January 10, 2012

R
R
e
e
s
s
p
p
o
o
n
n
s
s
e
e
a
a
n
n
d
d
R
R
e
e
c
c
o
o
m
m
m
m
e
e
n
n
d
d
a
a
t
t
i
i
o
o
n
n
s
s
t
t
o
o
t
t
h
h
e
e

N
N
e
e
w
w
Y
Y
o
o
r
r
k
k
S
S
t
t
a
a
t
t
e
e
D
D
e
e
p
p
a
a
r
r
t
t
m
m
e
e
n
n
t
t
o
o
f
f

E
E
n
n
v
v
i
i
r
r
o
o
n
n
m
m
e
e
n
n
t
t
a
a
l
l
C
C
o
o
n
n
s
s
e
e
r
r
v
v
a
a
t
t
i
i
o
o
n
n

C
C
o
o
n
n
c
c
e
e
r
r
n
n
i
i
n
n
g
g
t
t
h
h
e
e

D
D
r
r
a
a
f
f
t
t
S
S
u
u
p
p
p
p
l
l
e
e
m
m
e
e
n
n
t
t
a
a
l
l
G
G
e
e
n
n
e
e
r
r
i
i
c
c
E
E
n
n
v
v
i
i
r
r
o
o
n
n
m
m
e
e
n
n
t
t
a
a
l
l

I
I
m
m
p
p
a
a
c
c
t
t
S
S
t
t
a
a
t
t
e
e
m
m
e
e
n
n
t
t


JLCNY Page 2 of 28






JLCNY Page 3 of 28
Preface

The Joint Landowners Coalition of New York, Inc., (JLCNY) is a 501(c)(6) nonprofit
corporation whose mission is; To foster, promote, advance and protect the common
interest of the people as it pertains to natural gas development through education and
best environmental practices.

The JLCNY represents the common interests of 38 independent landowner coalitions
throughout the Southern Tier of New York whose members own over 800,000 acres of
land over the Marcellus Shale natural gas deposits. The JLCNY and New York
landowner coalitions have been very engaged on all aspects of natural gas development.
We have followed the development of natural gas in neighboring Pennsylvania,
researched all relevant issues, evaluated the best practices and have drafted leases
incorporating vigorous landowner protections. This extensive research, hundreds of
actual site visits by the members of the JLCNY and the professional background of many
of the JLC members with oil and gas experience formed the basis for many of the
following comments.

The JLCNY believes the original draft Supplemental Environmental Impact Statement
(dSGEIS) developed by the NYSDEC`s Minerals Division and released Ior public
comment in September 2009, was very close to achieving the necessary protections for
the environment. However, the latest release adding 500-plus pages to the document
provided very little in additional meaningful content and only served to delay natural gas
production in New York State, costing the Southern Tier region and its struggling
economy millions of dollars in lost revenue. For instance, adding several pages about the
various types of diesel engines provides very little useful information when a simple
reference to existing regulations and the need to meet them would suffice.

It is important to mention that the members of the JLCNY understand that the regulatory
process involves change. As development progresses in the field, a regulation might
need to be modified or removed at any time because it no longer addresses a situation or
a better technology has evolved. In addition to the specific recommendations in the
following pages, removing all redundant and superfluous material from the SGEIS would
improve the document and make it more useful for the DEC, the landowners, the public
and industry.

The JLCNY thanks the NYSDEC for the opportunity to provide meaningful input. This
document represents the collective input of the JLCNY membership. Please read it
carefully. Each of the individual comments may apply to the same or similar items found
in many places throughout the DSGEIS. Many address confusing or inconsistent issues
and some address items that are based on old or incorrect information.


JLCNY Page 4 of 28
Local Planning Documents
Section 1.7.5, Page 1-1

'The Department proposes that applicants be required to compare the proposed well pad
location to local land use laws, regulations, plans and policies to determine whether the
proposed activity is consistent with such local land use laws, regulations, plans and policies. If
the applicant or the potentially impacted local government informs the Department that it
believes a conflict exists, the Department would request additional information with regard to
this issue so it can consider whether significant adverse impacts relating to land use and
zoning would result Irom permit issuance.

JLCNY Response
It was a significant error by the NYSDEC to add this section to the DSGEIS. This
section has motivated municipalities across New York to pass regulations relating to oil
and gas development, thereby affecting the energy policy of the entire State. In the
1970s, New York experienced many problems with the regulatory program for the oil
and gas industry when municipalities began their own regulatory initiatives. This local
regulation of the oil and gas industry resulted in several problems, including:
1. Safety concerns resulting from untrained local staff going onto well sites;
2. The significant costs to hire proper professional petroleum engineer staff, which
was often too burdensome for local municipalities;
3. A patchwork of local regulation, which resulted in differing requirements for
drilling unrelated to geology;
4. Financial security at both the local and State levels;
5. Conflicts between municipal boundaries and setbacks; and
6. Exorbitant local taxation.

In 1981, the New York Oil, Gas and Solution Mining Law was amended to include the
following supersedure provision in ECL 23-0303(2): ~The provisions of this article
shall supersede all local laws or ordinances relating to the regulation of the oil, gas and
solution mining industries; but shall not supersede local government jurisdiction over
local roads or the rights of local governments under the real property tax law. This
amendment was enacted with the clear understanding that the supersedure clause
extinguished the right of municipalities to regulate any aspect of oil and gas
development including the right to zone oil and gas wells. There was never any intent to
allow a local government to extinguish the mineral rights of any landowner by zoning
out oil and gas development. Rather, ECL 23-0303(2) was intended to strengthen the
rights of landowners to recover their subsurface minerals, or have others do so for them,
unfettered by any local regulation. Unfortunately, many municipalities have interpreted
this section as an invitation to regulate oil and gas which threatens to return New York
to pre-1981 status. We believe NYSDEC did not intend this result and suggest this entire
section be deleted.
JLCNY Page 5 of 28
Setback from the New York City Watershed
Section 7.1.5, from pages 7-55 7-56

'Accordingly, the Department recommends that regulations be adopted to prohibit high-
volume hydraulic fracturing in both the NYC and Skaneateles Lake watersheds, as well
as in a 4,000 -foot buffer area surrounding these watersheds, to provide an adequate
margin of safety from the full range of operations related to high-volume hydraulic
Iracturing that extend away Irom the well pad.

