Gas Drilling In Otsego County Useful Information For Citizens

Reference Only Please Do Not Remove

NotetoReaders
ThisbinderhasbeenpreparedbycitizensofOtsegoCountyforcitizensofOtsegoCountyithasbeena volunteer effort to collect and organize information on gas drilling, which we hope will be useful to those who may not have access to a computer or who find the amount of information online to be overwhelming.Thisbinderisintendedtobearesourceforcounty,town,andvillageofficials,residents, landowners, and businesses looking for essential information on the Marcellus Shale, the hydraulic fracturingprocess,anditsimpactsonourenvironmentandinfrastructure.Thefollowingorganizations haveendorsedthisefforttoinformOtsegoscitizens: AdvocatesforCherryValley,Inc. AdvocatesforSpringfield ButternutValleyAlliance ConcernedCitizensofButternutValley CrumhornLakeAssociation CrumhornMountainResidents FlyCreekNeighbors/OtsegoLand&CommunityAdvocates Homescapes/Goldpetals,Inc. LandownersAgainstNaturalGasDrilling MarylandGroupAgainstDrilling MiddlefieldNeighbors OtsegoCountyConservationAssociation Otsego2000 SustainableOtsego UpperUnadillaValleyAssociation

GAS DRILLING VIA HYDRAULIC FRACTURING IN OTSEGO COUNTY: A PRIMER TABLE OF CONTENTS
Questions You Need to Ask about Hydrofracking Drilling- Frequently Asked Questions Things You Should Know Before You Sign a Lease Things You Should Know If Your Neighbor Signs a Lease Otsego County Natural Gas Well Locations and Leased Properties Compulsory Integration Pipelines and Eminent Domain Iroquois Gas Transmission System Map New York State Regulations for Oil and Gas Compared to Other States by James L. Northrup Safer Drilling: What Would It Look Like? By Lou Allstadt Our Water Safe Drinking Water Protecting Private Water Supplies Near Gas Well Drilling in NYS by Dr. Penningroth Baseline Water Quality Testing, in Respect to Gas Wells Water Resources of Otsego County, Map Gas Drilling in Drinking Water Watersheds by Win McIntyre How Drilling for Natural Gas Can Affect Our Water and Foodshed General Guidance on Well Water Monitoring in Advance Maps Marcellus Shale and Its Fairway in NYS Marcellus Shale Formation in Otsego County Local Impact The Economics of Extracting Natural Gas From Shale Formations Local Food Production and Gas Drilling: Are they Compatible? Hunting and Fishing at Risk Environmental Issues Letter from Farmer about Hydrofracking and the Foodshed Ozone Damage Statement Against Hydrofracking by the Medical Societies of Oneida, Herkimer, Madison, Chenango, Oswego and Cayuga Gaining Momentum in Opposition to Hydraulic Fracturing What You Can Do 13 Actions You Can Take Now Contact Information for Elected Officials Otsego County Board of Representatives Shale Gas: What a New York Town Should Do- A Powerpoint Presentation by James Chip Northrup

ThingsYouShouldKnowBeforeYouSignaLease
FromtheMeredithLandownersCoalitionNewsletter#1,Spring2010 1) LandownerCoalitions.Ifyoujoinacoalition,makesureyouunderstandhowmuchyouwill havetopayifyousignoneoftheirleases.Somecoalitionschargeyou,somegetapercentage fromthegascompaniesforeveryleasetheydeliver,whileothersareonlyaloose,informal group,sharinginformation,witheveryonejusttryingtoleasetheirownland. Thecoalitionusuallygetsafeebasedonthenumberofacresyoulease,oftenbetween$25and $50.Whateveryoupay,youllpayupfront,evenifagaswellisneverdrilled.Ifyourelooking foragasleasewiththemaximumprotectionforyourself,bewarned:coalitionleadersoftentry topersuadememberstodrasticallylowertheirexpectationstheeconomyisveryweaknow orgaspricesarereallylow,etcforfearthattoomanydemandswillmakethegascompanies goelsewhere.Ifthathappens,theywilllosetheirfees. 2) TheBonus.Signupbonuseshavegoneupanddownoverthelasttwoyearsfromanywhere between$50/acretomorethan$5000.Callyourneighborsandseewhattheyarebeing offered.Thencheckonlinetoseewhatthegoingrateisinotherareas. However,beawarethatasignupbonusdoesntmeanyoullgetallthemoneywhenyousign alargepartofmanybonuses(asmuchas90%)isconditional,dependingonvariousfactors,like whentheyDECregulationsfinallygointoeffect,orwhengasdrillingbeginsonyourproperty. Itsadeferredpaymentthatmayneverbepaidatall.Butsinceleasesaretreatedlikedeedsand filedintheCountyClerksoffice,theresnogettingoutofitonceyouvesigned. 3) Taxes.Sinceyoursignupbonusistreatedasincome,notascapitalgains,theamountyouwill havetopayinfederalandstatetaxeswillreducewhatyoukeepbyasmuchas50%. 4) Royaltiesaresupposedtobebasedontheactualamountofgasproduced,butthegas companiesaretheonescontrollingthemeters,andtheresnoeasywaytochallengetheir figures.Youmay,atyourownexpense,haveanauditdoneontheirbooks,butthatassumes theyhaveonlyonesetofbooksandthattheirmetersaretrackingallofthegasthatisbeing removed.(Beforeyouconsidertakingthemtocourttogetyourmoney,beawarethatthe burdenofproofisonyouandiftheywin,youcouldenduppayingtheirattorneysfeestoo!). Monthlyroyaltystatementsareusuallybasedonsalesmadeinthe4thmonthpriortothe statementanddeductarangeofmarketingexpensesfromthetotal(foritemslike compression,dehydration,gathering,processing,etc).Ifaseverancetaxisimposed(in Texas,its7.5%),thatwillalsobedeductedbeforeyourpercentageiscalculated. Thefirstyearyourwellisinproductiongeneratesmostoftherevenueyoulleverreceive.The secondyearproductiontypicallygoesdown50%,andinsubsequentyears,farlower.Sodont

expectbigroyaltypaymentsafterthefirstfewyearsawellisinoperation,eventhoughthegas equipmentwilllikelyremainforyears,evendecades.Yourleaseallowsthemtostayonyour propertyindefinitely,longaftertheinitialleaseperiod(usually5years)hasexpired. Havingagaswellonyourlandisanimprovement.Asaresult,yourassessmentmayincrease significantly,alongwiththeamountofpropertytaxesyoupay,andonceyourassessmenthas goneup,itprobablywontgodownagainuntilallthegasisextracted,andyoumaybepaying thoseextrataxesyearinandyearoutevenifyounolongerreceivesubstantialroyaltychecks. 5) Lawsuits.Ifyouleaseyourland,youcanbesuedforaccidentsandspills,eveniftheyhappen onotherpeoplesland.Makesuretheresaclauseinyourleasethatsaysthegascompanywill assumeALLliabilityforanydamages.Yourhomeownerorfarmpolicywontcoveryou. Asforthegascompanysinsurance,asktoseetheirEnvironmentalImpairmentLiabilitypolicy andcheckifyouandyourneighborswillbecovered.EveniftheyhaveEILinsurance,they candropit,orsellyourleasetoacompanythatdoesntcarryit. Justbecausetheyhaveproperinsuranceandyourleasesaysyourprotecteddoesntmeanyou wontbesued.Iftheresanaccident,youprobablywillbesued,andyouwillhavetohirea lawyertodefendyouincourt.Ifthegascompanyoffersyoualawyer,withalllegalexpenses paid,considercarefullywhethertheywillberepresentingyourinterests,ortheirs.Lawsuitslike thesetypicallygoonforyears. 6) Restoration.Whenyousignalease,thegascompanyhastherighttocomeonyourland whenevertheywantanddoprettymuchwhatevertheyplease.Youwilllosecontrolofyour propertyandyourprivacy.Theycan,forexample,buildaccessroads,laypipelines,digbigpits fortoxicwastestorage,bulldozeahillsideforthepad,cutdownyourtrees,dumpgarbage,dig upyourfields,useyourwoodsasatoilet,andalterthewaterrunoffonyourland,resultingin extensivesoilerosion. Theresusuallyaclauseinleasesrequiringgascompaniestoreturnyourpropertytoitsoriginal conditionwhentheyleave.Buttheymanynotleaveformanyyears.Iftheytransferyourlease toanothercompanywithoutassets,yourlandwonteverberestored. 7) Mortgages.FHArulesprohibitmortgagesonpropertieswithagaslease,soifyouhaveoneon yourhomeandyousign,youwilllikelyhavetofindanotherlender.Evenifyouhavea mortgagefromsomeoneelse,mostlendersprohibithazardoussubstancesfrombeingbrought ontothelandownersproperty,soyoumayberequiredtopayoffthemortageinfullbeforea gaswellcanbedrilled. Youmayalsohavedifficultywithyourhomeownersinsurance,whichmaybecancewlledatany timeattheveryleast,youlllikelyseeasubstantialincreaseinyourpremiums.

8) SecondThoughts.Ifyousignaleaseandhavesecondthoughtslateron,dontthinkyoucansell yourpropertywhiletheleaseisstillineffect.Themarketforsuchpropertiesisvirtuallynon existent.Whowantstobuypropertyencumberedbyaperpetualgaslease?Theresnosignup bonusandmuch,ifnotall,oftheroyaltieshavelikelyalreadybeendistributed,leavingthe buyerwithahugepropertytaxbillandlongtermlegalexposurefordamages,perhapsevena pondfulloftoxicwastestillwaitingtoberemovedtoatreatmentfacilitythatmayneverbe built. Donttakeourwordcallafewlocalrealtorsinareaswithalotofgasleases(Otsego,Broome, Chenango,Ithaca)andaskthemhowmanyleasedpropertiestheyvesoldrecently. Soconsiderverycarefullybeforeyousign.Youllbeinitforthedurationandtheconsequences foryourselfandyourneighborswilllikelylastforagenerationormore.

ThingsYouShouldKnowIfYourNeighborSignsaLease
FromTheMeredithLandownersCoalitionNewsletter#1,Spring2010 1) TheUnit.Yourneighborispartofapoolorunit,coveringanareaof640acres(1square mile),designatedbythegascompanyinitspermitapplication.Bylaw,hasdrillerscanplaceup to16horizontalwellswithineachunit,spacedevery40acres.Sincewellsareusuallydeveloped oneatatimeoveraperiodofyears,evendecades,theimpactwillbebothgradualandlong lasting. 2) Integration.Youmaybesurprisedtolearnthatyoumayalsobecomepartoftheunit,even withoutyouragreement.If60%ofthelandinaunithasbeenleasedtothegascompany,the ownersoftheremaining40%canbeforcedtoparticipate,throughastateapprovedprocedure calledcompulsoryintegration. Youllreceivea30daynoticebyregisteredmail,afterwhichyouautomaticallybecomeanon participatingmemberoftheunitandthegascompanycanextractthegasbeneathyourland bydrillinghorizontallyfromaneighboringwell.Youshouldreceiveacheckforthestate mandatedminimumroyaltyof12/5%,butsincethegascompanyisdoingalltheaccounting, theresnopracticalwaytoensuretheirhonesty.(Youalsohavetheoptionduringthe30day periodtojointheunitasaparticipatingmember.Ifyouchoosetoparticipate,thenthegas drillerscancomeontoyourland,andyoullshareliabilityforaccidents.) 3) Construction.First,amajorpipeline(agatheringline)willbelaiddownfromthemaingasline (mostlikelytheTennesseepipelinethatrunseastwestacrossOtsegoCounty)tothetown boundaryandthenacrossvariouspropertyownerslandsandundertownroadsuntilitreaches yourneighborswellhead. Afterthegatheringlineisinplace,ahorizontalwellusuallytakesabout1to2monthsto complete.Awellpadwillbeconstructedonyourneighborsland,coveringabout45acres. Thenagasrig,upto150feethigh,willbebuiltonthepad(aminimumof150feetfromyour house)anddrillingwillbegin,downtoadepthofoveramile,andthenextendinghorizontally foranotherfewthousandfeet. Theoutercasingofthewellboreissupposedtobelinedwithalayerofcementtoprevent leakageofgasandtoxicmaterialsintothegroundwater,butproblemshavebeenreportedin otherstatesinvolvingimproperproceduresandcracksthatdevelopovertime. ThedrillingisdonebyworkcrewsbroughtinfromplaceslikeTexas,working12hourshifts aroundtheclock,underbrightlightsatnight,thekindyouseeinafootballstadium. Thenoisefromthegenerators,pumps,andcompressorswillbeconstant.Expectozonelevels toriseandthesmellofdieselfuelandotherchemicalslikebenzenetobeintheairprettymuch

allthetime(inKansas,theycallitthesmellofmoney).Youllalsoneedtogetusedto vibrationsandtheintercomsystemblaringmessagestotheworkcrewatanyhour.Andthe barkingoftheguarddogsthatmanysitesusetokeepintrudersaway. 4) Fracking.Oncethedrillingisover,thetankertruckswillstartarrivingeverydaywithwater. Frackingawelleachcanbefrackedanaverageof5timesormorerequiresatleast2million gallons.At6000gallonspertruck,eachweighingover30tons,itwilltakeatleast333 truckloads.Soexpecttoseealongparadeoftankersrumblingbackandforthovereverydusty road. Othertruckswillbecarryingbarrelsofsandandhazardouschemicalsthataremixed(about1 gallontoevery200gallonsofwater)intothefrackingfluidthatwillbeinjectedunderextreme highpressureintoeachwelltoshattertheshaleandreleasethetrappedmethanegas. BytheDECsownestimates,somewherebetween9and35%ofthefluidswillflowbackupthe welltothesurfaceoverthenextfewdays,bringingwithitbrinydepositsandnaturalradioactive materialthatmustbeprocessedinspecialtoxictreatmentfacilities,noneofwhichcurrently existanywhereinNewYorkState. Thatmeansupto91%ofthetoxicchemicalsinthefrackfluidswillremaindeepbelowthe surface.Whetheranyofthesetoxinswillmigrateupward(overmonthsorevendecades) throughthethousandsoffissuresandlargerfaultsthatexistinourregionsunderground geologynooneknowsforsure. 5) Contamination.Incasetheresatoxicchemicalspillorleakonyourpropertyfromyour neighborswell,anditaffectsyourdrinkingortapwater(inDimock,PA,someresidentscan lighttheirfaucetswithamatch),reportitimmediatelytotheNYDEC(877/4575680),yourlocal emergencyresponders,andtotheEPAsEyesonDrillingprogram(877/9194372). Pollutantsinthewatersupplyarespecificallyexcludedinalmosteveryhomeownerpolicy, andcurrentlynoinsurancecompaniesinNewYorkoffersuchcoverageasanextra.Soifyou sufferenvironmentalorhealthdamages,youronlyrecoursewillbetosue.Dontgotoyour personallawyerhiresomeonewithextensiveexperienceinenvironmentallawsuits.Youwill needtoprovethatgasdrillingcausedtheproblem.Ifyourwaterhasbeencontaminated,then youmustshowyourwaterwasnotpriortodrilling.However,suchtestingcanbequite expensive($750$1000fromacertifiedlab). Themainobstacleyouwillneedtoovercomeinalawsuitisntprovingyourwellwas contaminated,oreventhatitwascontaminatedbythedrillingonyourneighborslandunder NewYorkStatelaw,youmustalsoprovenegligenceonthepartofthegascompanyoryour neighbor;inotherwords,thattheyviolatedtheproperproceduresmandatedbytheDEC.

 Inspiteofallthis,youstillhaveachanceofeventuallywinningsomekindofoutofcourt settlement,sincethecompanymayprefertoavoidallnegativepublicityofalongdrawnout legalbattle.Manygascompanieshavealreadyfactoredinsuchsettlementsasaroutinecostof doingbusiness,plannedforasacontingencylongbeforedrillingbegins.Butifyousettle,you wonteverbeabletospeakaboutwhathappened. 6) LocalPrices.Ifagasboomdevelops,moreandmoreitinerantworkerswillmoveintothearea. Somebusinesseswillgrowtomeettheincreaseddemandforgoodsandservices,butsowill prices.Therewillbeashortageofhousing;rentswillrise,andsomepeoplemaybepricedout ofthemarketaltogether.Expectthecostofmanyservicestodoubleoreventriple.Thestrain onmunicipalserviceslikefirefightingandEMSwillincreasesignificantly.Atsomepoint,the boomwillend.Ifthelocaleconomyhasbecomedependentongasdrilling,theboomwilllikely turntobust. 7) PropertyTaxes.Manypeople,eventhosewhosupportdrilling,acknowledgethereissome environmentalrisk,butcleanupbillswilldependonwhatkindofproblemsactuallydevelop. Roaddamage,however,isprettymuchacertaintynoneofourroadsarebuilttohandletraffic fromtensofthousandsoftankertrucksandtractortrailers.Ourtownboardsmaybeableto passordinancesrestrictingsomeofthistrafficandrequiringgascompaniestopostabond againstroaddamage,butifthedamageissevereenough,everyonespropertytaxeswillgoup. 8) PropertyValues.Ifyouhavebeencompulsorilyintegratedintoagasdrillingunit,youwontbe liableforanydamages(unlessyouchoosetobeintegratedasaparticipatingmember),but yourinclusionintheunitmaymakeitdifficultforyoutosellyourproperty. Afterthefirstfewyears,whateverroyaltiesyoureceivewilldiminish,andyourproximitytogas wellsintheunitwillmakeyourpropertylessattractivetopotentialbuyers.Evenifyouve managedtoavoidintegration,nearbygasdrillingactivitieswilllikelylowerthevalueofyour property.

GOOD TIMES BAD TIMES

SPRING 2010

A R ES I D ENTS G U I D E TO GAS D R I LLI N G

ISSUE #1

Many of us have read articles in the papers or seen the news on TV about what happened in Dimock, PA last year more than a dozen drinking wells were contaminated after an explosion caused by drilling in a neighboring gas well. Three months before the explosion, our own County Board of Supervisors overwhelmingly passed a resolution (#191) in favor of gas drilling, in which they cite the following example as evidence: in the Town of Dimock in nearby Susquehanna County Pa., Cabot Oil and Gas projects annual revenues from gas production would yield nearly $23 billion with annual royalty payments of $2.9 billion to local landowners. Since Dimock has only about 1400 residents, that would mean more than $2,000,000 for every man, woman and child, every year. What they are telling us just cant be right. So a few of us in Meredith have formed a group and done some independent research to try to get a better picture of what is really likely to happen in our town if drilling is allowed. The following is what we have found out so far.S

THINGS YOU SHOULD KNOW

BEFORE YOU SIGN A LEASE
1) Landowner Coalitions. If you join a coalition, make sure you understand how much you will have to pay if you sign one of their leases. Some coalitions charge you, some get a percentage from the gas companies for every lease they deliver, while others are only a loose, informal group, sharing information, with everyone just trying to lease their own land. The coalition usually gets a fee based on the number of acres you lease, often between $25 and $50. Whatever you pay, youll pay up front, even if a gas well is never drilled. If youre looking for a gas lease with the maximum protection for yourself, be warned: coalition leaders often try to persuade members to drastically lower their expectations the economy is very weak now or gas prices are really low, etc. for fear that too many demands will make the gas companies go elsewhere. If that happens, they will lose their fees. 2) The Bonus. Sign-up bonuses have gone up and down over the last 2 years from anywhere between $50/acre to
continued on page 4

THINGS YOU SHOULD KNOW

IF YOUR NEIGHBOR SIGNS A LEASE
1) The Unit. Your neighbor is part of a pool or unit, covering an area of 640 acres (1 square mile), designated by the gas company in its permit application. By law, gas drillers can place up to 16 horizontal wells within each unit, spaced every 40 acres. Since wells are usually developed one at a time over a period of years, even decades, the impact will be both gradual and long-lasting. 2) Integration. You may be surprised to learn that you may also become part of the unit, even without your agreement. If 60% of the land in a unit has been leased to the gas company, the owners of the remaining 40% can be forced to participate, through a state-approved procedure called compulsory integration. Youll receive a 30-day notice by registered mail, after which you automatically become a non-participating member of the unit and the gas company can extract the gas beneath your land by drilling horizontally from a neighboring well. You should receive a check for the statemandated minimum royalty of 12.5%, but since the gas
continued on page 5

BOOM AND BUST The potential scale of development of the Marcellus and other gas-bearing shales beneath our feet dwarfs any previous human activity in our area. What are the long-term social and economic implications? To address this issue, The Northeast Regional Center for Rural Development at Pennsylvania State University published a paper entitled, Energy Boomtowns and Natural Gas: Implications for Marcellus Shale Local Governments and Rural Communities. so local employment gains may be less than anticipated. Transient workers, brought in for a specic aspect of the development, comprise a workforce without indigenous moorings or loyalties to the local community. Local governments have little inuence on the level of natural gas development, but those institutions need to provide an increased level of services funded by the local taxpayer. Local governments may be unable to keep up with demand, leading to a decline in the availability and quality of services.

Abandoned well pads in western Colorado

The view from Mt. Meredith

Their analysis is based primarily on the long-term effects of energy development on small towns in the western United States, since large-scale natural gas development has come to the Northeast only recently. Although our region differs in many respects from western gas drilling areas, there are several key similarities, including the process used in the extraction of the gas, the type of workforce employed by the industry, and the rural nature of the economy. The study found that: The economic consequences of a boom have an uneven, often disturbing, impact. Some sectors benet more than others. Huge inuxes of capital and temporary workers into a small community can lead to rapid ination in the costs of goods and services. Small local businesses may have difculty retaining a workforce. Severe housing shortages for newcomers lead to skyrocketing real estate prices and rents. Those on xed incomes, such as retirees, often endure debilitating hardship, imposing physical and emotional duress. Gas industry jobs often require skills ill-matched to residents,

Unpredictability marks the social impact of a boom. From the Virginia tobacco boom to the building of the Alaska pipeline, American history tells us that this is so. Disproportionate increases in social problems such as crime, mental health problems, community dissatisfaction, family breakdown, alcoholism, and educational shortfalls have been reported in some gas drilling areas. The production phase of natural gas development typically lasts about 30 to 40 years. In small communities with few other employment options, an economic bust typically follows. Another report, Fossil Fuel Extraction as a County Economic Development Strategy, from Headwaters Economics, an independent, nonprot research group, shows that counties hosting intensive oil and gas extraction performed more poorly over 35 years than similar counties where there was little or no drilling. Energy-focusing counties ended up with smaller economies, lower student graduation rates, and greater gaps between rich and poor residents.

