You are here
Responses
As you are well aware, Walter, there is no practical difference between what we have asked DEC to do in our comments and our public statements and what you are asking us to sign, other than that the latter was penned by you.
I have always been the first to praise the grassroots for their extraordinary work on this issue, and nothing in my email implies that NRDC is primarily responsible for the fact that the de facto moratorium remains in place. We are partners in the effort.
With all due respect, you are targeting the wrong enemy.
NRDC stands with the grassroots in our mutual effort to ensure that no new risky fracking proceeds in New York on the basis of the deeply flawed analysis performed by DEC. I will continue to devote my energies to that end.
You may forward this email to all those you bcc’ed on your response to me.
All the best,
Kate
Sent: Tuesday, February 07, 2012 5:42 PM
To: Sinding, Kate
Subject: Re: Hydrofracking in NY
Greetings:
Thank you for cc'ing me on your response to more than 50 emails that you received as a member of the High-Volume Hydraulic Fracturing Advisory Panel. I am bcc'ing those correspondents.
Since 2008, thousands of activists and elected officials have worked incessantly at the grassroots level to maintain New York's de facto moratorium on horizontal hydrofracturing. With respect, I believe it is they who are primarily responsible for preventing the moratorium from being lifted.
A coalition letter with more than 22,000 signatories now requests that Governor Cuomo withdraw the Marcellus Shale Revised Draft SGEIS and send it back to the drawing board due to its failure to resolve at least 17 key concerns.
The signatories to that coalition letter include elected officials, scientists, physicians, civic, environmental and public interest groups, business leaders, religious organizations and tens of thousands of concerned citizens.
The coalition letter documents many of the same concerns that NRDC spelled out in its voluminous comments to DEC and is consistent with its request that DEC "redraft the study and proposed rules to address the numerous unresolved issues."
See: http://www.toxicstargeting.com/MarcellusShale/cuomo/coalition_letter/2011
Why won't NRDC sign this coalition letter to Governor Cuomo? He is clearly the decision-maker in this matter.
NRDC signed a 2009 coalition letter to then-Governor Paterson that spelled out many of the same concerns and requested that he withdraw the original draft SGEIS. That coalition letter likely helped persuade him to sign Executive Order No. 41 requiring the shortcomings of the draft SGEIS to be addressed. See: http://www.toxicstargeting.com/MarcellusShale/coalition_letter
Finally, given DEC's on-going failure to address the "numerous unresolved issues" NRDC identified, why won't NRDC sign this straightforward pledge as a member of the Advisory Panel?
Given the irreparable harm that shale gas extraction could wreak on New York's environment and public health, I request that Governor Cuomo maintain DEC's de facto moratorium on Marcellus Shale horizontal hydrofracturing until there is a consensus among all local, state and federal authorities as well as potentially impacted parties that the 17 major shortcomings documented in the Withdraw the Revised Draft SGEIS Coalition Letter have been fully resolved.
____________________________________________________
Date: ______________________
Thank you for your consideration. I look forward to receiving any response you might wish to provide.
Best regards,
Walter
Dear Mr. ___:
Thank you for your email.
NRDC has been fighting since 2008 to both institute and maintain the de facto moratorium on new fracking in New York State. We were one of a small handful of groups that opposed the 2008 law that changed the state’s spacing requirements to allow for horizontal drilling and high-volume hydraulic fracturing because of our serious concerns about the risks to human health and our natural resources posed by this heavy industrial activity. We were likewise one of the groups that took the lead in successfully calling on then-Governor Paterson to compel the Department of Environmental Conservation to conduct a comprehensive environmental review of those risks before moving forward with any new permitting of fracking – establishing what has come to be known as the “de facto moratorium.”
Since that time, we have been dedicated to keeping the moratorium in place to require that the state properly evaluate the dangers before making any decisions as to how – or indeed, whether – to move forward with this risky activity. Just last month, we submitted nearly 700 pages of scientific and legal comments on the revised draft SGEIS, concluding that the state has not yet done the requisite analysis to support any new fracking anywhere in New York. We further urged that the Department of Environmental Conservation redraft the study and proposed rules to address the numerous unresolved issues.
We take our role on the state’s Advisory Panel extremely seriously and view ourselves as representatives of the larger environmental and grassroots community. We have been strongly advocating – together with our environmental partners– that the work of this panel not in any way supersede the on-going public review process. We have further urged that the panel’s charge to investigate agency and local resource needs not precede completion of the environmental review process, or presuppose that any particular level of development might occur in the state. We are hopeful that the recent suspension of panel meetings while DEC evaluates the more than 45,000 comments it received on the RDSGEIS is an indication that we are having some success in that regard.