JLCNY Response
There are many problems wit h t his set back, i ncl udi ng t he violat ion of t he Fift h
Amendment to t he United St ates Constitution which provides t hat private property
shal l not be t aken for public use wit hout j ust compensat ion. We are certain that
landowners wi ll seek to address this issue in court.

I n addition, t his set back is si mpl y f lawed si nce some areas of the buffer actuall y
leave the Del aware River basi n and cross into t he Susquehanna River basin. An
example of where t his happens is i n t he Town of Meredith in Delaware Count y (see
map on next page). Also, there are landowners i mpacted by t he 4000 foot setback
wit h parcels that are located downhi ll or downstream of the NY C watershed wi th no
chance of any runoff or spi ll entering t he NY C watershed. The JL CNY does not
believe that t he New Yor k St ate Depart ment of Envi ronmental Conservation
intended this result. We therefore recommend t hat the language in the SGEIS be
changed to cor rect this issue. We suggest after ".4,-foot buffer area surrounding
these watersheds,." addi ng the following: .not including any portion of the buffer
zone which is in a different watershed where the setback will end at the boundary, or
where a property is downhil l or downstream from the watershed with no opportunity
for runoff from the property to enter the AYC watershed."


JLCNY Page 6 of 28



JLCNY Page 7 of 28
Invasive Species
Section 7.4.2.1 from page 7-92

'The well operator should assign an environmental monitor to check that all trucks,
machinery and equipment have been washed prior to entry and exit of the project site and
that there is no dirt or plant material clinging to the wheels, tracks, or undercarriage of the
vehicles or equipment; and.

JLCNY Response
This provision for i nvasive species mi tigat ion is unnecessar y once t he access road
and well pad are completed, as t hei r surfaces wi ll be covered with paving materials
such as gravel or crushed stone. The need to cont inue i nspecti ng vehicl es and
machi nery coming and going from t he site no longer makes sense. Annual follow-up
site inspections of t he access road and well pad duri ng the growi ng season will
achieve the desi red obj ective.


JLCNY Page 8 of 28
Pad Siting Equipment, Layout and Operation
Section 7.1.10, page 7-129

'The beneIits oI a multi-well pad are the reduced number of sites generating noise and,
with the horizontal drilling technology, the flexibility to site the pad in the best location
to mitigate the impacts. As described above and in more detail in Subsection 5.1.3.2,
current regulations allow for a single well pad per 40-acre spacing unit, one multi-well
pad per 640-acre spacing unit, or various other combinations. This provides the potential
for one multi-well pad to recover the resource in the same area that could contain up to
16 single well pads.

With proper pad location and design, the adverse noise impacts could be significantly
reduced. A multi-well pad provides a platform to extract gas over a wider area than the
area exploited by a single vertical well. This provides an opportunity to locate the multi-
well pad away from a noise receptor and in a location where there is intervening
topography and vegetation, which can reduce the noise level at the receptor location to a
level below that which might result from several single-well pads in close proximity to
the receptor location.

Multi-well pads also have the potential to greatly reduce the amount of trucking and
associated noise in an area. Rigs and equipment may only need to be delivered and
removed one time for the drilling and stimulation of all of the wells on the pad. Reducing
the number of truck trips required for fracturing water is also possible by reusing water
for multiple fracturing jobs. In certain instances, it also may be economically viable to
transport water via pipeline to a multiwell pad.

JLCNY Response
The JL CNY recommends t hat the NYSDE C consi der permitti ng wherever possible
duplex dri lli ng units as described below as Si ngle-Pad Duplex Dril ling Units.

Single-Pad Duplex Drilling Units
By abutting two 640-acre drilling units wherever possible and placing a single well pad
st raddling the common boundary line, several envi ronmental, landowner, indust ry, and
DE C benef its emerge, including:

1. One-half the surf ace disturbance:
o One pad instead of two;
o One gathering pipeline instead of two;
o One access road instead of two;
o Seven to ten acres or more of natural wildlif e habitat and productive
f armland in each consolidated drilling unit could remain undisturbed;
o Reduced storm water runoff .

2. Twice the usual number of wells could be located on a single drilling pad:
o Incentive to lay temporary pipelines for water dist ribution;
JLCNY Page 9 of 28
o Signif icant reduction in t ruck t raff ic;
o More efficient drilling rig and ancillary equipment utilization;
o Saf er and more eff icient handling and recycling of drilling and f racing fluids;
o Improved potential spill containment and remediation.

3. More eff icient regulatory activities for DE C f ield personnel :
o Eff ectively monitoring two well sites in a single location;
o Reduce evaluation time for permits;
o Reduce the amount of Department of Transportation (DOT) input on Road
Usage Plans;
o Eff ectively reduce the number of roads impacted by heavy t raff ic;
o More effectively site pad locations to reduce noise and visual impacts

4. Signif icant reduction in indust ry costs:
o Single envi ronmental impact statement rather than two;
o Reduced site preparation and const ruction costs;
o Reduced equipment installation, removal and t ransportation costs;
o Reduced product pipeline costs;
o Potential for multiple f racs with a single setup;
o More efficient flowback recycling and reduced waste disposal ;
o Consolidated flowback containment tank f arm;
o Consolidated noise abatement structures if requi red.

I n addition, by allowing all the wells scheduled for drill ing on the consol idated pad
to be dri lled consecutively by t he same r ig, many of t he aforementioned benefits
would significantly i ncrease for each of the partici pants i nvolved. This i ncrease in
efficiency al ready exists i n Pennsylvania where t he JL CNY has visited many si ngle-
pad well sites as l arge as 1,280 acres.


