Oil Spill into Chappel Fork

What do you guys think about the 2 morons who were mad at their former employer, an oil company, so they opened the valves on some tanks & drained approx. 45,000 gallons of crude onto the ground? It went into North Fork, Indian Run & Chappel Fork, as well as some making it to the Allegheny Reservoir. It was a dad & his son. They are in jail with $500,000.00 & $550,000.00 bail for creating a catastrophe,etc. I think it's time for them to sleep with the fishes that they killed. What do you think?

at least they are safe in jail.,,alot of people would love to chat with them 

What a senseless act. Why don't people think before they do ?

I was up there last weekend and this past wed, thurs and Fri, Serious cleanup and assessment operation going on.  It is a shame....that is a beautiful section of stream and area.
 
My money says the allegheny defense fund paid them to do it cause they couldn't pin enough on the oil & gas operators.

Bottom line is that when the feds bought it if they were seriously interested in preserving the forest then they should have went after the mineral rights as well.  Until then someone else owns it.
 
Is drilling out of control there?  It has changed some of my favorite hunting and fishing areas in the world, forever.  I am as upset by it as anyone.  However you have a choice where you live, just as I have a choice where I hunt and fish.  If the "oil smell" more likely natural gas, unless you are very near the current spill site becomes to annoying, you just as I have a choice. 
 
I hate to sound anti environment, I really am not, and this spill is obviously a tradgedy, the extent of which is only now being uncovered, but, they have to drill somewhere.  I am an environmental biologist, but I heat my house, I drive a vehicle, I buy plastic products etc.  We are all consumers to some extent, so we can not continue to use these products and then scream "not in my backyard".
 
I have looked at close to 300 wells in the ANF and on surrounding privately owned properties in McKean county, it is not the wells that are the problem.  The roads are what are causing the damage.  The runoff & associated sedimentation from the access roads is the problem and the oil & gas industry does not have exit plans to remove them.
 
As far as my comments about payment, I will say this, every group has its extremists, and I have had the displeasure of meeting a few from the ADP that fall in that category.

Such a senseless act

ORIGINAL: MuskyMastr

I was up there last weekend and this past wed, thurs and Fri, Serious cleanup and assessment operation going on.  It is a shame....that is a beautiful section of stream and area.

My money says the allegheny defense fund paid them to do it cause they couldn't pin enough on the oil & gas operators.

 
First, as proven by the wrong name for them you used, the Allegheny Defense Project, nor ANY of their members would advocate "paying to cause an environmental disaster". You OBVIOUSLY do NOT know that group. They are a thousand percent law abiding citizens, and do not in any way shape or form advocate "environmental terrorism". 
 
I seriously doubt you have ever talked to any of them.
 
They are simply, selflessly trying to protect the publics land, water and streams, so YOU can fish on them.
 
The guys who did this did this totally on their own behalf. It was nothing more that Snyder Brothers employiees ****ed at their ex-employier and trying to "get even".
 
It, like ALL the sabotoge going on in the ANF was done by "oil workers" against "oil producers".
 
I seriously doubt anybody from the ADP would talk to you very long, so I doubt you can begin to understand their very reasonable, and passave stance on environmental issues.
 
 

First off welcome to the forum SomethingFishy
 
 

ORIGINAL: SomethingFishy

I seriously doubt you have ever talked to any of them........

I seriously doubt anybody from the ADP would talk to you very long, so I doubt you can begin to understand their very reasonable, and passave stance on environmental issues.

Actually I have had phone conversations with many good people in the organization, when they need advice from qualified environmental consultants.  And they actually talked to me for over a half an hour each time.  Bottom line is when they want to know the in's and out's of the oil and gas code the do talk extensivley with me and many other professionals like me.

I have also had conversations in a professional setting with persons who "claimed" to be affiliated with the Allegheny Defense Project (excuse me for using the misnomer orininally), who suggested; and one who actually belived that an event exactly like this "would be exactly what the doctor ordered to get the dills and dozers to stop"

I do not particularly like the damage that has been done due to drilling in this area, I think it is a shame.  I also do not work for the oil & gas industry.  I am a private consultant, with an excellent working relationship with all regulatory agencies in the state.

In response to the article posted by PghMarty, the ADP is once again barking up the wrong tree, the PA DEP is the agency that authorizes well permits and also grants wetland encroachment or stream distance waiver requirments.  They are granted the authority to manage the latter two through the US Army Corp of Engineers.  These permits include written confirmation of PNDI results regarding Threatened, engangered and sensitive species located in the area of the proposed site.  If conflicts are found, the permitee must then follow specific instructions from the regulatory agency in charge of those species, which can include US Fish and wildlife service, pa game comm, pa fish & boat, pa DCNR (plant).  If suitable measures are not proposed to protect the resource the permit is not granted.  Most of the forest service personel are included in the process to keep them abreast of the process and to allow for input regarding location.

Can anyone tell me how far from the stream these tanks were located?  If the limit of disturbance from installation (how much they cleared to build the site) is more than 100 feet from the stream then they are perfectly legal installations.  100 feet is not very far.
Don't blame the agency, get the regulations changed.  This would be a much more wise use of ADP resources.

If the ADP feels that wetlands are being encroached on without permit then they should report these violations, immediately.

Stricter regulations do exist in HQ and EV watersheds, of which there are many in McKean County.

