CLEAR March 2019

clear@lists.cheatlakeclear.org

1 participants
6 discussions

PUBLIC MEETING on 3/27/19 - Natrium Fractionation Plant
by Duane Nichols via CLEAR 25 Mar '19

25 Mar '19

https://ohvec.org/natrium-meeting/?fbclid=IwAR3lRT3Ksjv6LNVo3lXddkC3ShRyL-j… PUBLIC MEETING – Natrium Fractionation Plant From the Ohio Valley Environmental Coalition, March 24, 2019 Thanks to everyone who submitted a request; the WVDEP has granted a public meeting on the air permit modification (permit R13-2896F) for Blue Racer Midstream, LLC’s Natrium Extraction and Fractionation Plant. The meeting is on Wednesday, March 27, 2019 at 6:00 PM at the New Martinsville City Hall, 191 Main Street, New Martinsville, WV. Below you will find a .pfd for the public meeting notification issued by the DEP. Map of the area along the Ohio River with the Natrium facility and the proposed PTT Global Ethane Cracker and Mountaineer Storage Facilities marked with yellow pins. Air patterns in this area move north along the river. The Natrium plant is a two-mile long facility that sits along the Ohio River about 12 miles south of the city of Moundsville, WV. A fractionation plant carries out one of the steps in refining natural gas liquids (NGLs) for use in petrochemical and plastics manufacturing. This plant likely would be processing ethane to be sent to the proposed PTT Global Ethane Cracker in Belmont County, OH, a stone’s throw north. Any excess ethane would be stored in the proposed Mountaineer Storage Facility, also nearby (see map at bottom of page). All are major infrastructure components for the proposed Appalachian Storage and Trading Hub/Petrochemical Complex. While the Natrium Plant has already been in operation for some time, it looks like they are applying for new permits to take on more NGL processing as part of the larger petrochemical hub. As a side note, Natrium does have on-site fracking pads too. This permit does not take into consideration the emission the PTT Global Ethane Cracker will also be contributing to this area (or any other industrial facility for that matter). States are not required to take into consideration the cumulative impacts of multiple facilities that work congruently. Nor do they take into consideration cumulative health impacts of long term exposure. Plus, the DEP fails to consider particulate matter less than 0.1 microns which have been demonstrated to have greater toxic effects on the human body. In 2016,the Natrium site leaked 17,000 gallons of chlorine gas that prompted the evacuation of hundreds of nearby residents and were cited for multiple safety violations. Table 4 (taken from the WVDEP’s Engineering Evaluation/Fact Sheet) shows the change in annual emissions in the air permit modification. Under this permit modification, Natrium is set to increase emissions of Carbon Monoxide (CO), Oxides of Nitrogen (NOx), Particulate Matter less than 2.5 microns (PM2.5), Particulate Matter less than 10 microns (PM10), Particulate Matter (PM), Sulfur Dioxide (SO2), Volatile Organic Compounds (VOC), and total Hazardous Air Pollutants (HAPs) which are carcinogens. Table 4 shows the changes between the current emissions and the permit modification. While at a glance, these number seem small, but keep in mind these limits are measured by Tons Per Year (TPY). You can click the names of the pollutants above for more information on how they impact human health. Do to the fact that air patterns along the Ohio River move in a northern direction, we are highly concerned about the cumulative impacts of air pollution form these proposed petrochemical facilities on communities in the area, especially Moundsville. Our region is also subject to air inversions. An inversion traps air pollution, such as smog, close to the ground making greater risk of exposure to human populations.

1 0

Notes of Peggy Pings Copied from Green Space Coalition.
by Duane Nichols via CLEAR 23 Mar '19