JLCNY Page 10 of 28
Number of Wells per Pad Site
Section 6.5.1.4, page 6-104

Drilling as many wells as possible from a single well pad provides for substantial
environmental benefits from less road construction, surface disturbance, etc. Also,
experience shows that average drilling time can be improved as more experience is
gained in a shale play. Based on industry information submitted in response to
Department requests, it is expected that no more than four wells could be drilled,
completed, and hooked up to production in any 12-month period. Therefore, the annual
emission estimates presented in Section 6.5.1.7 are based on an assumed maximum of
four wells per site per year.

JLCNY Response
Through discussions wi th industr y represent atives and visits to act ive drilling sites,
the JL CNY has found t hat i mprovements i n technology and eff iciency associated
wit h drill ing wel ls i n t he Marcellus Shale formation has i mproved. I t is now easi ly
possible to dril l si x wells or more per pad wi thin one year. This i ncrease in
efficiency would decrease t he overall emissions from a single well pad because t he
drilli ng equi pment requi red woul d be operati ng for the same amount of time for the
t wo addit ional wells that previousl y may have only dri lled four. This i ncrease in
efficiency also reduces the overall ti me of annoyance i mpact i n a specifi c area.


JLCNY Page 11 of 28
Well Casing
Section 7.1.10.1, from page 7-50

'SurIace casing shall consist oI new pipe wit a mill test oI at least 1000 psi, or used
casing that is pressure tested ...

And in Appendix 8, Number 4

'All surIace casing shall be a string oI new pipe with a mill test of at least 1,100 pounds
per square inch (psi) unless otherwise approved.

JLCNY Response
Apparentl y t here is a t ypographic er ror here. Section 7 says 1000 psi and Appendix
8 says 1100 psi. The GEI S (1992) says 1,100 psi
.
Also, a typo i n page 7-50 - h is missi ng from wi th.


JLCNY Page 12 of 28
Annular Pressure Buildup
Section 7.1.4.3

'Current casing and cementing practices require that the annular space between the
surface casing and the next string be vented at all times to prevent pressure build-up in
the annulus. If the annular gas is to be produced, a pressure relieve valve would be
installed in an appropriate manner and set at a pressure approved by the Department.
Proposed Supplementary Permit Conditions for high-volume hydraulic fracturing state
that 'under no circumstances should the annulus between the surIace casing and the next
casing string be shut-in, except during a pressure test.

However on page 7-53 the SGEI S st ates
'3) Intermediate casing would be cemented to the surIace and cementing would be by the
pump and plug method with a minimum of 25% excess cement unless caliper logs are
run, in which case 10 excess would suIIice;

JLCNY Response
The JL CNY f inds t his to be conf using and contradictory. We recommend that a
review of best pr actices from Ohio and Pennsylvani a be conducted and appropriate
language be added to cl arif y t his section. The JL CNY has visi ted many well sites i n
Pennsylvani a where al l casings are cemented to t he surface. This and t he use of four
casings (conductor , surface, intermediate and production) to date has solved the
problem of gas migr ation. This section coul d be i mproved by providi ng a clear
diagr am ill ustr ating constr uction requi rements rel ati ng to well -casi ng.

JLCNY Page 13 of 28
Reduced Emission Completions
Section 7.6.8, from Page 116;

'.a description oI planned use oI reduced emissions completions, iI any, including an
estimate of the amount of methane that would be recovered instead of flared by the use of
such; and.

From Page117;

'A reduced emissions completion, with minimal Ilaring (iI any), would be perIormed
whenever a sales line is available during completion at any individual well or the
multiwell pad.

JLCNY Response
The Public Service Commission (PSC) regulates pi peli nes i n New Yor k, not the
Depart ment of Envi ronment al Conservation. However, the SGEI S i n section 7.6.8
suggests that reduced emission complet ions be eval uated and i mplemented
whenever a sales line is avai lable.

The JL CNY has al ways, and conti nues to promot e best envi ronment al practices. I t
is i mportant to reduce methane and carbon dioxi de to t he atmosphere. The existing
regulation is designed for gas exploration t hat may or may not successfull y fi nd a
produci ng well; thus eli mi nating t he possibi lit y of bui ldi ng unnecessary gathering
pipel ines. I t is common knowledge that when a well is dri lled into the Marcellus
formation it is not a question of if you are going to f ind nat ural gas, but only a
question of how much. I n conversations wit h t wo nat ural gas companies operati ng
outside of New Yor k, we have been infor med t hat t hey build the pi peli nes
simult aneousl y wi th the wel l site in order to accomplish reduced emission
completions.

The JL CNY encourages the NYSDE C to do whatever is necessar y to encourage the
PSC to amend its regulat ions by allowing the constr uction of a sales line
simult aneousl y wi th dril ling and completion of natur al gas wells.


JLCNY Page 14 of 28
Drilling F luids
Section7.1.3.2, page 7-35

'Pits Ior Iluids used in the drilling, completion, and re-completion of wells should be
constructed, maintained and lined to prevent pollution of surface and subsurface waters
and to prevent pit fluids from contacting surface soils or ground water zones. Department
field inspectors are of the opinion that adequate maintenance after pit liner installation is
more critical to halting pollution than the initial pit liner specifications. Damaged liners
must be repaired or replaced promptly. Instead of very detailed requirements in the
regulations, the regulatory and enforcement emphasis will be on a general performance
standard for initial review of liner-type and on proper liner maintenance.

JLCNY Response
The JL CNY has i n previous cor respondence (comments on scopi ng document and
comments on f i rst dr aft of SGEI S) recommended closed loop dr illi ng thus
elimi nating the need for pits used in dril ling. The JL CNY also has recommended
using steel tanks for the cont ai nment of al l flowback fl ui ds. Many companies in PA
are recycling flowback fluids for reuse. The JL CNY encourages t his pr actice. The
only pits that we believe shoul d be al lowed are those for t he containment of fresh
water. Lease documents prepared by member coalitions of t he JL CNY specifical ly
prohibit t he use of open pits for any use ot her than containment of fresh wat er.


