Judge: Hydrant must go

Posted by Independent Weekender Editor on 5/16/13 • Categorized as News

————————————————

Judge rules hydrant must be removed from Montrose property

BY STACI WILSON (Staff Writer)

Published: May 11, 2013

MONTROSE – A hydrant used to fill a water truck must be removed from the residential lot where it was installed last year.

The hydrant, installed in January 2012 by Pennsylvania American Water Co. for anti-drilling activist Craig Stevens, is located on a property owned by Dr. Monica Marta at 12 Jessup St., on a “conditional use” lot in Montrose’s residential zone.

Mr. Stevens appealed a December decision against the hydrant by the borough’s zoning hearing board to Susquehanna County Court.

President Judge Kenneth Seamans handed down his order Wednesday upholding the zoning board’s decision.

Judge Seamans determined the hydrant was an unpermitted use and further ordered Mr. Stevens and/or Dr. Marta, with the assistance of PAWC, to remove the hydrant, pipes and concrete barriers within 45 days.

According to the decision, the conditional use on the property is only for light commercial customer service.

In the decision, the judge stated: “The appeal must be denied in that no permit was applied for and hence no permit was ever granted by the Montrose Zoning Hearing Board for the use of the property of Marta in a residential district to build and maintain a water distribution system for the purpose of transporting potable water outside the borough limits by truck.”

Mr. Stevens’ appeal was the result of a notice of violation for maintaining an unpermitted water distribution system. The notice of violation was issued to Dr. Marta in August by James Smith, the borough’s zoning officer.

Contact the writer: swilson@ independentweekender.com

http://thetimes-tribune.com/news/judge-rules-hydrant-must-be-removed-from-montrose-property-1.1487376

=======================================================

Montrose: Hydrant, Water Deliveries Violate Zoning

By By Dave Greber

• Councilman: Dimock ‘Thugs’ ‘Pirating’ Montrose Water

April 20, 2012  Updated Apr 20, 2012 at 11:42 PM EDT

Montrose, PA (WBNG Binghamton) A controversial spigot in the borough of Montrose that’s supplied water to residents in Dimock Twp. since early this year, has been ordered to be ripped out, and the deliveries stopped.

It’s just the latest in a series of issues that have poured from the hydrant, which is owned by Craig Stevens, of nearby Silver Lake Twp.

Stevens pays for the water, and since January, has delivered thousands of gallons to residents in Dimock Twp., who say natural gas drilling polluted their water.

A letter sent to the owner of the property where the spigot is located, Monica Marta, is signed by borough Zoning Officer James Smith. It says they’re in violation of a borough zoning ordinance, although it orders the deliveries to stop, and the hydrant to be torn out.

Stevens says the letter is yet another attack on him, and what he’s trying to do.

“Within days of setting it up, we were attacked by the borough, by the neighbors,” Stevens said. “Now, they’ve made it their their to get that thing shut down and removed, and for what reason, I don’t know. It makes me sick because I understand their position on bulk water sales. That’s a different issue. We’re trying to help people with this, and that’s all this is. Nothing’s charged for it. It’s a voluntary service.”

Stevens says if the hydrant does have to be torn out, he’ll look for another spot.

Meanwhile, Marta said Friday she has turned the matter over to her attorney.

Treasurer confronts activist over Chinese film crew visit

Posted by Independent Weekender Editor on 5/01/13

 BEFORE         AFTER

Will the REAL Scott Ely PLEASE STAND UP !!!!

Website Dimock Proud Contact Form Submitted

APRIL 29, 2013

From: Susan Oliver
Website: http://www.wpxenergy.com
Comment: DEP Statement on Franklin Forks Methane Migration Determination

After a 16-month investigation, the Department of Environmental Protection has determined that high levels of methane found in three private water wells in Franklin Township, Susquehanna County, cannot be attributed to natural gas drilling activity in that geographical area. DEP’s extensive investigation started in December 2011and included evaluation of the nearest natural gas wells, isotopic testing and analysis of historical water data to determine the origin of the methane.

The testing included water samples taken from three private water wells to compare with samples taken from natural gas wells located nearby and with water samples taken from the spring and private water well at Salt Springs State Park, which historically contains naturally occurring methane. The spring is approximately one mile from the affected homes. The testing determined that the water samples taken from the private water wells contained gas of similar isotopic makeup to the gas in the water samples taken from Salt Springs State Park. Additionally, the water wells and spring exhibited similar water chemistry, including the constituent’s barium, iron, total dissolved solids (TDS), chlorides, manganese and aluminum. DEP’s testing also determined that the gas in the water samples taken from the private water wells was not of the same origin as the natural gas in the nearby gas wells.