Again, thank you for reaching out to me, and thank you for your commitment to this critical issue.
Sincerely,
Kate Sinding
Senior Attorney
Urban East Program
Natural Resources Defense Council
To:
Subject: [NYGCG] Clarification as to NRDC's position regarding alternatives
Date: Tue, 7 Feb 2012 11:09:19 -0500
I am writing to address a question that has been circulating as to whether NRDC is advocating for and/or negotiating a plan to establish "sacrifice zones" that would allow new fracking in certain portions of the state. The answer is absolutely not.
NRDC, in its comments on the RDSGEIS, advanced a number of legal arguments, one of which appears to have been misinterpreted.
As many of you are aware, SEQRA's required analysis consists of three basic prongs: (1) disclosure of all potentially significant adverse environmental impacts; (2) identification of practicable mitigation to address significant adverse impacts; and (3) selection of the alternative that will result in the fewest unmitigated significant adverse impacts. The courts have held that, with respect to
alternatives, an agency need not examine all possible alternatives, but must consider a range of "reasonable alternatives" that satisfy the purpose of the proposed action.
NRDC's comments addressed in substantial detail deficiencies with respect to DEC's satisfaction of all three of these SEQRA prongs. With respect to the last of them, we argued that DEC failed to evaluate "reasonable alternatives" to the proposed action, and set forth a number of potential alternatives that, we argued, clearly met the legal imperative.
We stated that we were neither advocating for any of these particular alternatives, nor were we presupposing that -- upon a proper evaluation of impacts, mitigation and alternatives -- DEC should determine that it was appropriate to go forward with any fracking program at all.
Quite simply, NRDC has not advocated for, and is not advocating for, a "sacrifice zone," "demonstration project," or any other particular alternative. Indeed, as is expressly stated in our comments, we do not believe the state has done the requisite analysis to support moving forward with ANY new fracking at this time. We have, accordingly, called on the Governor and DEC to go back and properly consider the serious potential impacts before making any decisions about how -- or indeed, whether -- to move forward.
We hope this addresses the concerns many of you have been expressing and that we can move forward in our collective goal of ensuring that the gas industry is not permitted to run roughshod over our communities and natural resources.
As always, please feel free to be in touch in you have any questions about our work on this critical issue.
Kate Sinding
Senior Attorney
Urban East Program
Natural Resources Defense Council
Dear Walter--
Thank you for your recent e-mail to me in which you expressed your concerns about and opposition to New York State's proposal for fracking in the Marcellus Shale. I am writing to let you know that I and my NRDC colleagues share those concerns and have been hard at work to defeat the state's current fracking plan.
Indeed, NRDC and our environmental allies recently filed close to 700 pages of comments in which we raised numerous technical, scientific and legal questions about the state's fracking proposal and recommended that the environmental study and proposed rules be re-drafted to address the numerous unresolved issues.
At the state's advisory fracking panel, my environmental colleagues and I have insisted that the work of the advisory panel supplement and not replace the public environmental review process, which should be the primary forum for addressing the numerous questions that have been raised.
Moreover, I believe the the fracking panel has already played a useful role in prompting state and local agencies to confront the significant and currently unmet staffing and funding needs that would have to be associated with any new fracking program, if and when the Governor decides to move forward. The work of the panel is still in its early stages and I want to assure you that my colleagues and I on the panel will continue to press in every future meeting for the environmental protection objectives we share.
Your activism on this issue is inspiring and I encourage you to convey your concerns directly with Governor Andrew Cuomo, Executive Chamber, State Capitol, Albany, New York 12224.
Thank you again for being in touch with me on this very important issue.
Eric A. Goldstein
Senior Attorney
Natural Resources Defense Council
Date: Tue, Feb 14, 2012 at 1:16 PM
Subject: RE: New York's environment and public health
Thank you for contacting me to share your concerns about Environmental Advocates of New York’s participation on the state’s Hydrofracking Advisory Panel. It is really helpful to hear from other citizens who are just as concerned as I am.
As a member of the panel, I have worked at every turn to question New York's rush to drill, to ensure the panel and the public have complete access to pertinent information and research about fracking’s impacts, and to ensure that fracking is not permitted under New York State's current proposal for oversight and regulation.
On the panel I’ve repeatedly asked the Department of Environmental Conservation (DEC) and other state agencies hard questions to shed light on fracking’s dangers and New York State’s ill-preparedness to address these dangers. And we've asked that panel proceedings be made accessible to the public.
I can assure you that Environmental Advocates shares your concerns about hydrofracking and that we are raising those concerns at every opportunity, including in the meetings of the Advisory Panel.
Thank you again for emailing me.