Letter of Concerns RE: water analysis and reporting of test results practices of PADEP

The pdf of this 10-page letter linked elsewhere is not copy-able. I have OCR’d it and save it here, if you want to copy and paste quotes:

Letter Sec Krancer RE lab test protocol

Here is my summary of abbreviated quotes:

“(PADEP) implemented a procedure by which various parameters are tested for in water samples and results are determined and recorded, but the entire test results are purposely…not reported to the homeowner complaining of water quality degradation from shale drilling activities.”

“…appears to be contrary to the full Mission Statement of the PADEP which provides: to provide for the Health and Safety of its citizens through a cleaner environment.”

“In sworn testimony…purposely allow it to deny itself and Pennsylvania citizens full water test results that were paid for, compiled and sit in the possession of the PA DEP”

“the Department purposely,…failed to identify to Mr. Kiskadden that many toxic, heavy metals were tested for and found in his drinking water.”

“denying itself the full test result information to form a scientific conclusion as to whether an individual’s water was impacted by drilling operations…the metals tested for and not reported at the direction of the (DEP) are
critical in making a determination of oil and gas operations’ impact on drinking water. The metals not reported, for example in Mr. Kiskadden’ s tests, have clearly and repeatedly in scientific studies been found as contaminants in oil and gas flowback and produced waters.”

“health impacts of exposure to such metals are well documented and staggering. Many of the metals associated with oil and gas operations that were found but not reported…are known as heavy metals or toxic metals…(some) identified as human carcinogens or possible human carcinogens”

Now, let’s take a quote from the Pittsburgh Tribune-Review. At first glance, it seems the speaker is trying to explain DEP’s actions. But…

“They could have 100 different (contaminants) from an analysis, but they’re going to report what’s related to what they’re trying to investigate,” said David Yoxtheimer, a hydrogeologist at Penn State’s Marcellus Center for Outreach and Research. “That’s pretty much standard industry practice.”

~ (My comment): True and accurate. The linked report prepared with help from DEP for the Marcellus Shale Coalition in 2009; it’s a list of metals found in drilling and flowback water. The highlighted ones are the metals the DEP has to test for (according to the EPA) but fail to report to the homeowner by using ‘Suite Code 942’ to filter the report. Wouldn’t those, then, be “related to what they’re trying to investigate”?


About steventodd

Both parties are broken by big money...what to do? I'm a dad, husband, son, taxpayer, voter, civil engineer, reporter, blogger, rabble-rouser and honest guy.
This entry was posted in Uncategorized. Bookmark the permalink.

3 Responses to Letter of Concerns RE: water analysis and reporting of test results practices of PADEP

  1. steventodd says:

    The NYT has picked up on this, rather quickly. My comments follow some quotes of concern.


    “Mr. Sunday said oil and gas division officials wanted to see only the results they deemed relevant to determining whether drinking water was being contaminated by Marcellus Shale gas drilling and production.”

    ~ (My comment): This is a very incompetent decision, given the following, of which DEP is well aware.

    “Toxicology tests on Mr. Kiskadden and the other six plaintiffs who live within a mile of a Range Resources drill site and wastewater pond in Amwell Township have found the presence of toluene, benzene and arsenic in their bodies, according to the complaint.”

    ~ (My comment): And now, for something really weird:

    “the Marcellus Shale Coalition, an industry group, said that the state lab had been endorsed as “well-managed, efficient and highly functional”.”

    ~ (My comment): This insinuates that “Industry Group” MSC thinks this. MSC should point out they are not a lab. It should state whether or not it has an opinion on DEP’s lab being all those cool things. If they have an opinion, they should state the basis for it. Maybe one of their Associate Members – linked below – who is a lab gave the larger group this insight. If so, they must be identified and quoted. NYT should point out that MSC Board and and Associates include some of the largest donors to Gov Tom Corbett and many of PA’s elected leaders.



  2. kit says:

    thanks for your comment to nyt. someone needs to go to jail for this. My water was contaminated from a marcellus well, i received the 942 code, DEP said all my water came from my own property! The gas well was less than a mile away


  3. steventodd says:


    I couldn’t directly comment at NYT, which surprised me. I will follow this, and comment and share on social media. Please do the same. I would contact the law firm and/or Rep White’s office, to see if you can help with, or enjoin their efforts. You would be a very valuable resource, with firsthand knowledge. That’s something I am blessed not to have. Best luck to you and your family.


Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )


Connecting to %s