Additionally, agency staff evaluated information from a nearby mobile home park public water supply file relating to the its abandonment of a water source in 1998 due to elevated levels of methane, chlorides and TDS. The mobile home park is located approximately 2.3 miles from Franklin Forks, and this water well exhibited similar water chemistry to that of the three residential water supplies being investigated.

The owners of the private water wells affected by this investigation have been notified of DEP’s determination.

The real story on fracking, say scientists, is that the risks are small and the rewards immense.

John Stossel  | March 13, 2013

Celebrities are now upset about fracking, the injection of chemicals into the ground to crack rocks to release oil and gas. With everyone saying they want alternatives to foreign oil, I’d think celebrities would love fracking.

I’d be wrong. Lady Gaga, Yoko Ono and their group, Artists Against Fracking, don’t feel the love. Yoko sang, “Don’t frack me!” on TV.

Stopping fracking is the latest cause of the silly people. They succeeded in getting scientifically ignorant politicians to ban fracking in New York, Maryland and Vermont.

Hollywood gave an Oscar to “Gasland,” a documentary that suggests fracking will shove gas into some people’s drinking water, so the water will burn. It’s true that some water contains so much natural gas that you can light it.

But another documentary, “FrackNation,” shows that gas got into plumbing long before fracking came. There’s gas in the earth. That’s why it’s called “natural gas.” Some gets into well water. Environmental officials investigated the flames shown in “Gasland” and concluded that the pollution had nothing to do with fracking.

“FrackNation” director Phelim McAleer tried to confront “Gasland” director Josh Fox about this, but Fox wouldn’t answer his questions. Instead, he demanded to know whom McAleer works for. He also turned down my invitations to publicly debate fracking. Many activists don’t like to answer questions that don’t fit their narrative.

Even some homeowners who filed a lawsuit claiming that their water was poisoned by fracking weren’t happy to learn that their water is safe. I’d think they would be delighted, but “FrackNation” shows a couple reacting with outrage when environmental officials test their water and find it clean.

The real story on fracking, say scientists, is that the risks are small and the rewards immense. Fracking lowered the price of natural gas so much that Americans heat our homes for less, and manufacturing that once left America has returned. For those concerned about global warming, burning gas instead of oil or coal reduces CO2 emissions.

“Skeptical Environmentalist” author Bjorn Lomborg points out that “green” Europe promised to reduce emissions, but “only managed to cut half of what you guys accidentally happened to do when you stumbled on fracking.”

Still, the process sounds dangerous. It requires chemicals and explosions. So fracking is now scapegoated for the usual litany of things that peasants feared when threatened with curses centuries ago: livestock dying, bad crop yields, children born with deformities.

None of it is backed by scientific evidence. Even environmentalists who usually are too cautious (by my standards) see little danger. President Obama’s first EPA administrator, Lisa Jackson, told Congress that the EPA cannot show “that the fracking process has caused chemicals to enter groundwater.”

One of the more outlandish fears is that fracking will cause earthquakes. Silly people at MSNBC say fracking creates “a skyrocketing number of earthquakes.” Yes, cracking rocks does cause vibrations. But then, so does construction with dynamite or jackhammers — not to mention trucks on the highway.

Time and again, as humans make a good-faith effort to find new, cleaner ways to produce the energy a growing population needs, environmentalists find a reason — often very small or non-existent — that makes the new method unacceptable.

They say coal is dirty and normal oil production might overheat the planet. Hydroelectric dams kill fish. Nuclear plants could suffer meltdowns. Windmills kill birds.

Some won’t be happy unless we go back to what we did before industrialization: burn lots of trees and die young.

Nothing is completely risk-free. Companies make mistakes. Chemical spills happen.

But those risks are manageable. They are also far preferable to the risk of paying more for energy — thereby killing opportunities for the poor.

So far, most regulators outside New York, Maryland and Vermont have ignored the silly people. So thanks to fracking, Americans pay less for heat (and everything else), the economy is helped, new jobs get created, we create less greenhouse gas, and for the first time since the 19th century, America may become a net exporter of energy.

Good things happen if the silly people can’t convince all politicians to ban progress.

OPEN LINK FOR DATES OF FREE SCREENINGS  -  http://ow.ly/i/1KghH/original

Hearing board judge lets Dimock water appeal continue

A state Environmental Hearing Board judge has denied a natural gas drilling company’s motion to throw out a recently reinstated appeal by two Dimock Twp. families who object to the state’s remedy for their methane-tainted water supplies.

