Big Sewickley Creek Watershed Association wants stream restoration, not credits

An environmental group is asking the state to require a natural gas drilling company to do stream restoration in the Big Sewickley Creek Watershed instead of purchasing so-called “restoration credits” that would allow them to do the work in a different location.

In a letter to the state Department of Environmental Protection, Big Sewickley Creek Watershed Association members said their request is the result of damage done to dozens of streams and wetlands in the watershed when the Revolution pipeline was being installed in Beaver County by Energy Transfer Co., according to a news release from the environmental monitoring group.

Watershed members say the state ordered the company to restore the damage in 2019 and fined its parent company, Energy Transfer Partners, $140,000 for violations during the gas pipeline’s construction.

As part of a consent order signed by ETP, they agreed to develop a plan to fix the erosion and construction issues for which it was cited and submit progress reports to the state, watershed officials said.

But instead of doing the work to correct the damage, the company wants to buy credits to do work at another site.

“There are companies that buy conservation easements and properties where they build wetlands and restore streams,” said Mark Fedosick, the watershed association’s vice president. “Once the work is done, they are able to sell those credits to another company doing projects that have a negative impact on wetlands and streams.”

Watershed officials contend that while this does, in fact, replace and preserve the lost wetlands filled in when the pipeline was being built, “the mitigation credits are not located anywhere near the impact site.”

“The nearest credits available seem to be located 47 miles away from Baden,” they wrote. “With this approach, there is still a loss of wetland acreage, habitat and functions and values within the Big Sewickley Creek Watershed.”

The organization is asking the state to require ETC to restore the damage done to the watershed instead of fixing problems in another location unless the company can provide a “reasonable or feasible” reason for why the work cannot be performed.

“Normally the process of obtaining credits for restoration work is fine,” Fedosick said. “But in this case, the damage that was done was illegal and the company was fined, so we feel it’s in the best interest of local communities for the problems to be corrected.”

The organization also is asking the state to direct fines to local nonprofit organizations so that restoration work can be done.

Additionally, the group wants the state to post applications and other documents related to drilling operations online for the public to view when projects have the potential to cause a negative impact in a community.

“The Big Sewickley Creek Watershed Association respectfully suggests that the mitigation proposal should be to create and preserve or purchase and improve/restore/preserve wetlands within BSCW – thus replacing lost functions and values within the same watershed,” said Katie Stanley, the association’s president.

The letter was sent to DEP during a 30-public comment period that ended on Jan. 3.

Officials from Energy Transfer did not respond to requests for comment.