23 Mar '19

Hi Everyone, I was overextended today also, and haven't been able to make the meetings. But we here at Twin Spruce Marina (on the Mon, under the I-79 bridge and along the Rail-Trail), are glad to see Mon Valley Green Space Coalition as an organized "umbrella group". I hope out of 89 people on the email list, that enough were able to come to the meeting! (who really cares about "quorum" anyway). And, wow, lot's going on in our little valley! (Who is compiling / keeping the Green Space Calendar for MVGSC? Didn't Ella Belling used to do that years and years ago?) Here's a few more items to add to the Calendar: 1. Twin Spruce has done the paperwork and has been authorized (by WVDOH?) as Adopt-a-Road here, so I keep the Round Bottom Road from Rt 73 to the Uffington Trailhead and Marina fairly clean. I think there are a few others that do their part informally too. 2, The "Mon Dems" just got accepted as an Adopt-a-Road, along the entire Morgan Run Road, from Rt 857 to Cheat Lake Park and Trail. Their first official cleanup 9a-noon on Saturday March 30, raindate Sunday March 31, meet at Cheat Lake Park parking lot on the hill. Before the poison ivy leafs up. Contact Emilie Marlier for info/rsvp. <reilram123(a)gmail.com> 3. Lots of public events going on with WV Botanic Garden too!!! 4. Morgantown Area Paddlers are having their first public paddle trip this Saturday, 3/23, leaving Uffington Boat Dock at 1:30pm, for a 3-4 hour paddle trip up/down river. More the following days also! 5. Twin Spruce Marina welcomes our Mon Valley Green Space community to walk on in to the Marina to be by the river, any time. A heads-up email or text is useful, but not required. Restrooms will open May 15, when the boating season officially starts every year, but only Members ($10/mo) can get a gate / bathroom key. Motor boaters can get a $100 off Early Bird membership if they pay the 4-month docking season in full before April 15, now $175/month/slip. Slips now have access to electric outlets for boaters to plug their battery chargers in, using their own heavy-duty extension cord, a new improvement! There is a 20x20' open-air pavilion with new electric plug-ins for charging your cell phones or laptops using the free "Internet Café" (for anonymous donation in the donation box). We accept campers/trailers and have one remaining space for 1 camper to use the 30-amp plug for heat/AC and other electric appliances inside. I also have canoes/kayaks for use by MVGSC members, for donation (they are usually locked up). Come hang out a bit while using the rail-trail. Call for details. Peggy Pings, owner, TwinSpruceMarina(a)gmail.com, 304-777-3638. 6. Twyla, may I compliment you and say "Good meeting note-keeping!" ? See you all out and about! Peggy Pings, Owner, Twin Spruce Marina Peggy Pings, 304-777-3638 c/t (new Personal Cell Phone, 5-1-2017)

1 0

More on Proposed Tucker County Pumped Hydro Project
by Duane Nichols via CLEAR 19 Mar '19

19 Mar '19

https://www.parsonsadvocate.com/proposed-hydro-project-comes-to-a-halt/ Proposed Hydro Project Comes to a Halt By Heather Clower, The Parsons Advocate, March 18, 2019 Tim Williamson with FreedomWorks LLC received the eagerly awaited response, from the Monongahela National Forest Service, on March 4, in regards to the permit to study the feasibility of the proposed Pumped Storage Hydro plant. The studies were to include core drilling, observe sub-surface geology, analyze soil material, geochemistry analysis, soil chemistry analysis, and biological studies on the lands proposed to be utilized for the facility. The letter, signed by Forest Supervisor Shawn Cochran, stated that after evaluation of the permit request, he must “reject it for failure to meet initial screening criteria.” The response further stated, “The proposal is inconsistent, and it cannot be made consistent, with applicable forest land and resource management plan standards and guidelines for management of the area.” Examples for arriving at this decision explained in this letter included the requirement of vegetation and earth disturbances to occur within the Big Run Bog and would defy the management objectives he continued to outline. The letter concluded stating, “Rejection of this unsolicited proposal is not subject to administrative appeal.” A phone interview was conducted with Williamson, to which he stated, “There was no legal basis for denying the project. We’re not going to touch that (the bog), we are four hundred feet below that and off to the side,” he explained, “Big Run Bog was not going to be affected.” According to Williamson, during a January 11 government-to-business meeting in Farmington, several local entities “crashed and manipulated” the discussion which potentially persuaded the decision of the National Forest Service. Williamson stated the issue is the politics behind this project, or lack thereof. As a result, he is seeking out the support of more local and state representatives and officials. “This is not only a Tucker County project, it is a West Virginia project and without support, it will never happen,” he stated. The status of the project is currently in a “wait and see” mode, as he allowed “It is technically denied, and it’s illogical to spend one more dollar to go further.” Williamson hopes to gain the support of not only state representatives, but also the environmental groups. He compared the possibilities of the contributions of this proposed hydro facility to that of the racing industry in Charles Town, WV. According to Williamson, the thoroughbred racetrack grosses around $75,000,000 each year, a leading income provider for the state. This facility, based on his configurations, would be capable of generating around $100,000,000. One positive for FreedomWorks that came out of the denial was the extra studies they were required to do. As a result, he stated “I’m convinced more than ever this thing is viable.” Williamson stressed again, this was just a permit to study feasibility, not to begin any construction or final plans. He elaborated more on the benefits it could serve in the instance a flood were to hit the Cheat River. In a follow up email, he shared statistics from the National Weather Service (NWS) and the detrimental “Super Storm Sandy” as an example. He stated the NWS knew on October 22, 2012 that the barometric pressure reading from this storm was at the lowest point ever recorded on earth, which was seven days prior to the storm making land fall. “What if a similar Cat5 storm event like Sandy or Camille were to occur in the future, but set its sights on the Cheat River, instead of New York like Sandy did in 2012, or the James River, like Camille did in 1969? If the proposed Tucker County PSH project were specifically designed and built to make electricity and address flood control, it might be available to address such an extreme flooding event on the Cheat River,” he exclaimed. Williamson continued, “Because with seven days notice and the proper build-outs, there would be ample time for proposed TC-PSH project to gradually release water into the Cheat River, before recharging the reservoirs with flood waters whenever a declared emergency flooding condition exists. The current proposed TC-PSH project turbines are already sized large enough to handle potential dual-duty, if the section from proposed lower reservoir spillway to Cheat River was designed, funded, and built to siphon emergency flood water from the Cheat River.” As of now, this is where the project stands. Without access to the property to construct the facility, the project can go no further. Williamson is on the search for support for this proposal and is making the necessary contacts to do such. The Parsons Advocate will continue to report on the topic matter as it progresses. Sent from my iPad

