Infrastructure and cumulative impacts

Serious concerns about gas drilling

By FRITZ MAYER

LOCH SHELDRAKE, NY — It was clear that members of the multi-municipal gas drilling task force had done their homework and were prepared to advocate for their towns. Several members gave testimony at a public hearing held at Sullivan County Community College on October 28, regarding the new policies proposed by the NY Department of Environmental Conservation regarding gas drilling in the Marcellus Shale.

Most made the point that the towns needed to be notified in writing each time a drilling application was applied for in the town, and not just the first time, as the proposed policies now call for. The second common request was for clear language to be included in the supplemental generic environmental impact statement (SGEIS) requiring drilling companies to enter into road-use agreements with towns, thereby ensuring that the drilling companies and not the taxpayers will bear the burden of any damage caused by heavy trucks.

Some members of the task force were not necessarily opposed to drilling. In fact, Norm Sutherland, the highway superintendent of Highland, Charles Hallock, the highway superintendent of Lumberland and George Kinch, the highway superintendent of Tusten, all said that they were in favor of drilling coming to the area, but they wanted to make sure that local infrastructure was protected.

Others calling for additional steps to protect the towns included the supervisors of Tusten, Callicoon, Delaware, and Fremont: Ben Johnson, Linda Babicz, Jim Scheutzow and James Greier.

Luiz Aragon, the Sullivan County planning commissioner, spoke for the county legislature and called for a total ban of drilling in flood plains rather than the partial ban that is now part of the draft SGEIS, and a total ban on open pits lined with plastic to hold flowback fluids. The audience of about 300 responded with applause when Aragon made these points. He also called for a study of the cumulative impacts of numerous wells in the county, which has also been a goal of environmental groups.

Many speakers also called for an extension of the comment period on the SGEIS from 60 days, which ends at the end of November, by an additional 45, 60 or 90 days, to give stakeholders a chance to digest the contents of the 810-page SGEIS document.

Bruce Ferguson of the group Catskill Citizens for Safe Energy said the SGEIS mentions an alternative to traditional fracking fluids that relies on the use of propane, which eliminates the need to source water for hydraulic fracturing, recover flowback fluids to the surface and dispose of the flowback fluids. Ferguson asked why the DEC did not fully explore this alternative instead of mentioning it only in passing.

He also said that the assessment of the economic impact of drilling was wanting and relied, in part, on outdated studies from the 1980s and other more recent studies that were flawed.

Scott Rotruck, a vice president with Chesapeake Energy, said his company was still working on comments for the SGEIS, but made remarks on a related subject. He was interrupted several times by shouts and boos from the audience when he made statements such as, “New York has an extraordinary track record with natural gas exploration, with more than 14,000 wells drilled and stimulated … without any documented ground-water contamination.” Critics say that there are many instances of contamination related to fracking.

The crowd’s angry response prompted the man who ran the meeting, Stuart Gruskin, DEC executive deputy commissioner, to admonish the audience to treat all speakers with respect.

Noel van Swol, the founder of the group Sullivan Delaware Property Owners Association, which is negotiating for drilling leases on 70,000 acres of land, said that his group wholeheartedly supports the SGEIS, and said that natural gas was the only thing that can “jumpstart” the upstate economy. He called those who found fault with the SGEIS and who spoke against it during the hearing a “small vocal group of environmental radicals.”