more than 70,000 fish and wildlife, state officials said they do not believe drinking water was affected. But environmental advocacy groups said they wonder how the state can be sure. A U.S. Environmental Protection Agency report obtained by The Dispatch shows that the federal and state EPA officials had to wait five days before they were given a full list of the fracking chemicals the drilling company used at the site. Halliburton, the company hired by Statoil to frack the horizontal well, provided a partial list up front that included most of the chemicals. Others, which are protected by Ohio’s trade-secrets law, were omitted. “How can communities know that they are being protected when an incident like this happens?” said Teresa Mills, an environmental activist and Ohio organizer with the Center for Health, Environment and Justice. “We need more transparent laws.” To pull oil and natural gas from shale, companies drill vertically and then turn sideways into the rock. Then they blast millions of gallons of water, sand and chemicals into the shafts to free trapped oil and gas in the process called fracking. During the process, fluids bubble back up to the surface with the gas. Once a fracking job is finished, drilling companies have 60 days to disclose what chemicals they used to the Department of Natural Resources, which oversees drilling and fracking operations in Ohio. Ohio law says that companies have to disclose the contents of proprietary fracking mixes only to firefighters or Natural Resources if there is an emergency, such as fires or spills. In this case, both were given the full list but did not share the details with other agencies. Halliburton has yet to finish fracking the Monroe County well that caught fire. Chris Abbruzzese, an Ohio EPA spokesman, said that on the day of the fire and spill, a representative from a group that represents the federal and state EPA offices, the Ohio Department of Natural Resources and Monroe County emergency management and fire workers asked Statoil and Halliburton for a list of the chemicals. “Once they realized that the proprietary information wasn’t included, there were additional (requests) made,” Abbruzzese said. Natural Resources, which regulates drilling in Ohio, has authority under state law to see the entire list and asked on its own two days after the fire. Halliburton, the company hired by Statoil to frack the well, gave the list to the single agency. But Natural Resources did not share that information with either EPA office. “Internal communication is something we’re going to work on,” said Bethany McCorkle, a Natural Resources spokeswoman. Kirsten Henriksen, a spokeswoman for Statoil, said the company hired an outside toxicology firm to test both the creek and the Ohio River for toxic chemicals. None were found in the Ohio River, she said. The Ohio River Valley Water Sanitation Commission, a multi-state agency that tests the river, also found no contaminants. “Based on the chemicals that we were aware of, if there had been any other chemicals that would have been there, they all would have showed up (in tests),” Abbruzzese said. Kelly Scribner, a toxicologist with the Center for Toxicology and Environmental Health, which was hired by Statoil to perform the tests, said she wasn’t given a full list of chemicals either. But, she said, the tests would have shown abnormalities in the water either way. Fracking chemicals include ethylene glycol, which can damage kidneys; formaldehyde, a known cancer risk; and naphthalene, considered a possible carcinogen. The water tests showed elevated levels of chlorides, salt and acetone in the creek near the well pad. By the time federal and state EPA officials were given the full list, those chemicals likely flowed past towns along the Ohio River that draw in drinking water. That worries some state lawmakers and environmental advocacy groups. “We’ve got 70,000 or so fish that died,” said Nathan Johnson, an attorney for the Ohio Environmental Council. “Clearly, something was wrong with the water.” The group has been lobbying the Ohio legislature to pass laws that would force companies during emergencies to immediately disclose the full list of chemicals to all state agencies. Oil and gas industry officials and regulators have pushed back against additional regulations, saying Ohio’s laws are more than adequate to protect people. In a speech on Tuesday outside Mansfield, Gov. John Kasich said Ohio has “very tough regulations” concerning fracking. “If the accidents happen, and we’re not minding the store, or we’re looking the other way, that would be a disaster for us,” he said. Kasich told The Dispatch it would be unacceptable for emergency responders, including federal and Ohio EPA officials, not to know the full list of chemicals that might have spilled into the river. “We want people to know what the fracking fluid contains,” he said. Other states, including Pennsylvania and Texas, make companies disclose the full list of chemicals within 30 days of wrapping up a fracking operation. In Oklahoma, they must disclose the chemicals to state regulators before a well is drilled. The Statoil fire started on the morning of June 28 when, according to preliminary reports, a hydraulic line used during the fracking process broke. The broken line sprayed fracking fluid onto hot equipment, igniting it. The fire spread to 20 trucks, which went up in flames. No workers were hurt, but one firefighter was treated for smoke inhalation. About 25 people who live near the wells were evacuated. The fire continued to smolder for six days. As it burned, firefighters doused it with water and foam, washing chemicals from the site into the tributary, which flows for five miles before reaching the Ohio River. Legislators and environmental groups say the Statoil fire illustrates a gap in the law that allows fracking companies to determine when they release information and to whom. “It is a huge problem,” said Johnson, the Ohio Environmental Council attorney. “We’re essentially at the behest of the company with the chemical information.” Dispatch Public Affairs Editor Darrel Rowland contributed to this story.
12. According to Paul Feezel, Chair of Carroll Concerned Citizens, who resides in the hotbed of shale gas activity in Ohio, local impacts range from water threats to a 100 Percent increase in traffic accidents to local renters being priced out of their rental units. Carroll County's water specifically is under a triple threat from shale gas water extraction, massive volumes of hydraulic fracturing chemicals, and disposal needs for waste fluids. Unfortunately Carroll county is also currently seeing a resurgence in underground coal mining.
13. Some of the major provisions for the bill will include greater protections of public water sources and floodplains, a requirement for increased air monitoring, and improving the public’s right to know and right to appeal permit terms and conditions. We also hope to include language requiring additional inspectors and better reporting and tracking of shale gas incidents and accidents on ODNR’s website. Finally, there will be language requiring waste fluid recycling and reuse and increased protections for disposal of waste materials.