TOXIC WASTE Why should we be worried about the toxic chemicals in the uids that return from hydrofracked gas wells? Because the people who understand these risks are very concerned. They include public health ofcials in NY State, the staff of the NY State Dept. of Environmental Conservation, and the federal Environmental Protection Agency. All of these groups have written critically of how the current DEC proposals deal with fracking uid. These uids contain some of the most dangerous chemicals known, like gluteraldehyde, and cancer-causing agents like toluene and benzene (see our website for a list). The gas industry says fracking uid contains only 0.5% chemicals (1 part per 200), but benzene is banned from drinking water in concentrations above 1 part per billion. Each time a well is fracked, millions of gallons of toxic uids ow back up to the surface, bringing with it dangerous heavy metals like arsenic, and radioactive materials like uranium and radon, in concentrations hundreds of times above acceptable levels. All this adds up to many billions of gallons that must be processed and disposed of, but there are no facilities in NY that can do this. This is what the NY State Council of Environmental Health Directors the local ofcials whose job is to protect our public health says of the NY DECs plan to regulate hydrofracking: Impact of mud pits on groundwater quality: In some counties there are well documented studies that identify reclaimed mud and cutting pits as a source of groundwater contamination The DEC says it is ok to spread well-related uids on local roads. This is a potentially huge public health exposure risk. Naturally Occurring Radioactive Material (NORM) are not adequately addressed. The elevated radiological results from the drilling owback water and tailings present the potential for signicant public health risk. Municipal Publicly Owned Treatment Works (POTWs) are not designed to treat constituents in owback water and should not be used for treatment or disposal. Flowback waters are an industrial waste, and separate industrial wastewater treatment facilities should be constructed to specically treat them. There are no existing facilities in New York State designed to treat owback. No viable disposal option, NO drilling. Until recently, the EPA has been restricted by Congress from looking at the health and environmental risks of hydrofracking. But after gas drilling contaminated home drinking wells in Wyoming, Colorado and Pennsylvania, the EPA became concerned and Congress has now mandated that the EPA study the true risks of hydrofracking. As the EPA recently stated: There are compelling reasons to believe that hydraulic fracturing may impact ground water and surface water quality in ways that threaten human health and the environment, which demands further study. This December, the association of professional, scientic and technical employees of the NY DEC strongly criticized the DECs own proposal (the dSGEIS) to regulate gas drilling: NYS should not nalize plans to authorize expansion of drilling in the Marcellus Shale until after the US Environmental Protection Agency nished the recent Congressional legislative mandate to re-evaluate the safety and environmental implications of extracting gas from the Marcellus Shale. The dSGEIS is not adequate for protecting our water resources from the huge amounts of water withdrawals necessary for hydrofracking. Existing public municipal water supplies could also be negatively impacted. New Yorks water is one of its most valuable natural resources. One has to wonder if the DECs own scientists say the plan does not protect our health and the environment, who actually wrote that plan?

THINGS YOU SHOULD KNOW BEFORE YOU SIGN A LEASE continued from page 1 more than $5000. Call your neighbors and see what they are being offered. Then check online to see what the going rate is in other areas. However, be aware that a sign-up bonus doesnt mean youll get all the money when you sign a large part of many bonuses (as much as 90%) is conditional, depending on various factors, like when the DEC regulations nally go into effect, or when gas drilling begins on your property. Its a deferred payment that may never be paid at all. But since leases are treated like deeds and led in the County Clerks ofce, theres no getting out of it once youve signed. 3) Taxes. Since your sign-up bonus is treated as income, not as capital gains, the amount you will have to pay in federal and state taxes will reduce what you keep by as much as 50%. 4) Royalties are supposed to be based on the actual amount of gas produced, but the gas companies are the ones controlling the meters, and theres no easy way to challenge their gures. You may, at your own expense, have an audit done on their books, but that assumes they have only one set of books and that their meters are tracking all of the gas that is being removed. (Before you consider taking them to court to get your money, be aware that the burden of proof is on you and if they win, you could end up paying their attorneys fees too!) Monthly royalty statements are usually based on sales made in the 4th month prior to the statement and deduct a range of marketing expenses from the total (for items like compression, dehydration, gathering, processing, etc.). If a severance tax is imposed (in Texas, its 7.5%), that will also be deducted before your percentage is calculated. The rst year your well is in production generates most of the revenue youll ever receive. The second year production typically goes down 50%, and in subsequent years, far lower. So dont expect big royalty payments after the rst few years a well is in operation, even though the gas equipment will likely remain for years, even decades. Your lease allows them to stay on your property indenitely, long after the initial lease period (usually 5 years) has expired. Having a gas well on your land is an improvement. As a result, your assessment may increase signicantly, along with the amount of property taxes you pay, and once your assessment has gone up, it probably wont go down again until all the gas is extracted, and you may be paying those extra taxes year in and year out even if you no longer receive substantial royalty checks. 5) Lawsuits. If you lease your land, you can be sued for accidents and spills, even if they happen on other peoples land. Make sure theres a clause in your lease that says the gas company will assume ALL liability for any damages. Your homeowner or farm policy wont cover you. As for the gas companys insurance, ask to see their Environmental Impairment Liability policy and check if you and your neighbors will be covered. Even if they have EIL insurance, they can drop it, or sell your lease to a company that doesnt carry it. Just because they have proper insurance and your lease says youre protected doesnt mean you wont be sued. If theres an accident, you probably will be sued, and you will have to hire a lawyer to defend you in court. If the gas company offers you a lawyer, with all legal expenses paid, consider carefully whether they will be representing your interests, or theirs. Lawsuits like these typically go on for years. 6) Restoration. When you sign a lease, the gas company has the right to come on your land whenever they want and do pretty much whatever they please. You will lose control of your property and your privacy. They can, for example, build access roads, lay pipelines, dig big pits for toxic waste storage, bulldoze a hillside for the pad, cut down your trees, dump garbage, dig up your elds, use your woods as a toilet, and alter the water run-off on your land, resulting in extensive soil erosion. Theres usually a clause in leases requiring the gas company to return your property to its original condition when they leave. But they may not leave for many years. If they transfer your lease to another company without assets, your land wont ever be restored. 7) Mortgages. FHA rules prohibit mortgages on properties with a gas lease, so if you have one on your home and you sign, you will likely have to nd another lender. Even if you have a mortgage from someone else, most lenders prohibit hazardous substances from being brought onto the landowners property, so you may be required to pay off the mortgage in full before a gas well can be drilled. You may also have difculty with your homeowners insurance, which may be cancelled at any time at the very least, youll likely see a substantial increase in your premiums. 8) Second Thoughts. If you sign a lease and have second thoughts later on, dont think you can sell your property while
continued on page 7

THINGS YOU SHOULD KNOW IF YOUR NEIGHBOR SIGNS A LEASE continued from page 1 company is doing all the accounting, theres no practical way to ensure their honesty. (You also have the option during the 30-day period to join the unit as a participating member. If you choose to participate, then the gas drillers can come onto your land, and youll share liability for accidents.) 3) Construction. First, a pipeline (a gathering line) will be laid down from the main gas line (most likely the Tennessee pipeline that runs east-west across Otsego County) to the town boundary and then across various property owners lands and under town roads until it reaches your neighbors well head. The drilling is done by work crews brought in from places like Texas, working 12-hour shifts around the clock, under bright lights at night, like the kind you see in football stadiums.

The noise from the generators, pumps and compressors will be constant. Expect ozone levels to rise and the smell of diesel fuel and other chemicals like benzene to be in the air pretty much all the time (in Kansas, they call it the smell of money). Youll also need to get used to vibrations and the intercom system blaring messages to the work crew at any hour. And the barking of the guard dogs that many sites use to keep intruders away. After the gathering line is in place, a horizontal well usually takes about 1 to 2 months to complete. A well pad will be constructed on your neighbors land, covering about 4 or 5 acres. Then a gas rig, up to 150 ft. high, will be built on the pad (a minimum of 150 feet from your house) and drilling will begin, down to a depth of over a mile, and then extending horizontally for another few thousand feet.
cement layer

4) Fracking. Once the drilling is over, the tanker trucks will start arriving every day with water. Fracking a well each can be fracked an average of 5 times or more requires at least 2

5000-6000 ft
shale fractures

The outer casing of the well bore is supposed to be lined with a layer of cement to prevent leakage of gas and toxic materials into the groundwater, but problems have been reported in other states involving improper procedures and cracks that develop over time.

million gallons. At 6,000 gallons per truck, each weighing over 30 tons, it will take at least 333 truckloads. So expect to see a long parade of tankers rumbling back and forth over every dusty road. Assuming 8 wells per square mile (more if there are overlapping units tapping into different layers of shale, like the Utica) and just 25% of our 58 square miles are drilled, thats 193,000 vehicles weighing 6 million tons coming in and out of town, just to bring in the water.
continued on page 6

THINGS YOU SHOULD KNOW IF YOUR NEIGHBOR SIGNS A LEASE continued from page 5 Other trucks will be carrying barrels of sand and hazardous chemicals that are mixed (about 1 gallon to every 200 of water) into the fracking fluid that will be injected under extreme high pressure into each well to shatter the shale and release the trapped methane gas. By the DECs own estimates, somewhere between 9 and 35% of the uids will ow back up the well to the surface over the next few days, bringing with it briny deposits and natural radioactive material that must be processed in special toxic treatment facilities, none of which currently exist anywhere in New York State. That means up to 91% of the toxic chemicals in the frack uids will remain deep below the surface. Whether any of these toxics will migrate upward (over months or even decades) through the thousands of ssures and larger faults that exist in our regions underground geology no one knows for sure. only recourse will be to sue. Dont go to your personal lawyer hire someone with extensive experience in environmental lawsuits. You will need to prove that gas drilling caused the problem. If your water has been contaminated, then you must show your water was not prior to drilling. However, such testing can be quite expensive (a minimum of several thousand dollars from a certied lab). The main obstacle you will need to overcome in a lawsuit isnt proving your well was contaminated, or even that it was contaminated by the drilling on your neighbors land under NY State law, you must also prove negligence on the part of the gas company or your neighbor, in other words, that they violated the proper procedures mandated by the DEC. In spite of all this, you still have a chance of eventually winning some kind of out-of-court settlement, since the company may prefer to avoid all the negative publicity of a long, drawnout legal battle. Many gas companies have already factored in such settlements as a routine cost of doing business, planned for as a contingency long before drilling begins. But if you settle, you wont ever be able to speak about what happened. 6) Local Prices. If a gas boom develops, more and more itinerant workers will move into the area. Some businesses will grow to meet the increased demand for goods and services, but so will prices. There will be a shortage of housing; rents will rise, and some people may be priced out of the market altogether. Expect the cost of many services to double or even triple. The strain on municipal services like re-ghting and EMS will increase signicantly. At some point, the boom will end. If the local economy has become dependent on gas drilling, the boom will likely turn to bust. 7) Property Taxes. Many people, even those who support drilling, acknowledge there is some environmental risk, but cleanup bills will depend on what kind of problems actually develop. Road damage, however, is pretty much a certainty none of our roads are built to handle trafc from tens of thousands of tanker trucks and tractor trailers. According to Highway Superintendent Bill Jester, there are 80 miles of town roads (and 21 of county/state roads), and replacing just one of those miles will cost at least $310,000. Currently, 75% of our town budget $731,486 goes for road maintenance. Our town board may be able to pass an ordinance to restrict some of this trafc and require gas companies to continued on page 7

To view the video about Dimock, PA, visit our website at

www.meredith-coalition.org 5) Contamination. In case theres a toxic chemical spill or leak on your property from your neighbors well, and it affects your drinking or tap water (in Dimock, PA, some residents can light their faucets with a match), report it immediately to the NY DEC at 877-457-5680. The local EC Ofcer for our town is George Wilber (267-5479). The gas industry managed in 2005 (with the help of ex-Halliburton CEO Dick Cheney) to get Congress to exempt drilling from the provisions of many federal environmental regulations, but the regional ofce of the Environmental Protection Agency has recently established a monitoring program called Eyes on Drilling. Their hotline number is 877-919-4372. Pollutants in the water supply are specically excluded in almost every homeowner policy, and currently no insurance companies in New York offer such coverage as an extra. So if you suffer environmental or health damages, your

BEFORE YOU SIGN continued from page 4 the lease is still in effect. The market for such properties is virtually non-existent. Who wants to buy property encumbered by a perpetual gas lease? Theres no sign-up bonus and much, if not all, of the royalties have likely already been distributed, leaving the buyer with a huge property tax bill and long-term legal exposure for damages, perhaps even a pond full of toxic waste still waiting to be removed to a treatment facility that may never be built. Dont take our word call a few local realtors in areas with a lot of gas leases (Otsego, Broome, Chenango, Ithaca) and ask them how many leased properties theyve sold recently.

IF YOUR NEIGHBOR SIGNS continued from page 6 post a bond against road damage, but if the damage is severe enough, everyones property taxes will go up. 8) Property Values. If you have been compulsorily integrated into a gas drilling unit, you wont be liable for any damages (unless you chose to be integrated as a participating member), but your inclusion in the unit may make it difcult for you to sell your property. After the rst few years, whatever royalties you receive will diminish, and your proximity to gas wells in the unit will make your property less attractive to potential buyers. Even if youve managed to avoid integration, nearby gas drilling activities will likely lower the value of your property. If you have enough land and still own the mineral rights, your only option may be to try to sell your property to a gas company and move.

So consider very carefully before you sign. Youll be in it for the duration and the consequences for yourself and your neighbors will likely last for a generation or more.

You can send questions or feedback to us at info @meredith-coalition.org

WHO WE ARE The Meredith Landowners Coalition is a non-prot community group of local residents whose goal is to promote a better understanding of industrial gas development in our rural area. The impact of such development will affect everyone in our community for many years to come. Our own position, based on the research we have done so far over a period of several months, is that the potential long-term risks to the community as a whole appear to far outweigh the possible benets. At the very least, we believe its worth waiting for the Environmental Protection Agency to complete its current study of the safety of hydraulic hydrofracking before any drilling takes place. The gas has been there for over 360 million years. It will still be there in another couple of years. Weve mailed this newsletter to every resident and landowner in Meredith, in the hope that it will open an honest dialogue between neighbors about the pros and cons of a very complex issue. The current newsletter just scratches the surface. Many aspects havent been examined at all, or just touched on briey, without the kind of detail residents need to make an informed decision about what to do. Future newsletters will try to answer some of these questions more thoroughly, and as practically as possible. For example: what exactly should I be testing my well for, and who should I call and what will it cost? If I receive a letter compelling me to become part of a neighboring unit, what are my options? If a gas company offers me money for a right of way through my land for a pipeline, should I accept? If you feel this kind of information is of value, please consider making a contribution to our organization to support our educational efforts. Our mailing address is POB 2, Meridale, NY 13806. The Steering Committee of the Meredith Landowners Coalition, in alphabetical order: Larry Bennett, Nancy Cannon, Bob Rosen, Kelley Snodgrass, Cynthia Waterman, Sara Wright A copy of this newsletter, with color photos, is available for download from our website at www.meredith-coalition.org. Youll also nd videos, photos and links to information about gas drilling in our area.

GOOD TIMES BAD TIMES

SUMMER 2010

A R ES I D ENTS G U I D E TO GAS D R I LLI N G

ISSUE #2

Welcome to the 2nd issue of our newsletter about industrial gas development in our rural area. Our rst issue covered a lot of the basics, information we think everyone should be aware of, whether youre considering signing a lease, or concerned about what will happen if neighbors sign. In this issue, youll nd a lot of new information and local news about a broad range of topics: drilling units, pipeline access, well-testing, a new town residential proposal. If you have any comments or questions, please email us at info@meredith-coalition.org or visit our website at www.meredith-coalition.org.

THE FUTURE OF MEREDITH

1.
Heres a rough approximation of how Meredith and the surrounding area in Delaware County could be sliced up into square-mile units for drilling, based on what Chesapeake Energy, the largest gas company, is proposing to do in the town of Hancock and elsewhere in western New York:

All the units are oriented along a northwest/southeast axis, so that drilling will be perpendicular to the natural fractures in the shale, allowing the maximum amount of methane to be extracted. The Delaware watershed, which supplies water to NYC, is marked in aqua. Despite what the news reports may say,

it isnt legally off-limits for drilling. Gas companies can still propose units within this watershed, but must do a site-specic Environmental Impact Statement for each. This would entail considerable expense, but given the enormous potential for prot, it must be assumed that at least some gas companies will believe its worth doing, and that landowners within the watershed will sign gas leases. As for the units themselves, each would have a large well pad located near the center, from which 8 to 12 individual wells (16 maximum) will radiate outward, with at least 3 or 4 drilled every year. If all of Meredith is eventually drilled, wed be looking at 58 units and well pads, with something like 580 individual wells. More if other shale layers like the Utica are drilled too, which is more than likely. Considering only the Marcellus, and assuming the watershed is never touched, and only 70% of the rest of our town is leased or compulsorily integrated, we are still looking at a minimum impact of around 24 pads, and 240 wells. If each well is fracked only 3 times, requiring about 2 million gallons per frack (according to the DEC) thats almost 1.5 billion gallons of water coming into Meredith in
continued on page 4

NY LAND AND LAKES PROPOSES MERIDALE FARMS DEVELOPMENT New York Land and Lakes Development (NYL&L), of Sidney, NY, has a proposal before the Town of Meredith Planning Board to develop the 1090 acres of historic land known as Meridale Farms. The property is located on all four sides of the intersection of Turnpike Road and Route 28 and was purchased from the Hamilton family in 2005 for $2.45 million. NYL&L proposes to subdivide the land into 99 single-family residential lots averaging a little more than 10 acres each. NYL&L submitted its original proposal in 2006, and the nal scoping document was adopted by the Planning Board that November. The project was inactive until NYL&L resubmitted the project in revised form at the March, 2010 planning board meeting. NYL&L currently projects the value of the project at almost $3.6 million. This includes the original $2.45 million purchase price, plus future costs for road construction, installation of electric lines, storm water structures, well drilling, and EIS (Environmental Impact Statement) preparation. The Planning Board is now engaged in deciding if the proposal meets the Towns requirements, which would allow it to move to the next step, public review. Reaction among town residents has been mixed as to whether such a large subdivision in the heart of our rural community is appropriate and desirable. Questions have also been raised about how realistic the economics of the project are, even in a vastly improved economy. There is currently little visible economic base to support additional homeowners, and the potential for this many second-home owners congregating in one area seems limited. The outlook for a viable residential subdivision is further clouded by an advertisement online at www.nylandquest.com listing the entire property for sale: 1200 ACRES OF LAND WITH UNLEASED MINERAL RIGHTS IN DELAWARE COUNTY - OR PURCHASE MINERAL RIGHTS ONLY - Unique nd of contiguous acres in prime location... Offered at $8.5 million including all mineral rights. $3 million for mineral rights only... Located in Delaware County where it is believed to contain more extractable gas. The outright sale of the mineral rights, at roughly $2,500 per acre, is within the range of the going rate just for sign-up bonuses for gas leases, which, in some areas in Pennsylvania, have gone for as much as $6,000 per acre. While gas companies typically lease rather than buy, nothing prohibits them from buying. Nor is anything preventing NYL&L from selling or leasing the mineral rights to gas drillers while holding on to the surface rights for future development. If such a sale is completed, and gas drilling is allowed in our area, this could potentially become the nucleus for an enormous industrial operation in the middle of rural Meredith. If the property were divided into 3 or 4 adjacent 640-acre drilling units, with surrounding areas forced to become part of these units, under a procedure known as compulsory integration (legal in New York but not in most other states), the number of gas wells that could be put into production could easily total several dozen, and could even include a large compressor station. So what is NYL&L really planning? One possibility is that NYL&L is legitimately trying to implement its residential development proposal, and the mineral rights will be included as part of a standard real estate offer. A second scenario is that NYL&L believes it can sell the mineral rights separately and continue with residential development, hugely expanding the potential for prot. This option would be similar to what is known in some Western states, like Texas and Colorado, as a split estate, dividing the surface and underground rights and selling each separately. Its questionable, however, how many buyers in our area would be comfortable with the possibility of a gas company drilling wells on their land, without even receiving any royalties in return. Scenario #3: NYL&L is simply hedging its bets and looking at all the investment opportunities, either selling the land outright, in one big chunk or as individual pieces, to gas companies or to speculators, or selling only the mineral rights, or even just leasing them for gas development, or, if none of these options are possible, proceeding with the residential plan currently under consideration by the Planning Board. When asked for comment about the online ad, Bob Lesperance,
continued on page 7

SAFE DRINKING WATER (PART 1) In a table in its 804-page draft Supplemental Generic Environmental Impact Statement, the New York Department of Environmental Conservation (DEC) lists 259 chemicals that are used in hydraulic fracturing. Forty-three of these also appear in the Pocket Guide to Chemical Hazards, published by the National Institute of Occupational Safety and Health (OSHA) a few of the most dangerous are listed on our website, along with exposure limits and their associated health risks. Several hundred other chemicals, many of them toxic, have also been identied in fracking uids but are not on the DECs list. The uids injected underground each time a well is fracked contain only some of these chemicals and each gas company has its own proprietary formula, protected from public disclosure as a trade secret. As a result, theres currently no way to know just what chemicals may be used if a gas well is drilled on a neighbors property and, consequently, no way of doing precise baseline testing of your drinking water prior to drilling, in case something goes wrong and your water is contaminated, or you or family members begin to experience health problems that were not previously evident. On June 24, The Daily Star published a report on its front page about the chronic health problems lethargy, dizzy spells, nosebleeds, scratchy throats, itching of the Solloway family, who live on a 137-acre farm in rural Maryland, about 10 miles north of Meredith, in Otsego County. They believe their drinking water may have been contaminated by a nearby hydrofracking operation that began last September, an exploratory gas well owned by Gastem, a Canadian company based in Montreal. Until then, none of the family had any signicant health problems. Gastems President Orville Cole said Tuesday that wells in the Crumhorn Mountain area are tested quarterly, and the Solloways results have been normal There is toxicity in the fracking uids, and its all in the MSDS (material safety data sheets). We know what to test for. While the article in The Daily Star doesnt resolve whether the Solloway familys health issues are related to nearby gas drilling activity, it does raise many other important questions about the whole process of water testing and safety. Can gas production companies really be relied upon to monitor the toxic chemicals they are injecting beneath our aquifer system? If they do not disclose the components, how will we know they are testing for everything in their fracking uids? Even if they do make full disclosure, how will we know their list is really complete and that they are actually performing all the tests? And reporting all the results? Are they doing the testing themselves or using a certied independent laboratory? Are there even any certied laboratories in our area that can do these tests? [Answer: at this point, no.] Questions like these are being raised by many different groups, not only in communities like ours, but even within the gas companies themselves. In another news report online, shareholder groups ranging from the New York State Common Retirement Fund to Green Century to the As You Sow foundation are asking for reporting on the environmental impact of fracturing and potential policies to reduce the hazards from the process. Resolutions for fuller disclosure have been proposed at a dozen corporations. In the news article about the Solloway family, Gastems CEO says his company wants to work with county and state ofcials to make sure that water testing is done in a manner that makes people comfortable with the safety of their water and with gas drilling. He added that anyone who has a concern related to a Gastem operation should contact the company. We took him up on the offer and sent an email requesting the name of all the chemicals Gastem is testing for, and which independent testing service they are using, so that arearesidents can at least have the option to do their own well tests prior to the appearance of any health problems. A few days later, Mr. Cole responded. While he acknowledged he was unable to provide us with any names of the chemicals Gastem is using, due to liability, he went on to ask if we would participate in a baseline water study funded in part by Gastem, to be conducted independently by a couple of pretty high-prole organizations. The purpose of the study would be to develop credible and reliable standards for water testing. Cole declined to name the high-prole groups, but said hell get the ball rolling and make us a low or no cost proposition. [To be continued in the next issue of our newsletter.]