Judge Bernard A. Labuskes Jr. rejected Cabot Oil & Gas Corp.’s argument that the families had forfeited their right to appeal by accepting payments that the company had put into escrow accounts for them. The money had been set aside as part of a Department of Environmental Protection order that required the company to restore or replace 18 damaged water supplies.

The families have argued that the remedy outlined in the order – payments tied to the value of their homes and a now-expired offer to install treatment systems – is not sufficient to permanently replace their water wells and would not remove contaminants other than methane. Cabot denies that its operations affected the water supplies.

The two families, the Elys and Huberts, are the last of 12 that initially appealed the state’s order with Cabot. The others withdrew their hearing board appeals after they settled a separate lawsuit they brought against the company in federal court.

The Ely and Hubert appeals were briefly withdrawn by their former attorneys without their consent in an “unauthorized, inaccurate, ineffective, and void” action Judge Labuskes said was made by “attorneys who no longer had [the families'] interests at heart.”

In his ruling on Friday, Judge Labuskes upheld the reinstatement of the two families’ appeals and found that their receipt of the escrow payments did not preclude them from continuing their case.

“So long as a party is aggrieved by a Departmental action, it may pursue an appeal, even if its receipt of some benefits make it less aggrieved than it otherwise might have been,” he wrote.

He also pointed out that Cabot had committed “very clearly” to the board in the past that it would not take the position that the families waived their rights or any claims against the company, including their right to continue with the appeal, if they accepted the escrow funds.

“Somewhat remarkably,” he wrote, Cabot “has now taken that very position.”

In a separate motion filed last week, Cabot offered to install effective treatment systems at the homes if the board agreed to stay or dismiss the appeal and the families agreed to certain conditions, including not having access to the systems without a Cabot representative present and signing a confidentiality agreement that bars them from photographing the system, discussing it with the press or disclosing water sampling results until after the testing phase of the installation is over.

The families’ attorneys have until Tuesday to file their response to Cabot’s motion.

NOTE:  This means that:

The Ely family collected $153,008.00 from the monies held in escrow by the PA DEP.  The Ely family no longer lives at the 8.28 acre property in question. They’ve built and live in a 7,000 sq. ft. new house on Mr. Ely’s deceased father’s land. They did not accept a free water treatment system.

The Hubert family collected $25,112.00 from the monies held in escrow by the PA DEP. They do not have a dwelling on the 2.93 acre parcel. It is an empty lot. They did not accept a free water teatment system. Not even sure if there’s a water well on the property.

Open PDF file:  escrow-collected

The “Gas Man” Never Leased Natural Gas

2013 February 7

by EID Guest Blogger

New anti natural gas video, “Gas Man,” offers a humorous look at natural gas leasing, but misses the mark completely on accuracy of the process for landowners.

We were recently sent this letter from a supporter formerly associated with one of the several trade associations supporting natural gas who wishes to remain anonymous. It’s about a new video circulating where a folk singer attempts to describe the process of leasing for natural gas development on one’s property. According to the writer, the video is humorous, sure, but when it comes to accuracy it couldn’t be further from the truth.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8PSVO0e0ing

(The above video makes as much sense as our video does:)

GASMAN spoof by DIMOCK PROUD

►

February 5, 2013     from: Diane Jeffer

Thanks to natural gas, market forces, technology, and private sector activity, C02 emissions drop to a 20-year low

Thursday, August 16, 2012

http://tomwilber.blogspot.com/2012/08/cabot-settles-water-law-suit-with.html

Name: Ramona

Comment: I came upon your website sort of accidentally, by way of research…and I’m glad that I did. I’m a student who lives in Los Angeles, and I’m writing a research paper for my Environmental Christian Ethics class on fracking. I’m currently reading Seamus McGraw’s book, though I doubt I will have it completed before my report is due. I knew very little about fracking, but in my research I’ve discovered that there seems to be an overwhelmingly negative response to it. Fracking is the latest cause celebre. Even my professor (originally from Texas) speaks of it as if it is a personal affront to mankind and the environment. Although I’m still somewhat confused as to whether it’s harmful, if nothing else I can see that there really is two sides to every story. After reading through the stories and blogs on your website – from RESIDENTS, I can understand your anger and frustration. I just wanted to say “thank you” for putting your side out there. I’m going to use some of the information from your site (don’t worry, I will cite it!) in my paper. Hopefully, my professor won’t grade me down because of her personal convictions. This website is something that EVERYONE needs to see…
Media Request?:

Does anyone know who the thief is that took the mannequin from Jim Grimsley’s front yard?