JLCNY Page 15 of 28
F ueling Tank and Tank Refilling Activities
Section 7.1.3.1, page 7-34

'b. Fueling tanks would not be positioned within 500 Ieet oI a perennial or intermittent
stream, storm drain, wetland, lake or pond;

Setbacks from Other Surface Water Resources
Section 7.1.11.2, page 7-76

'Based on the above inIormation and mitigating Iactors, the Department proposes that
site-specific SEQRA review be required for projects involving any proposed well pad
where the closest edge is located within 150 feet of a perennial or intermittent stream,
storm drain, lake or pond.

JLCNY Response
The 500-foot setback for fueli ng activities occurs i n several pl aces i n the SGEI S
includi ng the above quote from the SWPPP. The JL CNY supports t he development
of the SWPPP and t he spill containment pl an, but also bel ieves that wit h t hese in
place t he refuel ing coul d t ake place anywhere on the well pad. A properly
developed SWPPP as described in the SGEI S wil l prohibit any spil ls from leaving
the pad site.

The JL CNY does not have an issue wit h t he 150-foot setback from perenni al or
intermittent streams. While we believe it may be possible to locate a fueling t ank on
the well pad 500 feet from a perenni al or i ntermi ttent stream, we question the need
for this requi rement I f the SWPPP and Spi ll Prevention Control &
Countermeasure (SPC C), i ncludi ng secondary contai nment, cur bing around the
tank, SPC C traini ng of an onsite crew, and ot her requi rements, is complete then the
fueling tank could be pl aced al most anyplace on the pad wit hout risk of surface
water cont amination. Also, it may be more benefici al to pl ace the fuel ing tank, from
an envi ronment al risk st andpoi nt, at a place t hat is closer t han 500 feet. The
JL CNY believes this section shoul d be changed to read: "1o the extent possible,
fueling tanks would not be positioned within 500 feet of a perennial or i ntermittent
stream, storm drain, wetland, lake or pond;"


JLCNY Page 16 of 28
Cumulative Water Withdrawal Impacts
Section 7.1.1.6, page 7-25

'The SRBC (February, 2009) stated 'the cumulative impact of consumptive use by this
new activity (natural gas development), while significant, appears to be manageable with
the mitigation standards currently in place. The extent oI the gas-producing shales in
New York extends beyond the jurisdictional boundaries of the SRBC and the DRBC.
New York State regulations do not currently address water quantity issues in a manner
consistent with those applicable within the Susquehanna and Delaware River Basins with
respect to controlling, evaluating, and monitoring surface water and ground water
withdrawals for shale gas development. The application of the NFRM to all water
withdrawals to support the subject hydraulic fracturing operations would
comprehensively address cumulative impacts on stream flows because it will ensure a
specified minimum passby flow, regardless of the number of water withdrawals taking
place at one time.

JLCNY Response
The JL CNY requests t hat t he NYSDE C wor k wi th the SRBC, t he DRB C and the
Great Lakes Basi n Commission (and any other watershed commission) to
implement a joi nt water wit hdr awal permit process. The process shoul d requi re the
submission of onl y one applicat ion t hat would satisf y the requi rements of all
concerned.

JLCNY Page 17 of 28

Primary and Principal Aquifers
Section 7.1.3.5, page 7-40

'Based on the analysis contained in Sections 6.1.3.4, the Department has determined that
the activities associated with high-volume hydraulic fracturing pose a risk of causing
significant adverse impacts to Primary Aquifers and, therefore, such operations may not
be consistent with the long-term protection of Primary Aquifers. The Department finds
that standard stormwater control and other mitigation measures may not fully mitigate the
risk of potential significant adverse impacts on these water resources from spills or other
releases that could occur in connection with high-volume hydraulic fracturing operations.
Therefore, the Department proposes to bar placement of high-volume hydraulic
fracturing well pads over Primary Aquifers and an associated 500-foot buffer to provide
an adequate margin of safety from the full range of high-volume hydraulic fracturing
activities. As defined in TOGS 2.1.3, Primary Aquifers are currently extensively used by
major municipalities as a source of drinking water. Contamination of a Primary Aquifer
could render a large, concentrated population without drinking water. Replacing a
drinking water source of this magnitude would be prohibitive because of exorbitant costs,
difficulty in locating alternative water supply sources, and the extensive time needed to
implement any alternatives. However, because the mitigation measures that would be
imposed through permit conditions and/or regulations may prove effective for preventing
uncontained, unmitigated releases that could contaminate Primary Aquifers, this bar will
be re-evaluated two years after the commencement of issuance of well permits associated
with high-volume hydraulic Iracturing operations.

'The Department Iurther proposes to require a site-specific SEQRA review for placement
of high volume hydraulic fracturing well pads that are proposed to be located over
Principal Aquifers or within a 500-foot buffer, as well as an individualized SPDES
stormwater permit. As defined in TOGS 2.1.3 and explained in Chapters 2 and 6,
Principal Aquifers are currently not intensively used by major municipalities as a source
of drinking water, as compared to Primary Aquifers. However, contamination of a
Principal Aquifer could still render a large population without water. Because mitigation
measures that would be imposed through permit conditions and/or regulations may prove
effective for preventing uncontained, unmitigated releases that could contaminate
Principal Aquifers, this proposed requirement will be re-evaluated in two years after
the commencement of issuance of well permits for high-volume hydraulic fracturing
operation.

Page 7-41
Summary
To ensure that mitigation measures are sufficient to protect primary and principal
aquifers, which are described in Chapters 2 and 6 of this Supplement and in the 1992
GEIS, the Department would implement the following restrictions until at least two years
after issuance of the first permit for high-volume hydraulic fracturing:
1) No well pads would be approved within 500 feet of primary aquifers; and
2) A site-specific SEQRA review and determination of significance, and a site-specific
JLCNY Page 18 of 28
SPDES permit, would be required for any proposed well pad within 500 feet of a
principal aquiIer.