THE FUTURE OF MEREDITH continued from page 1 240,000 truckloads and 7.5 million gallons of fracking uid that will be injected underground, of which (by DEC estimates) perhaps a third (2.5 million gallons) will ow back up to the surface, requiring storage and waste treatment (by facilities that have yet to be built) with 5 million gallons of toxic chemicals remaining under our aquifer system. And thats just the Marcellus. There are at least 2 or 3 other shale layers with similar potential. It might take 40 or 50 years, possibly longer, before all the gas is extracted and the gas companies leave. leased, a total of about 1300 acres, enough for 3 initial units.

2.

How likely is all of this to actually happen in our town and when? First, the NYS Dept. of Environmental Conservation must issue a nal set of regulations, which probably wont be until the end of the year at the earliest. At that point, gas companies will need to propose specic units in our town, like the ones above, and apply for permits. However, to do that, they must rst secure leases from landowners for at least 384 acres of each 640-acre unit they propose (60%). In some towns in upstate New York, this process is pretty much over in Caroline, for instance, in Tompkins County near the Finger Lakes, which is roughly the size of Meredith (but double the population), about three-quarters of the land is already leased. In Hancock, about a third is leased. In Meredith, however, and in neighboring towns like Franklin and Kortright, leasing has not really begun. As far as we know, no one has yet signed any leases in our area (except for a few in Davenport), though several landowners are either actively seeking to lease, or offering their land for gas speculation (like Land & Lakes, owner of the former Meridale Farms property at the center of Meredith see page 2 for more). All the initial units in our town would most likely be located in the northern 60%, in the Susquehanna River basin. Only a handful of people own more than 384 acres, and we can assume they will be among the rst to be offered leases, along with perhaps a few dozen others with more than 100 acres each. How many will accept? Of course, weve no way of knowing, but for the purpose of a hypothetical example, lets say 25% is

Assuming all three units receive permits from the DEC, does that mean production will begin? Again, many different factors are involved and we have no way of knowing at what point a particular gas company would consider it protable enough to proceed, but lets just say they do want to go ahead. At least two things must happen. First, at least one well in each unit must be successfully drilled. (If youre interested in some of the details, please refer to the rst issue of our newsletter, available online at www.meredith-coalition.org.) Second (this could happen rst or at the same time as drilling), a network of gathering lines must be laid to collect the gas from each well head to a central compressor station, where the gas will be sold at the going market price right now, its only about $5 per mcf (thousand cubic feet) and then sent on its way under high pressure, most likely north through Davenport to a junction point in northern Otsego County, where the TGP (Tennessee Gas Pipeline) runs from Buffalo through Massachusetts and Connecticut to NYC.

A typical compressor station

The pipeline network that brings the gas to and from the compressor station will be buried about three feet underground,

but sometimes its cheaper just to run it above ground, as in this photo from Pennsylvania:

3.
Whether or not to sign a gas lease is in itself immensely complicated, but it should be clear from this discussion that theres a lot more to think about. Before gas drilling can even get a start in our town, many difcult decisions will need to be made, both individually and collectively. In some places like Caroline, a majority of landowners have, for better or worse, rushed to embrace industrial gas production and its already too late for them to change their minds. Pennsylvania is even further ahead of us, by 4 or 5 years. So far, some people have done well. But others have been devastated by the impact and many regret having signed leases (see page 6). Many questions remain. How real is the danger of widespread contamination of our aquifers? Will everyone benet, or only a few? What will happen to our rural landscape and our way of life? No one really knows. Perhaps the only good answer at this point is just to wait and see what happens elsewhere. For those who are afraid of the risks to our health, our homes and our rural way of life, waiting will give time for more scientic studies, like the one now underway by the EPA, and also allow for additional safety measures to be developed and implemented. For those who are considering leasing, there is currently a glut of gas on the market. Prices, on which royalty payments are based, are near 5-year lows. Pennsylvania is rapidly expanding production and plans to issue 5,000 new permits each year, so the gas surplus is likely to last for some time. The gas itself has been there for at least 370 million years. It would seem that waiting a little while longer can only help all of us to make better and more informed decisions about our common future.

Whose land will these pipelines cross? Maybe yours. And your neighbors. Probably many of your neighbors.

In the example above, almost 50,000 feet of gathering lines would need to be laid across about 40 individual parcels in Meredith, owned by 33 different landowners. The going rate for a right-of-way for gathering lines is currently about $15-20 a linear foot (50 feet wide), so each landowner would receive anywhere between $1,500 and $61,000 (about $14,000 average) but only after its actually laid. There are other issues to consider as well. When will the pipeline be removed? If the company goes out of business before then, who will be responsible? Will you be liable for damages if theres a leak or an explosion? Will you be able to subdivide or sell your property with a pipeline running through it? Whatever the amount of this one-time payment, will it be enough for landowners to grant permanent easements through all these properties? If at any point along the way, the gas company fails to conclude a deal with even the smallest landowner, then production may not proceed at all. In fact, in some areas in Broome County, owners have even banded together to deny pipeline access to companies until better terms are offered. In addition, our town government must grant permission to allow these gas lines to be buried under local roads.

THE LANDMAN COMETH: INTERVIEW WITH A REGRETFUL LESSOR [Note: Due to the fear of retaliation from the gas company, the interviewee, who leased land in Laurens (Otsego County), has requested anonymity.] Q: When did you sign? A: 2008. Q: How much land did you lease? A: About 300 acres. Q: How much was the sign-up bonus? A: A pittance. Some people in this area who signed on early got about $100/acre, or even less. Some of those who waited got $500/acre. If I knew then what I know now, I would not have signed for ANY amount of money. Q: When did you start to have second thoughts? A: When I started hearing about all the negative impacts of hydrofracking in other areas, I realized I was deceived by the landman. Then I started doing my own research. Q: What lessons from your experience would you like to pass on to our readers? A: 1) The landmen want you to sign: they will tell you most anything! The landman DECEIVED us. We had never heard of hydrofracking. He did not tell us the potential impact of hydrofracking on our property (and community). He said it was environmentally friendly. He made it sound like we would barely notice it. 2) You need to realize that drilling companies can put more than one well on your property. 3) Dont sign anything until youve talked to a lawyer who specializes in natural gas leases, because the leases denitely favor the gas companies and not the landowner. They often have clauses that can lead to abuses. 4) Dont sign anything until youve visited a hydrofracking site. 5) If you do decide to sign, put in stipulations to protect you and your property: once you sign, they can do whatever they want! This includes going wherever they want, whenever they want on YOUR property, cutting trees, as well as putting in trailers for itinerant workers. Make sure they agree to drill far away from your house: 1000 feet or more. Drilling rigs may operate 24 hours a day with associated bright lights, noise and air pollution. There may be lots of trafc. There is a risk for explosions. 6) Before you sign, talk to your neighbors to see how much they have been offered. Landmen pay as little as they can. Consider

joining a local coalition of landowners who are interested in leasing land. 7) Water is a big issue. Insist the drillers pay an independent lab to test your water for contaminants known to be associated with natural gas exploration BEFORE they begin drilling. In case the drillers accidentally contaminate your water supply, insist they agree to supply a long-term replacement of clean water for all uses (including livestock, watering the garden, laundry, etc.). People in some areas where gas drilling accidents have occurred have only been given bottled drinking water. 8) If your well water is contaminated, your home is worthless, so make sure they agree to be held liable for the full value of your property or youll have no option but to sue. Q: Would you like to add anything? A: Im very sorry I ever signed. Please get your newsletter out as fast as you can so others are not deceived like we were. THE FIRST LANDMAN ARRIVES Weve received word that a landman, William F. Doyle, began knocking on a few doors in the northwestern part of Meredith in July. Apparently, Mr. Doyle set up shop at the Holiday Inn and has been in our area for about a month. Doyle gave out a card from Magnum Land Services, a small Michigan-based company that represents gas companies as leasing agents and for pipeline right-of-way acquisition. The offer he made to one resident was for a signing bonus of $100/acre. Asked why the offer was so low, Doyle cited uncertainty over regulations in New York State and that gas drilling in our area was still several years away. He refused to provide a copy of the lease unless the amount of the sign-up offer was accepted. Asked which company was offering the lease, Doyle mentioned Atlas Energy, a prominent gas producer in PA, with about 200 horizontal wells currently in production and more than 260,000 acres under lease. If a landman contacts you, please let us know and well post it on our website so that everyone can check for any recent leasing activity.

Send questions or feedback to us at info @meredith-coalition.org

Visit our website at www.meredith-coalition.org

MERIDALE FARMS continued from page 2 Vice-President of NY Land & Lakes, said, Thats news to me. Mr. Lesperance claimed the property is not for sale by NYL&L, as it is currently being reviewed by the Planning Board. He said he had allowed realtor Carl Snyder, of New York Land Quest, to show the property to a potentially interested gas company, and the ad was probably a remnant of that event. He maintained that he didnt even know what prices were quoted in the ad and expressed surprise when told the numbers. Mr. Lesperance then said that he might contact Mr. Snyder to have the ad removed. He added that the ongoing costs of holding the land are strangling us. Mr. Snyder was subsequently contacted and conrmed that the ad is still up on the website. He said there had been some potential interest in mineral rights, but NYL&L had not received any offers. He also said that Meridale Farms will continue to be offered for sale on the terms stated in the ad. When asked separately whether it was feasible to sell the mineral rights and continue with residential land development, both Mr. Lesperance and Mr. Snyder agreed. Sure, we do that all the time, said Lesperance.

Bisbees General Store in Meridale was the center of our rural community for many decades until it was destroyed by re in April, 1976. Now, from September 3 to the end of the year, the Meredith Historical Society is presenting an exhibition about Bisbees in Delhi at the Delaware County Historical Assn. If gas development comes to Delaware County, it will undoubtedly change us forever perhaps, as some people claim, creating new opportunities for economic growth, or, as others fear, destroying whatever remains. However you see it, we invite you to come to the exhibit. Remember the way it once was, and celebrate the rural way of life we value so much.

WHO WE ARE The Meredith Landowners Coalition is a non-prot community group of local residents whose goal is to promote a better understanding of industrial gas development in our rural area. The impact of such development will affect everyone in our community for many years to come. Our own position, based on the research we have done so far over a period of several months, is that the potential long-term risks to the community as a whole appear to far outweigh the possible benets. At the very least, we believe its worth waiting for the Environmental Protection Agency to complete its current study of the safety of hydraulic hydrofracking before any drilling takes place. Weve mailed this newsletter to every resident and landowner in Meredith, in the hope that it will open an honest dialogue between neighbors about the pros and cons of a very complex issue. Our rst two newsletters have just scratched the surface. Many aspects havent been examined at all, or just touched on briey, without the kind of detail residents need to make an informed decision about what to do. Future newsletters will try to answer some of these questions more thoroughly, and as practically as possible. For example: what exactly should I be testing my well for? Who should I call and what will it cost? If I receive a letter compelling me to become part of a neighboring unit, what are my options? Can I get additional homeowner insurance to protect my drinking water? If you feel this kind of information is of value, please consider making a contribution to our organization to support our educational efforts. Our mailing address is POB 2, Meridale, NY 13806. The Steering Committee of the Meredith Landowners Coalition, in alphabetical order: Larry Bennett, Nancy Cannon, Carolyn June, Bob Rosen, Kelley Snodgrass, Cynthia Waterman A copy of this newsletter, with color photos, is available for download from our website at www.meredith-coalition.org. Youll also nd videos, photos and links to information about gas drilling in our area.

Otsego County and Natural Gas Drilling

Approximately 11% of the land area in Otsego County has been leased to gas companies (see attached map). It is further understood that there are at least four landowner coalitions within the County positioned to lease another 49,000 acres of landalmost doubling percentage of leased lands. It is estimated that 100% of the leases grant surface rights, which allow activities such as drilling, access road construction, and long-term storage of wellhead development materials. These leased lands are owned by about 454 (roughly 2%) of the adult, year round County property owners. Thus, a very small proportion of the total population that will be impacted by gas drilling will reap any possible financial benefits. Furthermore, approximately 312 of the 1,146 leased parcels (27%) are less than 5 acres in area, and depending on local natural gas reserves may see very negligible revenue compared to the potential risk. People living in rural areas of Otsego County who have not leased their land may find themselves surrounded by leased land, and may be forced to participate through compulsory integration (see Compulsory Integration1) or eminent domain (see Pipelines and Eminent Domain2). Residents of Otsego County may not have a drill rig or well site next door, but will undoubtedly experience the effects of large-scale industrialization moving into the area. Traffic, air pollution, possible contamination of potable water supplies, and changes in their communities brought on by an influx of out-of-state, temporary workers may take their cumulative toll. In addition, nearby wild areas, such as State Parks, State Forests, and other environmentally sensitive areas may be negatively affected by nearby gas drilling.
_________________________________________________________________________________
1

Compulsory Integration

Even if a landowner has not signed a lease, gas still may be extracted from his or her property. How can this happen? When a gas company submits a proposal for a well to the DEC, it includes a map of a roughly rectangular area called a spacing unit. As long as a gas company controls leases on at least 60% of the land inside the spacing unit, it is allowed to drill a well somewhere inside that rectangle. Landowners inside the spacing unit who have not signed a lease are "compulsorily integrated" into the unit. The gas company cannot drill on or set foot on the surface

of land that has been integrated, but it can use horizontal drilling to drill under the property and can pump toxic chemicals under the property during hydrofracturing. It must compensate the landowner for any gas extracted.

Compulsory Integration Options

If the DEC issues a well permit for a spacing unit that requires compulsory integration of your property, the gas company must notify you that your property is being forced to integrate. You then have 21 days to choose one of three integration options (Ref: DEC Compulsory Integration). The three options differ in the amount of money earned and invested and in the risk involved. The three options are: (1) Integration as a Royalty Owner: This option is very similar to what would have happened if you had signed a lease. From the moment the gas company starts producing gas, you receive a royalty payment based on the fraction of the produced gas attributed to your property. For example, if you own one-tenth of the acreage in the spacing unit, your royalty is based on the value of one-tenth of the gas produced from that unit. Your royalty rate depends on what royalty payment other landowners in the unit are receiving. Your royalty rate is the greater of (a) 12.5% or (b) the lowest royalty rate for any landowner in the unit. So, if some people signed for 13%, some signed for 14%, and some signed for 16%, your royalty rate would be 13% (the lowest royalty rate, but still greater than 12.5%). (2) Integration as a Non-Participating Owner: Under this option you receive no money until after the gas company has recouped three times the cost of constructing the well. Once they start paying you, however, they pay you 100% (not 12.5% or some other royalty rate) of your share of the production. If you own one-tenth of the acreage in a spacing unit and the well cost the company $1 million to build, then after the company has made $3 million from selling gas from that well, they will pay you 10% (your fraction of the acreage) of the revenue from selling gas from that unit. (3) Integration as a Participating Owner: Under this option you pay up front your share of the costs for drilling the well. You receive your full share of the gas revenues from the beginning of production. So, if you own 10% of the land in a spacing unit and the well is estimated to cost $1 million to build, you contribute $100,000 to build the well, but get 10% of the revenue beginning when production starts. Both participating and non-participating owners, because they are partial owners of the well, take on personal liability for damages or injuries caused by gas drilling and extraction in their unit. Seek expert legal advice before choosing either of these options.

Pipelines and Eminent Domain

Eminent domain may be used by New York State to appropriate land for pipelines. In Pennsylvania, however, eminent domain is not granted for pipeline placement, and gas companies must negotiate with landowners for the right to use their land.

55 H G 29 H G

23759

' ,
RICHFIELD SPRINGS (V)

25 H G

G H G H
18B

18A

RICHFIELD

28 ? B

G H

25A

^ ^ ^
G H
26 H G 27 H G 53 H G 29A

'
23785

30 H G

'
23786
20 . /

G H G H
32 H G 32B

32A

PLAINFIELD

21 H G

51 ? B

24 H G

SPRINGFIELD

H G

53

18 H G

EXETER
22 H G 19 H G

23 H G

28 ? B 80 ? B

'

54 H G

23784 23760

CHERRY VALLEY
54 H G

^ ^ ^
166 ? B

CHERRY VALLEY (V)

^ ^

'
23782

' ,

G H

34A

G H

18C

BURLINGTON
8 ? B

OTSEGO

28 H G

EDMESTON
20 H G

'
21037
31 H G

MIDDLEFIELD
33 H G

57 H G

50 H G

^ ^
20 H G

^
16 H G

' ,
10138

205 ? B

COOPERSTOWN

ROSEBOOM
165 ? B

^ ^ ^

^
52 H G 166 ? B

34 H G

59 H G 39 H G

^
17 H G

HARTWICK

^ ^ G H ^^ ^
11C

WESTFORD
G H
36A

DECATUR
37 H G 38 H G

80 ? B

NEW LISBON PITTSFIELD

14 H G

43 H G

^
G H
15 H G 11 H G 11D

28 ? B

36 H G

' ,
4055

^^ ^

7 ? B

G H

38A

' ,
4050

33 H G 45 H G

13 H G

^
12 H G

^
42 H G

^
51 ? B 49 H G

G H

11B

' ,
10834

7 ? B

46 H G

MILFORD (V)

^ ^
MARYLAND
39 H G

35 H G

? B

23

MORRIS

' ,
2612

MORRIS (V)

^
49 H G 23 ? B

LAURENS
10 H G 10

' ,
10725

^G H
51

205 ? B

MILFORD

44 H G

23783

H G

^ LAURENS (V) ^ ^
8 H G

G H

11A

^
G H
35A

' , ' , ' ,

4429 4245 4547

^ ^ ^ ^ ^
41 H G 7 ? B

WORCESTER

' ,
88

^
" D

'
21036
11 H G 51 ? B

28 ? B

40 H G

^
" D

ONEONTA

G H

58A

BUTTERNUTS

^ ^ ^
OTEGO
7 H G

CITY OF ONEONTA

^ ^ ^
23 ? B

^
7 ? B

58 H G

18 H G

6 H G

^ ^

47 H G

28 ? B 51 ? B 48 H G

5 H G

^
7 ? B

3A H G

4 H G

^ ^ ^ ^
OTEGO (V)

Legend

Natural Gas Wells (with Hole #)

1 H G

UNADILLA
3 H G 2 H G

' , '

' ,
" D

' ,
10838
8 ? B

^ ^ ^ ^ ^^

7 ? B

^^ ^

7 ? B

UNADILLA (V)

357 ? B

LEASED PARCELS SUMMARY

This map reflects updated information through November 19, 2010.

NATURAL GAS WELL LOCATIONS AND LEASED PROPERTIES

NEW YORK
Otsego County Conservation Association
101 Main Street Cooperstown, NY 13326

OTSEGO COUNTY

PAW Date: December 08, 2010 Prepared By: File Path\Name: pln:\MAPS\NatGas\OC Natural Gas Leased.mxd Data Path\Name: pln:\Otsego_County_GIS\ots_roads_sp83, ots_municipal_sp83, ots_govpts_sp83, ots_railroads_sp83, ots_transmission_sp83, ots_streams_sp83, ots_lakes_sp83, ots_wetlands_sp83, ots_firmfema_sp83, ots_municipal_sp83, ots_forests_sp83, ots_parcels2008_sp83, finalponds, n:\GIS_data\NatGas\natgaswells_jan72009.dbf (NYS DEC database), leaseparcels_ex2, Ots_parcels2009_leases_Nov_2010.shp n:\GIS_data\Housing\Housing.shp . .

SHEET 1 OF 1

Compulsory Integration
Even if a landowner has not signed a lease, gas still may be extracted from his or her property. How can this happen? When a gas company submits a proposal for a well to the DEC, it includes a map of a roughly rectangular area called a spacing unit. As long as a gas company controls leases on at least 60% of the land inside the spacing unit, it is allowed to drill a well somewhere inside that rectangle. Landowners inside the spacing unit who have not signed a lease are "compulsorily integrated" into the unit. The gas company cannot drill on or set foot on the surface of land that has been integrated, but it can use horizontal drilling to drill under the property and can pump toxic chemicals under the property during hydrofracturing. It must compensate the landowner for any gas extracted. In our opinion, the rationale for compulsory integration comes from conventional well drilling and should not apply to tight shale gas reservoirs such as the Marcellus. With a conventional gas reservoir, your land and your neighbor's land are sitting on top of a single large pool of gas; there is no way that your neighbor can drill a well and tap into that pool without also draining gas from below your property. In New York, your neighbor has the right to extract the gas under his or her property. Because gas will be taken from you in the process, you have the right to be compensated for that gas. According to a DEC official, if you weren't forced to give up your gas, one small landowner sitting amidst many who wanted to drill would prevent them all from extracting any gas. In the case of the Marcellus Shale, however, gas is not taken from below your property unless the company drills very close to or under your property. Thus, one landowner who didn't want his gas extracted would not need to block drilling on neighboring property. Compulsory integration for the Marcellus Shale, despite bogus claims from the DEC that it protects the rights of the landowner being integrated, is really a tool to allow gas to be extracted from people who do not wish to participate, thus generating more profits for the gas company at the landowner's expense.

Compulsory Integration Options

If the DEC issues a well permit for a spacing unit that requires compulsory integration of your property, the gas company must notify you that your property is being forced to integrate. You then have 21 days to choose one of three integration options (Ref: DEC Compulsory Integration). The three options differ in the amount of money earned and invested and in the risk involved. The three options are: (1) Integration as a Royalty Owner: This option is very similar to what would have happened if you had signed a lease.