14. We are very concerned because Ohio’s state lands and its largest tract of federal land – the Wayne National Forest - are now open to drilling + logging. Quail Hollow State Park in Stark County was the first to be targeted. A small portion of the park was recently pulled into a drilling unit through Ohio’s unitization laws. And in Aug 2012, the park supervisor at Wayne National Forest announced that land could be leased for up to 13 drilling sites in the national forest.
15. -Gov’s energy bill: Passed in May 2012; Signed into law by the Governor, June 2012. Some good, some bad, & some ugly provisions. OEC began as interested party, but ended up opposing SB 315 due to an industry amendment & watering down of the bill. (There is an extensive press release covering the major provisions of this bill in your folders) -SB 46: State Senators Schiavoni (D) and LaRose (R) introduced senate bill 46 in the 2013 general assembly, as a response to the brine dumping incident in Youngstown, Ohio. This bill was a scarlet letter bill of sorts, proposing that the ODNR should permanently revoke permits from companies which intentionally or repeatedly commit violations of Ohio’s laws, and prohibit these violators from getting another permit in this state.. -Budget bill: Some of the significant changes included: Good: -Precludes brine that is produced from a horizontal well from being allowed to be spread on a roads -Calls for ODNR to develop a number of additional rules/regulations for horizontal drilling including rules around recycling, treatment and processing of brine, among other things. Bad: -Provisions regarding the disposal of solid waste materials, including radioactive materials, were not nearly as stringent as we would have liked (for example, definition of TENORM, or technologically enhanced naturally occurring radioactive material outdated definition which will not include drill cuttings or brine in testing requirements), did not prohibit Centralized Treatment Facilities (+grandfathered in Patriot treatment facility)
16. -Gov’s energy bill: Passed in May 2012; Signed into law by the Governor, June 2012. Some good, some bad, & some ugly provisions. OEC began as interested party, but ended up opposing SB 315 due to an industry amendment & watering down of the bill. (There is an extensive press release covering the major provisions of this bill in your folders) -SB 46: State Senators Schiavoni (D) and LaRose (R) introduced senate bill 46 in the 2013 general assembly, as a response to the brine dumping incident in Youngstown, Ohio. This bill was a scarlet letter bill of sorts, proposing that the ODNR should permanently revoke permits from companies which intentionally or repeatedly commit violations of Ohio’s laws, and prohibit these violators from getting another permit in this state.. -Budget bill: Some of the significant changes included: Good: -Precludes brine that is produced from a horizontal well from being allowed to be spread on a roads -Calls for ODNR to develop a number of additional rules/regulations for horizontal drilling including rules around recycling, treatment and processing of brine, among other things. Bad: -Provisions regarding the disposal of solid waste materials, including radioactive materials, were not nearly as stringent as we would have liked (for example, definition of TENORM, or technologically enhanced naturally occurring radioactive material outdated definition which will not include drill cuttings or brine in testing requirements), did not prohibit Centralized Treatment Facilities (+grandfathered in Patriot treatment facility)
17. -Gov’s energy bill: Passed in May 2012; Signed into law by the Governor, June 2012. Some good, some bad, & some ugly provisions. OEC began as interested party, but ended up opposing SB 315 due to an industry amendment & watering down of the bill. (There is an extensive press release covering the major provisions of this bill in your folders) -SB 46: State Senators Schiavoni (D) and LaRose (R) introduced senate bill 46 in the 2013 general assembly, as a response to the brine dumping incident in Youngstown, Ohio. This bill was a scarlet letter bill of sorts, proposing that the ODNR should permanently revoke permits from companies which intentionally or repeatedly commit violations of Ohio’s laws, and prohibit these violators from getting another permit in this state.. -Budget bill: Some of the significant changes included: Good: -Precludes brine that is produced from a horizontal well from being allowed to be spread on a roads -Calls for ODNR to develop a number of additional rules/regulations for horizontal drilling including rules around recycling, treatment and processing of brine, among other things. Bad: -Provisions regarding the disposal of solid waste materials, including radioactive materials, were not nearly as stringent as we would have liked (for example, definition of TENORM, or technologically enhanced naturally occurring radioactive material outdated definition which will not include drill cuttings or brine in testing requirements), did not prohibit Centralized Treatment Facilities (+grandfathered in Patriot treatment facility)
18. If you’d simply like to learn more about this issue, I am happy to provide you with additional resources,
19. We are very concerned because Ohio’s state lands and its largest tract of federal land – the Wayne National Forest - are now open to drilling + logging. Quail Hollow State Park in Stark County was the first to be targeted. A small portion of the park was recently pulled into a drilling unit through Ohio’s unitization laws. And in Aug 2012, the park supervisor at Wayne National Forest announced that land could be leased for up to 13 drilling sites in the national forest.
20. We are very concerned because Ohio’s state lands and its largest tract of federal land – the Wayne National Forest - are now open to drilling + logging. Quail Hollow State Park in Stark County was the first to be targeted. A small portion of the park was recently pulled into a drilling unit through Ohio’s unitization laws. And in Aug 2012, the park supervisor at Wayne National Forest announced that land could be leased for up to 13 drilling sites in the national forest.
21. Introduce self Here today to talk briefly about the OEC’s concerns and advocacy work surrounding shale gas development, also know as horizontal hydraulic fracturing or fracking for short.
22. Introduce self Here today to talk briefly about the OEC’s concerns and advocacy work surrounding shale gas development, also know as horizontal hydraulic fracturing or fracking for short.
23. Introduce self Here today to talk briefly about the OEC’s concerns and advocacy work surrounding shale gas development, also know as horizontal hydraulic fracturing or fracking for short.
24. This map from a recent Columbus Dispatch article by Spencer Hunt also provides a nice visual of where the majority of wells are in Ohio, most concentrated in Carroll, Columbiana and Jefferson Counties (can add a note here about how many wells are permitted in the county in which you are presenting)
25. As with any industrial activity, the development of oil and gas involves risks to air, land, water, wildlife and communities. Many of you have probably seen these sorts of images depicting the new combination of horizontal drilling with hydraulic fracturing, or the use of sand, water, and chemicals injected at high pressures to blast open the shale rock and release the trapped gas. What industry will argue is that this technology has been around for 40 years. But that is not correct. While the use of hydraulic fracturing to drill vertical wells has been around that long, using the technique of hydraulic fracturing combined with horizontal drilling is very new and only began in 2011 in Ohio.