Page 7-42
'Two years aIter issuance oI the Iirst permit Ior high-volume hydraulic fracturing, the
Department would re-evaluate the need for these restrictions based on experience with
high-volume hydraulic Iracturing outside oI these restricted areas.

"7.1.4 Potential Cround Water Impacts Associated With Well Drilling and
Construction
Existing construction and cementing practices and permit conditions to ensure the
protection and isolation of fresh water would remain in use, and would be enhanced by
Permit Conditions for high-volume hydraulic fracturing. See Appendices 8, 9 and 10.
Based on discussion in Chapters 2 and 6 of this Supplement, along with GWPCs
regulatory review,36 the Department proposes to .


Summary
To ensure that mitigation measures are sufficient to protect primary and principal
aquifers, which are described in Chapters 2 and 6 of this Supplement and in the 1992
GEIS, the Department would implement the following restrictions until at least two years
after issuance of the first permit for high-volume hydraulic fracturing:
1) No well pads would be approved within 500 feet of primary aquifers; and
2) A site-specific SEQRA review and determination of significance, and a site-
specific SPDES permit, would be required for any proposed well pad within 500
feet of a principal aquifer.

Revised Draft SGEIS 2011, Page 7-42
Two years after issuance of the first permit for high-volume hydraulic fracturing, the
Department would re-evaluate the need for these restrictions based on experience with
high-volume hydraulic fracturing outside of these restricted areas.

JLCNY Response
The JL CNY has several issues wit h prohi biti ng dri lli ng in the pri mar y and
princi pal aquifers. The NYSDE C has consistentl y al lowed nat ural gas drilli ng
through aquifers i n NY for decades and has successful ly regulated t he process
wit hout allowing cont ami nat ion. For example the Jamestown aquifer has over 170
wells dri lled through it wi thout i ncident. The process of dril ling a horizontal well is
essential ly the same as a vertical well for t he vertical section, t he section that
penetrates and passes through the ground water zone. The NYSDE C has well
casing procedures i n place and in the SGEIS that adequatel y protect groundwater
resources.

Also, the JL CNY disagrees wit h t he following quote taken from t he SGEIS text
above. 'The Department finds that standard stormwater control and other mitigation
measures may not fully mitigate the risk of potential significant adverse impacts on these
JLCNY Page 19 of 28
water resources from spills or other releases that could occur in connection wi th high-
volume hydraulic fracturing operations.

The SGEIS describes i n detail t he use of a Comprehensive SWPPP and SPDES
permit: ('The Department proposes to require SPDES permit conditions, a
Comprehensive SWPPP, and both structural and nonstructural Best Management
Practices (BMPs) to minimize or eliminate pollutants in stormwater. The Department is
proposing the use of a SPDES general permit for high-volume hydraulic fracturing
(HVHF GP), but the Department proposes to use the same requirements in other SPDES
permits should the HJHF GP not be issued.`) Also, described i n detail is the
requi rement for a Spil l Prevention Control & Counter measure pl an (SPC C) wit h a
trained team onsite to clean up any spil l t hat should occur.

The 1LCNY`s biggest concern with the section on Primary and Principal Aquifers is
found in the following st atement: 'Two years after issuance of the first permit for
high-volume hydraulic fracturing, the Department would re-evaluate the need for these
restrictions based on experience with high-volume hydraulic fracturing outside of these
restricted areas.`

The JL CNY would li ke t his rewritten as a sunset cl ause. We suggest the followi ng:
"1he restriction of high-volume hydraulic fracturing i n primary and principal aquifers
shall terminate two years after issuance of the first permit for high-volume hydraulic
fracturing unless prior affirmative action to extend is taken by the Department which
shall be reasonably justi fied because of contamination of New York ground water
resources as a direct result of high-volume hydraulic fracturing

We believe t his is an i mportant amendment based on t he lengt h of t ime it has t aken
for the NYSDE C to fi nish t he SGEIS. We have no confi dence t hat t he NYSDE C,
now or in the f ut ure, is capable of setti ng and meeting a schedule. The original
schedule for the SGEIS was about 6 months.

JLCNY Page 20 of 28
Reducing Indirect and Cumulative Impacts of Habitat F ragmentation
Grassland Focus Areas
Section 7.4.1.2, page 7-81

Grassland Focus Areas depicted in Figure 7.2 were determined by a group of grassland
bird experts, including Department staff with input from outside experts representing
federal agencies and academia.65 The focus areas were derived from Breeding Bird Atlas
(BBA) data from 2002 - 2004;66 they were further modified by expert knowledge, and
then followed up with a 2-year field verification study before being finalized. They
represent areas of New York State that contain the most important grassland habitat
mosaics. The 2006 BBA provided the core dataset for delineating Grassland Focus
Areas. All atlas blocks with a high richness of breeding grassland birds, as well as
contiguous blocks also supporting grassland species, were included in the focus areas.
The target Ior the Iocus areas was to 'capture or include at least 50 oI the BBA blocks
where each of the grassland species was found to be breeding across the state. The focus
areas were able to reach that target for all but the most widespread species. Although the
BBA does not provide estimates of abundance or densities, one of the criteria for
inclusion in a focus area was contiguity with adjacent blocks containing grassland birds;
analyses indicate that such blocks contain significantly higher abundances of the target
species than isolated blocks.

Extensive field surveys were conducted in 2005 and 2006 throughout the focus areas.
These surveys collected distribution and abundance data to confirm that the analysis of
the breeding bird data reflected actual conditions in the field (Table 7.4). A total of 487
different habitat patches were surveyed statewide. In some cases, focus area boundaries
were adjusted based on field survey data. The overall process resulted in the
identiIication oI 8 Iocus areas that support New York`s grassland breeding birds, 4 oI
which occur in the area underlain by the Marcellus Shale.