From the moment the gas company starts producing gas, you receive a royalty payment based on the fraction of the produced gas attributed to your property. For example, if you own one-tenth of the acreage in the spacing unit, your royalty is based on the value of one-tenth of the gas produced from that unit. Your royalty rate depends on what royalty payment other landowners in the unit are receiving. Your royalty rate is the greater of (a) 12.5% or (b) the lowest royalty rate for any landowner in the unit. So, if some people signed for 13%, some signed for 14%, and some signed for 16%, your royalty rate would be 13% (the lowest royalty rate, but still greater than 12.5%). (2) Integration as a Non-Participating Owner: Under this option you receive no money until after the gas company has recouped three times the cost of constructing the well. Once they start paying you, however, they pay you 100% (not 12.5% or some other royalty rate) of your share of the production. If you own one-tenth of the acreage in a spacing unit and the well cost the company $1 million to build, then after the company has made $3 million from selling gas from that well, they will pay you 10% (your fraction of the acreage) of the revenue from selling gas from that unit. (3) Integration as a Participating Owner: Under this option you pay up front your share of the costs for drilling the well. You receive your full share of the gas revenues from the beginning of production. So, if you own 10% of the land in a spacing unit and the well is estimated to cost $1 million to build, you contribute $100,000 to build the well, but get 10% of the revenue beginning when production starts. IMPORTANT: Both participating and non-participating owners, because they are partial owners of the well, take on personal liability for damages or injuries caused by gas drilling and extraction in their unit. Seek expert legal advice before choosing either of these options. Adapted from the Marcellus Accountability Project of Tompkins Countys Gas Drilling Primer)

Pipelines and Eminent Domain

Several pipelines will transport the natural gas from the Otsego Region to New York City and beyond. Every individual gas well will connect to them through smaller pipelines, forming a massive network snaking throughout our region. The widespread fragmentation of the land that will result is concerning, and may reverse efforts of local environmental groups to preserve large, unbroken tracts and corridors of wild land to benefit wildlife. Eminent domain may be used by New York State to appropriate land for pipelines. In Pennsylvania, however, eminent domain is not granted for pipeline placement, and gas companies must negotiate with landowners for the right to use their land.
(adapted from the Marcellus Accountability Project of Tompkins Countys Gas Drilling Primer)

New York State Regulations for Oil and Gas Compared to Other States
By James L. Northrup
New York State regulations on oil and gas drilling are in need of considerable updating in order to safeguard our environment. Here are some examples: 1. New York tasks it environmental agency with the issuance of drilling permits. This compromises the DECs mission as environmental agency, since the state gains fees from issuing permits and is motivated to issue as many permits as possible. Most other oil and gas producing states keep their environmental agencies out of promoting drilling. Without such independence, the DEC has already been compromised in its environmental duties, as evidenced by the grossly inadequate draft guidelines for horizontal hydrofracking of shale gas. 2. New York tasks the DEC with forcing compulsory integration of mineral rights owners into unitized well spacings, further compromising the agencys independence. In laymans language, this means that the DEC is the state agency that can force unwilling landowners to participate in a well with their neighboring mineral rights owners, even if they did not want to sell their mineral rights. Such compulsory integration is illegal in other states and should be illegal in New York. It is a travesty of property rights. 3. New York does not have a direct tax on gas production. Only two other states lack such a tax. Such a tax, known as a severance tax, enables states not only to benefit directly from the oil and gas produced, but also to fund the regulatory oversight necessary to monitor the extraction activity. The amount of oversight and environmental remediation activities is then tied directly to the volumes of gas produced, and not funded from general revenues. All of the fully evolved oil and gas states Alaska, Texas, Colorado, Louisiana, New Mexico, etc. have such a tax to fund their regulatory oversight and add to state coffers. 4. The DECs proposed regulations are based largely on antiquated regulations for small existing vertical New York oil and gas wells. While the regulations may have been adequate for these relatively small wells, and while the DEC may have been sufficiently staffed and funded to regulate these minor oil and gas fields, the regulations as well as DECs staffing and funding are completely inadequate to regulate the massively larger horizontal hydrofracking of the Marcellus Shale. For instance, as originally proposed, the DEC suggested a well set-back of fifty (50) feet from municipal drinking water sources. This meant that a horizontally hydrofracked shale well, which uses over 1 million gallons of fracking fluid, could be the same distance from the shoreline as a small vertical oil well that is a fraction of the size of the shale gas well. 5. New York offers far less protection of municipal surface drinking water than other states. For instance, most major lakes in Texas are used for municipal drinking water. This means that drilling a well under those lakes would require the consent of the owner, which in Texas is the municipality. This is not the case in New York. Municipalities, which use but do not own the lake water, have no oversight in drilling under the lake or next to the lake. The only municipal water sources with any meaningful protection in New York are New York Citys reservoirs and Syracuses lake which have a higher standard of review for wells in their watershed. The rationale for this higher standard, than for other drinking water sources such as Lake Otsego, is that those water bodies do not have filtration systems. Yet, critically, the sediment filtration used by other New York State municipalities will not filter out toxic chemicals or the release of natural

gas associated with horizontal hydrofracking of shale gas deposits. The proposed special treatment for New York City and Syracuse residents amount to disparate treatment under the law. In short, it is illegal. 6. The scope of the activity dwarfs the States preparedness. The size of the shale gas formations in New York and the well spacings contemplated will simply overwhelm both the DEC and state governments ability to respond effectively. The DEC is chronically understaffed and underfunded. The counties where the shale gas is found do not have adequate infrastructure sufficiently engineered roads and bridges, emergency response training for volunteer firefighters and emergency medical technicians, wastewater treatment facilities to deal with this level of industrialization. Since the drilling activity is not taxed by the state, and since the drilling companies will not pay much tax in the state, there will be no government revenue to address the upfront costs that drilling represents. While the revenue to the government from the wells may be down the road, the costs to counties will be heavily frontloaded. We recommend that the New York legislature: Adopt a severance tax on all oil and gas produced. This rate should be comparable to that imposed by other states, and this taxation should be handled by the New York Department of Taxation and Finance. Separate the permitting process from the DEC. Permit applications must, at a minimum, demonstrate that the applicant controls the mineral rights, has sufficient well spacing and set backs, has bonded the well against environmental damage and dry hole clean up, has an approved method or contract to dispose of flowback, has a road use permit from the counties affected, and has collected seismic data on each proposed lateral fracture. The permit application must require that seismic data be collected on each new lateral section to be fracked. Such seismic data will show if any faulting is present in the target zone and if that faulting communicates with any aquifers. This will address the risks of polluting aquifers via localized faulting, having the frack go out of zone, spills, or well casing failures into aquifers. If the seismic data shows that there is any chance that the frack zone will communicate with an aquifer, the permit should not be granted. James L. Northrup was in the energy business for over thirty years, having been a planning manager at Atlantic Richfield (ARCO), an independent oil and gas producer, and an owner of onshore and offshore drilling rigs. He attended Brown University and has an MBA from the Wharton School of Business. He is a member of the board of directors of Otsego 2000.

Safer Drilling
WhatWouldItLookLike
December8,2010

BenignFrackingFluid
Somethingthatwillnotcontaminatedrinking water Notoxins NoCarcinogens Nothingthatwouldbeprohibitedinany otherindustrialprocess Nospecialexemptionsfromenvironmental regulations

AddIdentifyingMarkerto FrackingFluid
Eliminatesanydoubtwhetherfracking fluidhasreachedawellormunicipal watersource

SeismicBeforeEveryFrack
Nofrackingifnaturalfissurescouldlead todrinkingwateraquifers

BetterCasingStandards
Casingorcementfailurecanallow contaminationofdrinkingwateraquifersby eitherfrackingfluidorgas Cemententirelengthofcasing Checkcasingbeforeeachfrack Nofrackingifcasingorcementintegrityis inquestion

ContingencyPlans
Planinplacepriortofracking Needtoassuregas/frackfluiddoesnotreach Aquifer Whatwillbedoneiffrackgoesoutoftarget zoneorwellblowsout? Reliefwell? Flaring? Other? WhatBPdidnothaveintheGulf

PeriodicSubsidenceChecks
Nofurtherfrackingifsurfacehasbegunto subsideoverwellbore
Subsidencecandisruptdrinkingwateraquifers

ClosedSystemsforFrackingand FlowbackFluids
Minimizeleaks,overflowsandreleaseof volatilecomponents Containfluidsinsteeltanks Noopenpits

RecycleFlowbackfluidsonSite
Reducetheamountofnewwaterand chemicals Considersystemsthatuselesswaterand areeasiertorecycle Propane? Nitrogen? Other?

TreatFlowbackFluids
Treatmentplanandcontractbeforefracking RequiresnewplantsinNYorhaulingtoplants orinjectionwellsoutofstate NoadequatetreatmentplantsinNY Only4injectionwellsinNY(thousandsin West)duetogeologyandEPArequirements HandleasHazardousWaste

AllowOnlyMultiwellPads
Eachpadrequiresaroadandapipeline Single=40acres=16persqmile Multi=640acres=onepersqmile Multiwellpadsonlyslightlylargerthan singles Easiertomanageandmonitor Farlesssurfacedisruption

SaferSetbacks
Moredistancebetweengaswellsand:
Drinkingwatersources
municipalwatersourcesandreservoirs,domesticwells, watersheds

SensitiveAreas
homes,schools,hospitals,nursinghomes,hamlets, historicdistricts,parks,etc.

Allowlocalgovernmentinputonwell locations mostotherstatesdo

LicenseDrillersand SubContractors
Anyapplicantfordrillingpermitandmajor contractorsshouldbelicensedbyState Require
Experienceforbothcompanyandkeypersonnel Historyofsafeoperations Assuranceoffinancialcapability Insurancepolicies

PerformanceBonds And CleanUpFund

Permitholdershouldnotbeablewalk awayfromproblemscausedbyhis operations Multimilliondollarbondoneachwell untilpluggedandabandoned Sizeableupfrontcontributiontoalong termgeneralcleanupfund

IncreaseDECStaff
Currentstaffingcannotpossiblyhandle workload

SeparateStateAgenciesforRevenue andEnvironmentalProtection
Oneagencycannotdobothwell. OnlyNY,PAandFederaloffshorehave combinedtheseresponsibilities OtherStateshaveseparateagencies AvoidmistakeslikeBPinGulfofMexico

RelativeSafety WeNeedtoRaisetheBar
IDEALSAFETYLEVEL BESTCOMPANIES CURRENTREGULATIONS WORSTCOMPANIES CURRENTENFORCEMENT

Safer Drilling
Candrillingbesaferthancurrent regulationsandprocedures? BetterTechnology BetterRegulations BetterEnforcement FinancialAccountability Canwemakeitsafeenough???

Community Science Institute

Volunteer Monitoring

www.communityscience.org
Risk Communication

Watershed Science

11 May 2010

Protecting Private Water Supplies Near Gas Well Drilling in New York State
By Stephen Penningroth, Ph.D., Executive Director, Community Science Institute Introduction This information is provided as a public service by the Community Science Institute (CSI), a local nonprofit organization whose mission is to monitor and protect natural resources, particularly water. A more detailed information booklet is available at http: www.communityscience.org/documents/Gas wells and water FAQ sheet Documenting Contamination.pdf. CSI operates a certified water quality testing laboratory located near the Ithaca airport (address in letterhead) and certified by the New York State Department of Health Environmental Laboratory Approval Program (NYSDOH-ELAP ID# 11790). We currently partner with a network of 50 volunteers to monitor water quality in Cayuga Lake and its tributary streams. The lab is certified to test drinking water samples from private wells. FAQ #1. Should I be worried about contamination of my water by a gas well? Yes. There is solid evidence that gas wells have contaminated drinking water supplies in the past. While no systematic studies are available on the Marcellus Shale, experience with old-style vertical gas wells in Pennsylvnia suggests there is roughly a 1% to 5% chance of contamination. Penn State Cooperative Extension recommends testing all wells, springs, ponds and streams within 1,000 feet of a traditional vertical gas well. Because horizontal well holes typically extend several thousand feet out from the drill pad, landowners further than 1,000 feet from the well head may also want to consider testing. FAQ #2. How can water on my property become contaminated by a gas well? There are several ways contamination can occur. Some are related to carelessness and human error. Others are related to the extremely high pressures and large volumes of fluid used for hydraulic fracturing that can force fluids as well as natural gas to move in unexpected directions underground. There is also a possibility, remote but real, that the cement casing around the vertical part of the well hole will fail, allowing fluids and gas to escape. FAQ #3. What should I test my water for and what does it cost? Its not possible to know in advance exactly which chemicals may get into your water. Contaminants could come from the drilling fluid; the hydraulic fracturing fluid; underground metals, radioactive materials, organic compounds and brine released by the drilling and fracturing processes; or a combination of these sources. Testing for all possible contaminants would cost thousands of dollars. Baseline testing is designed to provide
284 Langmuir Lab/Box 1044 95 Brown Road Ithaca NY 14850 Voice/Fax 607 257 6606 Certified Water Testing NYSDOH-ELAP #11790 EPA Lab Code NY01518 Stephen Penningroth Executive Director <lab@communityscience.org>

Community Science Institute

Volunteer Monitoring

www.communityscience.org
Risk Communication

Watershed Science

evidence of contamination while minimizing expense. If evidence of contamination is found, follow-up tests can identify as many of the pollutants as possible. Each certified lab approaches baseline testing differently, and consumers decide which lab to use and what to test for. CSI structures baseline testing as follows: a) Tests performed by CSI lab in Ithaca: pH, alkalinity, total dissolved solids, chloride, conductivity, chemical oxygen demand, total suspended solids, turbidity, detergents, total hardness and calcium; and b) Tests subcontracted by CSI to three other certified labs: Metals (barium, iron, manganese, arsenic, strontium), volatile organic compounds (VOCs), gross alpha and beta radioactivity, and methane (natural gas). The total cost of baseline testing by CSI is $623 including VOCs ($498 without VOCs) plus time and mileage to collect water samples. FAQ #4. When should I test my water? Water quality tends to be quite constant, notwithstanding small seasonal fluctuations. Thus, under federal environmental laws, state governments are required to monitor water for human impacts no more than about once every six years. Accordingly, CSI recommends baseline testing within about six years before a gas well is drilled; within six months after the well is completed; every two years for the 10- to 50 year life of the well pad or every time the well is hydraulically fractured again, whichever comes first; and every two years for ten years after the well is abandoned and plugged. FAQ #5. Where should I have my water tested? Testing must be performed by a commercial lab that is certified by the New York State Department of Health Environmental Laboratory Approval Program (NYSDOH-ELAP). Only test results from an ELAP-certified lab are admissible in legal proceedings involving gas wells in New York. Go to http://www.wadsworth.org/labcert/elap/comm.html for a list of certified labs. FAQ #6. Can I save money and collect water samples myself? No, not if you want the test results to stand up in court. Samples must be collected by an unbiased third party who uses accepted procedures and verifies the chain of custody for the sample. Typically samples are collected by someone from the certified testing lab. Baseline testing is like taking out an insurance policy on your water. Its not cheap, but it will pay big dividends if your water is contaminated. FAQ #7. What happens if baseline testing indicates my water is contaminated? CSI recommends contacting your towns water commissioner, your county health department, and the NYSDEC Division of Water in Albany. Inform them of the results of the baseline tests and request assistance in: a) Designing follow-up tests to identify all the contaminants in your water, b) Assessing the health risks and environmental risks caused by the contaminants, and c) Seeking financial compensation from the gas company. Unfortunately, once an underground aquifer is contaminated, it is all but impossible to clean it up. The best that can be done is to identify as many of the contaminants as possible and develop long-term strategies for managing and living with the risks.

284 Langmuir Lab/Box 1044 95 Brown Road Ithaca NY 14850 Voice/Fax 607 257 6606 Certified Water Testing NYSDOH-ELAP #11790 EPA Lab Code NY01518 Stephen Penningroth Executive Director <lab@communityscience.org>

Community Science Institute

Volunteer Monitoring

www.communityscience.org
Risk Communication

Watershed Science

Baseline Water Quality Testing With Respect to Gas Wells

The Community Science Institute (CSI) recommends that landowners near horizontal, hydraulically fractured shale gas wells hire a certified laboratory to test water on their property before the gas well is drilled and at regular intervals after it is completed. The set of tests that CSI recommends is designed to have a high probability of providing a chemical signature of contamination by gas well wastes while also being as affordable as possible. Obtaining a water quality baseline before the gas well is drilled and hydraulically fractured is absolutely essential if a landowner wants to make a case in court that the gas well is the cause of contamination. Further, the tests must be performed by a certified lab to have legal standing, and the samples must be collected by an unbiased third party. Often the certified lab collects the samples. It is important to note that New York State has not yet recommended this or any other set of tests for possible contamination from gas wells. Further, it is CSIs understanding that case law in the area of water contamination by gas wells is sparse because to date, relatively few lawsuits have been brought. This may change as more gas wells are drilled in Pennsylvania and New York and if there are documented cases of water contamination. Be that as it may, baseline testing is not a guarantee that a landowner will prevail in court if a gas well is drilled nearby and her drinking water becomes contaminated. Nevertheless, baseline testing gives a landowner a fighting chance. Without baseline testing there appears to be little hope of receiving compensation of any kind. Tests performed in CSI Lab pH $12 Alkalinity $18 Total dissolved solids $18 Chloride $20 Total suspended solids $18 Turbidity $12 Total hardness $18 Calcium $18 MBAS (detergents) $32 Conductivity $12 Chemical oxygen demand $20 Tests subcontracted to other certified labs Metals (barium, iron, manganese, $90 arsenic, strontium) Methane (natural gas) $110 Volatile Organic Compounds (VOCs) $125 Gross alpha and beta radioactivity $65 Sample processing and shipping $35 Site fee, per property $45 TOTAL COST OF TESTS PER SAMPLE: $668

Travel fees: Mapquest distance _________ x $.55/mile = $__________ (/ ___# properties = $______) Mapquest travel time ________ x $30/hour = $_________ (/ ___# properties = $______) TOTAL COST OF SAMPLE COLLECTION = $ _________ _____________________________ Client ________________________________ Community Science Institute

284 Langmuir Lab/Box 1044 95 Brown Road Ithaca NY 14850 Voice/Fax 607 257 6606 Certified Water Testing NYSDOH-ELAP #11790 EPA Lab Code NY01518 Stephen Penningroth Executive Director <lab@communityscience.org>

Otsego County

Legend

Water Resources of Otsego County, New York & Beyond

Canadarago Lake Otsego Lake

Assorted Otsego Watersheds Assorted Otsego Watersheds Assorted Otsego Watersheds Assorted Otsego Watersheds NYC Watersheds Streams Susquehanna River Lakes & Reservoirs Principal Aquifers Sole Source Aquifers

OTSEGO COUNTY

NYC WATERSHEDS

Binghamton Area

Pepacton Reservoir

Cannonsville Reservoir Ashokan Reservoir

Prepared for: Otsego 2000

0 5 10 20 30

Kilometers 40

Figure 6: Surface water and groundwater flow throughout most of Otsego County provide the headwater source for private and community wells, high-yielding principal aquifers, lakes, and reservoirs. In and beyond Otsego County, this water coalesces to form the Susquehanna River and recharge a sole source aquifer - the source water for the City of Binghamton and other down stream communities. Geologically and hydrologically, with the exception of more above ground impoundments, water resources of Otsego County are equally as vulnerable to surface and subsurface chemical excursions documented as being associated with hydrofractured gas wells and flowback water impoundments elsewhere. All Otsego County watersheds highlighted are sub-basins of the larger Susquehanna River watershed.

GAS DRILLING IN DRINKING WATER WATERSHEDS

By Win McIntyre Consultant, Water Resources Management Otsego Lake Watershed Coordinator Cooperstown, NY In the spring of 2010, DEC announced that the watersheds that supply drinking water for New York City and Syracuse, NY "will be excluded from the pending generic environmental review process for natural gas drilling using high-volume horizontal drilling in the Marcellus shale formation. Instead, applications to drill in these watersheds will require a case-by-case environmental review process to establish whether appropriate measures to mitigate potential impacts can be developed". The reason given for this is that the drinking water from these watersheds is unfiltered, and the EPA, in conjunction with the NYS Department of Health, has issued a Filtration Avoidance Determination (FAD), which means that NYC, for instance, does not have to construct a $10 billion filtration plant. Instead, NYC has a comprehensive watershed protection program that meets the requirements for unfiltered water systems. The intent of FAD watershed control requirements is to protect the microbiological quality of the drinking water by minimizing particulate matter. This was a convenient way for the DEC to exclude the NYC watershed from gas drilling. Drillers will tend to avoid having to go through site-specific State Environmental Quality Reviews (SEQR) for gas drilling applications. However, it avoids the bigger issue of the threat of chemical contamination from gas drilling to ALL of the drinking water watersheds in the Marcellus shale region, not just for two communities, NYC and Syracuse. With this announcement, DEC seems to imply that those communities who do filter their surface drinking water supplies are safe from the potential threats of gas drilling. This implication is scientifically flawed. Gas drilling using the technique of horizontal drilling and high-volume hydraulic fracturing uses millions of gallons of water and over 100 tons of chemicals for each well. Some of the chemicals used in the fracturing process are toxic hydrocarbons and are listed as contaminants in EPA's drinking water standards. Following the fracturing process, close to half of the water and chemicals used returns to the surface as wastewater, with additional contamination picked up from the shale bedrock. These include heavy metals, salt brine, and radionuclides such as radon, which are also listed as contaminants in drinking water standards. Except for the salt, these contaminants are dissolved in the wastewater. There are a number of ways that surface waters can become contaminated from gas drilling operations. There will be hundreds of large tanker trucks per well carrying chemicals and wastewater over secondary roads. Add these up over hundreds of wells, and the potential for tanker spills is real. According to DEC, there will be storage tanks and large centralized open impoundments for storing gas drilling wastewater. Tanks and pipes can leak and impoundments can overflow in a rainstorm or develop liner leaks. There is also the potential for fracturing fluids, under high pressure, to migrate vertically through naturally occurring fractures in the overlying bedrock and contaminate ground and surface waters. Thus, given the multiple potential sources of contamination, there is a real possibility of ground and surface drinking water supplies

becoming contaminated with toxic hydrocarbons, heavy metals, radioactivity, and high levels of chlorides. As pointed out above, most of the contaminants are in solution and are not solid particulate matter. Filtration plants used by municipalities to remove particulate matter from drinking water are not capable of removing contaminants in solution. These contaminants will pass right through conventional filters and enter a drinking water system. The concentrations of the toxic hydrocarbons and heavy metals may be very low, but the long-term effect on public health of low-level exposure to toxic chemicals is unknown. For this reason, all drinking water watersheds in the Marcellus shale region should be afforded the same protection as NYC and Syracuse.

How Drilling for Natural Gas Can Affect Our Water and Foodshed
Horizontal Hydraulic Fracturing requires 10 times the amount of water to fracture one well as vertical hydraulic fracturing, or up to 7 million gallons per well, drawn from our watershed and aquifers The water is mixed with sand and some combination of chemicals (over 500 are known to be in use but many are proprietary), many of which are highly toxic, before being injected at high velocity into the well to fracture the shale The Marcellus Shale also contains its own volatile organic compounds as well as radioactive materials which are released through the violent fracturing process and brought back to the surface with the estimated 40% of the fracking fluids that can be recovered. The remainder of the toxic fluids remains underground. The recovered fracking fluid is stored in open lined pits or containers before being shipped by tanker truck to wastewater treatment facilities. New York currently has 2 facilities marginally able to process the fluids safely. Accidents involving tanker trucks could lead to contamination of our water sources. While the well holes are lined with concrete, it is possible for this lining to fail and for chemicals to seep into the aquifer or other water sources. The brute force needed to fracture the shale can also cause other compounds to leach into the aquifer, such as methane, which can then contaminate the aquifer. Once the aquifer or waterway is contaminated, it is impossible to clean and is unsafe for the foreseeable future. Oil and gas companies are exempt from federal regulation under the Safe Drinking Water Act and the Clean Air Act. New York state regulations were adopted in the 1990s, before the horizontal hydraulic fracturing technology was developed. Over a thousand cases of water contamination have been reported by citizens living in close proximity to natural gas wells employing the horizontal hydro-fracking technology. Effects of contamination include serious illness, sick and dying livestock and pets, poisoned wildlife, and dead vegetation. 28 cows were recently quarantined by the Pennsylvania Department of Health after they consumed contaminated water which seeped into a pasture from a nearby well. Otsego County prides itself on its pristine waterways and lakes, which are the source of drinking water for its citizens, livestock, and agricultural production, as well as tourism, and which make the striking agricultural landscape such a unique and prized asset. Milk, cheese, fish, beef, pork, chicken, lamb, broccoli, corn, lettuces, radishes, potatoes, apples, pears, spinach, mushrooms, carrots, herbs, garlic, onions, ramps, strawberries, blueberries, raspberries, apple cider, and beer -- all Otsego agricultural products which depend on Otsego lakes and surrounding aquifers.

