Permit to Pollute?

FirstEnergy has a coal ash problem, and it wants us to deal with it.  Since 1975, the Beaver County power plant has pumped about 20 billion gallons of ash mixed with water to an impoundment called Little Blue Run on the border of Pennsylvania and West Virginia.  The problem is that the ash is toxic: it contains loads of heavy metals such as arsenic, lead, and cadmium, and other harmful pollutants like selenium and boron.  For years, this pollution has been finding its way into groundwater, wells, and streams, and even the air as the ash dries and blows around.

In 2012, FirstEnergy was ordered to close Little Blue Run because of the well-documented damage it was doing to the surrounding environment, nearby property, and neighbors’ health.  So FirstEnergy began to look for other places to dispose of this toxic waste.  It has now set its sights on the landfill at the Hatfield’s Ferry power station, a plant that FirstEnergy abruptly retired in 2013.  The ash would be dried out, loaded onto barges, hauled up the Ohio and Monongahela Rivers for 113 miles, then unloaded onto trucks and dumped at the landfill across the river from Masontown.

The proposed route between Little Blue Run (upper left) and Hatfield's Ferry (lower right) along the Ohio and Monongahela Rivers. 

But this landfill has its own set of problems.  The original landfill had no liner, and toxins from the ash disposed there have been contaminating the groundwater and surface water since at least 2001.  The most severe contamination is from arsenic, which has been found in concentrations up to 342 times the legal limit in monitoring wells around the site.  Exposure to arsenic can cause damage to the liver, kidneys, brain and nervous system, and can cause cancer.  Other contaminants that exceed federal standards are aluminum, boron, chromium, manganese, molybdenum, sulfate, and total dissolved solids (TDS).  There are at least seven private water wells within a two mile radius that are at risk of groundwater contamination, and one public water intake.

In 2006, the landfill was expanded and the new portion included a liner.  However, the original landfill remains unlined, and continues to leach pollutants.  The new lined portion partially overlaps the old portion, so it is difficult to know whether the liner is actually preventing additional toxins from contaminating groundwater.

In 2008, the landfill’s operator was fined for the contamination, and order to take corrective measures.  However, it is not clear that these corrective actions have been consistently followed, or whether new pollution continues to leach out from the site. 

A view of Little Blue Run courtesy of vice.com. Click the image for Vice's coverage of this impoundment. 

FirstEnergy is desperately trying to avoid having to build a new coal ash landfill that meets current federal standards for disposal of this waste that has already proven to be dangerous.  So they are trying to find the cheapest way possible to get rid of it.  First it announced it would ship it to the unlined pit in Labelle, but ongoing pollution problems at that site have prevented it from being able to accept waste from new sources.  So now the company has turned its attention to the Hatfield’s Ferry dump, yet another site with unresolved problems.  FirstEnergy, three strikes and you’re out.

In addition to the risks posed at the sites themselves, the transportation of the ash on open barges risks contaminating the Monongahela.  The Mon has long suffered from industrial pollution and acid mine drainage, and was at one time mostly dead ecologically.  However, it has begun to recover, and was voted River of the Year in 2013.  Multiple efforts are underway to encourage river-centered tourism and recreation, and transportation of millions of tons of toxic waste on open barges seems incompatible with that vision.

The Sierra Club, represented by Earthjustice, appealed a decision by the Pennsylvania Department of Environmental Protection (DEP) allowing FirstEnergy Generation, LLC to dispose of more than 17 million tons of toxic coal ash from the Bruce Mansfield Power Plant into a closed power plant landfill in Western Pennsylvania.

Bruce Mansfield power plant. 

In response to the DEP’s approval of the permit Charles McPhedran an attorney from Earthjustice and Tom Schuster, Pennsylvania Beyond Coal Campaign Representative for the Sierra Club released the following statements:

“This permit puts neighbors at risk” Charles McPhedran, an attorney with Earthjustice said.  “There are several private water wells and one public water intake that are at risk from contamination from this site, not to mention the risk up and down the rivers from transport of this ash. DEP needs to protect the families of Western Pennsylvania, not make them a dumping ground for FirstEnergy.”