Grassland Focus Area Species
Western Area Upland sandpiper, vesper sparrow, horned leak, savannah sparrow,
short-eared owl* Southern Area Northern Harrier, grasshopper sparrow, Eastern
meadowlark, savannah sparrow Middle Northern Area Vesper sparrow, grasshopper
sparrow, horned lark, savannah sparrow, short-eared owl* Eastern Area Northern harrier,
short-eared owl* *Wintering only

Revised Draft SGEIS 2011, Page 7-82
Specific Mitigation Measures to Reduce Impacts to Grasslands
In order to mitigate impacts from fragmentation of grassland habitats, the Department
proposes to require, through the permit process and/or by regulation, that surface
disturbance associated with high-volume hydraulic fracturing activities in contiguous
grassland habitat patches of 30 acres or more within Grassland Focus Areas would be
based on the findings of a site-specific ecological assessment and implementation of
mitigation measures identified as part of such ecological assessment, in addition to the
BMPs required for all disturbances in grassland areas that are identified in Section
7.4.1.1. This ecological assessment would include pre-disturbance biological studies and
JLCNY Page 21 of 28
an evaluation of potential impacts on grassland birds from the project Pre-disturbance
studies would be required to be conducted by qualified biologists and would be
required to include a compilation of historical information on grassland bird use of the
area and a minimum of one year of field surveys at the site to determine the current
extent, if any, of grassland bird use of the site. Should the Department decide to issue a
permit after reviewing the ecological assessment, the applicant would be required to
implement supplemental mitigation measures by locating the site disturbance as close to
the edge of the grassland patch as feasible and proposing additional mitigation measures
(e.g., conservation easements, habitat enhancement). In addition, enhanced monitoring of
grassland birds during the construction phase of the project and for a minimum period of
two years following active high-volume hydraulic fracturing activities (i.e., following
well completion) would be required.

Explanation for 30 Acre Threshold: Many oI New York`s rarest bird species that rely
on grasslands are affected by the size of a grassland patch. Several species of
conservation concern rely on larger-sized grassland patches and show strong correlation
to a minimum patch size if they are to be present and to successfully breed. Minimum
patch sizes will vary by species, and by surrounding land uses, but a minimum patch size
of 30-100 acres is warranted to protect a wide assemblage of grassland-dependent
species.67 Although a larger patch size is necessary for raptor species, a minimum 30
acres of grassland is needed to provide enough suitable habitat for a diversity of grassland
species. Grasslands less than 30 acres in size are of less importance since they do not
provide habitat for many of the rarer grassland bird species.68 The Grassland Focus Areas
cover about 22% of the area underlain by the Marcellus Shale. However, the actual
impacts on Marcellus development would affect less area for two reasons. First, only
those portions of the Grassland Focus Areas meeting the minimum patch size
requirement would be subject to the aforementioned additional restrictions on surface
disturbance. Second, even in areas where surface disturbance should be avoided, gas
deposits could be accessed horizontally from adjacent areas where the restriction does not
apply.

JLCNY Response
There are many serious f laws wit h t his section. Fi rst, we must make clear that the
JL CNY supports the protection of t hreatened or endangered species. I n f act,
JL CNY members are partici pants in the many U.S. Department of Agri culture
(USDA) conservat ion programs. The Natur al Resources Conservation Service
(NRCS) and t he F ar m Service Agency (FSA) admi nister t he many (over 20)
conservation programs t hat di rectl y or i ndi rectly assist landowners and producers
who wish to pr actice conservation on agricult ural l ands. The Conservat ion Reserve
Program (CRP), t he l argest of these programs, has a nationwi de enroll ment ceiling
of 32 mill ion acres and is designed to i mprove habit at for upland bi rds among other
things. However, even a program such as t his has potent ial negative i mpacts on
local economies, reducing production and associated jobs by i dli ng producti ve land
resources and cutti ng off t he mult ipl ier inherent in crop, livestock and poultr y
production.

JLCNY Page 22 of 28
Bi rd populat ions i n New Yor k are protected by the Threatened and Endangered
Species Act, the Migratory Bi r d Treaty Act of 1918 (wit h its subsequent
amendments) and NY`s Endangered Species Regulations. The 1LCNY believes the
same regulat ions shoul d appl y to l andowners i n t he grassl and and forest focus areas
that apply to any other constr uction proj ect. An i nvestigation of a site for
threatened and endangered species shoul d be conducted reviewi ng avail able
information from t he New Yor k St ate Nat ural Heritage Program for records of
state or Feder al t hreatened or endangered species within the proj ect ar ea or near
vicinit y. I f records of threatened or endangered species exist i n an area, then a fiel d
survey should be conducted i n t hat area to determi ne the presence or absence of the
named species. I f a named species is found at the proposed proj ect site then
appropriate steps must be taken to avoi d negative i mpact. The point here is that
procedures exist in New Yor k for handli ng threatened and endangered species and
no additional criteri a shoul d be applied to l andowners.

Private l andowners are an i mportant part of the grassland bi r d conservation
equation so t hey should be incl uded i n t he planning and discussion. The SGEIS has
mitigation met hods t hat appl y to grassl ands of over 30 acres but it is not clear how
size wi ll be measured and i t is not clear how grassland habitat is defi ned. This has
got to be clearl y defined upfront. How does the SGEIS defi ne field size, change in
crop, roads, and grassl and habit at?

Row crops are not useful grassl and habit at , nor are extensive areas of high i ntensit y
agricult ure. Fal low fiel ds generally are useful and hay f ields can be, depending on
mowing t imes. Crop rotation, a routi ne agricult ural pr actice, may change the
habitat characteristics of ~grassland focus area fields from one year to the next.

The cur rent dat a avail able from the breedi ng bi r d atl as and t he Audubon study
(discussed i n t he SGEI S) needs to be reviewed to prioriti ze the areas where pads
could occur wit hi n t he grassl and focus areas wit h a priority on pad pl acement t hat
protects important grassl and habit at whi le allowing access to gas under the area.
The SGEIS has f ailed to t ake t he appropri ate approach to this issue. I nstead it has
taken a broad brush to large areas, someti mes covering an enti re count y,
designating t hem as grassl and focus areas.