Our Otsego way of life would not be possible without our lakes and aquifers. Help protect this vital resource! www.otsego2000.org

_________________________________________________________________________________ Otsego County Soil & Water Conservation District

967 CO HWY 33 RIVER ROAD COOPERSTOWN, NEW YORK 13326-9222 PHONE (607) 547-8337 ext. 4

General Guidance Document on Well Water Monitoring In Advance of High Volume Horizontal Hydrofracturing Background: With the potential for wide-spread, high-volume, horizontal hydrofracturing natural gas development to take place within Otsego County, many residents and local municipal officials have expressed concern over the possibility of well water contamination that may come as a result. While the New York State Department of Environmental Conservation (DEC) does recommend, and may require, gas companies to test wells within a particular distance of a drilling operation, individuals or local governments outside this area may still wish to establish a predrilling baseline on the water quality of their own private or municipal well. One factor keeping such individuals and municipalities from beginning this process has been the lack of any official guidance from DEC or Department of Health (DOH). Although the draft Supplemental Generic Environmental Impact Statement (dSGEIS) currently being reviewed by DEC does suggest a list of parameters (Chapter 7, pages 40 & 41), any official recommendations that come from that process will most likely be included final SGEIS. At that point in time, permits for drilling could be issued and the opportunity to collect a pre-drilling baseline data set would have passed for some. In the interim, and until official guidance is provided by the State, a local working group consisting of the Otsego County Soil and Water Conservation District, Otsego County Planning Department, SUNY Oneonta faculty and Hartwick College faculty, are providing this unofficial general guidance for those who would like to acquire water quality data on their wells now. This general guidance was developed by comparing lists of parameters previously made available by industry, environmental consulting firms, DEC (as identified above), Penn State Cooperative Extension (Water Fact Sheet #28) and other Counties in NY. This comparison was assisted by H2H Associates, a private environmental consulting firm, and concluded with a list of 24 parameters seen as most appropriate and cost effective in detecting potential contamination. To address the issues of frequency and duration, the working group also consulted with a representative of the United States Geological Service (USGS). Thanks go out to all these individuals, agencies, departments and all of those who have commented and advised during the formulation of this general guidance. Additional thanks go to all of those participating in the public discussion for making so much good information readily available.

CONSERVATION DEVELOPMENT SELF-GOVERNMENT

What to Test for and Why: Below is the list of parameters recommended for testing along with a brief explanation as to why they are relevant and, where appropriate, US EPA drinking water guidelines. 1. Alkalinity Alkalinity is often the dominant anion in groundwaters. Monitoring changes in alkalinity can indicate other changes in water chemistry. 2. Arsenic Arsenic may be found in biocides used in hydrofracking fluids. It may also be liberated from shales when reacting with drilling fluids. US EPA (1986) drinking water guideline is 0.05 mg/L. 3. Barium A principle component of drilling muds. US EPA (1986) specifies a drinking water guideline of 1.0 mg/L 4. BTEX Benzene, Toluene, Ethylbenzene, and Xylene. The US EPA drinking water standards for each of these parameters are: 0.005, 1.0, 0.7, and 10.0 mg/l respectively. These are sometimes added to fracking fluids to provide lubrication for the injection of propants used to keep fractures open. 5. Bromide Bromide salts may be added to water as a mild biocide. 6. Chloride A possible component of shale brines. US EPA (1986) drinking water guideline is 250 mg/L. 7. Conductivity Electrical conductivity is one of the simplest and least expensive water quality indicators. As the amount of dissolved substances in water increase, so too does the ability of water to conduct an electrical current. Electrical conductivity is then a useful proxy for the amount of substances dissolved in water. 8. Dissolved Methane & Ethane Occurs naturally in local aquifers but may also leak into aquifers as a product of drilling and production. 9. Hydrogen Sulfide H2S is a naturally occurring gas that forms under similar environmental conditions that generate methane. H2S concentrations in deep shales are likely to be higher than surface concentrations. H2S is also a by-product of certain bacteria. 10. Iron Commonly found in local waters, iron may also be present in shale beds and may be liberated from shales during gas development. New York State maximum contaminant level of 0.3 mg/l. 11. Lead Lead is a known neurotoxin. The US EPA (1986) specifies a drinking water standard of 0.05 mg/L. Rock cuttings from the Marcellus shale may release small amounts of lead and other metals when washed with rain water. 12. Manganese Commonly found in deep groundwater aquifers, manganese produces a black stain in the presence of oxygen. The US EPA (1986) specifies a drinking water guideline of 0.05 mg/L. 13. MBAS (Surfactants/Detergents) Detergents are used in the hydrofracturing process to aid the liberation of gas from rock. Measuring MBAS levels in water can help indicate the presence or absence of hydrofracturing fluids in water supplies. 14. pH A basic water parameter sensitive to small changes in water chemistry. Acids used in hydrofracking fluids may lower the pH of water. US EPA (1986) drinking water guideline is 6.5-8.5.

CONSERVATION DEVELOPMENT SELF-GOVERNMENT

15. Potassium Like sodium, potassium is commonly found in deep shale brines and gas well flowback. 16. Radium 226/228 Black shale beds commonly have elevated concentrations of uranium. The radioactive decay of uranium results in the production of radium gas, which in turn decays into radon gas (a well known cause of lung cancer). There is concern that natural gas development may increase the migration of radium from deep shale beds to shallow aquifers. US EPA (1986) drinking water guideline is 5 pCi/L combined. 17. Sodium Sodium is commonly found in deep shale brines and gas well flowback. 18. Strontium Strontium has been commonly found in waters associated with shale beds. Strontium levels may help fingerprint water migrating from natural gas formations. 19. Sulfate Sulfate is produced by both the oxidation of iron sulfide minerals commonly found in black shales, as well as the dissolution of gypsum found in deep rock units in New York. Shale brines can be expected to have elevated concentrations of sulfate. The U.S. EPA has a drinking water quality guideline of 250 mg/L. 20. Total Dissolved Solids Deep shale brines may have a high TDS. Also indicates all dissolved species in water. US EPA (1986) drinking water guideline is 500 mg/L. 21. Total Hardness Hardness is a measure of all the calcium and magnesium dissolved in a water sample and are common in areas with limestone. Both calcium and magnesium levels may be affected by changes in water chemistry due to mixing with natural gas fluids. 22. Total Organic Carbon TOC can indicate the presence or absence of dissolved organic compounds in water. In the case of natural gas flowback waters, changes in TOC could indicate changes in methane, BTEX, detergents, and biocides. 23. Total Petroleum Hydrocarbon Hydrocarbons may be injected into shales as a lubricant in hydrofracturing fluids. Hydrocarbons may also occur naturally in shale beds. 24. Total Suspended Solids This is a direct measurement of all particulate matter transported by water which can cause water to look cloudy or turbid. Changes in suspended sediment in groundwater can be caused by the growth of organic material, the precipitation of iron minerals, or the mobilization of fine grained sediments caused by injecting water or pumping water from an aquifer. In addition to the list of parameters provided above, we also recommend that static water level be measured by the commercial lab (see below) at the time of sampling. This requires opening the well cap and measuring depth to water with a probe when the pump is not running. The static water level reflects the level of the water table and can influence the water quality of the well. Therefore knowing what your static water level is important to the interpretation of the results and should be measured when the sample is taken. The best time to measure static water level is mid-day after morning water use is done and the well has had time to recover.

CONSERVATION DEVELOPMENT SELF-GOVERNMENT

The Environmental Laboratory Approval Program (ELAP): Who performs the work of collecting and then analyzing well water samples is of critical importance. One purpose of the data collected may be to demonstrate well contamination. This makes properly collected, documented, accurate and reliable environmental analyses critical. The Wadsworth Center was established in 1984 under Section 502 of the Public Health Law and is responsible for the certification of laboratories performing environmental analyses on samples originating from New York State. In all cases, it is highly recommend that landowners and municipalities only use laboratories certified in ELAP when testing for the parameters recommended here. To view a list of New York State ELAP labs and laboratories in other states certified under the national program, go to: http://www.wadsworth.org/labcert/elap/comm.html. It is further recommended that the commercial laboratory selected be provided any well specific information available (age, depth, location, water source, etc) to assist in interpretation the results and so that modifications to this general guidance can be made if necessary. Sampling Strategies: The two sampling strategies offered here focus on detecting a significant change in the concentration of any of the recommended parameters over a time period that spans pre- and post-drilling. This is done by first establishing the normal variation in concentration of a parameter prior to drilling (due to change in season and annual precipitation) and then looking for a much different measurement (out of the normal variation) during and after drilling. The key to establishing variation is to measure the parameter repeatedly at different times of year and for multiple years. However, sampling for the number of parameters recommended here is not inexpensive and cost must also be considered when deciding how frequently and for how long to sample. For this reason two sampling strategies are offered here. First is a base-line sampling strategy that relies on regular sampling with additional comparisons of indicator parameters during and after drilling activities. This approach may be most suitable for municipalities or clusters of similarly situated wells. The second strategy is a less costly and less intensive protocol that does not establish a baseline but rather provides a one-time snapshot of pre-drilling water quality with subsequent comparisons of indicator parameters until such time that another snapshot may be warranted. Results should be compared against the limits described in the What to Test for and Why section of this document and previous measurements. In all cases, consultation with the selected commercial laboratory regarding the interpretation of results is recommended.

CONSERVATION DEVELOPMENT SELF-GOVERNMENT

Base-Line Sampling Strategy: In order to establish the baseline water quality, seasonal sampling prior to any drilling activity is recommended. The ideal schedule would be to sample for the parameters described above in the late fall and the spring of each year to account for the natural variability characteristic of the changes in ground water hydrology. As noted above, measuring the static water level at the time of each sample is strongly recommended. During drilling in proximity of the water well under consideration, such as the initial drilling of a well, drilling of subsequent wells on the multi-well pad, or high-volume hydrofracturing of a well, monitoring of indicator parameters should be conducted. Indicator parameters are reflective of a wider array of parameters and their use is a cost effective way to reduce the number of analysis needed to detect a change in water quality. The presence of, or change in, indicator parameters may signify contamination has occurred. The recommended schedule for monitoring of indicator parameters is once every 2 months after an event until the next regular base-line (spring or fall) test of all the parameters described above. The recommended indicator parameter list is: pH Chloride Sulfate Total Dissolved Solids Conductivity Barium Potassium Dissolved Methane & Ethane

If one or more of the indicator parameters is outside of the normal baseline range of results or previous results of indicator testing, the full suite of 24 parameters should be tested for again. As noted above, consultation with the commercial laboratory used for analysis in interpreting results is recommended. Considering that local precipitation may vary from year to year which will effect the natural variability of water quality, that potential gas development may be long term and the possibility that well contamination from well drilling activities may not occur for several years (owing to the slow movement of groundwater in some circumstances), it is recommended that base-line sampling be ongoing. Snap-Shot Sampling Strategy: In those cases where the cost of base-line sampling is prohibitive but where the concern level is such that some water quality information is desired, a snap shot sampling strategy is recommended. In order to establish a snap shot of a wells water quality, one sample analyzed for the full suite of parameters described above is required. The
CONSERVATION DEVELOPMENT SELF-GOVERNMENT

ideal time to sample would be the fall, if time permits. If drilling is about to commence, a snap shot sample should be taken prior to drilling, regardless of season. If possible, seasonal sampling of the indicator parameters as identified and described above is recommended. If not, sampling for indicator parameters during drilling activities (as described above) should be conducted. The recommended schedule for sampling of indicator parameters is once every 2 months after an event for a period of 6 months after which sampling for indicator parameters should take place annually to coincide with the date of the initial snap shot analysis or until the next regular indicator test (spring or fall). If one of the indicator parameter results is significantly higher than the snap shot test results or previous results of indicator testing, the full suite of 24 parameters should be tested for again. As noted above, consultation with the commercial laboratory used for analysis is recommended. Note: The information provided here is meant to serve as general guidance until such time as New York State (DEC or DOH) provides an official protocol to the public for the purpose of monitoring water quality well water as it relates to potential contamination from high volume, horizontal hydrofracturing natural gas development. For questions or comments on this guidance, please contact the Otsego County Soil and Water Conservation District at (607) 547-8337 x4.

CONSERVATION DEVELOPMENT SELF-GOVERNMENT

The map below shows Marcellus sh hale depths ra anging from a about 4000 fee to the surfa in the et ace go 2 he part ounty. It shoul be noted th ld hat Southern part of Otseg County to 2000 feet in th Northern p of the Co the Utica shale is a sim milar shale wh hich lies rough 2000 feet below the Ma hly arcellus and t there are laye of ers sandstone and limesto between the Marcellus and the Utica which may also have commercial e one t a quantities of gas. s

Officials at Brewery Ommegang oppose hydrofracking Cooperstown Crier - Your Source for Hometown News - Cooperstown, Baseball Hall of Fame

Cooperstown Crier - Your Source for Hometown News Cooperstown, Baseball Hall of Fame
November 25, 2010

Officials at Brewery Ommegang oppose hydrofracking

STAFF REPORT MIDDLEFIELD Following a close examination of the process, officials at Brewery Ommegang have decided to oppose hydrofracking for natural gas in Otsego County, saying it poses a material threat to its business. Ommegang believes that opposing development of hydrofracking is critical to the interests of our community, our people and our business. We are proud of our accomplishment in building a thriving, sustainable and environmentally conscious business in upstate New York, said Simon Thorpe, pesident/ CEO of the brewery. We are deeply concerned at the threat posed by development of drilling in the region and the risk to the purity of the water on which we depend, and which is a key reason we are located here. We reviewed detailed and extensive information provided by gas industry professionals, publications and supporters of hydrofracking who propose that drilling is safe, necessary, and will be an economic boost to Otsego County, wrote Larry Bennett, Ommegangs director of public relations, in a media release. We also reviewed information from gas industry professionals who are opponents of hydrofracking, as well as environmental and historic groups who contend that the permitting procedure is flawed, drilling is not safe, our currently pure water is endangered; and economic benefits will not be realized. According to Bennett, it has been concluded that: Gas companies have the right to drill without substantive local public review and both state and federal regulatory investigations into the risks of the process are mired in political delays. Landlease development and proposed drilling in the region has already reached an alarming level without any meaningful regulatory control and with very limited public awareness of the issues. Over 42,974 acres have already been leased by gasdrilling companies or their land agents and active drilling projects are now starting up in Otsego County. - The relative contribution of natural gas from hydrofracking to either the economy or the energy needs of the region is minimal and development does not materially contribute to a sustainable national or regional energy policy. - The number of documented spills, blowouts, leaking wells and other environmental accidents is significant and the environmental and human consequences have been serious in a number of states. From our perspective, the most critical threat is contamination of the aquifers occurring directly above the Marcellus shale. - The taking of huge quantities of water needed for the hydrofracking process and the heavy impact on local infrastructure cannot be sustained in Otsego County. Effective technologies for the treatment of the millions of gallons of polluted processing waste do not exist and there are no locations for waste disposal in New York capable of supporting the proposed scale of drilling. - The plans for drilling present a strategic risk to the entire Otsego County water supply. The New York City watershed has already been determined to be protected and this represents the clearest evidence that state regulators already understand a potential risk. The plans for drilling also pose a direct and material threat to

http://coopercrier.com/localnews/x1293918608/Officials-at-Brewery-Ommegang-oppose-hydrofracking/print[1/26/2011 4:03:11 PM]

Officials at Brewery Ommegang oppose hydrofracking Cooperstown Crier - Your Source for Hometown News - Cooperstown, Baseball Hall of Fame

Ommegang Brewery. The company draws water for our beer from aquifers beneath our 140-acre farmstead located close to Cooperstown, at the head of the Susquehanna watershed. Contamination of our currently pristine water supply would jeopardize our brewery business and even the threat of potential contamination could be sufficient for the future of our company to be at risk. - The company will join others in concluding that industrialscale hydrofracking in the rural upstate region will irreparably damage the essential qualities that make Otsego County an excellent place to live, raise families, farm and brew beer. In response to its conclusions, officials said they will call for an immediate moratorium and ban on both vertical and horizontal hydrofracking in Otsego County and New York state; call for the rejection of and rewriting of the State Supplemental Generic Environmental Impact Statement by the incoming Cuomo administration; support the transfer of control over hydrofracking to local authorities, allowing local communities to determine if they wish to accept the impact on their lives instead of those decisions being made at state and federal level. The media release said the brewery will defend the interests of its business, employees and community by actively campaigning for the prevention of hydrofracking by every available means.We are a company that enjoys a national reputation for super-premium quality beers produced in upstate New York and we hope that the state and local regulators attach value to what we do for the region in terms of employment and our representation of upstate New York in restaurants and grocery stores across the nation, Thorpe said.

http://coopercrier.com/localnews/x1293918608/Officials-at-Brewery-Ommegang-oppose-hydrofracking/print[1/26/2011 4:03:11 PM]

Environmental Issues
Chemicals Used in Hydrofracking
Although hydraulic fracturing has been done in NY since the 1940s, it has not been done on horizontal wells, and it only has been done using water mixed with gels or foams and other chemicals as the fracking fluid (Ref: Grannis Testimony 10/15/08). These processes use much lower volumes of fluid (20,000 to 80,000 gallons, which is roughly 0.5 to 2.3% of the volume required for the Marcellus Shale) for each well fracturing (Ref: GEIS: See Chapter 9, Part F). The new type of hydraulic fracturing to be used in the Marcellus Shale, developed in the late 1990s, is called slick water hydraulic fracturing. It uses different chemicals--reducing the amount of gelling agents and adding friction reducers (thus the term slick)--and requires much more fluid. Because of the increased fluid, it is also known as high-volume hydraulic fracturing. (Ref: Final Scope: See Section 2.1.2) Using slick water hydraulic fracturing just one time requires 2 to 9 million gallons (on average 3.5) of fracking fluid, and wells may be fracked many times over their 40year life spans. This much fluid contains about 140,000 pounds of chemicals, many of which are toxic to humans and wildlife. Industry refuses to publicly disclose the specific chemicals used, claiming they are proprietary. But scientists analyzing samples from the numerous spills around the country and from MSDS sheets and other documents have identified more than 200 chemicals, including benzene, toluene, xylene, kerosene, naphthalene, methanol, formaldehyde, ethylene glycol (antifreeze), and hydrochloric acid. Many of them cause cancer, mutations, nervous system disorders, developmental disorders, skin and lung problems, endocrine disruption, and reproductive damage. 65 of these chemicals are classified as hazardous, but gas companies are exempt from having to treat them as hazardous (see Federal Regulation Exemptions) (Ref: EWG Hazardous Waste).

Fresh Water Used in Hydrofracking

The fresh water used for hydrofracking is withdrawn from local streams, lakes, ponds, and aquifers free of chargea local gift to the gas industry. How much is 3.5 million gallons? The City of Ithaca draws 3.27 million gallons per day from Six Mile Creek

to supply over 35,000 customers, and Bolton Point took about 2.93 million gallons from Cayuga Lake each day in 2007 to service 30,000 residents.

Well Setback Regulations

Under current regulations in New York, a wellhead (the top of the well at the surface) can be placed up to 50 feet from surface water (the same surface water setback required for septic tanks), 100 feet from a residence, and 150 feet from a public building, such as a school. Horizontal wells may extend underground to within 330 feet from the border of the spacing unit.

Disposal of Toxic Waste

Some of the fracking fluid (perhaps 30 to 70%, but recent estimates hover around 15% (Ref: 85% Fracking Fluid Remains Underground)) comes back out, but the fate of the rest is unknown: does it stay trapped in the shale, or move through soil and rock layers, sometimes reaching underground water supplies? What does come back out after fracking, called "flowback" is even more hazardous than what went in because fracturing releases radioactive materials such as radon and radium 226 and 228 (Ref: Radioactivity in Marcellus Shale); heavy metals such as arsenic, barium, cadmium, lead, and mercury; and many salts and other minerals, often referred to as "Total Dissolved Solids" (TDS). In many areas, additional volatile organic compounds (VOC), such as benzenea known carcinogen, toluene, and xylene, also come out. In the SGEIS, the DEC claims, based on shale characteristics and data from 12 test wells from one gas company, that the Marcellus Shale will not add volatile organic compounds to flowback water. The result is millions of gallons of very toxic fluid, which presents a huge disposal problem. One option is treatment, but it is evident that current waste treatment facilities in New York will be unable to handle waste fracking fluid without violating their discharge limits. Thus waste may need to be trucked to appropriate facilities in Pennsylvania. Currently no treatment facilities in PA can remove TDS, which, when discharged into surface waters, can raise their salinity to levels that damage aquatic life (Ref: PA Wastewater Inundation). Another disposal option, deep-well injection, is to pump the waste into nonproducing gas wells. This is highly controversial because nothing is known of its long-term safety: toxic water may migrate through fractures in the rock layers and

contaminate local aquifers and drinking wells. Currently, the EPA prohibits the drilling of new injection wells in New York state because of the topography. Wastewater also may be stored on site temporarily in open, plastic-lined lagoons. These may leak and are hazardous to wildlife: animals are attracted to the salts in the wastewater and then poisoned when they drink from it. Alternatively, waste may be stored on site in huge steel tanks; this seems to create the fewest environmental hazards. Over a well's productive lifetime, the natural gas comes out of the ground mixed with fluid. Called produced water, this is also toxic (it contains the radioactivity, heavy metals, and TDS picked up from the shaleand in some areas, volatile organic compounds), and must be trucked away continually.

Water Contamination
Despite industry claims to the contrary, thousands of problems, including spills, leaks, and the seepage of contaminants into drinking water supplies, have been documented in fracking operations around the country (Ref: ProPublica 8/25/09) (Ref: ProPublica 11/19/08). Houses, water wells, and pipelines have exploded (Ref: ProPublica 4/26/09), and people have found methane levels in their water so high that they could light it with a match (Ref: ProPublica 4/22/09). In Dimock, PA, 30 miles south of Binghamton (see: Dimock articles), there have been at least 9 water well contaminations near drilling operations this year. Although human error and regulation short-cutting often may be to blame, even more disturbing concerns arise from the imprecise nature of hydrofracking itself: when gas companies fracture the shale, they have little control over exactly where fractures will develop, so fracturing fluids and natural gas can move in unexpected directions, ending up in aquifers and water wells. Water also may be contaminated via leaking from disposal lagoons, tanks, and deep-well injection sites, and in trucking accidents. Another source of contamination is the well borethe well hole down through the ground. This long hole creates a pathway connecting the surface, underlying aquifers, and various rock layers. Once the well is drilled, a metal pipe called the casing is inserted. The casing is then surrounded by cement to seal the well bore. Problems may arise when casings fail or the cement does not fully seal the hole: polluted surface water, fracking fluid, or methane can migrate up or down the bore to aquifers. A major concern in New York is the existence of 18,000 to 48,000 abandoned oil and gas wells that have not been plugged. During hydrofracking and deep-well injection, the high pressure underground can force the toxic fracking fluids up through any

existing uncapped wells, contaminating aquifers and drinking wells. Concerned citizens are requesting that gas companies be required to identify and plug all old wells before drilling.

