They stopped it in NY. Call your representatives and the media and your neighbors. Also the Pennsylvania DEP, for both sides of the story. When I looked at this over a year ago, my main concern for Penn was the issue of water contamination. Find out if the DEP requires disclosure of the chemicals to be used for hydrofracking and if they will test to make sure the companies are using the chemicals they say they are. Also find out what wastewater treatment processes will be used on the holding ponds, and what will be done with the water after it is treated. Those holding ponds in Wyoming sure do look abandoned, don't they?
Read the EPA study, you'll find smoking guns. Not in the conclusions, though.
And for what it's worth, the companies' claims that they can't release the chemical names does not compute in my mind. They say it will hurt them if their competitors get the information. But you don't have competitors knocking on your door. Even is a large bidding situation, I suspect that the real issue is on the cost side. There are likely to be chemicals that are more cost effective, and just possibly, those chemicals are also more dangerous to the water supply. When the companies found themselves under fire in NY, they started to back off the need for utter secrecy on the chemicals they were using, and it seems like they could find chemicals that are known to be safe. This might hurt their profits a bit, but they'll still make plenty of money and not risk the water supply.
It's been reported that Halliburton makes $1.5b a year on hydrofracking. I don't know if that is true. Check out Chesapeake's and Halliburton's 10Ks on their web sites (usually under Investor Relations) and you might also find out that you and your neighbors are being seriously underpaid. The Marcellus Shale is huge and there is a lot of money to be made; it's a good bet that some of your reprsentatives are getting contributions from these companies.