What The Regulator Has to Say for Itself.

This blog is meant to be read in association with Nova Scotia's Missing Fracking Wastes - Another 4 Million Litres Unaccounted For. Just How Little About This Does Our Regulator Want to Know?

The simple question was put to the department’s communications director: “Does the department know where those wastes went, and to what processing?” Instead of the usual assurance that she would get back to me when she found out, the question was immediately passed on to a District Manager to deal directly with me. From there it was passed to at least one more senior staff person, and after two work days there was an answer of sorts. The full text of that answer:

During the time period you refer to, the company was not obligated to inform the Department as to the disposition of these waters. It was a requirement that the water be taken to an appropriate facility. As the Department did not attribute a significant risk associated with these ponds and the water contained in them, the Department had no reason to verify where the water was ultimately disposed.

However, as we've stated, including at the public meeting, the Department continues to learn more about this industry and the risks associated with this type of activity. This is fundamental reason for the hydraulic fracturing review so that we ensure an appropriate level of oversight is put into place.

The department still maintains there is low risk associated with the ponds and the water contained by them. There are significant steps currently underway to have the company address these ponds and have the water safely disposed and the pond sites reclaimed to original conditions.

Derek J. DeGrass

Compliance and Inspection Coordinator

Environmental Monitoring & Compliance Division

Nova Scotia Environment

“It was a requirement that the water be taken to an appropriate facility.” is straight from The 2007 Hants County Shale Gas Project Environmental Management which the story opens with. The same document that at our community meeting on October 21 Mr. DeGrass said he could not speak to because he had never seen it before. “Its not our document.” [verbatim]. Not to mention that the department’s Industrial Approvals [which are their documents] for Kennetcook #1 and #2 did NOT make any such stipulation.

Self-regulation by industry is bad enough. Not much hope at all when there is no regulation in the first place.

The department did not know there were going to be waste storage ponds in the first place. Triangle told NSE that it was going to use the ponds to store fresh water pumped directly [and too slowly to go 'real time' straight into the fracking process] from Kennetcook River. The department made the erroneous assumption that this was the ONLY use of the ponds, even though they were designed and built as industry standard 'frack pits' for wastes.

The department has quite a record when it comes to determining "significant risks" when it comes

Over 60 actions organized internationally in response to... Jan 12

GROUNDWIRE OCTOBER 8 | MMIW HEARINGS AND VIGILS, MASS... Oct 16

GroundWire | Housing in the Budget, Fontaine Boushie... Mar 16

Activist Court Support: Kinder Morgan wants permanent ban... Mar 15