Air Pollution
The drilling, fracking, and gas-extracting processes dump a wide range of dangerous chemicals into the air. Sources include diesel generators, drill rigs, compressors, pumps, exhaust from construction vehicles and hundreds to thousands of trucks, evaporation of toxic chemicals from wastewater lagoons, and the routine venting and flaring of wells. Pollutants include Volatile Organic Compounds (VOCs) such as formaldehyde, benzene, toluene, ethybenzene, and xylene (the four latter ones are sometimes collectively known as BTEX); methane, carbon monoxide, nitrogen oxides, sulfur dioxide, particulates, dust, and (depending on the location) hydrogen sulfide, which has a rotten-egg smell. Some of the pollutants have a slight odor or color, but many do not, so people living near gas wells are not alerted to their presence in the air they breathe. These pollutants have numerous health and environmental effects. Some are known carcinogens (cancer-causing agents), or cause neurological effects, heart conditions, blood disorders, or respiratory ailments. Others contribute to acid rain and climate change. Some of them interact with sunlight to produce ground-level ozone (also known as smog), which causes numerous respiratory problems and aggravates others, such as asthma. A recent study has shown that long-term exposure to low levels of ozone can lead to death (Ref: Ozone). In formerly pristine parts of rural Wyoming, gas drilling at the well density allowed in our area has created ozone levels higher than those in Los Angeles (Ref: Ozone in Wyoming). Many other areas with gas drilling also report elevated ozone levels. The Town of Dish, Texas, the site of much gas drilling and many compressor stations, but virtually no other heavy industry, commissioned an air pollution study in August 2009, which found levels of numerous carcinogens and neurotoxins exceeding safety standards (Ref: Dish Air Pollution). For in-depth information on air pollution from gas extraction, see (Ref: Earthworks Air Pollution). A quick search of the web will find numerous videos and interviews with landowners living near wells who discuss their experiences: irritation to their throats and eyes, and increased illnesses in themselves, their families, and their livestock.

Noise

Well pad construction and drilling are very noisy, and the machinery runs 24 hours a day, 7 days a week, for up to several months. Noise comes from truck traffic, construction vehicles such as backhoes and bulldozers, generators, concrete mixers, and drilling equipment. At 500 feet, the level of noise from well construction is about the same as you would hear when standing next to a vacuum cleaner. Hydrofracking also is noisy, and the process can take up to a month. Once a well is in production, the noise depends upon what specific equipment is required to extract and separate the gas. There will always be noise from trucks carrying away wastewater and transporting workers. If gas pressure drops over time and compressors are used at the well site, they are much noisier and run all the time. Compressor stations will be required to bring the gas pressure in smaller gathering pipelines up to the pressure in larger transmission pipelines. The SGEIS says that each compressor station will service gas wells within a 4-to-6-mile radius, and also will have dehydration units, to remove water vapor from the gas. Compressor stations are extremely noisythe equivalent of a propeller plane flying overhead or a concrete mixerand operate 24 hours a day, 7 days a week. The siting of compressor stations does not require a SEQRA (State Environmental Quality Review Act) review, and is governed by the Public Service Commissionnot the DECso is not covered by the SGEIS. Eminent domain may be used for siting both compressor stations and pipelines. (Adapted from the Marcellus Accountability Project of Tompkins Countys Gas Drilling Primer)

COSTS TO PROPERTY OWNERS

Speculation disproportionately raises property values followed by divestment which decreases property values. Mineral rights trump surface rights in split estates. Any building erected on the surface after a lease has been signed may be demolished by the gas company without compensation. Banks are denying mortgages on properties that are leased, or for those parcels that are in close approximation to leased parcels; leaving sellers looking for buyers able to pay cash. Insurance companies are not writing policies on properties with gas leases, or are significantly increasing premiums as they have concluded that potential risk and liabilities are too high to chance. Property values have declined in areas where significant drilling activities occurred, after all, who wants to live in an industrial zone? In cases where homes suffer water contamination or are exposed to air or excessive noise pollution, the market considers these properties worthless or unmarketable. The NYS Office of Real Property Services (ORPS) has only provided guidelines to tax assessors suggesting how to tax gas, minerals and surface rights. Local assessors are free to assess the gas and minerals as the town board directs and tax property owners accordingly. Potable water replacement, filters or venting are all costs property owners may face. Gas companies are denying any causal allegations forcing individuals to buy their own water treatment and exhaust systems. Medical care costs may include treatment for any number of conditions related to ingesting or bathing in contaminated water, or inhaling polluted air. Many pollutants cause a variety of health ailments including reproductive disorders.

COSTS TO LOCAL COMMUNITY

The additional heavy traffic ( The DEC estimates a minimum of 895 trucks per well) causes structural damages to roads and bridges. Truck drivers find negotiating country roads difficult, resulting in more accidents and emergency calls. Traffic congestion and road dust is inevitable for all residents. Emergency Responders need special equipment, and many volunteers need training in dealing with gas fires, spills and explosions. In some communities police are overwhelmed with increases in drug use, bar brawls, thefts and rapes. Court systems may become overwhelmed by the increase in cases. Increased demands are also placed on the social services system of many rural communities. Some report an increase in medical care costs from uninsured workers. Others are dealing with increasing rates of teen pregnancy. Those on fixed incomes are finding themselves priced out of rental units, as gas company employees are willing to pay higher rents than these locals can afford. Tourists and visitors are finding local hotels have no rooms available.

COSTS TO OTHER INDUSTRIES

While gas production may provide revenues of $22 billion, other industries threatened by the gas industry generate over $400 billion in gross revenues.

Source: John Schwartz

THE TRADE OFF

Government is forcing farmers into a choice many don't want to make. What is needed is an agricultural policy that helps farmers receive a fair price for their product, not an energy policy that provides them quick cash at the expense of the environment, our food supply, our water, air and soil, and the health of future generations.

THE BOOM BUST CYCLE

Long-term analysis on communities that rely on fossil fuel extraction for economic development report overall negative consequences and diminished future competitiveness.

for communities that rely on fossil fuel extraction

Boom/Bust Cycle

Pollution: Who pays the clean up bill, especially in the case where a gas company declares bankruptcy? You will! Toxic Disposal : Whats the cost to your community landfill or water treatment plants where these toxic wastes are dumped?

4 3.5 3 2.5 2 1.5 1 0.5 0 -0.5 -1 -1.5 -2 -2.5 -3 -3.5 -4 -4.5 -5

3.6 3.0 2.4 1.9 1.7

Economic Indicators

Income Employment Avg. Earning Population Income/Capita

-2.1 -2.5 -3.4 -4.5

-2.4

Difference in Annual Growth Rates relative to Peers

Over 100 Counties Studied
Headwaters Economics 2005

Energy Boom Over Performed

Energy Bust Under performed

WHAT THE GAS COMPANIES DONT WANT YOU TO KNOW

Many old leases dont pay landowners for water, gravel, timber loss, crop loss, pipeline easements, storage facilities, or compressor station locations. Gas rights are traded like a stock. The company made money when it agreed to let you keep 12% of the share, and sold the rest on the open global market. Gas companies create holding companies that allow for a shell game where the gas can be sold at a price less than market value, stored, and later resold at a higher price. Most leases are based on the first sale. Currently the gas industry receives tax breaks, subsidies, and are exempt from the following: 1. The Safe Drinking Water Act 2. The Clean Water Act 3. The National Environmental Policy Act 4. The Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation and Liability Act (CERCLA) 5. Resource Conservation and Recovery Act 6. Clean Air Act 7. Toxic Release Inventory under the Emergency Planning and Community Right-to-Know Act (EPCRA) 8. Federal Hazardous Waste Regulations 9. OSHA -- as it relates to the handling of radioactive material
Where are all those jobs? A Penn State study commissioned by the Marcellus Shale Coalition and released in May concluded the industry's growth would lead to more than 88,000 new jobs in 2010 and more than 111,000 in 2011. The most recent numbers from the state Department of Labor and Industry puts the number of people employed in the natural gas or related industries at 11,428 as of the third quarter of 2009. But natural gas companies - at least for now - are importing skilled workers from out of state to do the actual well drilling. Source:
http://thetimes-tribune.com/news/so-far-gas-jobsmainly-in-related-fields-1.1060490

THE WELL PRODUCTION CURVE

Wells decline significantly after their first year of production as this chart from Chesapeake shows.

THE ECONOMICS OF EXTRACTING NATURAL GAS FROM SHALE FORMATIONS How much does that gas really cost and who pays the bill?

HOW MUCH WILL A LANDOWNER REALLY MAKE IN AFTER TAX DOLLARS? Using this royalty calculator
http://www.pagaslease.com/calculator_natural_gas_royalty _form.php a landowner might expect the following from an average Marcellus well:

5 acres, at $4 gas, at 20% royalty gives a landowner $67,977 over ten years ($6,798/yr) 5 acres, at $4 gas, at 12% royalty gives a landowner $33,989 over ten years ($3,399/yr) 30 acres, at $4 gas, at 20% royalty gives a landowner $329,238 over ten years ($32,924/yr) 30 acres, at $4 gas, at 12% royalty gives a landowner $164,619 over ten years ($16,462/yr)

For more info LINK TO RESOURCES Get informed, get involved, speak up. To find a group near you visit: GASMAIN.ORG

INDIVIDUALS, COMMUNITIES, THE ENVIRONMENT, AND OTHER INDUSTRIES PAY THE PRICE OF HORIZONTAL GAS DRILLING AND HIGH VOLUME HYDRAULIC FRACTURING, WHILE ONLY A FEW LANDOWNERS STRIKE IT RICH.

Local Food Production and Gas Drilling: Are they really compatible?

Photo credit: Sue Smith-Heavenrich

A compilation of articles, studies and websites that suggest that agriculture and industrialization due to natural gas drilling can not co-exist (at least while drilling is in progress, and perhaps beyond) if we want a healthy, sustainable, local food supply. Prepared by Martha Goodsell January 7, 2011

The Impacts of Natural Gas Drilling on Agriculture Foodshed concerns Food safety and inspections Livestock health Animal mortality and disposal Continuance of toxins through the food chain Fencing (or lack there of) where critical Chemical contamination and pollution pathways Mud and waste water disposal Water quality Water quantity Radioactivity Ozone and VOC impacts Noise impacts Soils and farmland: contamination, compaction, fragmentation Shared driveways, rights of ways, pipeline crossings Reclamation, drainage and contouring Erosion and total dissolved solids Invasive species Landowner liability Legal fees and testing costs Insurance premium increases (if even available) Hauling fee increases Farm income (or loss) and property value decline Lost crops, markets and business opportunities Mortgages and loan hold ups Big rigs on public roads and municipal road use agreements Organic certification at risk Taxpayer investments in infrastructure Costs to the community

FOODSHEDS
Fairfield, Hannah. The Hot Spots for Organic Food. New York Times. May 3, 2009. http://www.nytimes.com/imagepages/2009/05/03/business/03metrics.graf01.ready.html?ref=business Heller, Marc. Study May Shift Where Foods Grow. Watertown Daily Times. September 27, 2009. http://www.watertowndailytimes.com/article/20090927/NEWS02/309279956 Local Foodshed Mapping Tool for New York State. Cornell University Department of Crop and Soil Sciences. http://www.cals.cornell.edu/cals/css/extension/foodshed-mapping.cfm Piestrak, Jeff; Local and Regional Food Systems: Initiatives and Resources. Albert R. Mann Library at Cornell University. Updated November 16, 2010. http://guides.library.cornell.edu/print_content.php?pid=84833&sid=632227 Peters, C.J., Bills, N.L., Lembo, A.J., Wilkins, J.L., and Fick, G.W. Mapping potential foodsheds in New York State: A spatial model for evaluating the capacity to localize food production. Renewable Agriculture and Food Systems. Renewable Agriculture and Food Systems 24(1);72-84. October 15, 2008. http://www.regionalpartnerships.umn.edu/public/Peters%20Mapping%20Foodsheds%20in%20New%20York.pdf Peters, C.J., Bills, N.L., Wilkins, J.L., and Fick, G.W. Foodshed analysis and its relevance to sustainability. Renewable Agriculture and Food Systems. Renewable Agriculture and Food Systems (2009), 24: 1-7 Cambridge University Press Published online by Cambridge University Press 08 Dec 200 http://journals.cambridge.org/action/displayAbstract?fromPage=online&aid=4290516&fulltextType=AC&fileId=S17421 70508002433 Peters, C.J., J.L. Wilkins, and G.W. Fick. 2007. Testing a complete-diet model for estimating the land resource requirements of food consumption and agricultural carrying capacity: The New York State example. Renewable Agriculture and Food Systems 22(2): 145-153. http://journals.cambridge.org/action/displayAbstract?fromPage=online&aid=1091328&fulltextType=RA&fileId=S17421 70507001767 Peters, C.J., J.L. Wilkins, and G.W. Fick. 2008. Land and diet: Whats the most land efficient diet for New York State. Rural New York Minute. Issue 19 (July 2008). http://devsoc.cals.cornell.edu/cals/devsoc/outreach/cardi/publications/upload/07-2008-RNYM.pdf Stagnaro, Melissa. Blue Ribbon Task Force Formed on Future of New York Farming. Evening Sun. October 12, 2010. http://www.evesun.com/news/stories/2010-10-12/10662/Blue-ribbon-task-force-formed-on-future-of-NY-farming/

Syrov, Viktoriya. Mapping the NYC Regional Food System. Food Systems Network NYC. January 5, 2011. http://www.foodsystemsnyc.org/articles/udl-nyc-foodshed-initiative

FARM AND BUSINESS STATEMENTS

---, Farmers Speak Out About Natural Gas Drilling Via Hydro Fracking. Ithaca Food Web Blog. November 21, 2009. http://ithacasfoodweb.blogspot.com/2009/11/farmers-speak-out-about-natural-gas.html Bennett, Larry. Brewery Ommegang Statement on Hydrofracking for Shale Gas. Ommegang press release. November 19, 2010. Found at: http://gdacc.wordpress.com/2010/11/20/brewery-ommegang-calls-for-ban-on-hydrofracking/ Blacklock, Colleen. Presentation to the NYS Council on Food Policy October 21, 2010. Email to BuyLocalNY list. Message # 1097. October 25, 2010. http://groups.yahoo.com/group/BuyLocalNY/message/1097 Blacklock, Colleen. Potential Impacts of Gas Drilling on Agriculture. Comments on the dSGEIS. December 11, 2008. http://www.occainfo.org/documents/PotentialImpactsofGasDrillingonAgriculture_001.pdf

Burnett, Bonnie. Her Experience. Email sent via T-ROUSE 12/21/10. Goodsell, Martha. Sheldrake and Red Newt Opposition to the dSGEIS. Email to Regional Community Food Project. Message #649. December 9, 2009. http://tech.groups.yahoo.com/group/RCFP/message/649

Holtz. Joe. PURCHASES FROM NY STATE FARMS THREATENED BY POLLUTION FROM HYDROFRACKING, AND BUYERS CONCERNS ABOUT FOOD TAINTED BY GAS DRILLING ACTIVITIES. Park Slope Food Coop Statement. December 8, 2010. Email on NYFoodShed list. December 10, 2010.
8:29 AM. http://tech.groups.yahoo.com/group/NYFoodshed/message/29 Jaffee, Ken. ..large regional supermarket chain, avoiding purchases of meat from northern PA where there is

hydrofracking. Email November 21, 2010. http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Shaleshock/message/6614

FARMING AND NATURAL GAS IN THE NEWS

--- , Another Marcellus Fracking Mess American Agriculturalist. November 23, 2010. http://www.americanagriculturist.com/story.aspx/another/marcellus/fracking/mess/happens/9/44071 Belander, Don, et al. Remembering Rumsey Ranch: A Case Study of the Pollution of a Cattle Ranch in the Alberta Foothills Carleton University, Canada. London Journal of Canadian Studies. 1997 Vol 13. http://www.canadianstudies.net/lccs/LJCS/Vol_13/Belanger_et_al.pdf Cleghorn, Stephen. Paradise Lost as the Great Marcellus Gas Rush Hits Home. Post Gazette Opinion. October 10, 2010. http://www.post-gazette.com/pg/10283/1093640-109.stm Duncan, Byard. Fracking with Food: How the Natural Gas Industry Poisons Cows with Crops. Alternet. July 30, 2010. http://www.alternet.org/story/147634/ Haggerty, James. Natural Gas Drilling Leases Saving Farms. Times-Tribune. May 10, 2010. http://thetimestribune.com/news/natural-gas-drilling-leases-saving-farms-1.776312 Hammil, Jim. Couple Regrets Gas Well Lease. WNEP News. Oct 28, 2010. http://www.wnep.com/wnep-brad-gas-wellregret-water-contamination,0,3331396.story Head, Justin. Area Farms Hurting From Marcellus Shale Boom. November 18, 2010. Evening Tribune. http://www.eveningtribune.com/news/x151217655/Area-farms-hurting-from-Marcellus-Shale-boom Hurdle, Jon. Pennsylvania Lawsuit Says Drilling Polluted Water. Reuters. November 9, 2009. http://www.reuters.com/article/idUSTRE5A80PP20091109 Kobell, Rona. Marcellus Shale Natural Gas Drilling: Pipe Dreams in Pennsylvania. Chesapeake Bay Journal. Volume 20 Number 8 November 2010. http://www.paenvironmentdigest.com/newsletter/default.asp?NewsletterArticleID=14190 Legere, Laura. Western PA Communities Changed by Natural Gas Drilling. Times Tribune. June 23, 2010. http://thetimes-tribune.com/news/western-pa-communities-changed-by-natural-gas-drilling-offer-local-lessons-1.860440 Malone, Samantha. Forced Polling Versus Organic Farming. October 29, 2010. http://www.fractracker.org/2010/10/forced-pooling-vs-organic-farming.html Mingis, Candace. Farm Familys Nightmare: Gas Drillers Cut Corners From Day One. September 27, 2009. http://splashdownpa.blogspot.com/2009/09/farm-familys-nightmare-gas-drillers-cut.html Smith-Heavenrich, Sue. Impacts of Drilling on Agriculture Part 1: Protecting Farmland Through Leases and Agricultural Districts. Country Folks. February 2, 2009.

http://www.countryfolks.com/ME2/Audiences/dirmod.asp?sid=&nm=Features&type=Publishing&mod=Publications%3A %3AArticle&mid=8F3A7027421841978F18BE895F87F791&id=A2A0FD61AC584819821EC3A073B27C2E&tier=4 Smith-Heavenrich. Sue. Impacts of Drilling on Agriculture Part 2: Protecting Forested Land. Country Folks. February 9, 2009. http://www.countryfolks.com/ME2/Audiences/dirmod.asp?sid=&nm=Features&type=Publishing&mod=Publications%3A %3AArticle&mid=8F3A7027421841978F18BE895F87F791&id=2BC67A97B39B4CFBA0CB147D4AD8B13B&tier=4 Smith-Heavenrich, Sue. Impacts of Drilling on Agriculture Part 3: Country Folks. February 16, 2009. http://www.countryfolks.com/ME2/Audiences/dirmod.asp?sid=&nm=Features&type=Publishing&mod=Publications%3A %3AArticle&mid=8F3A7027421841978F18BE895F87F791&id=F6F2008223DE49F6B03A377AF5126112&tier=4 Torres, Chis. Hope, Fear Reign in Marcellus Country. Lancaster Farming. September 25, 2010. http://lancasterfarming.com/news/Hope--Fear-Reign-in-Marcellus-Country Townsend, Ian. Farmers Fuming Over Natural Gas Rush. ABC news. January 18, 2010. http://www.abc.net.au/news/stories/2010/06/18/2931187.htm Velez, Adriana; New York Governor's Fracking Loophole Could Kill Small Farmers. FoodChange.org December 16, 2010 http://food.change.org/blog/view/new_york_governors_fracking_loophole_could_kill_small_farmers Vogel, John. Gas Drilling Raises Water Well Concerns. American Agriculturalist. August 14, 2008. Wolf, Isaac. Rural Residents Say Natural Gas Drilling Has Tainted Their Drinking Water. Milford Daily News. November 23, 2010. http://www.milforddailynews.com/lifestyle/health/x1485353677/Rural-residents-say-natural-gasdrilling-has-tainted-their-drinking-water Wolin, Toby. Where Food and Natural Gas Collide. Fire Dog Lake News. July 5, 2010 http://my.firedoglake.com/tobywollin/2010/07/05/where-food-and-natural-gas-collide/ Wright, Tina. Dairies Face Drilling Concerns. Tompkins Weekly. December 15, 2009. Zook, Wendy. Locals hope to inform others of Clearville natural gas project: Contamination a concern for some. The Altoona Mirror. March 22, 2010 http://www.altoonamirror.com/page/content.detail/id/528108.html?nav=742

FOOD SAFETY and LIVESTOCK HEALTH

--- , Are Gas and Oil Operations Harming Livestock? Opposing Views. Natural Resources Defense Council. May 6, 2009. http://www.opposingviews.com/i/are-gas-oil-operations-harming-livestock/follow_ups ---. Lack of Regulation Allows Sale of Tainted Meat. News Inferno Blog. April 14, 2010. http://www.newsinferno.com/food-poisoning/lack-of-regulation-allows-sale-of-tainted-meat/ Hamilton, C. R., et al. The Rendering Industrys Bio Security Contributions to Public and Animal Health http://assets.nationalrenderers.org/essential_rendering_biosecurity_contribution.pdf Jaffee, Ken. So when cattle drink contaminated water, the USDA will act to protect the food supply, but when farmers drink contaminated water the EPA does nothing. Email. Lustgarten, Abrahm. 16 Cattle Drop Dead Near Mysterious Fluid at Gas Drilling Site. ProPublica, April 30, 2009. http://www.propublica.org/article/16-cattle-drop-dead-near-mysterious-fluid-at-gas-drilling-site-430 *Mall, Amy. Oil and Gas Impacts on Livestock Health? Switchboard: Natural Resources Defense Council Staff Blog. May 5, 2009. http://switchboard.nrdc.org/blogs/amall/oil_and_gas_impacts_on_livesto.html