JLCNY Page 23 of 28
Monitoring Changes in Habitat
Forest Focus Areas
Section 7.4.1.3, page 7-87, 7-88

The following mitigation measures are necessary to better understand and evaluate the
impacts oI habitat Iragmentation on New York`s wildliIe Irom multi-pad horizontal gas
wells and would be required as permit conditions for any applications seeking site
disturbance in 150-acre portions of Forest Focus Areas and 30-acre portions of Grassland
Focus Areas:

Conduct pre-development surveys of plants and animals to establish baseline reference
data for future comparison;75

Monitor the effects of disturbance as active development proceeds and for a minimum of
two years following well completion. Practice adaptive management as previously
unknown effects are documented; and

Conduct test plot studies to develop more effective re-vegetation practices. Variables
might include slope, aspect, soil preparation, soil amendments, irrigation, and seed mix
composition.77

With the aforementioned measures in place, the significant adverse impacts on habitat
from high volume hydraulic fracturing would be partially mitigated.

JLCNY Response
There are several assumptions in the discussion of forest focus areas that have
already been shown to be incorrect. ~The conservative projection of 250 drilling
rigs in Pennsylvania is one. The r ig count in Pennsylvani a as of January 9, 2012
was 112 and decreasing monthly. Another inaccurate assumption is that ~.activity
could result in approximately 40,000 wells by 2040. That would requiring drilling
1428 wells per year st arti ng now - no chance. The fol lowing news art icle sums up a
major controlling f actor in the rate of natur al gas development - PRI C E.

US NATURAL GAS INDEX SLUMPS 40% IN ONE YEAR
December 29, 2011 - The US benchmark for natural gas has collapsed dramatically, ending the
year as the worst-performing commodity index because of a glut of domestic shale gas. In
yesterday's trading, the Nymex Natural Gas Index was down 40.83% on its value at the beginning
of the year.
New extraction techniques have opened up vast deposits of natural gas trapped in previously
inaccessible rock formations. This has turned the US from a net importer of gas to a country that
is gearing up for exports. Citigroup has cut its forecast for the average natural gas price next year from as
high as $4.10 to $3.30, citing production growth and record inventories.
Much of the Pennsylvania dri lli ng activit y is rel ated to dril ling one or t wo wells per
unit for the pur pose of hol ding leases before they expi re. I n New Yor k, because of
JLCNY Page 24 of 28
regulations that requi re a uni t be completed i n 3 years (E C L 23-0501), the JL CNY
believes the scenario proposed by t he DE C of 75 , 200, 325, 650, and 1300 wells
drilled i n years 1 t hrough 5 is unreasonably high.

A recent report by The Nature Conservancy (Dec 19, 2011) depicti ng the
development of nat ural gas in Tioga Count y, NY uses the same fl awed assumptions
as t he SGEI S cit ing a high, medi um and low development scenario. These are
proj ected scenarios t hat are unli kely to occur. Nat ural gas product ion is regulated
by the same mechanism as any ot her commodit y - suppl y and demand. The
li keli hood t hat nat ural gas development wi ll develop quickly i n New Yor k is very
small. There is a glut on t he mar ket, dril ling rigs are l eaving northeast
Pennsylvani a for more profit able locations and those remai ni ng are dril ling to hold
leases.

Alt hough the vast deposits of natur al gas found in U.S. shale deposits has
dramatical ly changed our dependence on foreign energy sources, proj ecting f uture
development scenarios in New Yor k based on what has happened i n northeast
Pennsylvani a needs to be tempered wi th reason. There is subst antial natural gas
drilli ng and associated production goi ng on i n many shale plays i n t he continental
U.S. other than t he Marcellus. This adds to the vast amount of oversupply and
reduces the potenti al that New Yor k wi ll see subst ant ial development anyt ime soon.
The rate proj ected by the DE C, and t he doom and gloom scenarios proj ected by t he
ant i-development groups si mply wil l not occur. I n f act, competit ion from other
areas has left New Yor k f ar behind and has cost the state thousands of j obs and
hundreds of millions of dollars in lost revenue.

The f act t hat most dril ling in Pennsylvania is one to t wo wells per pad (to hold
leases) means t hat several more wel ls per pad are needed to extract the avai lable
gas. Also, t he si ze of spaci ng units is defined by law in New Yor k by E C L s 23-
0501(1)(b)(1)(vi). The l aw defines 640 acres as t he l argest spacing uni t for one multi -
pad well. DEC ~anticipates that multi-well pad horizontal dr illi ng (whi ch results in
the lowest densit y and t he least l and dist urbance) wi ll be t he predomi nant
approach and that the use of multi-well pads ~significantly reduces the number of
needed well pads and associated roads (RDSGEIS pp. 5-22). The Tioga st udy
(T HC Tioga Count y, NY Study Dec 2011) on page 9 says approxi mately 90% of
wells wil l be hori zont al wel ls wit h an average spaci ng unit of 160 acres each; (E AR,
pp. 4-3).

As technology has progressed i n the dril li ng and completion process, individual well
production has increased and dri lli ng unit size in Pennsylvani a has become l arger.
I t is common to have wells wi th initi al production exceeding 12 mmcf/day and
spaci ng units as large as 1280 acres, furt her reduci ng the surf ace i mpact. However,
there is no mention of this i n the focus area scenarios of t he dSGEI S or the recent
T HC Tioga Count y, NY Study. The JL CNY has, since incept ion, promoted
envi ronment al responsi bil ity whi le keeping close tr ack of technological advances
JLCNY Page 25 of 28
that i ncrease efficient nat ural resource production and f urther reduce negative
impact.

