Nuisance Ordinance not being enforced- Chesapeake odor event two miles strong in Arlington Entertainment District

UPDATE Less than a year later the Truman drill site by the ATT Cowboys Stadium had an odor event that stank up the Entertainment District in Arlington, yet NO NUSIANCE VIOLATION was found!…

And here is the map from Harwell St past the ATT Cowboys Stadium south to the Chesapeake drill site…

ALMOST TWO MILES AWAY!

Below is a video of our City Health Officer refusing to comment on health risks near fracking…

FYI no response on the below letter…

From: Kim Feil <kimfeil@sbcglobal.net>

Date: May 28, 2012 5:16:04 PM CDT

To: Trey Yelverton <trey.yelverton@arlingtontx.gov>, Jim Parajon <jim.parajon@arlingtontx.gov>, Don Crowson <don.crowson@arlingtontx.gov>, cynthia.simmons@arlingtontx.gov

Subject: urban drilling violates the city’s nuisance ordinance 

Trey, your city officers are not doing their jobs.  We have videos of effluents leaving the drill sites and yet no nuisance violations have been found.

Your Health Officer refuses to contact me after repeated requests. Jim Parajon has offered to meet with me, however, I need to move up the chain of command as our previous meetings have not been productive in addressing my concerns of urban drilling.

Trey I expect to hear from you on these issues, thank you.

http://www.arlingtontx.gov/citysecretary/pdf/codeofordinances/NUISChapter.pdf

Administrator – the City Manager designated Department Directors or their designees that are responsible for enforcement of this chapter.

ARTICLE I DEFINITIONS AND PROHIBITIONS

Section 1.01 Findings and Purpose

A. The Arlington City Council makes the following findings:

1. A nuisance is a condition which substantially interferes with the use and enjoyment of land by causing unreasonable discomfort or annoyance to persons of ordinary sensibilities attempting to use and enjoy land.

2. A nuisance is a condition that may cause physical harm to property; physical harm to a person on his or her property; or emotional harm to a person from the deprivation of the enjoyment of his or her property, such as by fear, apprehension, offense, or loss of peace of mind.

3. Whatever is dangerous to human health or welfare, or whatever renders the ground, water, air or food a hazard to human health is declared to be a nuisance;

5. It is necessary to provide for the abatement of nuisance conditions in the interest of public necessity when such conditions are offensive or annoying to the senses and detrimental to property values and community appearance.

6. It is further necessary to the extent of public necessity to provide for the abatement of nuisance conditions that interfere with the comfortable enjoyment of adjacent property or hazardous or injurious conditions detrimental to the health, safety or welfare of the general public.

ARTICLE I – 1 (Amend Ord 07-045, 6/19/07)

Section 1.03 Power to Define and Prohibit

The City of Arlington, acting by and through its duly authorized officers, agents and representatives, as desig- nated herein, shall have the power to:

A. Define all nuisances and prohibit the same within the City and outside the City limits for a distance of five thousand (5,000) feet (provided that this ordinance shall not apply within any portion of such five thousand foot area which is contained within the territory of any other municipal corporation);

Section 2.02 Property Blight Nuisances Enumerated

F. Stagnant, Foul and Offensive Water. Any stagnant, foul or offensive water upon any lot or other premises or under the floor of any building.

Section 2.03 Other Nuisances Enumerated

C. Burning Certain Substances. Burning in the open: hair, leather, rags or other substances emitting an offensive, unhealthful or annoying smell, smoke or odor.

ARTICLE II – 2 (Amend Ord 07-045, 6/19/07)NUISANCE 2.02

I. Pollution of Surface Waters. Any condition prohibited by the Health Chapter of the City of Arlington Code, as amended.

Section 3.02 Penalty for Violation

B. Any person violating any section of Article II or committing an act or continuing or maintaining a condition declared to be a nuisance by this Code of Ordinances, other than those enumerated in Section 3.02(A) hereof, shall be guilty of a misdemeanor, and each day the violation continues shall be a separate offense. Each such offense shall be punishable by a fine not to exceed Two Thousand Dollars and No Cents ($2,000.00) as allowed by law.

