Marietta City Council members read over proposed changes to Resolution 79, which, if adopted, would allow the chair of the Water and Sewer Committee to create a task force to collect information and data on injection wells. Read more in the Thursday edition of the Marietta Times. (Photo by Gwen Sour)

Marietta City Council’s Water and Sewer Committee discussed two proposed resolutions aimed at responding to the state’s approval of a Class II injection well.

However, they disagreed over how much authority to grant a proposed task force and whether changes to one of the resolutions would narrow or broaden the city’s legal options.

Resolution 79 would establish an Injection Well Task Force as an ad hoc advisory committee to the Water and Sewer Committee. The task force would be charged with gathering information on geology, permitting and potential impacts to the city’s drinking water aquifer. The committee would serve until Dec. 31 and report its findings to council. Meanwhile, Resolution 80 would authorize the city’s law director to pursue legal action against the Ohio Department of Natural Resources, which on Aug. 28 granted Deep Rock Disposal Solutions a permit for an injection well to be drilled within two miles of the well field for the city’s drinking water.

Committee Chairman Ben Rutherford said he believed the two resolutions work together.

“Resolution 79 is about a process in place to one, study and then inform and then act,” he said. “Resolution 80 preempts the study phase and simply says we’re going to act, so, both of these can work in parallel with one another and actually be complementary to one another.”

Several members of the council expressed concern that section 4 of Resolution 79 directly conflicted with Rutherford’s claim. Section 4 states, “The Council of the City of Marietta shall then review the information and decide whether the City of Marietta should file a mandamus action challenging the Ohio Department of Natural Resources Oil and Gas Division issuance of Class II injection well permit to Deep Rock Disposal Solutions for the proposed … injection well.”

Members discussed whether to change the wording in the resolutions from “mandamus” to “legal action,” which would allow the law director to pursue other courses based on the findings of the task force. But some councilors wanted to ensure the language included the mandamus action.

“The problem is, is that this mandamus action is important if the city wants to require that the Ohio Department of Natural Resources follow the current law that has existed since Jan. 13 of 2022,” said Council President Susan Vessels.

Councilman Jon Grimm said the city should retain flexibility.

“We should be informed in our legal action,” he said. “We don’t know enough right now to know what the proper legal action is. … We may find out a year from now that they followed the law and then the city is six figures poorer because of it.”

Members agreed to continue refining amendments to clarify the language and scope of the resolutions. Both resolutions are scheduled to return to the full council for further consideration at Thursday evening’s council meeting at 7:30 p.m. in the Armory.

The proposed well is designated as Class II. Those are underground injection wells designed to dispose of fluids brought to the surface during oil and natural gas drilling, the most common being brine, or salt water, according to the Ohio Environmental Protection Agency.

Gwen Sour can be reached at gsour@newsandsentinel.com.