As for t he cl ai m concerni ng the loss of forest l and, a 1996 report by Be r nar d F.
Stanton and Nelson L. Bills, ~ The Return of Agricultural lands to Forest
describing the change in agricultur al lands in New Yor k from 1910 through 1992
sums up what has actuall y happened. The amount of New Yor k's " improved land /
cropland " and the amount of its " woodl and, par ks and uni mproved l and " were
about equal (48% each) in 1910; and by 1990 the amount of " mostly woodland
under private and government ownershi p " was about 71%, whi le i mproved land /
cropland was down to about 16%. This trend has conti nued through t he last decade
of the l ast cent ury and the fi rst decade of this cent ury wi th i mproved l and/cropl and
declini ng to about 12%. Duri ng the same period (1910-1992) the state i ncreased i ts
land holdings to 13.65% of the total l and area.

For example, in Steuben Count y, a grassl and focus area, st ate l and holdings exceed
29,000 acres. I n Chenango County, a forest focus area, state hol dings exceed 80,000
acres. Has t he state managed these l arge hol dings wi th consider ation for the
grassland or forest bi rds habit at needs as a pri mar y concern? Many l andowners
have by joini ng one or more of the USDA conservation programs.

The JL CNY members i n t he focus areas are also concerned about the potential for
selective enforcement of regul ations on various forms of development. What if a
tract of l and was being evaluated as an I ndustri al Development Parcel, or for
housing? It doesn`t take a very large parcel to exceed the size of a well pad and
access road and t he surface dist urbance woul d be long term. The JL C NY believes
that the majority of t he discussion on focus areas in Chapters 6 and 7 should be
removed and instead the di rection shoul d be on best management pr act ices and
advances i n technology t hat reduce surface impact.


JLCNY Page 26 of 28
Mitigating Operational and Safety Impacts on Road Systems
Section 7.11.3, page 7-141

JLCNY Response
The JL CNY recommends t hat the DE C requi re GPS tr acki ng devices on water and
waste hauli ng trucks. This wil l ensure that trucks stay on predeter mined routes and
wi ll also allow inspectors to easil y i nvestigate any compl ai nts concerni ng water or
waste hauli ng.
JLCNY Page 27 of 28
General Comments

In addition to the many issues addressed in the preceding pages, the JLCNY wishes to
make the following general comments:

1. The DSGEIS does not adequately address the difference between temporary
impacts and long-term impacts. The development of the Marcellus Shale natural
gas play will take decades to fully develop. During that development period
many pads will be constructed, wells will be drilled, put into production and
partially reclaimed. Grass, shrubs and trees will re-grow, returning much of the
landscape to its original condition while at the same time development will be
continuing in other areas. The DSGEIS, especially in the sections about grassland
and forest focus areas, fails to address this condition. In a 640-acre unit the actual
construction (road and pad) will only occupy a little over 1% of the total unit area,
and even some of that will be reclaimed.

2. The JLCNY believes that the NYSDEC has failed to adhere to NYS ECL Article
23-0301 which declares it to be in the public interest to regulate the development,
production and utilization of natural resources of oil and gas in this state in such a
manner as will prevent waste; to authorize and to provide for the operation and
development of oil and gas properties in such a manner that provides for a greater
ultimate recovery of oil and gas; and that the correlative rights of all owners and
the rights of all persons including landowners and the general public be fully
protected. The DSGEIS` excessive and unnecessary setbacks and prohibition of
surface operations will result in stranded acreage, inefficient patchwork
development and unrecovered gas, failing to meet the public interest as required
by New York law.

3. The JLCNY is also concerned about an obvious exercise of selective enforcement
which is likely to be challenged in the courts. There are numerous examples of
how the NYSDEC is imposing burdens on this industry which it does not apply to
any other industry operating within New York. New York will fail to realize the
benefits of this industry if the NYSDEC creates unjustified, excessive and
inequitable rules and regulations which go well beyond what is required of any
other industry in New York State.

4. The DSGEIS will have the unintended consequence of increasing the number of
drilling pads. Without regular spacing of units and optimal placement of drilling
pads on those units, there will on average be fewer wells per pad in New York.
This will drive the construction of more pads than necessary with the
corresponding unnecessary increase in traffic, environmental disturbance and
cost.

JLCNY Page 28 of 28
Concl usions

The JLCNY has spent tens of thousands of hours reviewing the 2009 DSGEIS, providing
comments, reviewing the 2011 DSGEIS and now providing comments again. Our goal is
to provide substantive comments that improve the DSGEIS making it possible for our
members to develop their mineral resources while, at the same time avoiding or reducing
any associated environmental impact. We believe that as a group, the JLCNY goal is in
sync with the Minerals Division of the NYSDEC.

The original 2008 scoping document and the 2009 DSGEIS addressed most of the real
issues. Unfortunately, at some point the process became political, and the history of
successful drilling in New York State and scientific facts upon which the process should
be based was lost. The DEC, for whatever reason, failed much of the citizenry of t he
state by not taking over the process and informing the public of the real facts about the
various processes involved in natural gas development. In 2008 and 2009, the DEC held
several public meetings which were informative and educational. The long hi story
surrounding the safety of natural gas extraction in NY should be recognized by the DEC
who should become more proactive clarifying facts to the public. The JLCNY has
maintained a website designed to provide those Iacts in the DEC`s absence.

During the summer of 2009 the process got out of control. Delay after delay caused by
the political atmosphere, including the firing of the former DEC commissioner, has
slowed the development of a concise and useful SGEIS. The JLCNY members have
submitted thousands of comment letters that are all the same, supporting this one
response to the DEC. The JLCNY and its member coalitions have worked collectively to
develop this document with the express purpose of presenting our unified comments
while ensuring that we do not further delay the completion by submitting thousands of
comment letters that the DEC would have to review. Other organizations could have
done the same, making the DEC review less of a burdensome clerical process. Clearly
they have a different goal.

It appears the natural gas industry is the only major industry willing to come to New
York without requiring extensive tax breaks and grants, while promising thousands of
high-paying jobs and billions of dollars in income to the State and its citizens.

The JLCNY and our member coalitions stand ready to assist the NYSDEC in any way
possible to complete a meaningful, concise SGEIS with reasonable regulations that will
adequately protect the environment, serve the needs and rights of our citizens, and
encourage the natural gas industry to come to New York State.