What have 18 families been offered by Cabot Oil & Gas – and what have 11 families refused to accept?

CLICK BELOW TO OPEN THE PDF FILE:

EXHIBIT D to Consent Order

Comment Received 07/19/2012:  Probably right around now the water pipeline from Montrose to Dimock would be just about finished. How about some sort of Thank You to all the people who stood up and said No.  How many people would have had their lawns and driveways torn up. They would have probably been forced to hook up or pay road frontage. Developers would have been thinking how many homes can I squeeze onto a farm?. For what?  The liar litigants who never needed the pipeline?  The liars who refused testing and treatment?  The ones who once they permitted testing found out that the contaminate in their water comes from their septic.? They have been permitted to bully and push people around for quite a while. They are more than happy to toss around the “I have a lawyer” phrase.  Everyone including the supervisors who stood up and said NO should be thanked. 

These people have been receiving water for free for almost 4 yrs now. (Yes, they continue to get it even though they don’t need it). Have they ever thanked the people who used their hard earned money to buy it? Did they thank the children who collected it?  I doubt it.  Do they thank the truck driver that comes almost every day with the water and the driver of the escort truck? Probably not.  Where are the media now to expose them?  They created these monsters they should expose them for what they are.  Everyone who has ever stood up to any of them should be thanked.

The following e-mail was sent to dimockproud@gmail.com:

Has anyone had problems with their Dimock Proud signs being destroyed or stolen???  I’m on my 4th sign.  I proudly  post the signs on MY property.  This only leads me to believe the Anti’s are removing them from MY property and trespassing in order to do so.  I guess I’ll have to p/u another handful of signs and maybe place some at the end of Carter Road as I’ve been told the owner of the property the old school house sits on (across from Carter Rd) is with US!

Unfortunately, Dimock, PA, is not the only area with an undeserved reputation. Pavillion, Wyoming, is also suffering similar image abuse. Below is an excerpt from the Casper Star-Tribune written by Jeremy Fugleberg:

CASPER, Wyo. — Jon Martin’s letter from the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency is worn and folded in thirds, its words underlined with a pink highlighter past its prime.

The letter, water well testing results, should be Martin’s ticket to retirement — proof his water is fine and his land and home east of Pavillion worth selling.

Yet potential buyer after potential buyer has turned away because of the town’s reputation, now stained with international perceptions of polluted water and environmental conflict.

“Everybody who walked in my door would say, ‘Tell me about your water,’” Martin said. “I would let them read that EPA letter, but it didn’t seem to make any difference because of the perception that’s out there, that the water in Pavillion is bad. Period.

“That’s the perception, but it’s not the truth.”

The town and surrounding area in west-central Wyoming, home to only a few hundred people, has found itself the center of global attention after several residents living in a natural gas field outside the town said they feared nearby gas wells had ruined their well water.

The area is now stuck with a reputation for water gone bad because of energy development. That reputation has driven away both customers and land buyers, hindered loan financing and driven a wedge between neighbors.

While those with concerns continue their quest to find out why their water is bad, some of their neighbors are fed up with the negative publicity and the damage done.

“We were quiet too long,” said Martin, sitting at neighbor Steve Hugus’ table. “We just thought the story would go away. And it didn’t.”

Comment from J&D:

I would like to know how a handful of people can continuously get away with misleading individuals, Government Agencies, politicians, actors, the media, etc. into believing lies and false information. Our wonderful media does not portray the truth about what has been going on with the litigants from Carter Road. We the people of Dimock township are fed up with the media referring to any incident reported as problems in Dimock. The only problem Dimock township has is the small handful of people on Carter Road. They have single handedly torn our township down. People nationwide think Dimock Township is a disaster zone. They have devalued our property and ruined the reputation of a very beautiful area in Pennsylvania.  This whole farce has caused stress, anguish and heartache for the entire community because of a few individuals’ greed. They have used any vehicle they could for their own personal agenda, which is a get rich scheme of becoming instant millionaires. They are using the lie of tainted water to reach their goal as they carry around a milk jug of dirty water from who knows where. If they really wanted better water, they would have cooperated with DEP and Cabot Oil in drilling new water wells and installing filtering systems (at no cost to them – free of charge) like their  neighbors did. They are not fooling us, we all know the truth!    Unfortunately, it seems to me when issues like this arise, no matter what the results, industry HAS to be the blame! Now that EPA has come into the area to do more extensive water testing at our expense what type of results are they looking for to determine that Cabot and fracking ISN’T the cause of the litigants claim?  What is it really going to take? A thought to ponder…….Enough is Enough!  Media Request?: