PA Environment Digest

Share this:

Environmental Quality Board Tables Vote On Accepting Petition For Study To Increase Setbacks From Shale Gas Wells Until Last Minute Comments Can Be Reviewed

On April 8, the Environmental Quality Board voted 16 to 3 to table a vote on whether to accept a rulemaking petition for study to increase setbacks from shale gas wells until comments submitted at the last minute to the Board can be reviewed.

Commissioner Kathryn Zerfuss, representing the Public Utility Commission on the Board made the motion and was seconded by Matt Osenbach, representing Sen. Gene Yaw (R-Lycoming).

“There has been some additional information that has been submitted to the board, to the board members, as early as this morning, and it seems considerable and it's in relation to the petition,” said Commissioner Zerfuss. “There have been letters being submitted by industry the past couple days, up to and including late last night or yesterday evening. It's a lot of information. So suffice it to say there's a lot of passion on the topic and on the petition.

“My humble opinion is that I would like more time to review this additional information so I am better prepared to ask questions of the petitioners and of the department. I think it behooves us to take some extra time to review these materials, so therefore I move that we lay this petition on the table,” Commissioner Zerfuss said.

The motion to table consideration was not supported by Sen. Carolyn Comitta (D-Chester), Rep. Greg Vitali (D-Delaware) and John Walliser from DEP’s Citizens Advisory Council.

Letters Submitted To The Board

-- April 2, 2025 letter from Marcellus Shale Gas Coalition

-- April 4, 2025 letter from American Petroleum Institute - Pennsylvania

-- April 7, 2025 letter from PA Independent Oil & Gas Association [Read more here]

-- April 7, 2025 letter from PA Chamber of Business & Industry

What Does Vote To Accept Petition For Study Mean?

The motion to Table came after a lengthy discussion between Glendon King, representing Rep. Martin Causer (R-Cameron) and Acting Secretary Jessica Shirley and other agency staff on what a vote to accept the petition to study actually meant at this point.

“So, we're all making decisions right now about whether it makes any sense, again, to vote on something that would ban natural gas development in the state,” said King. “And I don't think that makes the least bit of sense for anyone to even approve for further study at this stage, considering everything going on in the energy world at this point.”

Acting Secretary Shirley responded by saying-- “The petition vote is just that they understand that we believe that it meets the criteria of the petition policy for further study. The actual vote on the actual policy would come far later, and if a rulemaking is proposed.”

She added-- “It is possible that the department proposes something different that is not effectively a ban on oil and gas development.

“We don't even know that that's what the petition policy would be, it's something that we would have to look at.

“So, I don't personally know if it would be a ban on natural gas development based on what's in the petition. That's something we would have to look at.”

Petitioner Presentation

As is EQB policy, groups submitting a rulemaking petition have the opportunity to present the petition to the Board in a five-minute presentation before any action is taken. This is that presentation--

Good morning. My name is Lisa Hallowell. I'm a senior attorney with the Environmental Integrity Project here representing the Clean Air Council and the Environmental Integrity Project.

This petition for rulemaking requests greater protective buffers from new, unconventional or fracking sites to people's homes, drinking wells, waterways, hospitals, daycares, and schools.

Since 2012, 42 independent peer-reviewed studies show fracking at current setback distances has caused dangerous impacts to health and the environment due to releases of benzene and other harmful fracking pollutants.

This proposed regulation is narrowly drafted. It does not seek to ban fracking or relocate existing sites.

It only applies to new unconventional oil and gas wells and sets common-sense data-driven protective buffers.

This is a screenshot taken through a bedroom window in Washington County, Pennsylvania. Imagine this was your home. [The photo was of a shale gas well pad flare included in the photos accompanying this article.]

At its core, this petition is about the state ensuring that Pennsylvanians can feel safe in their homes and in this Commonwealth we all share.

Would you feel assured your health was protected here?

For most Pennsylvanians, their home is their biggest investment they will make.

EQB has a mandate to protect the safety and property rights of persons residing in areas where fracking occurs.

This is a daycare approximately 1,046 feet from an unconventional well site.

If you had to leave your toddler here for eight plus hours per day, would you feel assured that their health was protected?

Nothing in the Oil and Gas Act states that the current setbacks are a maximum, and the Pennsylvania Supreme Court has stated that Section 3215, which includes the current setbacks, permits agencies to go farther.

Industries claim that this Board lacks the authority to act on this petition is not supported by these laws.

The [state] Oil and Gas Act, Clean Streams Law and Air Pollution Control Act give EQB the authority and mandate to promulgate regulations to protect health and the environment.

The agency's duties under the Pennsylvania Constitution to conserve and maintain Pennsylvania resources further bolster this authority.

The setbacks requested are a common sense step to better protect Pennsylvanians.

This petition recommends data-supported minimum setbacks from new fracking wells.

42 independent peer-reviewed studies show serious health impacts at current setback distances.

I urge the board to read through Attachment C for a summary of the health effects observed, as well as the studies themselves, to understand the gravity of the harms caused by fracking at current setback distances.

The harms documented are vast, including infant mortality, respiratory and neurological ailments, and rare childhood cancers.

Study after study showed that the closer people and wells are to fracking sites, the worse the documented harm has been.

The state relied upon DEP's Southwest short-term air studies in setting the current setbacks, but DEP itself has stated in legal filings that these studies did not analyze cancer risk, did not involve any public health officials and only monitored for less than a week.

DEP's Air [Quality] Chief, who I believe was in the room today, admitted that these studies were designed to serve as planning tools, not standards to protect public health.

DEP also admitted that the studies did not make a conclusion as to whether fracking emissions were safe or unsafe and failed to analyze long-term effects, cumulative effects, or more than a few of the many fracking pollutants.

Don't believe the false narrative that protective buffers would ban fracking.

It would move new fracking sites outside of people's backyards and further away from water wells.

Industry has been drilling five-mile laterals in practice, so requiring new fracking wells to be one kilometer from buildings, 750 feet from streams and a mile from schools and hospitals is well within their abilities and usual practices and will not infringe on their ability to reach the gas they seek to extract.

Furthermore, Pennsylvanians want these common-sense setbacks.

We submit a letter here... and we're going to pass it out... from 28 Pennsylvania health and environmental groups, and there are hundreds of thousands of Pennsylvania members supporting this petition.

We also submit a petition signed by over 2,500 Pennsylvanians demanding these protective buffers.

The petition for rulemaking meets all the requirements under the board's regulations for moving forward.

42 independent peer-reviewed scientific studies show that fracking at current setbacks harms Pennsylvanians.

The Board has a statutory mandate to protect health and the environment, and the time to act is now.

Click Here for a link to supporting materials submitted by the petitioners.

Petition Background

On October 22, the Clean Air Council and Environmental Integrity Project-- as part of the Protective Buffers PA Coalition-- filed a 358-page rulemaking petition with the Environmental Quality Board asking it to increase minimum setback distances from shale gas wells from a minimum now of 500 feet to 3,281 feet. Read more here.

Specifically, the petition proposes--

-- 3,281 feet from any building;

-- 3,281 feet from any drinking water well;

-- 5,280 feet from any building serving vulnerable populations (e.g., schools, daycare centers, hospitals); and

-- 750 feet from any surface water of the Commonwealth.

In November, DEP announced it has determined the petition meets the initial criteria to be considered by the Board, including that the Board has the statutory authority to adopt a regulation setting more protective setbacks from shale gas wells.

Reactions

The petitioners-- Environmental Integrity Project and Clean Air Council-- released this statement on the EQB action--

“We are incredibly disappointed that the Environmental Quality Board voted not to consider our petition,” said Jen Duggan, Executive Director of the Environmental Integrity Project (EIP). “We will continue to make the legal and factual case to the board about the need for protective buffers and fight for these commonsense protections for Pennsylvanians.”

She added that the board made its decision to table the petition even though the Pennsylvania Department of Environmental Protection admitted that EIP and Clean Air Council had raised important legal arguments and provided the board with new health studies documenting harm to Pennsylvania communities from oil and gas operations.

“While our petition hangs in limbo, more gas wells will be drilled by peoples’ homes and schools, more undisclosed chemicals will sully our air and water, and more children will be sickened and hospitalized,” said Alex Bomstein, Clean Air Council Executive Director. “We need protective setbacks now to stop this public health emergency and we will do everything in our power to move them forward.”

Earthworks Pennsylvania Policy and Field Advocate Melissa Ostroff issued this statement on the EQB action--

“Yesterday’s decision ignores a mountain of peer-reviewed research showing that fracking harms the health of residents, especially children who live and go to school near wells. It also ignores DEP’s own recommendation to move forward with study on the petition.

“Hiding behind the need for ‘more time’ to listen to the oil and gas industry in order to delay public health protections for families is shameful. Residents living with fracking proposed in their backyards don’t have time to wait. And our coalition will continue to fight for their right to breathe clean air.”

Marcellus Shale Coalition president Jim Welty released this statement on tabling the petition--

"We appreciate the Environmental Quality Board for taking the time to further review this petition, which amounts to a direct ban on natural gas development in Pennsylvania. To be clear, as DEP has previously acknowledged, the General Assembly holds the exclusive authority to establish setback distances.

"The mere entertainment of such a draconian proposal threatens economic growth and opportunity for Pennsylvania and further imperils our Commonwealth’s access to a reliable and resilient electric grid.

"We will continue to work tirelessly with our partners and pragmatic policymakers to stop these attacks on Pennsylvania workers, royalty owners, and consumers, and focus on solutions to leveraging natural gas to move Pennsylvania forward."

Other Agenda Items

Also on the agenda were three regulations-

-- Final regulation setting site-specific methylmercury criterion for Ebaughs Creek in York County related to the York County Landfill-- was adopted;

-- Proposed regulation explicitly giving DEP authority to request delegation from EPA to enforce air quality regulations on existing sources included by reference in the federal program - was adopted; and

-- Proposed regulation amending the Land Recycling Program regulations to adopt a standard for chromium-- was adopted.

For available handouts and more information, visit the Environmental Quality Board webpage. Questions should be directed to Laura Griffin, laurgriffi@pa.gov or (717) 772-3277.

(Photos: top- Range Resources Augustine Drill Pad in Cecil Township; Augustine Drill Pad showing scale of operation; bottom- Map of Shale gas wells (red dots), conventional oil and gas wells (blue/green dots) in Cecil Township (DEP Oil & Gas Program); 523 feet from nearest house; Well pad gas flare from bedroom window near Augustine well pad (WTAE). Other photos Courtesy of The Energy Age Blog.)

Resource Links - Setbacks:

-- Environmental Health Project Releases New White Paper: PA's Shale Gas - What We Can Do Now To Better Protect Public Health [PaEN]

-- Environmental Health Project: Lois Bower-Bjornson Shares Her First-Hand Experiences With Shale Gas Health, Environmental Impacts In Washington County [PaEN]

-- 7 Years Ago, People From Over 70 Households Gave First-Hand Accounts Of How The PA Shale Gas Industry Impacted Their Health, Lives And Communities To A State Grand Jury Describing The ‘Sometimes Harsh Reality’ Of These Operations [PaEN]

-- State Dept. Of Health Apologizes For Not Listening To Communities Suffering Health Impacts From Shale Gas Development; New Health Study Results ‘Just The Tip Of The Iceberg’ [August 2023]

-- University Of Pittsburgh School Of Public Health Studies Find Shale Gas Wells Can Make Asthma Worse; Children Have An Increased Chance Of Developing Lymphoma Cancer; Slightly Lower Birth Weights [August 2023]

-- State Dept. Of Health Invites Citizens To File Environmental Health Complaints Related To Natural Gas Development; Health Will Also Review Environmental Test Results [September 2023]

-- State Dept. Of Health Pushing For Changes To Reduce Adverse Health Impacts From Natural Gas Development [November 2023]

-- Part I - Environmental Impacts: State Dept. Of Health, Penn State Medical Webinars On Caring For Persons Living & Working In Communities With Oil & Natural Gas Extraction [January 2025]

-- Part II - Health Impacts: State Dept. Of Health, Penn State Medical Webinars On Caring For Persons Living & Working In Communities With Oil & Natural Gas Extraction [March 2025]

-- New State Health Plan Identifies Health Issues Related To Natural Resource Extraction, Climate Change In Top 5 Threats To Health Outcomes [April 2023]

-- 2025 PA Shale Gas & Public Health Conference Attended By Nearly 480 People Featured Health Experts, Scientists, Advocacy Groups On Health, Environmental Impacts Of Shale Gas Development [February 2025]