Peter King: rdSGEIS Comments Page 1 of 5

Created on 1/11/2012 18:56:00 a1/p1

Date: Wednesday, January 11, 2012 From: My name is Peter King, and I live in Syracuse, NY. Re: Comments on revised Draft Supplemental Generic Environmental Impact Statement (rdSGEIS), prepared by the Division of Mineral Resources, New York State Department of Environmental Conservation (NYS DEC). On reviewing the DEC's submitted guidelines, I request the NYS DEC withdraw their 2011 revised Draft Supplemental Generic Environmental Impact Statement (rdSGEIS), as it fails to address many complex problems incurred as a result of allowing the described intensive drilling for natural gas. Furthermore, I request the DEC to ask New York State citizens if they truly desire allowing any current variant of intensive oil or gas drilling, in full knowledge of the damages incurred, as observed on many occasions over the past decade in many locations worldwide. If such a referendum results in a predominantly no vote, I request New York States government to formally ban all forms of unconventional intensive drilling for fossil fuel. In thus far NOT following other states' and the fossil industry lead on unconventional drilling, New York is NOT 'holding up the works' by being 'overly cautious'; but IS setting important new standards in how humanity can and should obtain energy supplies, without compromising sustainable resources for generations yet to come. Given my limited time budget, I cite specific concern examples in the following areas. Note ~ I do not focus on water concerns, because many others are raising that legitimate issue; and I implicitly include water concerns in all my examples. I am extremely concerned about all water impacts from unconventional fossil drilling, including human drinking water. Concerns with the rdSGEIS: 1) The NYS DEC frames unconventional drilling risks as occasional, yet observation from many news reports, books and studies regarding other drilling locations indicates two kinds of ongoing impacts: 1a) Ongoing and unpredictable health threats related to a combined water and air toxin generation from drilling activity are not presented clearly by the rdSGEIS, nor are adequate solutions posed. 1b) Ongoing social and economic impacts related to drilling activity are not presented clearly by the rdSGEIS, nor are adequate solutions posed. 2) Well failure is both inevitable and unpredictable, a problem unaddressed by the rdSGEIS. 3) The rdSGEIS fails to address the twin broader concerns, Climate Change & Energy planning. 4) New York State citizens, Local N.Y. governments, and other New York State departments are effectively excluded from a one-pointed planning process imposed by the rdSGEIS. Concerns with the rdSGEIS (details): 1a) During well drilling and extraction, risks occur more than occasionally, posing ongoing and unpredictable health threats from combined water and air pollution. The rdSGEIS fails to adequately address these risks, posing inadequate solutions. Prevailing concerns about intensive gas drilling AKA fracking have focused on water quality and accidental releases. However, observations indicate frackings combined and cumulative water and air emissions negatively impact human and ecosystem health on an ongoing basis (Meixsell 2010, Colborn, Kwiatkowski, Schultz & Bachran 2011). Relative to national averages, New York has high asthma and other lung disorder rates, possibly related to how prevailing winds often carry air pollution

Peter King: rdSGEIS Comments Page 2 of 5

Created on 1/11/2012 18:56:00 a1/p1

eastward across the United States (Kelso 2011). These rates are typically highest in urban centers, often located in valleys (Volz 2010). The heavier gases often produced by fracking such as benzene may easily settle in the rolling hill valleys common throughout New York, as has been observed in some European valleys (Schnitzhofer et al 2007; Harnisch, et al 2008). Climate change may further increase regional air emission concentrations; as some studies predict a general atmospheric slowdown over the northeast, resulting in more stagnant air masses and increasing air pollutants over New York State (Jacob & Winner 2009). This scenario would tend to intensify drilling emission impacts, especially ozone; which can often combine with other harmful gases like benzene and BTEX compounds. While the rdSGEIS makes every attempt to assure they will regulate these emissions, industry equipment designs and procedures typically create more leakage than can be effectively regulated (Howarth et al 2011). All high-concern regulations would be increasingly difficult to regulate, given reduced DEC staffing during tough economic times. 1b) Ongoing social and economic impacts related to drilling activity are not presented clearly by the rdSGEIS, nor are adequate solutions posed. >> In other locations, studies have observed a "boom - bust economy" resulting from local rushes to engage in unconventional drilling (Christopherson et al 2011). Preliminary study indicates similar results in New York State (ibid). These studies do not even address questions relating to agricultural industry impacts, not addressed by DEC's analysis. >> The industry typically externalizes costs to local communities. The DEC economic study fails to address local municipal costs, as has Christopherson's study (ibid). The elaborate road funding scheme proposed in Part 2.4.14.2 (Regional Road Systems) seems likely to fall apart from political contest and ongoing entropy. While local government planning is acknowledged in Chapter 2, Part 2.4.15 (Community Character) and Chapter 3 (Proposed SEQRA Review Process); local citizens are likely excluded from this process by sheer scale and government bureaucracy. Under New York State law, those citizens and communities informed enough *may* be prepared to engage the industry in containing road damages and potential spills. However, observed results in Pennsylvania and other states lead one to question whether any level of preparation is adequate. Those communities unprepared with extensive legal protections are more likely to suffer severe economic losses from ongoing road damages and increased health costs, unforeseen spills and blowouts, and other difficulties. As all these impacts are likely to incur cumulatively high economic costs, permitting this kind of activity in effect creates an unfunded mandate, contributing to further social and economic declines during a time when we need all the strength and adaptability we have. 2) Well failure is both inevitable and unpredictable, a problem unaddressed by the rdSGEIS. From the DEC's "What We Learned From Pennsylvania" (http://www.dec.ny.gov/energy/75410.html): "Problems identified: Dimock - Excessive pressures and improperly or insufficiently cemented casings Bradford County - Improperly cased and cemented wells The 2011 SGEIS solution: Properly designed wells and continue the present practice of reviewing each well casing and cementing prior to issuing a permit. Specific requirements for cementing practices, testing and use of intermediate casing" Here, DEC may accurately identify one of the more trouble-prone drilling factors. However, the DEC's solution seems inadequate for resolving this error, considering how cement operates under