Noell, Nastassaja. Natural Gas Compressor Station Coats Farmland in Used Gear Oil. Philly IMC. February 2, 2010. http://www.phillyimc.org/en/natural-gas-compressor-station-coats-farmland-used-gear-oil Storey, David, editor. Pennsylvania Quarantine Cattle Over Gas Drilling. Reuters. July 1, 2010. http://www.reuters.com/article/idUSTRE66058L20100701 Vogel, John. Natural Gas Wastewater Puts Cattle At Risk. American Agriculturalist. July 8, 2010. http://www.americanagriculturist.com/story.aspx/natural/gas/wastewater/puts/cattle/at/risk/9/39892 Zerbe, Leah. How Slop From Natural Gas Fracking Could End Up in Your Food. Sewage sludge a common farm fertilizer could be laced with toxic chemicals from natural gas drilling. Rodale. September 27, 2010. http://www.rodale.com/fracking

SHOW ME THE SCIENCE

Adler, R. Toxicosis of Sheep Following Ingestion of Natural Gas Condensate. Department of Toxicology, Marion Merrell Dow, Inc., PO Box 68470, Indianapolis, IN 46268-0470 (USA). Veterinary Pathology January 1992 vol. 29 no. 1 11-20 http://vet.sagepub.com/content/29/1/11.refs Coppock RW, Mostrom MS, Khan AA, Semalulu SS. Toxicology of oil field pollutants in cattle: a review. Environmental Toxicology Research, Alberta Environmental Centre, Vegreville, Canada. Vet Hum Toxicol. 1995 Dec;37(6):569-76. Review.PMID: 8588300 Related citations http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/8588300 Coppock RW, Mostrom MS, Stair EL, Semalulu SS. Toxicopathology of oilfield poisoning in cattle: a review. Environmental Toxicology Research, Alberta Environmental Centre, Canada. Vet Hum Toxicol. 1996 Feb;38(1):36-42. Review.PMID: 8825749 Related citations http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/8825749 Cottle MK, Guidotti TL. Process chemicals in the oil and gas industry: potential occupational hazards. Toxicol Ind Health. 1990 Jan;6(1):41-56. Review.PMID: 2190356 Related citations Dorman DC. Toxicology of selected pesticides, drugs, and chemicals. Petroleum distillates and turpentine. Vet Clin North Am Small Anim Pract. 1990 Mar;20(2):505-13. Review.PMID: 2180192 Related citations Edwards WC, Zinn LL. Diagnosis of petroleum hydrocarbon poisoning in cattle. Vet Med Small Anim Clin. 1979 Oct;74(10):1516-8. No abstract available. PMID: 261009 Related citations Edwards WC, Gregory DG. Livestock poisoning from oil field drilling fluids, muds and additives. Oklahoma Animal Disease Diagnostic Laboratory, College of Veterinary Medicine, Oklahoma State University, Stillwater 74078. Vet Hum Toxicol. 1991 Oct;33(5):502-4. 1746149 Related citations http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/1746149 Edwards WC. Toxicology of oil field wastes. Hazards to livestock associated with the petroleum industry. Department of Veterinary Medicine and Surgery, Oklahoma State University College of Veterinary Medicine, Stillwater. Vet Clin North Am Food Anim Pract. 1989 Jul;5(2):363-74. Review.PMID: 2667711Related citations http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/2667711 Edwards VC, Coppock RW, Zinn LL.. Toxicoses related to the petroleum industry. Vet Hum Toxicol.1979 Oct;21(5):328-37. .PMID: 516361 Related citations http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/516361 GERARDE HW. Toxicologiccal studies on hydrocarbons. IX. The aspiration hazard and toxicity of hydrocarbons and hydrocarbon mixtures. Arch Environ Health. 1963 Mar;6:329-41. PMID: 13947290 http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/13947290 Kerr LA, Edwards WC. Chromate poisoning in livestock from oil field wastes. Vet Hum Toxicol. 1981 Dec;23(6):401-2. PMID: 7336559 http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/7336559

Linden CH. Volatile substances of abuse. Emerg Med Clin North Am. 1990 Aug;8(3):559-78. Review.PMID: 2201521 Related citations MacFarland HN Toxicity of petroleum hydrocarbons. State Art Rev Occup Med 3: 445454, 1988 McCann PM, Cockran M. Characterization of heavy components in natural gas liquids and natural gas. In: Proceedings of the Sixty-fourth Annual Convention of the Gas Processors Assoc, Houston, TX, 18-20 March, pp. 99105, 1985 Meadows DL, Waltner-Toews D. Toxicosis in dairy cattle: was it crude-oil poisoning? Vet Med Small Anim Clin. 1979 Apr;74(4):545-6. No abstract available. PMID: 256379 Related citations Pllumaa L, Maloveryan A, Trapido M, Sillak H, Kahru A. Study of the environmental hazard caused by the oil shale industry solid waste. Altern Lab Anim. 2001 May-Jun;29(3):259-67.PMID: 11387023]Related citations Ranger SF. A case of diesel oil poisoning in a ewe. Vet Rec. 1976 Dec 18-25;99(25-26):508-9. No abstract available. PMID: 1014309 Related citations http://vet.sagepub.com/content/29/1/11.refs?related-urls=yes&legid=spvet;29/1/11 Ritter L, Solomon K, Sibley P, Hall K, Keen P, Mattu G, Linton B. Sources, pathways, and relative risks of contaminants in surface water and groundwater: a perspective prepared for the Walkerton inquiry. J Toxicol Environ Health A. 2002 Jan 11;65(1):1-142. Review.PMID: 11809004 Related citations Seymour FK, Henry JA. Assessment and management of acute poisoning by petroleum products. Hum Exp Toxicol. 2001 Nov;20(11):551-62. Review.PMID: 11926609Related citations Veldre IA, Jnes HJ. Toxicological studies of shale oils, some of their components, and commercial products. Environ Health Perspect. 1979 Jun;30:141-6.PMID: 571802Free text Related citations Waldner, C. L. and C. S. Ribble, E. D. Janzen, and J. R. Campbell. Associations between oil- and gas-well sites, processing facilities, flaring, and beef cattle reproduction and calf mortality in western Canada. Department of Large Animal Clinical Sciences, Western College of Veterinary Medicine, University of Saskatchewan, Saskatoon, Sask., Canada S7N 5B4. Department of Population Medicine, Ontario Veterinary College, University of Guelph, Guelph, Ont., Canada N1G 2W1 Received 6 September 2000; accepted 24 April 2001 Available online 5 July 2001. Wernersson AS. Predicting petroleum phototoxicity. Ecotoxicol Environ Saf. 2003 Mar;54(3):355-65.PMID: 12651192 [PubMed - indexed for MEDLINE]Related citations Winkler JK, Gibbons WJ. Petroleum poisoning in cattle. Mod Vet Pract, pp. 4546, November 1973 Yamada M, Takada H, Toyoda K, Yoshida A, Shibata A, Nomura H, Wada M, Nishimura M, Okamoto K, Ohwada K. Study on the fate of petroleum-derived polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons (PAHs) and the effect of chemical dispersant using an enclosed ecosystem, mesocosm. Mar Pollut Bull. 2003;47(1-6):105-13.PMID: 12787605 Related citations

FENCING REQUIREMENTS (OR LACK THEREOF)

Comparison of Oil and Gas Regulations for Safety and Security in the Intermountain West http://www.oilandgasbmps.org/docs/Public%20Safety%20Comparison.pdf

ANIMAL MORTALITY and DISPOSAL

RISKS
Allen, Donald. Fracking: Lets Get Real. Press Connects. November 21, 2010. Accessible at: http://www.theithacajournal.com/article/20101121/VIEWPOINTS02/11210317/Fracking-Let-039-s-GetReal&template=artsemantics&server=MOC-WN0280 OConnor, Brendon. Comments responding to, Fracking Lets Get Real Email sent November 21, 2010. http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Shaleshock/message/6629 Cabot Oil and Gas Corporation. Form 10-K For the Fiscal Year December 31, 2009. EATON, Leslie and WOMACK, Jason. Gas Blast Rocks Texan Town: Explosion Kills One, Injures Eight, Fuels Debate Over Natural-Gas Production. Wall Street Journal. June 8, 2010. http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052748703303904575293042591061542.html SMITH, Vicki. 7 burned in W.Va. gas well blast likely to survive. KIDK June 7, 2010. http://www.kidk.com/news/national/95803344.html --- Gas Well Ruptures in State Forest. WJACTV.com June 4, 2010 http://www.wjactv.com/news/23792353/detail.html PODGORNEY, Robert. POTENTIAL FOR AIR QUALITY TO LIMIT OIL SHALE DEVELOPMENT IN THE WESTERN UNITED STATES Idaho National Laboratory Arthur Rood, Idaho Falls. 2009. www.oilshalesymposium.com/fileadmin/user_upload/.../PODGORNEY.pdf SOKMAN, Kalmer THE INFLUENCE OF OIL SHALE MINING TO THE ENVIRONMENT OF THE COUNTY IDAVIRUMAA, ESTONIA. Estonian Oil Shale Company, Director of Developing, Jaama 10, 41533, Jhvi, Estonia. 2009. www.oilshalesymposium.com/fileadmin/user_upload/.../SOKMAN.pdf

SOILS and FARMLAND: Contamination, Compaction, Fragmentation

Cornell University. New Test Assesses Gas Drilling Effects on Soils. April 1, 2010. www.Physorg.com Gilpin, R. K., Wagel, D. J. and Solch, J. G. (2005) Production, Distribution, and Fate of Polychlorinated Dibenzo-pDioxins, Dibenzofurans, and Related Organohalogens in the Environment, Dioxins and Health, Second Edition (eds A. Schecter and T. A. Gasiewicz), John Wiley & Sons, Inc., Hoboken, NJ, USA. doi: 10.1002/0471722014.ch2 http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1002/0471722014.ch2/summary Gottlieb, Jeff. Toxic Soil Lurks Beneath Carson Neighborhood. Los Angeles Times. April 27, 2010. http://www.latimes.com/news/local/la-me-carousel-shell-20100427,0,588699.story Lacey, John. Email regarding farm fragmentation impacts. October 13, 2010. Archived at: http://www.mailarchive.com/sustainable_tompkins-l@list.cornell.edu/msg00440.html Land Trust Alliance. Energy Development Threats to Conservation. http://www.landtrustalliance.org/policy/emergingissues/energy-development/energy-development

Mortensen, David A., et al. Forest Roads Facilitate the Spread of Invasive Plants. Invasive Plant Science and Management 2009 2:191199 http://www2.allenpress.com/pdf/ipsm-02-03-191-199.pdf
New York State Department of Agriculture and Markets. Guidelines for Construction and Restoration at Natural Gas Well Drilling Sites in Agricultural Areas. Smith-Heavenrich, Sue. After the Drilling Comes the Pipeline. Broader View Weekly, October 24, 2008. http://www.tiogagaslease.org/images/BVW_10_24_08.pdf

Hoeks, J. Changes in Composition of Soil Air Near Leaks in Natural Gas Mains: The study of influence of natural gas on plantations. Soil Science: January 1972 - Volume 113 - Issue 1 - ppg 46-54 http://journals.lww.com/soilsci/Citation/1972/01000/Changes_in_Composition_of_Soil_Air_Near_Leaks_in.9.aspx R.E. Akpojivi, SPE, and P.E. Akumagba. Title Impact of Gas Flaring on Soil Fertility. Society of Petroleum Engineers. SPE Middle East Oil and Gas Show and Conference, Mar 12 - 15, 2005 2005, Kingdom of Bahrain. 2005. http://www.onepetro.org/mslib/servlet/onepetropreview?id=SPE-93666-MS&soc=SPE Reilly, Conor. Metal Contamination of Food: Its Significance for Food Quality and Human Health, Third Edition. Published Online: 16 NOV 2007 http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1002/9780470995105.fmatter/pdf

WATER QUANTITY
Legere, Laura. Study: Dense Drilling Impacting Watersheds. Standard Speaker. October 17, 2010. http://standardspeaker.com/news/study-dense-drilling-impacting-watersheds-1.1050047 Parsons, Jim. Pa. Streams Drained Dry By Drillers Western Pa. Streams Emptied By Natural Gas Drilling. WTAE ABC Channel 4 The Pittsburgh Channel.com November 13, 2008. http://www.thepittsburghchannel.com/r/17973811/detail.html FERGUSON, Ian M., and MAXWELL, Reed M. HUMAN IMPACTS ON THE HYDROLOGIC CYCLE: COMPARING GLOBAL CLIMATE CHANGE AND LOCAL WATER MANAGEMENT. Geology and Geological Engineering, Colorado School of Mines, 1500 Illinois Street, Golden, CO 80401. Geology and Geologic Engineering, Colorado School of Mines, 1500 Illinois St, Golden, CO 80401 Geological Society of America Abstracts with Programs, Vol. 42, No. 5, p. 40 GAO. ENERGY-WATER NEXUS A Better and Coordinated Understanding of Water Resources Could Help Mitigate the Impacts of Potential Oil Shale Development GAO-11-35 October 2010 http://www.gao.gov/mobile/products/GAO-11-35 HUNT, Randall J., et al, TOWARDS SUSTAINABILITY: SIMULATING HYDROLOGIC AND BIOLOGIC RESPONSE TO LAND USE AND CLIMATE CHANGE Wisconsin Water Science Center, U.S. Geological Survey, 8505 Reaseach Way, Middleton, WI 53562 Geological Society of America Abstracts with Programs, Vol. 42, No. 5, p. 145

CONSUMPTIVE WATER USAGE

CHEMICALS USED
---. Fracking Chemicals To be Used in NY. Email from Elaine Perkus to NYRAD. October 5, 2010. Long, Sandy. Whats in that Fracking Fluid River Reporter. December 4-10, 2008. http://www.riverreporter.com/issues/08-12-04/news-fracking.html and http://www.riverreporter.com/issues/08-1204/fracking.pdf Colborn, Thoe. "Chemicals in Natural Gas Operations"- VIDEO. Available at: http://www.endocrinedisruption.com/chemicals.videoplayer.php

POLLUTION AND PATHWAYS

---. EPA, Powell Barnett Newsletter Agree: Hydraulic fracturing causes gas to penetrate water zone. Dec 21, 2010. http://txsharon.blogspot.com/2010/12/epa-powell-barnett-newsletter-agree.html
Biello, David. What the Frack? Natural Gas from Subterranean Shale Promises U.S. Energy Independence--With Environmental Costs. Scientific American. March 30, 2010 http://www.scientificamerican.com/article.cfm?id=shale-gasand-hydraulic-fracturing Cornell University Cooperative Extension. Marcellus Shale Natural Gas Drilling and Water Quality Issues. Website. Retrieved November 27, 2010. http://waterquality.cce.cornell.edu/naturalgasdrilling.htm Damascus Citizens. Toxic Chemicals Released During Oil and Gas Operations. Handout. http://www.damascuscitizens.org/images/TOXIC_CHEMICALS.pdf Dasseault, Maurice, et al. Why Oil Wells Leak: Cement Behavior and Long Term Consequences. Society of Petroleum Engineers. 2000. http://www.onepetro.org/mslib/servlet/onepetropreview?id=00064733&soc=SPE DEP Bureau of Oil & Gas Management. Stray Natural Gas Migration Associated with Oil and Gas Wells. http://www.dep.state.pa.us/dep/subject/advcoun/oil_gas/2009/Stray%20Gas%20Migration%20Cases.pdf Gashler, Krisy. Experts Question Treated Gas Drilling Fluid. Press Connects. July 9, 2009. Langham, Jay. Supermister: Marcellus Gas Well Activity in Washington County, PA. October 5, 2010. Accessed at: http://un-naturalgas.org/The%20Super%20Mister.pdf Legre, Laura. Hazards Posed by Natural Gas Are Not Limited to Below Ground. Republican Herald. June 21, 2010. http://republicanherald.com/news/hazards-posed-by-natural-gas-drilling-are-not-limited-to-below-ground-1.857445 Mall, Amy. EPA Subpoenas Halliburton, And Why Its Important. Swithboard. NRDC Staff Blog. Posted November 10, 2010. http://switchboard.nrdc.org/blogs/amall/epa_subpoenas_halliburton_and.html

McLendon, Russell. Big frack attack: Is hydraulic fracturing safe? Mother Earth News. Dec 10 2010 http://www.mnn.com/earth-matters/translating-uncle-sam/stories/big-frack-attack-is-hydraulic-fracturingsafe?hpt=Sbin
Northrup, James L. POTENTIAL LEAKS FROM HIGH PRESSURE HYDRO-FRACKING OF SHALE. Otsego 2000. September 8, 2010. http://63.134.196.109/documents/10nov11_edit_NorthrupEPAFinal9-12-10.pdf Northrup, James L. The Unique Environmental Impacts of Horizontally Hydrofracking Shale Gas. http://www.sustainableotsego.org/index.php?option=com_phocadownload&view=category&download=24:uniqueenvironmental-impacts...&id=7:v.-the-risks-of-fracking&Itemid=77 Oil and Gas Accountability Project. Oil and Gas Pollution. Fact Sheet. EARTHWORKS | 1612 K St., NW, Suite 808 | Washington, D.C., USA 20006 January 16. http://www.earthworksaction.org/pubs/Oilandgaspollution.pdf Oil and Gas Acountability Project. Pathways and Sources of Contamination. EARTHWORKS | 1612 K St., NW, Suite 808 | Washington, D.C., USA 20006 http://www.earthworksaction.org/contaminantpathways.cfm Pittsburg Geological Society. Natural Gas Migration Problems in Western Pennsylvania. http://www.pittsburghgeologicalsociety.org/naturalgas.pdf US Geological Survey. Contamination in Fractured Rock Aquifers. Fact Sheet 2007-3074. September 2007. http://pubs.usgs.gov/fs/2007/3074/

Wilber, Tom. Pa. seeks stronger drilling rules to combat methane migration: Problem associated with natural gas exploration. Press Connects. May 23, 2010. http://www.pressconnects.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=20105230346 Rush, Jilda. Gas fracking and cement cracking. Press Connects. April 25, 2010. http://www.pressconnects.com/article/20100425/VIEWPOINTS02/4250308/1120/Gas+fracking+and+cement+cracking

WATER QUALITY
Legere, Laura. Private lab finds toxic chemicals in Dimock water. Times Tribune. September 16, 2010 http://thetimestribune.com/private-lab-finds-toxic-chemicals-in-dimock-water-1.1014476 LOEWENSTEIN, James. Methane found in well water in Monroe Twp. Daily Review. August 12, 2010. http://thedailyreview.com/news/methane-found-in-well-water-in-monroe-twp-1.942868 Lustgarten, Abraham. Buried Secrets: Is Natural Gas Drilling Endangering US Water Supplies? ProPublica. November 13, 2008. http://www.propublica.org/article/buried-secrets-is-natural-gas-drilling-endangering-us-water-supplies-1113 Mayer, Fritz. Dont drink the water: Wyoming well contamination confirmed. River Reporter. Oct 9, 2009. http://www.riverreporter.com/issues/10-09-09/news-contamination.html

Mall, Amy. Incidents where hydraulic fracturing is a suspected cause of drinking water contamination. NRDC Switchboard. December 22, 2010. http://switchboard.nrdc.org/blogs/amall/incidents_where_hydraulic_frac.html
Meeks, Louis. Gas drilling has blighted my life We need energy -- but not at the cost of clean water. October 12. http://www.hcn.org/hcn/wotr/gas-drilling-has-blighted-my-life Penningroth, Stephen Ph.D.. Documenting Contamination of Private Water Supplies by Gas Well Drilling in New York State. Community Science Institute. April 2009. http://communityscience.org/documents/Gas%20wells%20and%20water%20FAQ%20sheet%20%20Documenting%20Contamination.pdf Scott, Michael. Oil and gas drilling's threat to our drinking water is local, national debate. Cleveland.com. February 15, 2010. http://blog.cleveland.com/metro/2010/02/oil_and_gas_drillings_threat_t.html Sumi, Lisa. Drinking Water at Risk. Earthworks Oil and Gas Accountability Project. April 2005. http://www.earthworksaction.org/pubs/DrinkingWaterAtRisk.pdf BIRKHOLZER, Jens T., ZHENG, Liange, SPYCHER, Nicolas, VARADHARAJAN, Charuleka, and NICO, Peter S., . GROUNDWATER QUALITY CHANGES IN RESPONSE TO CO2 LEAKAGE FROM DEEP GEOLOGICAL STORAGE. Geological Society of America Abstracts with Programs, Vol. 42, No. 5, p. 45 Earth Sciences Division, Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory, 1 Cyclotron Road, MS 90-1116, Berkeley, CA 94720, JTBirkholzer@lbl.gov

WASTE WATER DISPOSAL

Gashler, Krisy. Experts Question Treated Gas Drilling Fluid. Press Connects. July 9, 2009. Kasey, Pam. State Needs to Plan for Gas Well Drilling Brine. The State Journal. November 26, 2008. http://www.statejournal.com/story.cfm?func=viewstory&storyid=47274 Kasey, Pam. Pa. Sewage Plants Ordered to Refuse Gas Well Drilling Water. The State Journal. November 13, 2008. http://www.statejournal.com/story.cfm?func=viewstory&storyid=46862 Keister, Timothy Marcellus Hydrofracture Flowback and Production Wastewater Treatment, Recycle, and Disposal Technologies ProChemTech International, Inc.Brockway, PA Presentation at The Science of Marcellus Shale January 29,

2010Hosted by Lycoming College in Williamsport, PA. http://www.prochemtech.com/Literature/Technical/The_Science_of_Marcellus_Shale_Wastewater.pdf Legere, Laura. Gas drillers face tough regulations for treating wastewater. Times Tribune. July 13, 2009. http://thetimestribune.com/news/gas-drillers-face-tough-regulations-for-treating-wastewater-1.113286 Parsons, Jim. Toxic Roads? Pittsburgh Channel.com November 15, 2010. http://www.thepittsburghchannel.com/r/5334068/detail.html Our look at GAS DRILLING WASTEWATER: Flowback and Brine Treatment in Pennsylvania. Website: MarcellusShale.us Accessed Dec 3, 2010. http://www.marcellus-shale.us/drilling_wastewater.htm Joaquin Sapien, Joaquin and Shankman, Sabrina. Drilling Wastewater Disposal Options in N.Y. Report Have Problems of Their Own. ProPublica Dec. 29, 2009. http://www.propublica.org/article/drill-wastewater-disposal-options-in-nyreport-have-problems-1229