“Toxins from the ash disposed at the Hatfield’s Ferry site have been contaminating nearby water since at least 2001. Arsenic has been found in concentrations up to 342 times the legal limit in monitoring wells around the site, and continues to violate health standards” Tom Schuster, Pennsylvania Beyond Coal Campaign Representative for the Sierra Club said. “Exposure to arsenic can cause damage to the liver, kidneys, brain and nervous system, and can cause cancer.  DEP needs to protect this community and require FirstEnergy to clean up this site before any more toxic ash is dumped.”

The Department of Environmental Protection should not issue a permit to all FirstEnergy to simply move its toxic liability from one community to another.  If it must dispose of its ash at Hatfield’s Ferry, it should be required to completely clean up the existing site, line the entire landfill, and monitor extensively to ensure new pollution does not occur.  Better yet, the company should avoid barging the ash up our rivers altogether, and build a state of the art landfill on site.

Sierra Club PA Chapter Testifies at EPA Methane Hearing in Pittsburgh

The following is testimony provided to the EPA by Sierra Club PA Chapter Director, Joanne Kilgour, on September 29, 2015 in Pittsburgh, PA: 

Good afternoon, and thank you for the opportunity to speak here to day on this important topic - controlling methane emissions from oil and gas sources. My name is Joanne Kilgour and I serve as the Director of the Sierra Club PA Chapter, representing 25,000 members and 80,000 supporters across the Commonwealth of PA. Our members have - for decades - been leading climate advocates and clean air champions in their communities, and I know that each of them would be here testifying today if they could. 

By holding this hearing in Pittsburgh, you are recognizing the significant impact air pollution from methane emissions has on this region - and regions across Pennsylvania - largely as a result of the dirty oil and gas industry. While we support and appreciate EPA taking this necessary first step to control methane emissions from oil and gas sources, we also recognize the need for action that will address pollution from existing sources.

I live in Lancaster, PA - one of the areas with the worst air quality in the nation. In fact, more than half of the counties in Pennsylvania are at risk because of air quality concerns, which are exacerbated by harmful methane emissions from the oil and gas sector. Just like me, more than four million residents of Pennsylvania live in areas that exceed national ozone standards, meaning that our health and our communities cannot afford to bear pollution from the thousands of existing sources in our state - let alone from new and modified sources. Our children, our elderly, and individuals as greater risk from respiratory complications cannot take another ozone action day.

Since this is the first-ever proposal to control methane pollution from the oil and gas industry we thank you, we support this initial step, and we call for these proposals to be adopted quickly so we can get to work on tackling the threat from methane emissions from oil and gas sources now in existence - sources that by 2018 are projected to account for nearly 90% of all methane emissions in this sector. 

In addition to threatening our climate, the public health threat posed by these emissions is staggering. For this reason, we call on EPA to revise its cost-benefit analysis and include in this revision metrics that monetize the public health benefit the methane standard will generate by reducing VOCs - and this smog and soot - as well as hazardous air pollutants. Without this adjustment, the benefits of implementing the rule will remain understated and the cost-benefit analysis will remain an inadequate assessment. Public health benefits are not simply qualitative or experiential, but have quantifiable financial benefits that must be documented.

I applaud the EPA and the Obama Administration for beginning to address this problem of new and modified sources of methane, and I now look to our state Department of Environmental Protection and the Wolf Administration to follow this lead and address fugitive emissions from existing sources, moving as fast and far as necessary to put the health and prosperity of Pennsylvania families first.

Make a Plan to Vote!

On November 3, several important elections will be taking place in Pennsylvania. Some of the key votes include the mayoral elections in Upper Darby Township, Philadelphia, and Reading. All municipal elections will be on this day as well. 

It is imperative that everyone of age votes between 7a.m. and 8p.m. on the 3rd. Through elections, we are able to voice our opinion and have an impact on decisions made in our towns and municipalities. Every vote counts. 