26. Also, most folks are probably aware of the series of earthquakes that occurred in Youngstown, Ohio, including a 4.0 magnitude earthquake on New Year’s Eve 2011, which was linked to the disposal of fracking fluids at nearby waste injection well. As a result of these quakes, the ODNR has issued a series of reforms to brine injection well regulations.
27. Even with few producing wells in the state of Ohio, incidents have already cropped up. The OEC assisted a gentleman in Harrison county in submitting a verified complain to the Ohio EPA regarding a white substance which was running out of an underground spring down the hill 75 ft. below the Dodson Well Pad. Two state regulatory agencies, plus the US EPA, are conducting remediation of over 200,000 gallons of brine (fracking waste) that were dumped into a storm drain which empties into the Mahoning River in Youngstown, Ohio (article date: Feb 6, 2013). A criminal investigation is also underway. And finally, we were made aware of “frack outs” or releases of bentonite clay slurry by Mark West Company during pipeline drilling in Harrison County. These frack outs caused clay slurry to accumulate in streams and wetlands, smothering out macroinvertebrates and negatively affecting aquatic life.
28. Even with few producing wells in the state of Ohio, incidents have already cropped up. The OEC assisted a gentleman in Harrison county in submitting a verified complain to the Ohio EPA regarding a white substance which was running out of an underground spring down the hill 75 ft. below the Dodson Well Pad. Two state regulatory agencies, plus the US EPA, are conducting remediation of over 200,000 gallons of brine (fracking waste) that were dumped into a storm drain which empties into the Mahoning River in Youngstown, Ohio (article date: Feb 6, 2013). A criminal investigation is also underway. And finally, we were made aware of “frack outs” or releases of bentonite clay slurry by Mark West Company during pipeline drilling in Harrison County. These frack outs caused clay slurry to accumulate in streams and wetlands, smothering out macroinvertebrates and negatively affecting aquatic life.
29. Halliburton delayed releasing details on fracking chemicals after Monroe County spill By Laura Arenschield The Columbus Dispatch  •  Monday July 21, 2014 5:16 AM A fracking company made federal and state agencies that oversee drinking-water safety wait days before it shared a list of toxic chemicals that spilled from a drilling site into a tributary of the Ohio River. Although the spill following a fire on June 28 at the Statoil North America well pad in Monroe County stretched 5 miles along the creek and killed more than 70,000 fish and wildlife, state officials said they do not believe drinking water was affected. But environmental advocacy groups said they wonder how the state can be sure. A U.S. Environmental Protection Agency report obtained by The Dispatch shows that the federal and state EPA officials had to wait five days before they were given a full list of the fracking chemicals the drilling company used at the site. Halliburton, the company hired by Statoil to frack the horizontal well, provided a partial list up front that included most of the chemicals. Others, which are protected by Ohio’s trade-secrets law, were omitted. “How can communities know that they are being protected when an incident like this happens?” said Teresa Mills, an environmental activist and Ohio organizer with the Center for Health, Environment and Justice. “We need more transparent laws.” To pull oil and natural gas from shale, companies drill vertically and then turn sideways into the rock. Then they blast millions of gallons of water, sand and chemicals into the shafts to free trapped oil and gas in the process called fracking. During the process, fluids bubble back up to the surface with the gas. Once a fracking job is finished, drilling companies have 60 days to disclose what chemicals they used to the Department of Natural Resources, which oversees drilling and fracking operations in Ohio. Ohio law says that companies have to disclose the contents of proprietary fracking mixes only to firefighters or Natural Resources if there is an emergency, such as fires or spills. In this case, both were given the full list but did not share the details with other agencies. Halliburton has yet to finish fracking the Monroe County well that caught fire. Chris Abbruzzese, an Ohio EPA spokesman, said that on the day of the fire and spill, a representative from a group that represents the federal and state EPA offices, the Ohio Department of Natural Resources and Monroe County emergency management and fire workers asked Statoil and Halliburton for a list of the chemicals. “Once they realized that the proprietary information wasn’t included, there were additional (requests) made,” Abbruzzese said. Natural Resources, which regulates drilling in Ohio, has authority under state law to see the entire list and asked on its own two days after the fire. Halliburton, the company hired by Statoil to frack the well, gave the list to the single agency. But Natural Resources did not share that information with either EPA office. “Internal communication is something we’re going to work on,” said Bethany McCorkle, a Natural Resources spokeswoman. Kirsten Henriksen, a spokeswoman for Statoil, said the company hired an outside toxicology firm to test both the creek and the Ohio River for toxic chemicals. None were found in the Ohio River, she said. The Ohio River Valley Water Sanitation Commission, a multi-state agency that tests the river, also found no contaminants. “Based on the chemicals that we were aware of, if there had been any other chemicals that would have been there, they all would have showed up (in tests),” Abbruzzese said. Kelly Scribner, a toxicologist with the Center for Toxicology and Environmental Health, which was hired by Statoil to perform the tests, said she wasn’t given a full list of chemicals either. But, she said, the tests would have shown abnormalities in the water either way. Fracking chemicals include ethylene glycol, which can damage kidneys; formaldehyde, a known cancer risk; and naphthalene, considered a possible carcinogen. The water tests showed elevated levels of chlorides, salt and acetone in the creek near the well pad. By the time federal and state EPA officials were given the full list, those chemicals likely flowed past towns along the Ohio River that draw in drinking water. That worries some state lawmakers and environmental advocacy groups. “We’ve got 70,000 or so fish that died,” said Nathan Johnson, an attorney for the Ohio Environmental Council. “Clearly, something was wrong with the water.” The group has been lobbying the Ohio legislature to pass laws that would force companies during emergencies to immediately disclose the full list of chemicals to all state agencies. Oil and gas industry officials and regulators have pushed back against additional regulations, saying Ohio’s laws are more than adequate to protect people. In a speech on Tuesday outside Mansfield, Gov. John Kasich said Ohio has “very tough regulations” concerning fracking. “If the accidents happen, and we’re not minding the store, or we’re looking the other way, that would be a disaster for us,” he said. Kasich told The Dispatch it would be unacceptable for emergency responders, including federal and Ohio EPA officials, not to know the full list of chemicals that might have spilled into the river. “We want people to know what the fracking fluid contains,” he said. Other states, including Pennsylvania and Texas, make companies disclose the full list of chemicals within 30 days of wrapping up a fracking operation. In Oklahoma, they must disclose the chemicals to state regulators before a well is drilled. The Statoil fire started on the morning of June 28 when, according to preliminary reports, a hydraulic line used during the fracking process broke. The broken line sprayed fracking fluid onto hot equipment, igniting it. The fire spread to 20 trucks, which went up in flames. No workers were hurt, but one firefighter was treated for smoke inhalation. About 25 people who live near the wells were evacuated. The fire continued to smolder for six days. As it burned, firefighters doused it with water and foam, washing chemicals from the site into the tributary, which flows for five miles before reaching the Ohio River. Legislators and environmental groups say the Statoil fire illustrates a gap in the law that allows fracking companies to determine when they release information and to whom. “It is a huge problem,” said Johnson, the Ohio Environmental Council attorney. “We’re essentially at the behest of the company with the chemical information.” Dispatch Public Affairs Editor Darrel Rowland contributed to this story.
