I write to you as the Planning Board Chairman in the Town of Ulysses in Tompkins County

Dear Commissioner Martens:

I write to you as the Planning Board Chairman in the Town of Ulysses in Tompkins County a lake-shore and agricultural community which resides uneasily over the Marcellus shale.

My message is simple: please halt the process presumably culminating in the release of the SGEIS on July 1st. Prior to your emergence as DEC Commissioner your organization received roughly 14,000 communications from a wide spectrum of scientists, lawyers, politicians, community leaders, and just plain folks denouncing the proposed document as hopelessly inadequate to regulate a process (e.g., horizontal slickwater high volume hydrofracking) about which we are still learning even as you read this. Indeed, among those 14,000 critical communications was one from the EPA stating that your department's 1992 SGEIS was so out of touch with scientific reality in so many ways it never should have been the basis for the development of horizontal hydrofracking oversight. As you know the EPA is currently conducting a national study of the effects of hydrofracking on water. This will not be completed until sometime in 2012. How can you possibly allow hydrofracking to proceed in New York State before the results of this EPA have been reported and assessed?

And meanwhile as you are well aware a cornucopia of negative information some scientific, some observational, but all relevant, continues to mushroom. Since the end of 2010 when the public comment period officially expired we continue to learn about the environmental dangers of hydrofracking. And now it is becoming increasingly apparent that the economic ramifications for those living in the midst of hydrofracking operations are at least as perilous. You are almost certainly aware of the following information all developed in 2011 but if you will permit me:

*The NY Times articles by Urbana (Feb. 26, 2011) based on 30,000 pages of documents obtained from regulatory agencies clearly define high correlations between hydrofracking operations and petroleum hydrocarbons and radionuclides in gas drilling waste water. Has your SGEIS review committee assimilated all of these data?

*A peer-reviewed Duke University Study (Osborn et al: Methane Contamination of Drinking Water Accompanying Gas-well Drilling and Hydraulic Fracturing) identified 68 wells in nearby Pennsylvania which showed levels of methane with the chemical configuration of shale-gas in groundwater were 17 times higher in water wells located within a kilometer of active hydrofracking than in water wells where no hydrofracking was nearby. This study confirms countless anecdotal and observational reports in recent years clearly suggesting the ramifications of hydrofracking thousands of feet underground in shale are unforeseeable. Communities like Ulysses which is located next to a lake from which thousands of people get their drinking water are very scared about the consequences of hydrofracking on our water supplies, not only near drill sites but distant from them. And of course the effects of hydrofracking on Cargill's salt mining operations below the lake and adjacent towns like Ulysses, Lansing, etc. are unknown. Has the DEC considered this possibility in our area?

The DEC is requiring individual EIS reviews for the New York City and Syracuse watersheds. Obviously you and your Department are concerned about the possible contamination of water by hydrofracking operations. But what about the population in between Syracuse and New York City. WHAT ABOUT US IN THE FINGER LAKES!? Is our water somehow immune to the effects of hydrofracking? If you can protect the people in Syracuse and New York, how about protecting us? Please explain!

*Professors Howarth and Ingraffea at Cornell have determined that natural gas extraction via hydrofracking is at least equivalent and possibly more dangerous than mountain-top coal removal in terms of its impact on greenhouse gases. Howarth also found that the leakage rate of natural gas during "normal" extraction operations is at least equal to 1.5% of natural gas consumed and the real rate is probably considerably higher. We don't know the true leakage rate because hydrofracking operations are very poorly monitored and industry is renowned for covering up accidents.

Speaking of which, even assuming the SGEIS could in some perfect world be strengthened to become a viable regulatory document, who is going to insure the regulations are going to be enforced? As you are so well aware, the Department you run is horrifically understaffed in a State whose moniker should probably be "Budget Crisis" instead of "Empire" as this financial shortfall proceeds. You not only lack sufficient staff to attempt to revise the SGEIS in light of the thousands of comments the DEC is attempting to digest and continues to receive, but you also have only a handful of regulators in the field to oversee your inadequate regulations should they ever see the light of day. Has the gas and oil industry demonstrated a respect for environmental regulations to date? Millions of devastated people all over the globe and countless animal, fish and bird species could they even speak would scream NO! And I add my cries to theirs.

Finally, while I realize the "E" in your Department stands for "Environment" not "Economy" let's be candid and admit this is all about money. You and the Governor would not be pushing this flawed process forward so recklessly if you weren't being pressured by industry and the Federal Government which looms over us all.

And since this is all about money, I implore you to expand the scope of your current deliberations to include expected effects of the hydrofracking industry on local economies. An increasing body of information is showing lenders are loathe to give mortgages to people hoping to finance purchases of land adjacent to leased acres. Also NYS title insurance is voided if the premises are being used for commercial purposes (e.g., gas drilling in this case.) Adjacent gas leases also negatively impact those seeking funding from the FHA or the Department of HUD.

The true economic effects of hydrofracking are horribly apparent in nearby Pennsylvania where rents have skyrocketed, pushing local residents out in favor of industry workers--most from out of state--who can afford outlandish prices thanks to their dirty work. The story has been repeated in town after town from Rifle, Colorado, to Dish, Texas, and now in Dimock, PA and Bradford County PA. Hydrofracking enriches a few and impoverishes the vast majority. Shouldn't these aspects be addressed in your imminent SGEIS too?

In closing I will quote a man who was once your counterpart in Pennsylvania, John Quigley, who upon leaving his office said, "We're burning the furniture to heat the house. In shifting away from coal towards natural gas we're trying for cleaner air (note: which we are NOT getting; see Howarth above) but we're producing massive amounts of toxic wastewater with salts and naturally occurring radioactive materials and it's not clear we have a plan for properly handling this waste...."

Sir, you have a chance do what Quigley couldn't do. You can halt the SGEIS approval process right now and start afresh armed with the data your Department should have had in the first place.

Sincerely,

Ken Z