Click here to see Sierra Club PA Chapter Supreme Court endorsements. 

For more information on voting and polling places click here. 

To learn more about your specific needs as a voter click here.  

Groups Oppose HB 965

The Sierra Club PA Chapter joined the letter below, asking members of the PA House to oppose HB 965, expected to come up for a vote on second consideration today:

October 16, 2015

Re: Opposition to HB 965 (P.N. 1885) and SB 562

Dear Representative:

On behalf of the hundreds of thousands of members we represent in Pennsylvania, the undersigned respectfully request that you OPPOSE House Bill 965 (P.N. 1885), which is scheduled for second consideration this Monday, October 19.         

You may hear that HB 965 (and its Senate counterpart, SB 562) is necessary for legislative “oversight.”  In reality, this legislation would hamstring the current independent and bipartisan process for updating state agency regulations by giving standing committees of the legislature unilateral control to hold up proposals they dislike. At the same time, HB 965 will make Pennsylvania’s regulatory rulemaking process much less transparent to the general public.

At best, these bills are solutions in search of a problem; at worst, they represent legislative overreach that would politicize Pennsylvania’s rulemaking process and take the “independent” out of the Commonwealth's Independent Regulatory Review Commission (IRRC).

We are specifically concerned with two particular changes proposed by HB 965 and SB 562.

First, by enabling standing committees of the General Assembly to repeatedly delay IRRC votes on proposed regulations (and introducing other delays), HB 965 and SB 562 would further complicate an already complicated process – and effectively transfer executive powers to small groups of legislators.

By way of background, one of the stated intentions of the Regulatory Review Act is “to provide ultimate review of regulations by the General Assembly” (see section 2(a)). That step already exists in our current IRRC process. After the IRRC votes on a regulatory proposal by a state agency, legislative standing committees already have the power to further review or disapprove the proposal. When a committee invokes its power to review or disapprove, the regulatory proposal is stayed for fourteen days, so that it can be brought to a vote before the full legislature. For three decades, this process has given the General Assembly ample time to review new regulations proposed by state agencies.

HB 965 and SB 562 would turn this orderly process on its head by (among other things) giving legislative committees the additional power to “further review” proposed regulations before the IRRC ever votes – and to do so repeatedly. By exercising this power, a standing committee could postpone a vote by IRRC indefinitely, and thereby effectively block the executive rulemaking process. In addition, the bills would needlessly inflate several post-vote periods during which the legislature can take action against proposed regulations. These changes would only serve to create bureaucracy and red tape, hinder the passage of much-needed regulations (which are often necessary to implement federal law or statutes passed by the General itself has), and subject the formerly independent IRRC to the control of small groups of legislators.

Second, the bills would block publication of agency “Statements of Purpose” (SOP) in the Pennsylvania Bulletin. The only effect of this prohibition would be to make it harder for your constituents to understand proposed regulatory changes. The sponsorship memo for SB 562 suggests that blocking Bulletin publication will prevent courts from interpreting SOPs in a way that is inconsistent with the regulations or the intent of the General Assembly. But courts do not review and interpret SOPs because they are printed in the Bulletin; they do so because SOPs are drafted by agencies and introduced into evidence in judicial proceedings. Blocking Bulletin publication will prevent neither of these things. It will only eviscerate the ability of the public to learn about and comment on new regulations.

Please tell your leadership that you OPPOSE HB 965 and vote to keep the “independent” in the Independent Regulatory Review Commission.

Thank you for in advance for standing up for the integrity and transparency of our regulatory process and OPPOSING HB 965.