30. According to Paul Feezel, Chair of Carroll Concerned Citizens, who resides in the hotbed of shale gas activity in Ohio, local impacts range from water threats to a 100 Percent increase in traffic accidents to local renters being priced out of their rental units. Carroll County's water specifically is under a triple threat from shale gas water extraction, massive volumes of hydraulic fracturing chemicals, and disposal needs for waste fluids. Unfortunately Carroll county is also currently seeing a resurgence in underground coal mining.
31. Some of the major provisions for the bill will include greater protections of public water sources and floodplains, a requirement for increased air monitoring, and improving the public’s right to know and right to appeal permit terms and conditions. We also hope to include language requiring additional inspectors and better reporting and tracking of shale gas incidents and accidents on ODNR’s website. Finally, there will be language requiring waste fluid recycling and reuse and increased protections for disposal of waste materials.
32. We are very concerned because Ohio’s state lands and its largest tract of federal land – the Wayne National Forest - are now open to drilling + logging. Quail Hollow State Park in Stark County was the first to be targeted. A small portion of the park was recently pulled into a drilling unit through Ohio’s unitization laws. And in Aug 2012, the park supervisor at Wayne National Forest announced that land could be leased for up to 13 drilling sites in the national forest.
33. -Gov’s energy bill: Passed in May 2012; Signed into law by the Governor, June 2012. Some good, some bad, & some ugly provisions. OEC began as interested party, but ended up opposing SB 315 due to an industry amendment & watering down of the bill. (There is an extensive press release covering the major provisions of this bill in your folders) -SB 46: State Senators Schiavoni (D) and LaRose (R) introduced senate bill 46 in the 2013 general assembly, as a response to the brine dumping incident in Youngstown, Ohio. This bill was a scarlet letter bill of sorts, proposing that the ODNR should permanently revoke permits from companies which intentionally or repeatedly commit violations of Ohio’s laws, and prohibit these violators from getting another permit in this state.. -Budget bill: Some of the significant changes included: Good: -Precludes brine that is produced from a horizontal well from being allowed to be spread on a roads -Calls for ODNR to develop a number of additional rules/regulations for horizontal drilling including rules around recycling, treatment and processing of brine, among other things. Bad: -Provisions regarding the disposal of solid waste materials, including radioactive materials, were not nearly as stringent as we would have liked (for example, definition of TENORM, or technologically enhanced naturally occurring radioactive material outdated definition which will not include drill cuttings or brine in testing requirements), did not prohibit Centralized Treatment Facilities (+grandfathered in Patriot treatment facility)
34. -Gov’s energy bill: Passed in May 2012; Signed into law by the Governor, June 2012. Some good, some bad, & some ugly provisions. OEC began as interested party, but ended up opposing SB 315 due to an industry amendment & watering down of the bill. (There is an extensive press release covering the major provisions of this bill in your folders) -SB 46: State Senators Schiavoni (D) and LaRose (R) introduced senate bill 46 in the 2013 general assembly, as a response to the brine dumping incident in Youngstown, Ohio. This bill was a scarlet letter bill of sorts, proposing that the ODNR should permanently revoke permits from companies which intentionally or repeatedly commit violations of Ohio’s laws, and prohibit these violators from getting another permit in this state.. -Budget bill: Some of the significant changes included: Good: -Precludes brine that is produced from a horizontal well from being allowed to be spread on a roads -Calls for ODNR to develop a number of additional rules/regulations for horizontal drilling including rules around recycling, treatment and processing of brine, among other things. Bad: -Provisions regarding the disposal of solid waste materials, including radioactive materials, were not nearly as stringent as we would have liked (for example, definition of TENORM, or technologically enhanced naturally occurring radioactive material outdated definition which will not include drill cuttings or brine in testing requirements), did not prohibit Centralized Treatment Facilities (+grandfathered in Patriot treatment facility)
35. -Gov’s energy bill: Passed in May 2012; Signed into law by the Governor, June 2012. Some good, some bad, & some ugly provisions. OEC began as interested party, but ended up opposing SB 315 due to an industry amendment & watering down of the bill. (There is an extensive press release covering the major provisions of this bill in your folders) -SB 46: State Senators Schiavoni (D) and LaRose (R) introduced senate bill 46 in the 2013 general assembly, as a response to the brine dumping incident in Youngstown, Ohio. This bill was a scarlet letter bill of sorts, proposing that the ODNR should permanently revoke permits from companies which intentionally or repeatedly commit violations of Ohio’s laws, and prohibit these violators from getting another permit in this state.. -Budget bill: Some of the significant changes included: Good: -Precludes brine that is produced from a horizontal well from being allowed to be spread on a roads -Calls for ODNR to develop a number of additional rules/regulations for horizontal drilling including rules around recycling, treatment and processing of brine, among other things. Bad: -Provisions regarding the disposal of solid waste materials, including radioactive materials, were not nearly as stringent as we would have liked (for example, definition of TENORM, or technologically enhanced naturally occurring radioactive material outdated definition which will not include drill cuttings or brine in testing requirements), did not prohibit Centralized Treatment Facilities (+grandfathered in Patriot treatment facility)
36. If you’d simply like to learn more about this issue, I am happy to provide you with additional resources,
37. Introduce Jill. Recognize Brian and Bill.
38. Usually when you think of enhancing public understanding of this issue, you think of research that has been done to identify impacts. However, to date, little research has been conducted on human health impacts. WE at the SWPA EHP don’t do formal research on this topic. SEE MISSION. This is a public health approach to shale gas drilling. To our knowledge, we are the only organization in this country which has this mission to recognize how the public’s health is impacted by drilling and what needs to be done to protect them. It might be possible for a state’s public health infrastructure to respond to such issues. But in PA, there are only ~6 county public health departments; to date the state DoH (now with an interim director) has not played an active role in the shale gas debate in the state. So while we aren’t academic researchers, we believe that we have plenty to contribute to the understanding of health impacts today.
39. reference (verbally) our Medical Toolkit on our website and collaborations with the Physicians, Scientists, and Engineers for Healthy Energy Clinical tox profiles – attempting to learn as much as we can about the chemicals that we are most certain that people are exposed to. Will reference this later, too. Reference (verbally) our Air Filter recommendation? Austin Healthmate Air, water, soil and food
40. ----- Meeting Notes (6/25/14 13:41) ----- Note Speck is now PM 2.5 and linked to AQI levels. We use this as an early warning/ongoing monitoring system to advise residents on their typical indoor exposures, and ways to reduce exposure.
41. Note—this meant little data has been compiled on children to date. This will occur more often for future assessments.
42. STATE: Many of the changes you’ve identified reflect what community members have told researchers. The list of the frequently-mentioned social impacts includes truck traffic, higher cost of living, especially for housing, increased crime, increased use of health and social services, more disputes or disagreements between neighbors around shale gas drilling issues, and a loss of a “sense of place or community.” On the other hand, some community members report that the gas companies are good neighbors. They make generous contributions to many local activities that would struggle without their funding. There isn’t time here to discuss all of the anecdotes and research related to these. But we will review a few in turn.
43. STATE: Most immediately, people begin to see an increase in truck traffic. The noise, smells, dust, and congestion that slows travel time from point A to B clearly impact daily living.
44. STATE: In 2011, The Center for the Study of community and the Economy at Lycoming College studied the impact of the shale gas industry on the cost and availability of housing in the six counties most heavily impacted at that time – Bradford, Lycoming, Sullivan, Westmoreland, Greene and Washington. The researchers found that with intense drilling, the influx of workers often required the establishment of man camps to meet temporary housing needs. In addition, where workers would find housing, the rents increased from 50 to 300% or more over the “pre-gas rush” prices. This is a particular problem for local residents “on the economic margins.” These include disabled people, non-working poor and elderly people who live on fixed incomes, and more recently, working poor for whom paychecks don’t cover rent. Source: MARCELLUS NATURAL GAS DEVELOPMENT’S EFFECT ON HOUSING IN PENNSYLVANIA (http://marcellus.psu.edu/resources/PDFs/housingreport.pdf) By J. Williamson and B. Kolb, Lycoming College
45. STATE: Some community changes are hard to measure in quantitative terms. But they do make a difference in the quality of life. For example, in communities where people know most of their neighbors, some have reported new divisions between those who stand to profit from the new industry through mineral rights leases and jobs (called the “haves”) and those who will not (the “have nots”). There are also sometimes tensions between long-term residents or “old timers” and new residents in the community or “newcomers,” based on their attitudes about the drilling. The changing physical appearance of a community, the rapid influx of population, the heightened tensions among residents, the increased “busy-ness” of restaurants, hotels, and stores catering to the shale gas industry can give communities a different feel. This is what sociologists and anthropologists call a “sense of place.” Sociologist Simona Perry ethnographic study of communities in Susquehanna County over multiple years documents both of these changes in detail.
46. STATE: As is the case with the societal impacts of natural gas extraction, researchers and journalists have attempted to measure the economic impacts of this industry. Jobs, income from mineral rights leases, and fees accruing to state and local governments from the industry represent promising positive impacts for some residents. However, the impacts on housing – both the decrease in property values near drilling sites and the upward pressure on rental housing costs – and unexpected losses suffered by other industries are potential negative economic effects.
47. . This figure stands in sharp contrast to the claims in some industry-financed studies, which have included estimates as high as 31 for the number of jobs created per well drilled.[9]. Study includes Maryland
48. STATE: There are no firm figures yet on what those who own mineral rights in shale gas regions are earning. A small survey study by Penn State Extension Service faculty in 2009 estimates that mineral rights owners may actually collect between $1 – 2 million per well in signing bonuses and royalty payments. But the actual number depends largely on the per acre signing bonus and percent of earnings the owner negotiated with the company. These researchers also found that the recipients they surveyed invested a large portion of these payments. Photos: http://www.google.com/url?sa=i&source=images&cd=&cad=rja&docid=HDWQce1ljsHu4M&tbnid=FbgJwPbaljJ9kM:&ved=0CAcQjB0wAA&url=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.pghcitypaper.com%2Fpittsburgh%2Fthere-will-be-crud%2FContent%3Foid%3D1341840&ei=bxcYUamlOqTU0gH3xICQCw&psig=AFQjCNFIjWPuw2eR_oxL0M8QCkJq05TnYw&ust=1360619759987801 and http://www.google.com/url?sa=i&rct=j&q=&esrc=s&source=images&cd=&cad=rja&docid=Ew-ZHW37u11dtM&tbnid=Q9JHVM1f7J8kRM:&ved=0CAMQjhw&url=http%3A%2F%2Fmoney.cnn.com%2F2011%2F05%2F09%2Fnews%2Feconomy%2Fnatural_gas_fracking_duke%2Findex.htm&ei=HBgYUY78Ou3U0gH6oYCABw&bvm=bv.42080656,d.dmQ&psig=AFQjCNGrbizff6gtqwmAoN1bguuJrxD8DQ&ust=1360619848772208 Source: http://marcellus.psu.edu/resources/PDFs/Economic%20Impact%20of%20Marcellus%20Shale%202009.pdf Economic Impacts of Marcellus Shale in Pennsylvania: Employment and Income in 2009 Timothy W. Kelsey (Penn State), Martin Shields (Colorado State), James R. Ladlee (Penn State), and Melissa Ward (Penn State), in cooperation with Tracy L. Brundage (Penn College), Jeffrey F. Lorson (Penn College), Larry L. Michael (Penn College), and Thomas B. Murphy (Penn State)
49. State: This January 27, 2013 AP report of billions of dollars of payments seems like very good news for the individuals holding leases, but have not been verified by other sources. Source: http://hosted.ap.org/dynamic/stories/U/US_GAS_ DRILLING_ROYALTIES?SITE=AP&SECTION=HOME& TEMPLATE=DEFAULT&CTIME=2013-01-27-17-43-51
50. Source: Marcellus Shale Coalition, New Marcellus Shale Fee “Yields Higher-Than-Expected Revenue” (Sep 11, 2012) (available at http://marcelluscoalition.org/2012/09/new-marcellus-shale-fee-yields-higher-than-expected-revenue/)
51. STATE: Recently researchers at the National Bureau of Economic Research looked at more than 19,000 properties sold over a five year period in Washington County, Pennsylvania, and controlled for neighborhood amenities and other factors. These are the findings which are the cause for concern among some homeowners: Properties dependent upon groundwater for their drinking water are more likely to experience large and negative changes in property values than properties that get their water from a piped-in municipal water supply. This is due to the perceived risk to groundwater, which is estimated to decrease property values by 23.6 percent if there is a wellpad within 2000 meters. Further, the researchers conclude that net negative impacts on property values could lead to "an increase in the likelihood of foreclosure in areas experiencing rapid growth of hydraulic fracturing." Local economic development and lease payments associated with shale development can boost the housing market substantially, but only if the property has access to a public water supply. The researchers estimate that properties that get their water from public drinking water supplies saw increases in value of 10.7 percent, and speculate that this increase is most likely due to lease payments. Shale Gas Development and Property ValuesDifferences across Drinking Water SourcesNBER Working Paper No. 18390, September 2012,http://www.nber.org/papers/w18390 Photos source: https://www.google.com/search?q=photos+of+homes+near+gas+drilling+in+PA&hl=en&client=firefox-a&hs=faj&rls=org.mozilla:en-US:official&tbm=isch&tbo=u&source=univ&sa=X&ei=NXgqUaf3D-6E0QG2qoCgCA&ved=0CEAQsAQ&biw=1366&bih=642
52. STATE: Reports of other unintended consequences potentially caused by drilling have begun to emerge. Several case studies have emerged in academic journals which document the loss of cattle, stillborn calves and impacts on other farm animals near the sites of drilling and frack ponds. In addition, the Nature Conservancy and other conservation organizations have estimated the loss of scenic beauty and recreational opportunities, and the impact on wildlife habitat has significant costs – possibly as much as $27 million per year – for the recreation and eco-tourism industries.
53. STATE: Degradation of roads is commonplace where drilling occurs. The Pennsylvania State Police and other state and federal departments undertook intensive monitoring over three weekends in 2010, inspecting nearly 3500 trucks, and writing 2600 citations. Although the state has instituted bonding requirements to pay for the cost of road damage, no study has established if they are sufficient to cover total damage costs. CJ Randall, Hammer Down: A Guide to Protecting Local Roads Impacted by Shale Gas DrillingI Working Paper Series (Dec. 2010) (available at http://www.greenchoices.cornell.edu/downloads/development/marcellus/Marcellus_Randall.pdf)
54. STATE: No systematic attempts to measure costs in vehicle and property damage, human injury, and increased use of local emergency medical services or law enforcement associated with shale gas-related activities although accidents are widely-acknowledged to occur regularly and have especially strained local volunteer emergency services. Photo sources: http://www.wcag-wv.org and https://www.google.com/search?q=photos+of+homes+near+gas+drilling+in+PA&hl=en&client=firefox-a&hs=vM5&rls=org.mozilla:en-US:official&tbm=isch&tbo=u&source=univ&sa=X&ei=6IgqUa2_O8mE0QGHzYDYBg&ved=0CDoQsAQ&biw=1366&bih=642#imgrc=ZZPslypz33V9AM%3A%3BTJK7I6D-bko4BM%3Bhttp%253A%252F%252Fi.usatoday.net%252F_common%252F_notches%252F5a724431-1f3d-479e-89e9-f2530c60aa78-cleghornx.jpg%3Bhttp%253A%252F%252Fwww.usatoday.com%252Fnews%252Fnation%252Fstory%252F2012-05-29%252Ffracking-environment-gas%252F55845708%252F1%3B245%3B184
55. STATE: It is important to review these social and economic changes related to the extraction of shale gas because both directly and indirectly they impact health. Most directly, the stress of such changes can impact the physical health of those who experience them. But changes in our physical and social surroundings that make it more difficult to live in a secure, supportive environment also have been associated with specific health conditions including heart disease, diabetes, obesity, mental health problems and other health impacts.