Here is a link to the oil & gas operators manual.  They should study up before blaming the wrong agencies, or blaming agecies for following state mandated restrictions.

http://www.dep.state.pa.us/dep/subject/ADVCOUN/oil_gas/2001/01IntroChap1.pdf

Bottom line is that the forest service is not where the buck stops here.

Musky, it seems like you are well informed and level headed about the oil and gas exploration in the ANF. Let me ask you two questions.
 
Is it true that the state law mandates that all holding facilities have a dyke around them that is sufficient to hold all of the oil intended to be in the tanks? (There are dykes contructed around all holding tank facilities that I see...I too live here in the ANF)
 
Also, do you honestly believe that drillers abide by environmental regs. when they know they are not being watched or when they know that no one will be "stopping by"?
 
To answer your question about citations for drillers it does happen.  Last year a company was actually banned from drilling in the ANF because of their practices.  Their name escapes me but they are owned by a husband and wife from NY.
 
 
 
 

LDD,
I try to be level headed.  They have destroyed some prime areas, but as I said before we are all consumers in one form or another.  To answer your question, it is not true that the dyke or containment system must be able to contain all of the oil in all of the tanks.  Some tanks require no containment system if they are under certain capacities.  But when required it must be able to contain all of the oil in the largest tank, so if it is a single tank installation then yes but as is often the case now we see multiple tanks in one area.  Below is the print copied from Chapter 4 Page 88 of the PA oil & gas operators manual.
 
To answer your second question, no I do not belive that they follow the environmental regs.  Most of what I do is delineate resources prior to site installation, however this is not required and many companies don't do it.  I would venture to say that 80% of the sites that are not investigated by professional delineators end up encroaching on wetlands in one form or another.  Some intentionally, but mostly unintentionally.  According to the regulations a one year old tractor rut with the proper vegetation can be a wetland.  Similarly you know what the terrain of the anf looks like, almost all of those dips and low spots that are 10' x10' are wetlands (many of them highly non productive at that).   So while wetlands are an invaluable resource, many of the ones being encroached on are man induced, through historic logging and other activites and not extremely productive parts of the ecosystem.   
 

B. Oil Storage Tanks and Containment (Dikes)

[font="ngldcc+centurygothic,century gothic"]

1. In order to prevent release of a significant quantity of oil from reaching the waters of the Commonwealth, and to protect life, health and property, storage tanks of 660 gallons each or a combined capacity of 1,320 gallons which containing crude oil must have a spill containment system. (Refer to 25 Pa. Code § 78.64 in Appendix 1).

Containment areas must be constructed to:

a. Have a capacity sufficient to hold the volume of the largest single tank, plus a reasonable allowance for precipitation based on local weather conditions and facility operation.

b. Be sufficiently impervious to contain spilled materials or wastes until it can be removed or treated.

c. Be compatible with the material or waste stored.

d. Provide for drainage of precipitation on an as-needed basis. Drainage lines must be kept closed at all times unless actual drainage is in progress. Drainage must be conducted under responsible supervision and must not cause a harmful discharge or sheen.

The Operator’s Preparedness, Prevention and Contingency (PPC) plan should identify the procedures, necessary equipment and personnel, including their location and response time, required to remove or treat spilled materials in an efficient and expedient manner to prevent pollution.

I hope that spill was taken care of in time.
 
Something fishy, the problem with nepa is that the forest service DOES NOT own the mineral rights to that area.  If they did then nepa would certainly be required, however because the subsurface rights are privately held, no nepa.
 
Here is the other problem.  Where was oil first discovered in the US?  New York actually, they were using surface flows to light a town 20 years before drakes well hit.  That withstanding PA is where drilling began, because of that, our oil & gas laws are the oldest (and sometimes most antiquated) in the nation.
 
Wait until the meridith shale monster rears it's ugly head, which it is in some places now already.  Does that mean they will re drill all of these areas again?

Update on that spill in Ludlow...the sign said "Oil Spill Area" but it was actually diesel.  Looks like it was taken care of.

Hey don't get me wrong NEPA is extremely good for business for me.  If they all have to start doing EIS I will be a busy boy.  I just don't happen to believe that it will change anything, yes the public opinion process will be included, but a few calls from harrisburg will change that, thanks to our current leadership.
 
You are right, we do own the surface.....and pa code states that surface owners can not impede reasonable access to subsurface owners.
What should have been included was more complete exit strategies for the sites.
 
I have a question for you, since you seem educated on the subject,  what type of site fees are the Forest service recieving per well & access?   Because while the lease agreements are with the subsurface owners, the site fees would go to the USFS.

You would own exactly that the surface and it's resources.  The state provides that surface owners must provide for "reasonable access" to mineral rights owners.  They could drill in your living room, but the site fee they would be required to pay you would be enormous, probably 2x the value of the home.  They must pay the surface owner for site disturbance on the surface.  typical site fees around here where well go in farm fields etc.  include the value of the crops to be lost + roughly $3000.

I do know that the game commission pretty much waives the upfront lease fees and sometimes the site fee per well in lieu of higher percentages of the gross percentage at the well head.  I would be upset if the forest service was not getting at least the timber value and should be getting more than that.
That however is because those are properties where the pgc owns the mineral rights so they can negociate.  I am not sure how that is handled by the usfs.