Sincerely,

David Masur, Executive Director                   Joanne Kilgour, Chapter Director

PennEnvironment                                        Sierra Club, Pennsylvania Chapter

Joseph Otis Minott, Executive Director           Matthew Stepp, Policy Director

Clean Air Council                                          Citizens for Pennsylvania’s Future

Jackson Morris, Director Eastern Energy      Gretchen Dahlkemper, National Field

Mark Szybist, Senior Program Advocate       Manager

Natural Resources Defense Council          Moms Clean Air Force

Josh McNeil, Executive Director                     Phil Wallis, Executive Director

Conservation Voters of Pennsylvania         Audubon Pennsylvania

Alice Tong, Eastern States Advocate               Khari Mosley, Pennsylvania Regional

Environmental Entrepreneurs (E2)               Programs Manager

                                                                          BlueGreen Alliance

Steve Hvozdovich                                            Mary Booth

Clean Water Action                                        Partnership for Policy Integrity

What you need to know about the Pennsylvania Clean Power Plan

President Obama and the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) took historic action on August 3, 2015 when they announced the finalized Clean Power Plan (CPP), a step to reduce carbon pollution and combat climate change. The plan extends to the year 2030 and focuses on lowering emissions from power plants and increasing renewable energy and efficiency. States will individually develop plans to meet the guidelines laid out by the CPP.

Pennsylvania already has programs that would get us over halfway to our goal, if they are fully put into effect. These current policies would meet 51% of the goal. The other 49% will be covered by increasing energy efficiency, increasing renewable energy, and taking other additional measures. By adjusting the energy efficiency savings goal to 1.5% (which is consistent with leading states),PA  would get to 14% of the target.  The state can also increase the percent of renewable energy to 20%, which again compares to surrounding states and would alone get us 31% closer the aim. The leftover 4% is easily attainable by updating building codes and the efficiency of power plants. 

The Wolf administration's Department of Environmental Protection (DEP), will be holding 14 community listening sessions across to state to provide the public and opportunity to share their thoughts and opinions about the Clean Power Plan.  Click here to learn more about these sessions.

Members and staff at the first listening session held in Harrisburg on 15 September.

Field Notes: Ryerson Outing

Last weekend, the Pennsylvania Sierra Club held its first event as part of the Forest Watch Campaign. Working with the Allegheny Group and the Center for Coalfield Justice, we brought a group of urban Pittsburgh residents and community members from Southwestern Pennsylvania to Ryerson Station State Park. There, we held two hikes and a workshop on bringing together different groups fighting natural gas, longwall, and climate issues.

Southwestern Pennsylvania is under attack from coal and gas extraction on all fronts and Ryerson, a 1,164-acre state park found in Greene County, is no exception. The park was home to Duke Lake, a reservoir lake and cornerstone of the surrounding community. Ten years ago, Duke Lake was drained due to the cracks forming in the dam. The Department of Environmental Protection later determined longwall mining at CONSOL’s nearby Bailey Mine to be at fault. We chose to have our outing at Ryerson to highlight these past injustices and to learn how to support the current work being done by the community members in the area.

We started the day with a bird-watching hike through Polly Hollow led by a DCNR employee. The park is home to a variety of birds, both residents and visitors, and more than 120 species of birds have been documented in the park. While we didn’t see many birds on our hike, we certainly heard a few, including the Orchard Oriole. Participants also shared knowledge on different plants and mushroom varieties we saw along the trail.

A little later in the morning, the rest of our outings participants began to trickle in. The main hike took place along the Iron Bridge Trail. This path follows some of the North Fork of Dunkard fork, a little feeder stream, and what used to be Duke Lake. Here, we stopped to talk about some of the hydrology at Ryerson and wetlands in particular. Members of our group highlighted the important role that wetlands play in regulating streamflow and maintaining water quality.

After our hike, we broke for lunch back at the Iron Bridge where we had a workshop on balancing the complex relationships between communities, extraction, and activism. Our participants broke into small discussion groups to tackle the question, “if you could end all coal mining immediately, would you?” The groups spent a while deliberating and came back with some thoughtful responses. As a group made up of local residents and urban allies, everyone had a different approach and relationship to the issues in the region.