1 0

Rowlesburg discusses need for sewer upgrade with residents
by Duane Nichols via CLEAR 17 Mar '19

17 Mar '19

PRESTON COUNTY NEWS & JOURNAL Rowlesburg discusses need for sewer upgrade with residents by Theresa Marthey STAFF WRITER, WV News, March 15, 2019 In October 2016, Friends of the Cheat Executive Director Amanda Pitzer takes a closer look at what the state Department of Environmental Protection said is an unpermitted sewer pipe in Rowlesburg. The town has begun the process of addressing problems with its sewage system. • File photo by Theresa Marthey The town of Rowlesburg placed this sign near the Rowlesburg Community Park where a pipe discharges sewage into the Cheat River. • File photo by Theresa Marthey Rowlesburg Mayor Eric Bautista, left, sits next to council members Eric Baumgardner and Delores Riggs during a sewer informational meeting Monday. • Staff photo by Theresa Marthey Thrasher Engineering engineer Ashley Reed shares information about the Rowlesburg sewer project with those in attendance at a meeting Monday. • Staff photo by Theresa Marthey ROWLESBURG — Raw sewage discharging into the Cheat River after rain and West Virginia Department of Environmental Protection violations were just two of the reasons given for the town of Rowlesburg to pursue upgrading its sewage treatment facility. At an informational meeting Monday, town council and Thrasher Engineering representatives described how deep the problem is. “We want to educate the public on the situation the town is in and why,” Thrasher engineer Ashley Reed said. Mayor Eric Bautista told the crowd of about 15 people that the town has been receiving notices from the DEP, and something needs to be done sooner rather than later. “In 2016, we received a $200,000 fine from the DEP for violations,” Bautista said. “Fortunately, with the help of an attorney who specializes in this type of violation, it was reduced to $2,500.” Bautista said he’s been asked why the town doesn’t just keep hiring an attorney to talk down the fine. “The bottom line is there will come a time when the DEP says no more breaks, and we are fined $400,000,” Bautista said. “We can’t afford that. We have to fix it — or sign the town over to the DEP.” Reed said with the decrease in the 2016 fine, the town was also given a consent order by the DEP requiring an effort to move forward to fix the problems with the system. “First, we have to modify the sewage permit because it is classified as a sanitary sewer overflow releasing raw sewage to the system,” Reed said. “We are working toward changing the town’s permit with the DEP to be recognized as a CSO system.” CSO is short for Combined Sewer Overflows. These systems were constructed with sanitary sewer collection systems that carried both wastewater and storm water in the same pipes. “We will begin long-term control plans that will outline future projects to fix the system over the next 40 years of ideas to correct the system,” Reed said. “Modifying the permit will cost.” After the town receives the approval from the DEP to recognize their system as a CSO, they can move toward deciding on which projects they want to work on first to begin fixing the system. “We could work the larger projects or smaller projects in the plan first,” Reed said. “It would be up to the town.” Bautista said there will be rate increases, although the town will try to keep them at a minimum. “We are probably going to have to raise sewer rates,” he said. “Thrasher was telling us it doesn’t have to be all at once. It could be one or two dollars a month.” Friends of the Cheat Director Amanda Pitzer applauded the town for addressing the problem and offered her group’s assistance. The council also had their regular meeting following the special meeting. They had the second reading of the trash and vacant building ordinances. Those now go onto the third reading and signing into law at the next meeting. The council also announced it is in the beginning stages of planning a spring clean-up day for the town with details to be announced. Staff Writer Theresa Marthey can be reached at (304) 276-1127 or by email at tmarthey(a)prestonnj.com. URL: https://www.wvnews.com/prestoncountynews/news/rowlesburg-discusses-need-for…