Peter King: rdSGEIS Comments Page 3 of 5

Created on 1/11/2012 18:56:00 a1/p1

drilling scenarios. Cement casings may be the weakest link in drilling operations, related to casing location and brittle chemical makeup. The industry often claims the underground piping is strong and secure, and will not impact aquifers. However, the weakest material points seem to be the cement casings near the surface, observed as failure-prone in many instances from the 2010 Dimock PA leakage to the 2010 Gulf Oil spill disaster. While a 1992 study found an average 16.7% short-term failure rate; wellhead casings are 100% likely to fail as underground contents including raw natural gas mixtures, residual flowback and drilling muds often re-pressurize within 50-years; breaking down cement and steel casings (Dusseault, Gray and Nawrocki 2000; Bishop 2010). Raw natural gas, residual flowback and drilling muds often contain Benzenes, BTEX compounds, naturally-occurring radioactive materials (NORMs) and other hazardous substances, some volatile and potentially airborne. Even assuming no drilling problems, failure occurring years after well completions and plugging suggests these toxic substances can surge unpredictably to the surface, unanticipated by local communities as being dangerous. 3) Climate Change and Energy planning. The proposed drilling would impact the continuum of local to global environment in climate change and energy planning contexts; yet the rdSGEIS completely fails to engage either planning framework. Climate consequences from the proposed drilling would likely significantly increase local and global greenhouse gas emissions (Howarth, Santoro & Ingraffea 2011), severely compromising and complicating local community and ecosystem adaptations to climate change (Wright, Smith, Getchell & Kane, 2010; Noyes et al. 2009). Rapid climate changes in New York State are predicted to severely disrupt the DEC's carefully delineated distinctions between flood zones, high-use aquifers, and Filtration-Avoidance Determination watersheds (Rosenzweig & NYSERDA 2011). I find no mention of climate change in the rdSGEIS suggesting DEC is adequately addressing either climate adaptation or mitigation. The rdSGEIS also fails to adequately anticipate broad-scale energy consequences. Local energy supplies are likely to be tapped more for the drilling; only yielding a relatively brief spurt in energy supply, potentially depleted within a decade. After the initial 'rush', surviving local economies and industries would be left dependent on both a rapidly departing energy industry and a declining specific fuel source. Broader concerns about globally declining fossil reserves AKA Peak Oil are not addressed in the rdSGEIS. The imposed natural gas dependency cycle would render society-wide conversion to renewable sources untenable, from the short to long term. The DEC follows industry rhetoric, by framing the proposed gas rush as a competitive market commodity unrelated to common pool resource concerns like clean air, water, and quality of life or broad planning synthesis. However, the proposed intensive unconventional fossil extraction would occupy a dominating social, environmental and economic role; likely bearing damaging & potentially disastrous impacts just as our society is only beginning to realize how mistaken our default fossil fuel practices are. Turning to exploit new and more damaging fossil reserves without considering climate, health, ecology, and future energy sustainability is an unacceptable planning practice for New York or today's world. 4) New York State citizens, Local N.Y. governments, and other New York State departments are effectively excluded from a one-pointed planning process imposed by the rdSGEIS. Given the above described short- and long term public health risks, I fail to understand why DEC is generally excluding most New York citizens, local governments and other NYS Departments from any meaningful voice in this process. DEC scheduled the short Fall-Winter public comment period