While most people had an immediate response, the effects of their initial decisions became clear through discussion. Some participants talked about the need to stave off future climate disasters but others talked about the immediate harm to local communities forced into a coal-based mono economy. Other people brought up the need for a slow and just economic transition parallel to backing away from a carbon-based economy. Regardless of their decision, it became clear that we don’t win unless everybody wins and many people questioned whether they were the ones to make that call in the first place.

After our workshop, we caravaned to a few locations in Greene County to see the impacts of the coal and gas industry. We stopped by a gas compressor station adjacent to the park, a coal refuse disposal area which is a valley filled in with toxic coal waste, and the largest coal preparation facility in the county that processes over 20 million tons of coal a year.

Veronica Coptis and Eva Westheimer from the Center for Coalfield Justice shared some background on the current threats to the park. Currently the beautiful streams left in Ryerson Station State Park are under imminent threat from ongoing longwall mining that is predicted to destroy them. With the recent news that Duke Lake cannot be restored because of ongoing ground movement from mining subsidence, these streams are vital to renewing and improving Ryerson State Park.

There is still work to be done to save Ryerson State Park. To get involved and learn more about these efforts, please contact Veronica at the Center for Coalfield Justice. To learn more about CCJ’s work with Ryerson, click here. To get involved with the Forest Watch Campaign or to plan an outing in your area, contact me.

Sierra Club Responds to DEP Draft Final Rulemaking for Oil and Gas Operations

August 12, 2015

Contact: 

Joanne Kilgour, Director, Sierra Club Pennsylvania Chapter, 412-965-9973, joanne.kilgour@sierraclub.org

Thomas Au, Conservation Chair, Sierra Club Pennsylvania Chapter, 717-234-7445

Sierra Club Responds to DEP Draft Final Rulemaking for Oil and Gas Operations

Governor Wolf has promised to ensure that Pennsylvania’s government would be open and transparent  and to regulate oil and gas drilling activities to ensure that operations would be conducted safely. Today, the Department of Environmental Protection (DEP) and DEP Secretary Quigley followed through on the promise of openness and transparency, and announced some of the changes to how it will regulate oil and gas activities.

The Pennsylvania Sierra Club thanks DEP for the thorough and meaningful public participation process that led to this draft final rule, and applauds the administration for taking steps to limit fracking pits and impoundments. “Waste impoundments are a significant pollution threat and create dangerous conditions for public health and the environment,”  Chapter Director Joanne Kilgour stated. “We support provisions that prevent operators from using open pits for storage of dangerous substances, including wastewater, drill cuttings, and substances (like gels and cement) that return to the surface after fracking.  Many spills, leaks, and incidents involving pits have occurred which have contaminated water, soil, and air.”  The regulations will require containment of regulated substances, but does not totally ban open impoundments.

However, the Sierra Club remains concerned that the administration will not keep oil and gas operations at least one mile from schools and playgrounds and will not follow through to regulate noise pollution. The draft final regulations only require drilling activities to be a mere 200 feet from schools and playgrounds.  Schools, playgrounds, medical facilities, and nursing homes are public resources which should be protected from hazardous industrial activities, and in the interest of transparency we will seek a full explanation from DEP for its decision to establish such a small setback.  “Our children and those in need of medical attention require protection from oil and gas operations and  such a small protected area will not be sufficiently protective of their health. We will continue to seek additional protections for schools, playgrounds, and medical facilities.” stated Ms. Kilgour.

“Regulations to protect the public are long overdue”  stated Thomas Au, Conservation Chair for the Pennsylvania Sierra Club. “The degradation of our air, water, and health have been a fact of life since the drilling boom began several years ago. Pennsylvania is long past the time of continued debate on whether oil and gas activities impact health. Instead, there is an urgent need to face realities on the ground and fix critical problems, such as failures to immediately notify public officials of spills and leaks.”

The Sierra Club will continue to work with the administration to adopt oil and gas regulations that are fully protective of the public, and looks forward to the inclusion of public health in future regulatory packages. DEP has received significant input from both the public and the regulated community on these changes, and DEP must be empowered to move quickly to finalize these regulations.

#####