1 0

Hydro Project in Upper Cheat Watershed has been rejected by US Forest Service
by Duane Nichols via CLEAR 14 Mar '19

14 Mar '19

US Forest Service shuts down proposed Tucker County hydro project | Breaking News https://www.wvgazettemail.com/news/us-forest-service-shuts-down-proposed-tu…

1 0

Are Buffer Zones Needed Around Locks and Dams Due to Horizontal Drilling & Fracking?
by Duane Nichols via CLEAR 05 Mar '19

05 Mar '19

http://www.frackcheckwv.net/2019/03/05/are-buffer-zones-needed-at-locks-dam… Are Buffer Zones Needed at Locks & Dams Due to Horizontal Drilling & Fracking? Cross Creek Reservoir in Washington County, PA Buffer zones debated for drilling near PA state’s dams Edited from an Article by Don Hopey, Pittsburgh Post Gazette, March 2, 2019 Hundreds of shale gas wells are crowding close to and sometimes snaking under Pennsylvania’s many dams. That’s because there’s no risk-based setback requirements for shale gas development around dams in Pennsylvania, now the nation’s second biggest natural gas producing state, with more than 11,500 Marcellus and Utica shale gas wells drilled and fracked, another 10,000 permitted, and the potential for tens of thousands more in the future. That’s in contrast to buffer zones of 3,000 to 4,000 feet around scores of dams in other shale gas drilling states. Examples of shale gas wells near dams in southwest Pennsylvania are easy to find. CNX has drilled and fracked 17 Marcellus Shale gas wells within 2,100 feet of the Beaver Run Dam in Westmoreland County, where a few thousand feet farther from the dam, the company lost control of a Utica Shale well last month, causing pressure spikes and gas flaring at nine nearby shallow wells near the reservoir. In light of studies and analyses that suggest gas drilling could cause surface subsidence, some say that kind of encroachment is cause for concern or at least for a focused risk study to assess what could happen to dams when drilling and fracking occurs nearby. Anthony Ingraffea, a civil and environmental engineering professor emeritus at Cornell University in New York, said such studies should be done to ensure public safety, especially around bigger dams where a breach or failure could cause loss of life or economic ruin. “Yes, shale gas extraction will cause subsidence, and yes, dams will subside. But the question is how much, and then how much damage will that cause?” Mr. Ingraffea said. “Is subsidence the biggest issue raised by shale gas development? Probably not in Pennsylvania right now. But if a dam fails, then it will be a big ‘Ooops.’ I think it would be better to be safe than sorry.” That was the approach by the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers Southwest Division which since 2011 has prohibited shale gas well drilling and fracking, horizontal laterals and pipeline routes within 3,000 feet of 90 of its dams in Texas, Oklahoma, Kansas, Arkansas and Missouri to protect them from structural damage and reduce the risk of catastrophic collapse. And three years ago, the Fort Worth District in that same corps division conducted an engineering study that resulted in widening the 3,000 foot buffer zone to 4,000 feet around the massive Joe Pool Dam west of Dallas. The corps was concerned that continued and close drilling and fracking near the dam would put it in jeopardy. If Pennsylvania had a 4,000 foot buffer around its dams, 303 shale gas wells would be within that exclusionary zone, according to mapping done for the Post-Gazette by Fractracker Alliance, an environmental nonprofit with mapping and data collection expertise. And 167 of those are drilled and fracked wells within 3,000 feet of 27 dams in 10 counties, including wells close to 19 dams in seven southwestern Pennsylvania counties — Allegheny, Beaver, Butler, Greene, Fayette, Washington and Westmoreland. The corps’ Joe Pool Dam study also recommended that deep wastewater injection wells — the kind that activated deep bedrock faults and caused 77 deep but minor earthquakes around Youngstown, Ohio, in 2011 — be kept five miles away from the dam. Seven of the dozen deep injection wells in Pennsylvania are closer to dams than that, according to Fractracker mapping. Matt Kelso, Fractracker’s manager of data and technology, called on the corps in Pittsburgh to take a more proactive role in assessing the risk to dams. “The Army Corps of Engineers has identified this particular risk with oil and gas wells and especially brine disposal wells in close proximity to dams in one part of the country, and yet the same practice is essentially unregulated in other locations,” Mr. Kelso said. “We encourage USACE to enact these common-sense preventative measures nationwide to protect this critical infrastructure.” Drilling sideways or deep “horizontal drilling” Modern shale gas wells don’t just go straight down. Some laterals can extend horizontally through the shale for more