Fracking panel mulls water safety

Proposed regulations for how close natural gas wells can be located to wells and streams has some environmentalists claiming a state commission reviewing Marcellus shale drilling isn’t doing enough to protect residents of Western Maryland.

A presentation by a Duke University researcher who called for setbacks of one kilometer led to assertions by one commissioner that state officials were not protecting drinking water in Garrett and Allegany counties from fracking operations.

“The state does not support the conclusions of his research,” Paul Roberts, a citizen member of the commission, said, speaking of a presentation given by Avner Vengosh, a professor of geochemistry and water science at Duke University.

Vengosh gave a presentation of his research by phone Monday morning. During the presentation, the researcher said there was evidence that methane appears in most drinking water wells to some degree but that the amount present in wells where fracking occurs is higher in some cases. That amount decreases farther from the natural gas drilling well.

Vengosh urged the panel to consider a one-kilometer — or 3,300 feet — setback from sources of drinking water.

“We really have very limited information about what is going on,” Vengosh said. “If I were in your position, I would try to be as cautious as possible.”

The setbacks are expected to be part of a final report containing recommendations for possible regulations regarding fracking in Maryland.

The Marcellus Shale Advisory Commission Monday outlined a new timeline in which it hopes to deliver a final report in October rather than August, a date originally set by Gov. Martin J. O’Malley in an executive order.

“It’s an ambitious schedule but we’re going to try to make it,” said commission Chair David Vanko, dean of the Jess and Mildred Fisher College of Science and Mathematics at Towson University. “It’s going to be a long summer.

The commission still needs to complete economic, health and risk assessment studies, release those for public comment and potentially revise them all before combining the information into one report.

The commission, which has met more than 30 times since its formation in 2011, will meet five more times from May to September.

The panel’s work is likely to play a key role when the governor and the General Assembly decide whether to allow natural gas fracking and, if so, how aggressively to regulate it.

Fracking — the technical term is “hydraulic fracturing” — is a powerful drilling process in which millions of gallons of water laced with toxic chemicals are used to fracture rocks, freeing up the gas inside. Concerns about fracking’s impact on water supplies and other environmental fears have led some to oppose the drilling. Supporters say the economic benefits of fracking are too attractive to ban or limit the practice and that environmental protections can be enacted.

Currently, the setback recommended by state officials is 1,000 feet from sources of public drinking water and 2,000 feet from private drinking wells but that can be reduced to as low as 1,000 feet if the company can show the drinking water well is not downhill from the fracking well.

“A 1,000-foot setback is not enough protection,” Roberts said.

Roberts worked with Del. Heather R. Mizeur, D-Montgomery, earlier this year on a bill that would have imposed the one-kilometer setback. The state opposed the bill. Roberts said that is because the state is dismissive of Vengosh’s research.

Christine E. Conn, director of strategic land planning for the Maryland Department of Natural Resources, said Roberts and others are misinterpreting the facts.

“We’re not disputing the results of his study at all,” Conn said, adding that Vengosh’s work could not determine if the contamination came from below ground or as the result of above-ground spilling of contaminated fracking water. Conn said the working theory is that surface spills and older capped wells, which Vengosh said fail at the rate of nearly 70 percent, are the primary causes of contamination.

“That’s where our thinking is,” Conn said. “The study is not faulty at all.”

Conn said there is still room to negotiate and change setbacks as the science improves.

“They’re not static,” Conn said. “They’re going to change as we get new information. Right now we’re at that stage of trying to develop the best practices.”