From Dan Fitzsimmons, President, Joint Landowners’ Coalition of New York – 02.20.2011 Dear Coalition Leaders, Landowners, Union Leaders, Workers, Business Leaders, and Natural Gas Supporters Everywhere, Please send this to all pro-gas supporters possible. This is an event that we need as many pro-gas supporters to spread the word about as possible: Landowners Coalition Hosts Public Community Forum “Marcellus Shale in Our Community: What’s in it for All of Us” The Joint Landowners Coalition of New York (JLCNY) is sponsoring a public meeting, titled “Marcellus Shale in Our Community: What’s in it for All of Us?” to help educate property owners, business owners and others on what to expect when expanded natural gas exploration comes to the Southern Tier. The coalition will lead a panel of experts who will discuss such topics as: community tax revenue; the phenomenon of natural gas migration; the realities of water usage and chemical ingredients; the SGEIS; and economic and employment projections. WHO: Joint Landowners Coalition of New York, Inc. WHAT: “Marcellus Shale in Our Community: What’s in it for All of Us?” WHERE: Binghamton West Middle School WHEN: 7 p.m. , Friday, February 25 The event is free and open to the public. All are encouraged to attend! In the event of a school closing or early dismissal, the event will take place at 7 p.m. the following Friday, March 4. The Joint Landowners Coalition of New York, Inc., formed in the fall of 2008, was created to bring together the various groups that were forming for education and land protections. The JLCNY incorporated as a 501c 6 a non-for-profit corporation and has grown to represent 17 counties and 37-plus coalitions. Estimated numbers of households are currently 17,500 representing approximately 70,000 people and more than 800,000 acres throughout New York 's Southern Tier. We want to have as many people as possible who don't know how gas will safely benefit them come to this event! Thanks for your help in posting these fliers and if at all possible please attend yourself to learn more great information about how Natural Gas will safely and responsibley benefit everyone in our communities! Sincerely,
From Energy In Depth – 02.13.2011
The administrator had already had quite a day up until that point on December 7, 2010, and in an email sent at 4:54 that afternoon, he indicated it was about to get even better. “We're about to make a lot of news,” EPA Region 6 administrator Al Armendariz wrote to friends and allies representing some of the most active anti-shale organizations in Texas. “There’ll be an official press release in a few minutes … time to Tivo channel 8.” But over on Channel 8’s website, the news had already broke: “The Environmental Protection Agency has issued an emergency order after it determined that a natural gas company's operations caused or contributed to the contamination of drinking water in Parker County,” read the lead. Dr. Armendariz was quoted in the story, which was posted online before his office had even notified the state of Texas that EPA was about to take over its investigation. “Yee haw!” the director of the Texas Oil & Gas Accountability Project (OGAP), Sharon Wilson, wrote in reply. “Hats off to the new Sheriff and his deputies!” A Texas-style round-up was officially underway. Fast-forward a month-and-a-half. Rejected by the court after filing at least three separate motions requesting that any attempt to gather sworn testimony from its staff be blocked, EPA Regional 6 official John Blevins finally sat for a court-ordered deposition in New Orleans, where he was asked a series of straightforward questions. Questions like: Did EPA have prior knowledge of the fact that methane had been detected in water wells in Parker County long before Range ever arrived on the scene? Blevins: “[Y]es, we were aware of those facts.” Did you include those facts in the administrative record? “[W]e do not believe those facts were … germane or relevant to the issue at hand.” Ok. But at least EPA took a look at the Strawn Formation, right? The shallower, non-producing, higher-in-nitrogen formation that most experts now believe was the actual source of the natural gas in the Parker Co. wells? Blevins: “Not related to this case, no.” But obviously the nitrogen profile of the methane is an important factor in determining where the methane originated, right? “It's a factor, yes.” So you’re saying no one at EPA even looked at it? “I don't believe that I could say EPA has an expert to opine on the nitrogen levels within any gas source.” Then how were you able to determine the pathway? “That was not what we needed to issue the order on.” What, EPA just couldn’t do the work? “The Agency could do the work. The Agency doesn't believe that we need to do the work.” Come again? Thanks to the transcripts, we now know that not everyone at the agency believed EPA had compiled a sufficiently strong case to warrant the issuance of an emergency order. “[T]his is not conclusive evidence because of the limited data set,” Dr. Doug Beak, an EPA scientist, wrote in a memo to his colleagues (p. 271). “The only way now to compare the data would be to make assumptions to fill in data gaps and I don't believe we have enough experience at this site or data to do this at this time.” The political folks, as we know, disagreed. The rest, as they say, is history. The full EPA deposition transcript, all 327 pages of it, is available here – but if this was simply another story about EPA jumping the gun on an investigation, it wouldn’t be half as interesting as it has actually turned out to be. Indeed, the color here comes not from shaky foundation upon which the order was issued – but the circumstances under which the order was issued in the first place. A piece in Friday’s edition of The New York Times/E&E News hints at one of the possibilities:
Of course, in Alisa Rich’s sworn deposition, she categorically denies ever offering this strategy up to the landowner. But according to the transcripts (page 257), not only did she recommend that EPA get involved – she actually made that recommendation without having access to a single shred of testing data to back it up. Turns out, the test results hadn’t even been returned from the lab yet. “I – that’s exactly right,” Rich told investigators. “We did not have [the tests] back by August 12” – the date on which she sent the email to the landowner counseling him to bring in EPA, and stating that it would be “worth every penny” if they were successful in doing so. So now we know how EPA moseyed into this little situation – but how is it that Alisa Rich ended up getting together with the landowner to set the wheels in motion in the first place? Ms. Rich, for her part, doesn’t really address that question in her testimony. But the landowner, in his sworn statement to the court, absolutely does. From his transcript (pp. 85-87):
Starting to see how all the pieces fit together here? According to the landowner, someone at the county health department told him to watch Gasland (which is troubling in itself), he did, and then afterward found his way over to the film’s social media page to offer up a message. He even attended a screening of the film – in the transcripts, he says he went to the October 26 showing in Fort Worth, at which, according to this invite, Texas OGAP director Sharon Wilson was also in attendance. But he didn’t go to watch the film, he says in his sworn statement -- he’d already seen it. He went there to meet some folks. Soon after or just before – the record isn’t clear – a woman “in Texas” gave him a list of everyone he’d need to get EPA into the case. Naturally, Alisa Rich was on that list; she had done plenty of work for OGAP in the past, and had long been an acquaintance of Dr. Armendariz stretching back to his time at SMU. Ms. Rich would handle the “tests,” such as they were. And Ms. Wilson would handle the rest, drawing on her personal relationship with the administrator to ensure the ducks were all lined up and ready to go just as soon as EPA decided to pull the trigger. As we know, that trigger was officially pulled on December 7, and shortly after making the move, Armendariz couldn’t have been more effusive in thanking Wilson for her efforts. “Thank you both for helping to educate me,” the Ph.D. environmental engineer wrote to Wilson and her allies. “And thank you all for your continued support and friendship. Its [sic.] been a crazy few days.” Crazier still they might soon become. In a filing posted Feb. 10, Range asked the court for permission to interview a few more EPA staff to help get to the bottom of this thing – and maybe gain access to a few more EPA emails while they’re at it. EPA, for its part, would prefer that everyone just stop asking questions and accept its findings as fact, notwithstanding its own sworn admissions that it did not evaluate the geology below the landowner’s well; did no research to determine possible pathways the methane could have taken to get there; and had at least two scientists on its team (one in-house, the other a consultant) who, if the transcripts are right, appear to have disagreed with EPA on everything from method, to execution, to conclusion. How deep this rabbit hole actually goes in anyone’s guess – but with additional depositions on the horizon, and lots more emails to unearth, smart money says we’re about to find out a lot more, and soon, about how this thing all went down. And to that we say: Yee haw. READ MORE
COMMENTARY FROM NICK SCHOONOVER OF THE TIOGA LANDOWNER"S GROUP - 02.11.2011 To All:
A LETTER FROM JLCNY - 02.10.2011 Great News! To everyone that has donated so far...Thank you. For those that have not this is a reminder. And Thank you for the one generous donation of $1,000, Wow! As of many you know Joseph Martens , acting DEC Commissioner, soon to be confirmed, has said he will release the complete SGEIS study in June. In yesterday's statement Mr. Martens said New York State does not need to wait for the EPA study to be completed before going forward. There will be a thirty day comment period after the SGEIS is released. After that drilling permits could begin. This is a milestone for our organization and something we all have been waiting for. Make no mistake the anti-gas protesters will become incensed and will do everything to stop this process from going forward the way it is being proposed. As an example they will try to have the 30 day comment period extended to 120 or more, Delay! Delay! Delay! We will need to become stronger with our efforts, increase our voice, and be more politically active to keep this process on track. The fund raising campaign is more important than ever before. These next four months are when we need to keep in touch with our political allies throughout the State. We will need to work with them throughout the State to best protect your interests. Other activities will include: Please remember that all the JLCNY board members and committee members are 100% volunteers. They pay for their own gas, supplies, and materials to fight for your rights and future. Your donations will help them to help you in your efforts to secure a legally, environmentally, and financially rewarding lease. To donate on line please visit the JLCNY website home page (www.jlcny.org) and click on the yellow "Donate" oval on the right side. Or donations (checks or money orders made payable to "JLCNY, Inc.") can be mailed to: JLCNY I thank you for your support and let us remain vigilant in our convictions to make this happen. Sincerely, |
For more current information go to the website for the Joint Landowners Coalition of New York: http://www.jlcny.org/site/index.php Find JLNY on Facebook: Joint Landowner's Coalition of NY Inc.
Contact your Elected Representatives
|
Click to check out are past messages Archives
The Steering Committee of
The Binghamton Conklin Gas Lease Coalition