Peter King: rdSGEIS Comments Page 4 of 5

Created on 1/11/2012 18:56:00 a1/p1

during the busiest time of year, especially for students, farmers and local government officials. As well, the flooding emergency in parts of the Southern Tier rendered much comment impractical for local residents there. While local governments are ostensibly acknowledged in the rdSGEIS (as cited above), their inclusion in this document is presented as finality, not as an ongoing, collaborative negotiation. Other NY State agencies seem absent from the important drilling concerns, e.g. NYS Department of Health, NYSERDA, New York State Division of Housing and Community Renewal (DHCR) and other relevant agencies. The DEC's mineral rights department seems to have taken an exclusive role in creating this document...were other DEC departments adequately consulted? The exclusive protection of New York's two Filtration-Avoidance Determination watersheds poses an obvious question, why are other watersheds not worthy of similar protections? Finally, throughout the lengthy and deliberative language clothing the rdSGEIS, DEC presents the drilling question not as an if but a solid when. Please rescind these regulations. Thank You, Peter King Syracuse =================>> References: Bishop, R.E. (2010) Chemical and Biological Hazards Posed by Drilling Exploratory Shale Gas Wells in Pennsylvanias Delaware River Basin. Report for the Delaware River Basin Commission Exploratory Well Hearing, November 16, 2010. Retrieved online on 1/11/2012 from http://www.damascuscitizens.org/Bishop-Report_R1.pdf Christopherson, S. (editor) (2011) The Economic Consequences of Marcellus Shale Gas Extraction: Key Issues. Cardi Reports. Issue Number 14, September 2011. Retrieved online on 1/11/2012 from http://www.greenchoices.cornell.edu/ Colborn, T., Kwiatkowski, C., Schultz, K., & Bachran, M. (2011). Natural Gas Operations from a Public Health Perspective. Human and Ecological Risk Assessment: An International Journal, 17(5), 1039-1056. doi:10.1080/10807039.2011.605662 Retrieved online on 1/11/2012 from http://www.endocrinedisruption.com/chemicals.journalarticle.php Dusseault, M.B., Gray, M.N. and Nawrocki, P. (2000) Why Oilwells Leak: Cement Behavior and Long-Term Consequences; Society of Petroleum Engineers International Oil and Gas Conference and Exhibition, Beijing, China, November 7 10, 2000 (as Quoted in Bishop 2010). Harnisch, F., Gohm, A., Fix, A., Schnitzhofer, R., Hansel, A., & Neininger, B. (2008). Spatial distribution of aerosols in the Inn Valley atmosphere during wintertime. Meteorology and Atmospheric Physics, 103(1-4), 223-235. doi:10.1007/s00703-008-0318-3 Retrieved online on 1/11/2012 from http://elib.dlr.de/55904/01/fulltext.pdf Howarth, R. W., Santoro, R., & Ingraffea, A. (2011). Methane and the greenhouse-gas footprint of natural gas from shale formations. Climatic Change. doi:10.1007/s10584-011-0061-5

Peter King: rdSGEIS Comments Page 5 of 5

Created on 1/11/2012 18:56:00 a1/p1

Jacob, D. J., & Winner, D. A. (2009). Effect of climate change on air quality. Atmospheric Environment, 43(1), 51-63. doi:10.1016/j.atmosenv.2008.09.051. Retrieved online on 1/11/2012 from http://acmg.seas.harvard.edu/publications/jacob2008a.pdf Kelso, M. (2011) Adults with Current Asthma, 2009 (USA). Created Feb 3, 2011. Retrieved online on 1/11/2012 from FrackTracker website, at: http://data.fractracker.org/cbi/export/mapSnapshot? uuid=~01b52258e82fd011e09574fc4731ab600b Meixsell, T. (2010). Collateral Damage: A Chronicle of Lives Devastated by Gas and Oil Development and the Valiant Grassroots Fight to Effect Political and Legislative Change Over the Impacts of the Gas and Oil Industry in the United States. CreateSpace books. Noyes, P. D., McElwee, M. K., Miller, H. D., Clark, B. W., Van Tiem, L. A., Walcott, K. C., Erwin, K. N., et al. (2009). The toxicology of climate change: Environmental contaminants in a warming world. Environment International, 35(6), 971-986. Rosenzweig, C., & New York State Energy Research and Development Authority. (2011). Responding to climate change in New York State: Technical report. Albany, NY: New York State Energy Research and Development Authority. Schnitzhofer R, Dunkl J, Norman M, Wisthaler A, Gohm A, Obleitner F, Neininger B, Hansel A (2007) Vertical Distribution of Air Pollutants in the Inn Valley Atmosphere in Winter 2006. ICAM 2007, 29th Int. Conf. on Alpine Meteorology, Chambery, France. Retrieved online on 1/11/2012 from http://www.cnrm.meteo.fr/icam2007/ICAM2007/extended/manuscript_96.pdf Wright, B., Smith, A., Getchell, F., & Kane, K. (2010). Impact Assessment of Natural Gas Production in the NYC Water Supply Watershed. ASCE Conference Proceedings, 394(41143), 86-86. doi:10.1061/41143(394)86 Volz, Conrad (2010) Adjusted Rate of Death from Asthma in New York State (2007), created Dec. 31, 2010. Retrieved online on 1/11/2012 from FrackTracker website, at: http://data.fractracker.org/cbi/export/mapSnapshot?uuid=~01b52258e82fd011e09574fc4731ab600b