56. STATE: In 2012, comprehensive shale gas development legislation, known as Act 13, was passed into law in the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania. The legislation was largely based on recommendations made by a commission assembled by Governor Corbett earlier in the year., but still generated a lot of controversy. The law seeks to address health and environmental concerns by increasing the setbacks from residences, businesses, streams and other existing structures and features. It increases state and local revenues by implementing a formula for user fees paid on each well from which gas is extracted. It limited local governments’ ability to regulate drilling activities in their jurisdictions in favor of regulation at the state level. Also as result of the legislation, companies are required to list all but proprietary chemicals used in fracking fluids on the website Fracfocus.com. The law also regulates the terms under which medical professionals can access and use information on proprietary chemicals. These provisions on jurisdictional rights of local governments and access to proprietary information by medical professionals are both currently being challenged in court.
57. Marcellus Shale Advisory Commission’s Health Recommendations for Department of Health Activity: Establishment of the population-based health registry & curriculum development Collection and evaluation of clinical data provided by health care providers Routine evaluation and assessment of Marcellus Shale-related environmental data, such as air, water, solid waste, and fish and other food samples Creation of a population-based health registry with the purpose of characterizing and following over time individuals who live in close proximity to gas drilling and production sites
58. “In fact, the recommendations directly related to the Department of Health do not require legislation. They can be advanced through the agency’s traditional policy implementations – indeed, many already reflect what the department does day in and day out.” -Patrick Henderson Energy Executive, Office of the Governor Pittsburgh Post Gazette, 3/14/12
59. Hydraulic fracturing chemical disclosure requirements. The specific identity and amount of chemicals claimed to be confidential proprietary will be available to health professionals who execute a confidentiality agreement and provide a written statement insuring that the information is needed for the purpose of diagnosis or treatment of an individual who may have been exposed to a hazardous chemical, and that knowledge of information will assist in the diagnosis or treatment of an individual. If a medical emergency exists, the specific identity and amount of any chemicals claimed to be confidential proprietary information will be disclosed to the health professional upon a verbal acknowledgment by her or him that the information may not be used for purposes other than the health needs asserted and that the health professional shall maintain the information as confidential. The entity providing the information may request that the health professional provide a written statement of need and a confidentiality as soon as circumstances permit.
60. Our interpretation of these new chemical disclosure provisions (copied almost verbatim from a controversial Colorado law): A physician may receive information about proprietary chemicals, but must agree not to reveal this information to the public, even if it is likely that the same chemicals that made her/his patient sick are likely to impact the health of others. “It is a breach of a physician’s responsibilities not to report a public health threat, as well as a contradiction of established public health practice and law.”
61. Also on the issue of companies responsibility to report on chemicals, the legislation says: Section 3332.1(c)3: Notwithstanding any other provision of this chapter, a vendor, service provider or operator shall not be required to do any of the following: . . . (3) Disclose chemicals that occur incidentally or are otherwise unintentionally present in trace amounts, may be the incidental result of a chemical reaction or chemical process or may be constituents of naturally occurring materials that become part of a stimulation fluid. . . .
62. Whether or not intentional, our reading of this language leads us to conclude that a company can withhold information about chemicals that drilling brings up from underground, including the natural gas constituents which themselves can be toxic, and naturally occurring toxic agents such as arsenic, barium, brine components and radioactive compounds dissolved in the flowback water.
63. Introduce Jill. Recognize Brian and Bill.
64. Overview of what we’re doing…
65. Overview of what we’re doing…
66. Overview of what we’re doing…
67. Overview of what we’re doing…
68. Overview of what we’re doing…
69. Overview of what we’re doing…
70. Overview of what we’re doing…
71. Usually when you think of enhancing public understanding of this issue, you think of research that has been done to identify impacts. However, to date, little research has been conducted on human health impacts. WE at the SWPA EHP don’t do formal research on this topic. SEE MISSION. This is a public health approach to shale gas drilling. To our knowledge, we are the only organization in this country which has this mission to recognize how the public’s health is impacted by drilling and what needs to be done to protect them. It might be possible for a state’s public health infrastructure to respond to such issues. But in PA, there are only ~6 county public health departments; to date the state DoH (now with an interim director) has not played an active role in the shale gas debate in the state. So while we aren’t academic researchers, we believe that we have plenty to contribute to the understanding of health impacts today.
72. reference (verbally) our Medical Toolkit on our website and collaborations with the Physicians, Scientists, and Engineers for Healthy Energy Clinical tox profiles – attempting to learn as much as we can about the chemicals that we are most certain that people are exposed to. Will reference this later, too. Reference (verbally) our Air Filter recommendation? Austin Healthmate Air, water, soil and food
73. Usually when you think of enhancing public understanding of this issue, you think of research that has been done to identify impacts. However, to date, little research has been conducted on human health impacts. WE at the SWPA EHP don’t do formal research on this topic. SEE MISSION. This is a public health approach to shale gas drilling. To our knowledge, we are the only organization in this country which has this mission to recognize how the public’s health is impacted by drilling and what needs to be done to protect them. It might be possible for a state’s public health infrastructure to respond to such issues. But in PA, there are only ~6 county public health departments; to date the state DoH (now with an interim director) has not played an active role in the shale gas debate in the state. So while we aren’t academic researchers, we believe that we have plenty to contribute to the understanding of health impacts today.
74. Usually when you think of enhancing public understanding of this issue, you think of research that has been done to identify impacts. However, to date, little research has been conducted on human health impacts. WE at the SWPA EHP don’t do formal research on this topic. SEE MISSION. This is a public health approach to shale gas drilling. To our knowledge, we are the only organization in this country which has this mission to recognize how the public’s health is impacted by drilling and what needs to be done to protect them. It might be possible for a state’s public health infrastructure to respond to such issues. But in PA, there are only ~6 county public health departments; to date the state DoH (now with an interim director) has not played an active role in the shale gas debate in the state. So while we aren’t academic researchers, we believe that we have plenty to contribute to the understanding of health impacts today.