———————————————-

TX Health & Safety Sec. 341.082.  APPOINTMENT OF ENVIRONMENTAL HEALTH OFFICER IN CERTAIN HOME-RULE MUNICIPALITIES.

(a) In a home-rule municipality, an environmental health officer may be appointed to enforce this chapter.

(b)  The environmental health officer must be a registered professional engineer. The officer must file a copy of the officer’s oath and appointment with the board.

(c)  The environmental health officer shall assist the board in enforcing this chapter and is subject to:

(1)  the authority of the board; and

(2)  removal from office in the same manner as a municipal health authority.

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

BESIDES NUISANCE, we have to worry about the financial stability of Chesapeake, who is our main driller here in Arlington GASLAND TX.

I’m almost sure this is Arlington they are talking about……..”I even received a comment on Thursday from a city council member in a Texas town where Chesapeake dominates the drilling who asked, “We wonder how vulnerable our town is to a Chesapeake bankruptcy.” http://www.thestreet.com/story/11511473/1/how-chesapeake-energy-can-be-saved-opinion.html

From: Kim Feil <kimfeil@sbcglobal.net>

Date: May 11, 2012 11:09:28 AM CDT

To: Trey Yelverton <trey.yelverton@arlingtontx.gov>

Subject: Chesapeake-even Pickens ran from the financial mess they are in/Arlington heavy invested in risky Chk

Trey I’ve been parsing news stories and share the wealth of knowledge that smart city managers need to have when invested in urban drilling with the likes of Chesapeake. Please advise how you plan to mitigate this risk.

BREAKING Chesapeake news wsj video  http://online.wsj.com/video/51068C7A-F9F0-4842-8876-902503BE3E93.html?wsj_category_tboright

http://www.cnbc.com/id/47380959  “I don’t like the position he’s in.”On top of the recent headlines, McClendon “is spending more than his cash flow, he’s done that for ten years,” Pickens said.

http://www.cnbc.com/id/47379129 “Pickens has been trying — and failing — to get Congress to pass what is now called the Energy Security Act, aimed particularly at the development of natural gas…” “I’m the geologist that is never pessimistic. Geologists can’t stay pessimistic because they drill so many dry holes,” Pickens said.

http://trib.com/news/state-and-regional/report-mechanical-failure-caused-chesapeake-gas-well-blowout-in-wyoming/article_6c1ed0be-9ab8-11e1-a91b-0019bb2963f4.html

“The (Chesapeake) well near Douglas vented up to 2 million cubic feet of gas and 31,500 gallons of oil-based drilling “mud” over nearly three days….The blowout impacted a 52.2-acre area (423 ft) around the well site,…..finally plugged the well 66 hours later on April 27.”

We as a Home Rule city need to be able to control the “build out” that is to come if NG prices do go up*. If we chose to err on the side of caution for public health and safety, we need to either own/maintain our own drill sites (for fear of 2.nd tier drillers), or have a mechanism built into our land use and future development goals that do not include urban drilling. Rather we ignore the uneconomics of dry gas drilling or ignore the health effects being blamed on proximity to drilling as antidotal while spooked families decide to move away for fear of health effects. https://barnettshalehell.wordpress.com/2012/05/07/drill-baby-drill-or-more-like-kill-baby-kill-arlington-health-effects-near-urban-drilling-recapped/

The boom was just that…a speculation that has lined our pockets (with $82 million?) and now is the time to get out (see below) while the goings good.

FYI,  one MCF (thousand cubic feet) of natural gas has almost 6 times less the BTU’s of one barrel of crude oil.

* The futures market says Deborah Rogers, Ft Worth economist, predicts on this video that NG will not go to $6MCF before 2020.  http://energypolicyforum.com/?p=242

Deborah has also said “The court documents claim that Chesapeake has been overproducing wells in order to meet production targets for these banks. Overproducing shale wells is known to be potentially detrimental to the overall EUR’s of the wells which raises the question as to whether this is prudent management with regard to mineral owners and their interests which Chesapeake has an obligation to uphold.” http://energypolicyforum.com/?p=345

http://energypolicyforum.com/?p=408: Loans Are Not the Only Worry at Chesapeake

To see Energy Policy Forum’s April 18, 2012 post about Chesapeake VPPs: Link

—————————————–