than three miles. So directional drilling from well pads located more than 4,000 feet from dams can also allow well laterals to burrow closer to, or even under, dams. One such operation is Range Resources Appalachia LLC’s Avella Land Ventures well pad about a mile away from the Washington County-owned Cross Creek Park Dam. Three well laterals end approximately 400, 600 and 1,000 feet from the breastworks, and one 6,600 foot lateral stretches under the dam. Washington County’s original 2003 lease for gas drilling under the 2,400 acre park prohibited drilling within 3,000 feet of the dam, but that was changed to accommodate newer directional drilling technology, said Lisa Cessna, executive director of the Washington County Planning Commission now and in 2012 when the commission approved the change. Ms. Cessna said the change was made after the county consulted with engineers, but Bob Donnan, a local anti-drilling activist, said the higher revenue the county received also came at a higher risk. “One has to wonder what sort of risk that added to a potential failure of the earthen breastworks of the dam ,” he said. “The resulting flooding would severely affect the small town of Avella.” State Rep. Rob Matzie, D-Beaver, introduced legislation two years ago that would have established a 4,000 foot setback from dams for wells and pipelines, but the bill didn’t get out of committee. He plans to reintroduce it this spring. “The number of wells within 4,000 feet of our dams speaks to the need to get some regulation in place,” said Mr. Matzie, whose interest in the issue was prompted by plans to route the Shell Falcon ethane pipeline close to the Ambridge Reservoir. “I’m a big supporter of the natural gas industry, but I want to be cautious about our water supplies,” he said. “The industry should be cautious too if it wants to be a good neighbor. If setbacks are good enough for Texas they should be good for Pennsylvania too.” Buffer zone debate being exposed The corps’ Pittsburgh District has not established exclusionary safety zones between shale gas operations and any of its 13 flood control dams or 17 river navigation locks and dams in Western Pennsylvania. And although all of the corps’ dams and locks in the state were built years before the first shale gas well was drilled, the local corps district hasn’t conducted specific engineering studies to assess impacts and risks from present and future shale gas development. Officials in the corps’ Pittsburgh district office and its headquarters in Washington, D.C., say they have no plans to do new engineering assessments, but both have talked about doing so. “We pulled a team together to see if we needed a specific process. We found that there was an ‘area of concern’ in the Southwest, but in Pennsylvania we did not identify a high level of concern for our projects,” said Tammy Conforti, a civil engineer and acting dam and levee safety officer in the corps’ D.C. office. “We concluded it was not an issue for a national policy, and (shale gas development) posed a threat similar to other industries. “At this point we don’t feel a need to drill down and develop a specific approach for fracking, although there might be concerns on specific sites.” So far in Pennsylvania, only two corps’ projects — Lock and Dam No. 8 on the Allegheny River near Kittanning in Armstrong County, and Lock and Dam No. 2 on the Monongahela River in North Braddock, Allegheny County — have shale gas wells within 4,000 feet, and the Pittsburgh corps office said it has no issues with those. But the Pittsburgh corps did have some concern a decade ago when shale gas development was just getting started in the state, said Werner Loehlein, the corps’ water management chief in Pittsburgh until his retirement two years ago and now a senior lecturer in the civil and environmental engineering program at the University of Pittsburgh. “One of the concerns we had then was what could happen when horizontal well laterals go under our dams,” Mr. Loehlein said. There were also internal concerns about the cumulative impacts on corps dams of hundreds or thousands of shale gas wells. “There were meetings about those concerns and we talked about a 3,000 foot buffer,” Mr. Loehlein said. “And I do remember there was talk about doing a research study. There was interest in doing it, but it just didn’t happen.” Jeffrey Hawk, a Pittsburgh District corps spokesman, said the corps reviews shale gas well locations near its dams during “periodic assessments,” and evaluates the risk they pose. Although drillers and pipeline companies are not required to notify the corps about shale gas development operations on private land near dams, Mr. Hawk emphasized that the Pittsburgh corps has a “rigorous” dam safety inspection program that includes the use of inclinometers to determine if its dams are sinking, and includes regular inspections for cracks and leaks. “To