75. Usually when you think of enhancing public understanding of this issue, you think of research that has been done to identify impacts. However, to date, little research has been conducted on human health impacts. WE at the SWPA EHP don’t do formal research on this topic. SEE MISSION. This is a public health approach to shale gas drilling. To our knowledge, we are the only organization in this country which has this mission to recognize how the public’s health is impacted by drilling and what needs to be done to protect them. It might be possible for a state’s public health infrastructure to respond to such issues. But in PA, there are only ~6 county public health departments; to date the state DoH (now with an interim director) has not played an active role in the shale gas debate in the state. So while we aren’t academic researchers, we believe that we have plenty to contribute to the understanding of health impacts today.
76. Overview of what we’re doing…
77. Usually when you think of enhancing public understanding of this issue, you think of research that has been done to identify impacts. However, to date, little research has been conducted on human health impacts. WE at the SWPA EHP don’t do formal research on this topic. SEE MISSION. This is a public health approach to shale gas drilling. To our knowledge, we are the only organization in this country which has this mission to recognize how the public’s health is impacted by drilling and what needs to be done to protect them. It might be possible for a state’s public health infrastructure to respond to such issues. But in PA, there are only ~6 county public health departments; to date the state DoH (now with an interim director) has not played an active role in the shale gas debate in the state. So while we aren’t academic researchers, we believe that we have plenty to contribute to the understanding of health impacts today.
78. Usually when you think of enhancing public understanding of this issue, you think of research that has been done to identify impacts. However, to date, little research has been conducted on human health impacts. WE at the SWPA EHP don’t do formal research on this topic. SEE MISSION. This is a public health approach to shale gas drilling. To our knowledge, we are the only organization in this country which has this mission to recognize how the public’s health is impacted by drilling and what needs to be done to protect them. It might be possible for a state’s public health infrastructure to respond to such issues. But in PA, there are only ~6 county public health departments; to date the state DoH (now with an interim director) has not played an active role in the shale gas debate in the state. So while we aren’t academic researchers, we believe that we have plenty to contribute to the understanding of health impacts today.
79. Usually when you think of enhancing public understanding of this issue, you think of research that has been done to identify impacts. However, to date, little research has been conducted on human health impacts. WE at the SWPA EHP don’t do formal research on this topic. SEE MISSION. This is a public health approach to shale gas drilling. To our knowledge, we are the only organization in this country which has this mission to recognize how the public’s health is impacted by drilling and what needs to be done to protect them. It might be possible for a state’s public health infrastructure to respond to such issues. But in PA, there are only ~6 county public health departments; to date the state DoH (now with an interim director) has not played an active role in the shale gas debate in the state. So while we aren’t academic researchers, we believe that we have plenty to contribute to the understanding of health impacts today.
80. Usually when you think of enhancing public understanding of this issue, you think of research that has been done to identify impacts. However, to date, little research has been conducted on human health impacts. WE at the SWPA EHP don’t do formal research on this topic. SEE MISSION. This is a public health approach to shale gas drilling. To our knowledge, we are the only organization in this country which has this mission to recognize how the public’s health is impacted by drilling and what needs to be done to protect them. It might be possible for a state’s public health infrastructure to respond to such issues. But in PA, there are only ~6 county public health departments; to date the state DoH (now with an interim director) has not played an active role in the shale gas debate in the state. So while we aren’t academic researchers, we believe that we have plenty to contribute to the understanding of health impacts today.
81. Usually when you think of enhancing public understanding of this issue, you think of research that has been done to identify impacts. However, to date, little research has been conducted on human health impacts. WE at the SWPA EHP don’t do formal research on this topic. SEE MISSION. This is a public health approach to shale gas drilling. To our knowledge, we are the only organization in this country which has this mission to recognize how the public’s health is impacted by drilling and what needs to be done to protect them. It might be possible for a state’s public health infrastructure to respond to such issues. But in PA, there are only ~6 county public health departments; to date the state DoH (now with an interim director) has not played an active role in the shale gas debate in the state. So while we aren’t academic researchers, we believe that we have plenty to contribute to the understanding of health impacts today.
82. Usually when you think of enhancing public understanding of this issue, you think of research that has been done to identify impacts. However, to date, little research has been conducted on human health impacts. WE at the SWPA EHP don’t do formal research on this topic. SEE MISSION. This is a public health approach to shale gas drilling. To our knowledge, we are the only organization in this country which has this mission to recognize how the public’s health is impacted by drilling and what needs to be done to protect them. It might be possible for a state’s public health infrastructure to respond to such issues. But in PA, there are only ~6 county public health departments; to date the state DoH (now with an interim director) has not played an active role in the shale gas debate in the state. So while we aren’t academic researchers, we believe that we have plenty to contribute to the understanding of health impacts today.
83. Usually when you think of enhancing public understanding of this issue, you think of research that has been done to identify impacts. However, to date, little research has been conducted on human health impacts. WE at the SWPA EHP don’t do formal research on this topic. SEE MISSION. This is a public health approach to shale gas drilling. To our knowledge, we are the only organization in this country which has this mission to recognize how the public’s health is impacted by drilling and what needs to be done to protect them. It might be possible for a state’s public health infrastructure to respond to such issues. But in PA, there are only ~6 county public health departments; to date the state DoH (now with an interim director) has not played an active role in the shale gas debate in the state. So while we aren’t academic researchers, we believe that we have plenty to contribute to the understanding of health impacts today.
84. Usually when you think of enhancing public understanding of this issue, you think of research that has been done to identify impacts. However, to date, little research has been conducted on human health impacts. WE at the SWPA EHP don’t do formal research on this topic. SEE MISSION. This is a public health approach to shale gas drilling. To our knowledge, we are the only organization in this country which has this mission to recognize how the public’s health is impacted by drilling and what needs to be done to protect them. It might be possible for a state’s public health infrastructure to respond to such issues. But in PA, there are only ~6 county public health departments; to date the state DoH (now with an interim director) has not played an active role in the shale gas debate in the state. So while we aren’t academic researchers, we believe that we have plenty to contribute to the understanding of health impacts today.