date,” he said, “the Pittsburgh District’s assessments have not determined any significant risks to district dams and no damage has occurred.” Much is unknown about fracking impacts There’s been no damage in Texas either, but the corps’ Fort Worth District, in coordination with the Southwestern Division has gone the extra 3,000 or 4,000 feet in ensuring dam safety. That approach was embodied in an April 2011 letter to the mayor of Grand Prairie, where the Joe Pool Dam is located, from Col. Richard Muraski Jr., then commander of the Fort Worth District. Mr. Muraski wrote that the corps was adopting the buffer zone because it had “significant dam safety concerns” about the impact of hydraulic fracturing, or fracking, on its dams. “Much is unknown about the impact of hydraulic fracturing and removal of oil and natural gas from formations in close proximity to USACE dams and other key structures,’ Mr. Muraski said in the letter. “Although hydrofracturing generally occurs in formations that are found more than a mile below the ground surface, there is concern that the disruption to the geologic structure of natural gas shale formations could result in subsidence of the underground structures supporting dams, resulting in damage to the dams and associated structures.” The Joe Pool study of February 2015, done for the corps by DLZ National Inc., an engineering consulting firm from Columbus, Ohio, found that the area’s closely spaced wells could cause dam subsidence of from 2 inches to 21 inches. “There were a lot of wells already around the dam and we were concerned that any type of subsidence from fracking or faults could produce (slumps) or displacement at the dam,” Mr. Muraski, now retired from the Army, said in a phone interview last month. Loree Baldi, chief of the Dam and Levee Safety Section and the geotechnical branch in the corps’ Fort Worth District, said corps concerns were heightened by memories of the Baldwin Hills Dam failure near Los Angeles in 1963, which killed five people and has been blamed on significant subsidence activated by oilfield extraction and deep injection well activity along a fault line. Ms. Baldi said the corps undertook the Joe Pool engineering study to determine if it could rule out negative impacts to its dam projects from drilling in the 8,600 foot deep Barnett Shale. By comparison, the Marcellus Shale in Pennsylvania lies between 5,000 and 9,000 feet underground. “But the information developed could not rule that out,” Ms. Baldi said. “The risk posed by shale gas wells near Joe Pool Dam was not acceptable to allow drilling to go forward. Other, outside experts reviewed our study and concluded the same thing.” Pennsylvania Under Consideration Pennsylvania agencies — the Department of Environmental Protection, Department of Conservation and Natural Resources, Game Commission, Fish and Boat Commission — own more than 250 dams. None of those agencies reported damage to their dams from shale gas operations, but none have conducted engineering studies to assess risks from existing and future gas development. The PA-DEP, which owns 10 small dams, and regulates the shale gas industry through permitting and enforcement, issued a statement saying it does not track distance between its dams and gas wells and does not consider seismic activity from fracking a risk to surface structures like dams. The PA-DEP, in the aftermath of one “induced seismic event,” causing several “low magnitude earthquakes apparently associated with hydraulic fracturing” in Lawrence County, does require seismic monitoring at shale gas wells in the northwestern part of the state and at underground injection wells for wastewater disposal. The state Dam Safety Program, part of the Department of Environmental Protection, oversees regulation of approximately 3,400 dams, including 747 classified as “high hazard” dams, meaning their failure or collapse would likely cause loss of human life. Roger Adams, director of PA-DEP’s Waterways Engineering and Wetlands Bureau, which contains the state Dam Safety Program, said many of the state’s dams, especially the high hazard dams, are designed to withstand a seismic event, like an earthquake. But subsidence is another matter, one that warrants watching, he said, noting that the concrete Duke Lake Dam in Ryerson Station State Park in Greene County cracked due to mining subsidence in 2005, causing the state to draw down the water in the popular recreational lake, which remains drained. “Subsidence raises different concerns because dams are not designed for subsidence,” said Mr. Adams, who is also president of the Association of State Dam Safety Officials. “Subsidence is not something we’ve heard much about, but something we need to look into.” Sent from my iPhone

1 0

2024

2023

2022

2021

2020

2019

2018

2017

2016

2015

2014

2013

2012

2011

2010

2009

2008

2007

2006

2005

CLEAR March 2019