SLUDGE and DRILLING MUDS

---. Exploration and Production Waste Management Guidelines. The E & P Forum. September 1993. http://www.deq.state.la.us/portal/Portals/0/permits/sw/ePwaste%20magt%20gdlns%201993.pdf --- Farm Risks. United Sludge Free Alliance. Website accessed November 30, 2010. http://www.usludgefree.org/risk.html ---. Land Application: Land Farming. Drilling Waste Management Information Systems. http://web.ead.anl.gov/dwm/techdesc/land/index.cfm ---. radionuclides and metals oxidizing and mobilizing in the black shale cuttings will be a potentially much

bigger problem than radionuclides in flowback. Email from geologist forwarded on MarcellusGasInfo list. December 17, 2010. 7:14 pm.
Associated Press. Oklahomans Object to Soil Farm. Texarkana Gazette. Feb 22, 2010. http://www.texarkanagazette.com/news/WireHeadlines/2010/02/22/oklahomans-object-to-soil-farm-46.php Bansal, K.M., and Sugiarto, 1999, "Exploration and Production Operations - Waste Management A Comparative Overview: U.S. and Indonesia Cases," SPE 54345, SPE Asia Pacific Oil and Gas Conference, Jakarta, Indonesia, April 20-22. http://www.onepetro.org/mslib/servlet/onepetropreview?id=00054345&soc=SPE Barton, Robert. HVSWHF (High Volume Slick Water Hydraulic Fracturing) waste products. Email correspondence. December 8, 2010. Callahan, M.A., A.J. Stewart, C. Alarcon, and S.J. McMillen, 2002, "Effects of Earthworm (Eisenia Fetida) and Wheat (Triticum Aestivum) Straw Additions on Selected Properties of Petroleum-Contaminated Soils," Environmental Toxicology and Chemistry, Vol. 21, No. 8, pp. 1658-1663. http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1002/etc.5620210817/abstract Cao H, Ikeda S. Exposure assessment of heavy metals resulting from farmland application of wastewater sludge in Tianjin, China: the examination of two existing national standards for soil and farmland-used sludge. University of Tsukuba, Ibaraki, Japan. cao@ecopolis.sk.tsukuba.ac.jp Risk Anal. 2000 Oct;20(5):613-25. http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/11110209 or http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/0272-4332.205056/abstract Cole, E., and S. Mark, 2000, "E&P Waste: Manage It Cost Effectively through Land Farming," World Oil, August Vol. 221, No. 8 http://www.worldoil.com/magazine/magazine_detail.asp?ART_ID=1145#EandP

Harkinson, Josh. Sludge Happens. Recycling sewage into fertilizer might be making us sick. Why doesn't the EPA give a crap? Mother Jones. May/June 2009. http://motherjones.com/environment/2009/05/sludge-happens Hawkes, Alison. Test results of city sludge dont satisfy critics. Way Out West, Bay Area Green News. August 18, 2010 http://www.wayoutwestnews.com/2010/08/18/test-results-of-city-sludge-dont-satisfy-critics/ HYLTON, Susan. Drilling waste feud Tulsa World. March 21, 2010. http://www.tulsaworld.com/news/article.aspx?subjectid=11&articleid=20100321_12_A11_Claudi614404 Marks, Jay. Oil companies dispose of drilling mud in soil farms. NewsOK. December 10, 2010. http://newsok.com/oilcompanies-dispose-of-drilling-mud-in-soil-farms/article/3522455#ixzz17jnmqZ1q McPherson, Barbara. Sewage Sludge On Farmland Can Make You Sick. Now Public. September 11, 2008. http://www.nowpublic.com/environment/sewage-sludge-farmland-can-make-you-sick Smith-Heavenrich, Sue. Sludge Report. A publication of the Northeast Organic Farming Association of New York. 1998. Tioga Gas Watch. Marcellus Shale & Sewage Sludge: Same Sh*t, Different Day. Blog Post Feb 19, 2010. http://tiogagaswatch.blogspot.com/2010/02/marcellus-shale-sewage-sludge-same-sht.html Wilbur, Tom. Questions Raised As Landfill Seeks to Increase Intake of Marcellus Drilling Waste. Star Gazette. March 31, 2010. http://www.stargazette.com/article/20100331/NEWS01/3310383/Questions-raised-as-landfill-seeks-to-increaseintake-of-Marcellus-drilling-waste Zerbe, Lea. How Slop from Natural Gas Fracking Could End Up in Your Food. Rodale Press. Sept 27, 2010. http://www.rodale.com/fracking

HEAVY METALS
Pierzynski, G. M. , Schwab, Arthur Paul . Reducing Heavy Metal Availability to Perennial Grasses and Row-Crops Grown on Contaminated Soils and Mine Spoils Kansas State University EPA Grant Number: R825549C029 EPA Project Officer: Manty, Dale. Center: HSRC (1989) - Great Plains/Rocky Mountain HSRC; Center Director: Erickson, Larry E. October 22, 1990 through February 21, 1993. main center abstract C. Facemire, T. Augspurger, D. Bateman, M. Brim, P. Conzelmann, S. Delchamps, E. Douglas, L. Inmon, K. Looney and F. Lopez, et al. Impacts of mercury contamination in the southeastern United States Water, Air, & Soil Pollution Volume 80, Numbers 1-4, 923-926, DOI: 10.1007/BF01189745 http://www.springerlink.com/content/r01621391jp35460/ K. Fytianos, E. Charantoni and E. Voudrias. Leaching of heavy metals from municipal sewage sludge. Environmental Pollution Control Laboratory, Chemistry Department, University of Thessaloniki, 540 06,Thessaloniki, Greece. Department of Environmental Engineering, Democritus University of Thrace, 671 00, Xanthi, Greece Environment International Volume 24, Issue 4, May 1998, Pages 467-475 HuYuan Zhang, Bao Wang, XingLing Dong, Lei Feng and ZhiMing Fan Leachability of heavy metals from solidified sludge From the issue entitled "Special Topic on Intelligent Manufacturing"Science in China Series E: Technological Sciences Volume 52, Number 7, 1906-1912, DOI: 10.1007/s11431-009-0124-2

RADIOACTIVITY
Goodsell, Martha. Gas Drilling: NY State DEC Meets With Concerned Landowners: Many Questions Remain. Broader View Weekly. July 25, 2008. http://www.tiogagaslease.org/images/BVW_07_25_08.pdf Gray, Peter. NORM Contamination in the Petroleum Industry. SPE, Peter Gray & Assocs. Journal of Petroleum Technology Volume 45, Number 1. January 1993 Pages12-16 Copyright 1993. Society of Petroleum Engineers

Language. Pg. 22880-PA DOI 10.2118/22880-PA. http://www.onepetro.org/mslib/servlet/onepetropreview?id=00022880&soc=SPE Lustgarten, Abrahm. Natural Gas Drilling Produces Radioactive Wastewater. November 9, 2010. http://www.scientificamerican.com/article.cfm?id=marcellus-shale-natural-gas-drilling-radioactive-wastewater MALIZIA, Tracy et al. URANIUM GEOCHEMISTRY IN THE MARCELLUS SHALE: EFFECTS on METAL MOBILIZATION BANK. Geology, SUNY at Buffalo, 411 Cooke Hall, Buffalo, NY 14260, tlbank@buffalo.edu, Department of Geography, Geology, and the Environment, Slippery Rock University, Slippery Rock, PA 16057 Geological Society of America Abstracts with Programs, Vol. 42, No. 5, p. 502 OSHA. Ionizing Radiation. http://www.osha.SLTC/radiationionizing/index.html OSHA. Occupational Exposure to Ionizing Radiation. Code of Federal Register 29CFR Part 1910. Docket No. H-016 RIN 1218-AC11. http://www.osha.gov/pls/oshaweb/owadisp.show_document?p_table=FEDERAL_REGISTER&p_id=18341 OSHA. Radiation Associated with Oil and Natural Gas Production and Processing Facilities. New Orleans Independent Media Center. June 20, 2010. http://neworleans.indymedia.org/news/2010/06/15125.php Resnikoff, Marvin. Radioactivity in Marcellus Shale. Radioactivity Waste Management Association. May 19, 2010. Smith-Heavenrich, Sue. Radioactivity Present in Marcellus Waste. Broader View Weekly, November 26, 2009. http://www.tiogagaslease.org/images/BVW_11_26_09_2.pdf University at Buffalo. Uranium in groundwater? 'Fracking' mobilizes uranium in Marcellus shale. Science Daily. October 27, 2010. http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2010/10/101025172926.htm US EPA. Exemption of Oil and Gas Exploration and Productions Wastes from Federal Hazardous Waste Regulations. http://www.epa.gov/osw/nonhaz/industrial/special/oil/oil-gas.pdf US EPA Radiation Protection Oil and Gas Production Wastes. Website. http://www.epa.gov/radtown/drillingwaste.html US EPA. Radioactive Waste From Oil and Gas Drilling. Office of Radiation and Indoor Air (6608J) EPA 402-F-06-038 | April 2006 http://www.epa.gov/radtown/docs/drilling-waste.pdf US Geological Service. Naturally Occurring Radioactive Materials (NORM) in Produced Water and Oil-Field Equipment An Issue for the Energy Industry. USGS Fact Sheet FS14299. September 1999 van der Heijde HB, Beens H, de Monchy AR. The occurrence of radioactive elements in natural gas. Ecotoxicol Environ Saf. 1977 Jun;1(1):49-87. PMID: 617086 [PubMed - indexed for MEDLINE] http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/617086 Wilbur, Tom. Tests Show High Concentration of Radioactive Waste in Marcellus. Press Connects. December 6, 2009. http://www.theithacajournal.com/article/20091206/NEWS01/912060349/Tests-show-high-concentration-of-radioactivewaste-in-Marcellus

RADON and DRINKING WATER

---. States Taking Action on Radon Limits in Drinking Water. The Ground Water Protection Council Newsletter. December 23, 2010. http://www.gwpc.org/communique/archive/Communique%2012-23-2010.pdf EPA. Proposed Radon in Drinking Water Regulation. Safe Water Drinking Act- Radon. Updated June 4, 2010. http://water.epa.gov/lawsregs/rulesregs/sdwa/radon/regulations.cfm

EPA. Radon in Drinking Water. http://www.epa.gov/radon/rnwater.html Greenblatt, Mark. City of Houston shuts down two radioactive water wells. 11 News I-TEAM (KHOU.com) December 23, 2010. http://www.khou.com/news/investigative/I-TEAM-City-of-Houston-shuts-down-tworadioactive-water-wells-112364389.html VAIDYANATHAN, GAYATHRI States Pursue Radon Limits in Drinking Water as EPA Action Lags. Greenwire. December 7, 2010 http://carbonwaters.org/2010/12/states-pursue-radon-limits-in-drinking-wateras-epa-action-lags/ Also at: http://www.nytimes.com/gwire/2010/12/07/07greenwire-states-pursue-radonlimits-in-drinking-water-a-78542.html Commission on Life Sciences. Risk Assessment of Radon in Drinking Water. Committee on Risk Assessment of Exposure to Radon in Drinking Water. Board on Radiation Effects Research National Research Council NATIONAL ACADEMY PRESS Washington, D.C. 1999 http://www.nap.edu/catalog.php?record_id=6287 CDC. Radon and Drinking Water from Private Wells. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, Atlanta, GA. Last updated May 2010. http://www.cdc.gov/healthywater/drinking/private/wells/disease/radon.html

RADIOACTIVITY AND THE FOOD CHAIN

Al-Kharouf SJ, Al-Hamarneh IF, Dababneh M. Natural radioactivity, dose assessment and uranium uptake by agricultural crops at Khan Al-Zabeeb, Jordan. Royal Scientific Society, Amman 11941, Jordan. J Environ Radioact. 2008 Jul;99(7):1192-9. Epub 2008 Mar 24. PMID: 18359539 [PubMed - indexed for MEDLINE] http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/18359539 Blanco RP, Vera TF, Lozano JC. About the assumption of linearity in soil-to-plant transfer factors for uranium and thorium isotopes and 226Ra. Departamento de Fsica, Facultad de Ciencias, Universidad de Extremadura, Badajoz, Spain. Sci Total Environ. 2002 Feb 4;284(1-3):167-75. PMID: 11846161 [PubMed - indexed for MEDLINE] http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/11846161 Fisenne IM, Perry PM, Decker KM, Keller HW. The daily intake of 234,235,238U, 228,230,232Th and 226,228Ra by New York City residents. Environmental Measurements Laboratory, U.S. Department of Energy, New York, NY 10014. Health Phys. 1987 Oct;53(4):357-63. PMID: 3654223 [PubMed - indexed for MEDLINE] http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/3654223 Forte M, Rusconi R, Margini C, Abbate G, Maltese S, Badalamenti P, Bellinzona S. Determination of uranium isotopes in food and environmental samples by different techniques: a comparison. ARPA Lombardia, Division of Radiological Protection Milan, Italy. Radiat Prot Dosimetry. 2001;97(4):325-8. PMID: 11878412 [PubMed - indexed for MEDLINE] http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/11878412 Hamilton EI. The concentration of uranium in man and his diet. Health Phys. 1972 Feb;22(2):149-53. PMID: 5067039 [PubMed - indexed for MEDLINE] http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/5067039 Harley NH, Fisenne IM. Distribution and alpha radiation dose from naturally occurring U, Th, and Ra in the human skeleton. New York University Medical Center, NY 10016. Health Phys. 1990 Apr;58(4):515-8. PMID: 2323933 [PubMed - indexed for MEDLINE] http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/2323933 Hattemer-Frey HA, Travis CC, Land ML. Benzene: environmental partitioning and human exposure. Lee Wan and Associates, Inc., Oak Ridge, Tennessee 37830. Environ Res. 1990 Dec;53(2):221-32. PMID: 2253601 [PubMed - indexed for MEDLINE] http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/2253601 Isam Salih MM, Pettersson HB, Lund E. Uranium and thorium series radionuclides in drinking water from drilled bedrock wells: correlation to geology and bedrock radioactivity and dose estimation. Department of Radiation Physics, IMV,

Faculty of Health Sciences, Linkping University, Sweden. isam.salih@imv.liu.se Radiat Prot Dosimetry. 2002;102(3):249-58. PMID: 12430963 [PubMed - indexed for MEDLINE] http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/12430963 Izak-Biran T, Schlesinger T, Weingarten R, Even O, Shamai Y, Israeli M. Concentrations of U and Po in animal feed supplements, in poultry meat and in eggs. Radiation Safety Department, Soreq Nuclear Research Center, Yavne, Israel. Health Phys. 1989 Mar;56(3):315-9. PMID: 2917860 [PubMed - indexed for MEDLINE] http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/2917860 Johnson JE, Ward GM, Ennis ME Jr, Boamah KN. Transfer coefficients of selected radionuclides to animal products. I. Comparison of milk and meat from dairy cows and goats. Department of Radiology and Radiation Biology, Colorado State University, Fort Collins 80523. Health Phys. 1988 Feb;54(2):161-6. PMID: 3338913 [PubMed - indexed for MEDLINE] http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/3338913 Mordberg EL, Aleksandruk VM, Kovygin GF, Sheuchenko II, Bliumshten VM. Passage of uranium-radium series isotopes into the grain of some agricultural crops. Gig Sanit. 1976 Feb;0(2):58-61. PMID: 964626 [PubMed - indexed for MEDLINE] http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/964626 Mullen AL, Stanley RE, Moghissi AA. Absorption, distribution and milk secretion of radionuclides by the dairy cow. II. Radiorubidium. Health Phys. 1973 Apr;24(4):417-27. PMID: 4698184 [PubMed - indexed for MEDLINE] Mullen AL, Bretthauer EW, Stanley RE. Absorption, distribution and milk secretion of radionuclides by the dairy cow--V. Radiotungsten. Health Phys. 1976 Nov;31(5):417-24. PMID: 1002478 [PubMed - indexed for MEDLINE] http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/1002478 Pulhani VA, Dafauti S, Hegde AG, Sharma RM, Mishra UC. Uptake and distribution of natural radioactivity in wheat plants from soil. Health Physics Division, Bhabha Atomic Research Centre, Mumbai, India. vanpulh@magnum.barc.ernet.inJ Environ Radioact. 2005;79(3):331-46. http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/15607519 Rajaretnam G, Spitz HB. Effect of leachability on environmental risk assessment for naturally occurring radioactive materials in petroleum oil fields. University of Cincinnati, Department of Mechanical, Industrial, and Nuclear Engineering, OH 45221-0072, USA. Health Phys. 2000 Feb;78(2):191-8. PMID: 10647985 [PubMed - indexed for MEDLINE] http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/10647985 Rayno DR. Estimated dose to man from uranium milling via the beef/milk food-chain pathway. PMID: 6362004 [PubMed - indexed for MEDLINE] Sci Total Environ. 1983 Dec 1;31(3):219-41. http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/6362004 Rope SK, Whicker FW. A field study of Ra accumulation in trout with assessment of radiation dose to man. Health Phys. 1985 Aug;49(2):247-57. PMID: 4019196 [PubMed - indexed for MEDLINE] http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/4019196 Vandenhove H, Olyslaegers G, Sanzharova N, Shubina O, Reed E, Shang Z, Velasco H. Proposal for new best estimates of the soil-to-plant transfer factor of U, Th, Ra, Pb and Po. Belgian Nuclear Research Centre, Biosphere Impact Studies, Mol, Belgium. hvandenh@sckcen.be J Environ Radioact. 2009 Sep;100(9):721-32. Epub 2008 Dec 5. PMID: 19058886 [PubMed - indexed for MEDLINE] http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/19058886 Vera Tome F, Blanco Rodrguez MP, Lozano JC. Soil-to-plant transfer factors for natural radionuclides and stable elements in a Mediterranean area. Departamento de Fsica, Facultad de Ciencias, Universidad de Extremadura, 06071Badajoz, Spain. fvt@unex.es J Environ Radioact. 2003;65(2):161-75. PMID: 12527233 [PubMed - indexed for MEDLINE] http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/12527233 * Askinazi EI. [Evaluation of magnesium, calcium and 226Ra uptake from soils into agricultural plants] [Article in Russian] Gig Sanit 1988 Jan;(1):37-9. PMID: 3350364 [PubMed - indexed for MEDLINE] http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/3350364

* Belova RS, Lun'kina ZP. [Radium and uranium levels in food products and the accumulation of these elements in the teeth of humans] [Article in Russian] Gig Sanit. 1967 Jun;32(6):48-51. PMID: 4236781 [PubMed - indexed for MEDLINE] http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/4236781 * Frindik O. Thorium amd uranium in food of animal origin. [Article in German] Bundesforschungsanstalt fr Ernhrung, Zentrallaboratorium fr Isotopentechnik, Karlsruhe, Bundesrepublik Deutschland. Z Lebensm Unters Forsch. 1992 Apr;194(4):377-80. PMID: 1598792 [PubMed - indexed for MEDLINE] http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/1598792 * Kirchmann R, Lafontaine A, van den Hoek J, Koch G. [Comparison of the level of transfer to cow's milk of Ra-226 from drinking water and of Ra-226 incorporated in hay] [Article in French] C R Seances Soc Biol Fil. 1972;166(11):155762.PMID: 4667375 [PubMed - indexed for MEDLINE] * Kuroda K. [Distribution of naturally occurring radionuclides belonging to the uranium decay series. 4. RA226 content of food] [Article in Japanese] Igaku To Seibutsugaku. 1968 Jan 10;76(1):31-3. PMID: 5692193 [PubMed - indexed for MEDLINE] http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/5692193 * Popovi V. [Study of radioactive contamination of the environment with special reference to the effect of food on carrying radioactive material into the body] [Article in Croatian] Arh Hig Rada Toksikol. 1968;19(3):359-71. PMID: 5200051 [PubMed - indexed for MEDLINE] http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/5200051 * Vasilenko IIa. [Food products--sources of radionuclide uptake into the human body] [Article in Russian] Vopr Pitan. 1986 Mar-Apr;(2):3-8. PMID: 3518240 [PubMed - indexed for MEDLINE] http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/3518240 ** The abstracts of these studies support the concern about radioactivity in the foodshed; however, the entire paper is not written in a language I can read and understand.

OZONE AND VOLATILE ORGANIC COMPOUNDS

Crane, Stephen. County to receive big EPA bucks. Pinedale Roundup. July 9, 2009. http://www.pinedaleroundup.com/V2_news_articles.php?heading=0&story_id=1164&page=72 Eisenfeld, Mike et al. Toxic Soup of Harmful Chemicals Found in the Air Near Schools and Homes in the Four Corners. Global Community Monitor. November 4, 2010. http://www.gcmonitor.org/article.php?id=1109 EPA. EPA Finalizes Greenhouse Gas Reporting Requirements for Petroleum and Natural Gas Industry November 9, 2010 Press Release available at: .http://yosemite.epa.gov/opa/admpress.nsf/6427a6b7538955c585257359003f0230/8518e9bdc820460a852577d600591852 !OpenDocument Requirements at: http://www.epa.gov/climatechange/emissions/ghgrulemaking.html Evans, Brandon. Flight for survival Toxic emissions force family to leave home. Wise County Messenger. September 23, 2010 http://www.wcmessenger.com/news/content/EklVEZEyuVBmtmajzo.php Falchek, David. As water worries mount, researcher says Marcellus Shale poses risk to air. Times Tribune. July 31, 2010 http://thetimes-tribune.com/news/as-water-worries-mount-researcher-says-marcellus-shale-poses-risk-to-air-1.912761 Farr, Derek. Ultra cited for air-quality violations. Sublette Examiner. June, 29, 2009. http://www.subletteexaminer.com/V2_news_articles.php?heading=0&story_id=1210&page=72 United States Government Accountability Office. FEDERAL OIL AND GAS LEASES: Opportunities Exist to Capture Vented and Flared Natural Gas, Which Would Increase Royalty Payments and Reduce Greenhouse Gases. Report to Congressional Requesters. GAO-11-34. October 2010. http://www.gao.gov/highlights/d1134high.pdf

Milbourn, Cathy. EPA Finalizes Greenhouse Gas Reporting Requirements for Petroleum and Natural Gas Industry/Reporting targets methane, a potent greenhouse gas and valuable fuel. US EPA Press Release. November 9, 2010. http://yosemite.epa.gov/opa/admpress.nsf/6427a6b7538955c585257359003f0230/8518e9bdc820460a852577d600591852! OpenDocument Nichols, Jeremy. Citizen Petition to Designate the Sublette County Area of Wyoming as Nonattainment for the 8-Hour Ozone National Ambient Air Quality Standard., Rocky Mountain Clean Air Action, on behalf of a number of organizations and citizens. June 14, 2008. http://www.wyomingoutdoorcouncil.org/html/what_we_do/air_quality/pdfs/Wyoming%20Nonattainment%20Petition.pdf NOx 2008 emission link: http://www.ahs2.dep.state.pa.us/eFACTSWeb/criteria_facilityemissions.aspx Weiss, Jim. Components of Natural Gas and their density. Email to the NYGCG yahoo group. Thursday, September 23, 2010 10:21 PM. http://groups.google.com/group/nygcg---new-york-gas-coordinationgroup/browse_thread/thread/9e93b8d94c21a614/b4e63c1da337357f?hl=en&lnk=gst&q=September+23#b4e63c1da33735 7f California EPA. Ozone and Health: Overview of the harmful health effects of ground level ozone. SACRAMENTO CA DSLPMM-01 REVISED May 30, 2008. http://www.arb.ca.gov/research/aaqs/caaqs/ozone/ozone-fs.pdf USDA ARS. Effects of Ozone Air Pollution on Plants. Website. Accessed December 2, 2010. http://www.ars.usda.gov/Main/docs.htm?docid=12462 . Available as a pdf at: http://www.rst2.edu/ties/ozone/university/ozonepdfs/1g27.pdf

Show me the science

Booker, Fitzgerald and Russell Muntifering, Margaret McGrath, Kent Burkey, Dennis Decoteau, Edwin Fiscus, William Manning, Sagar Krupa, Arthur Chappelka, and David Grantz. The Ozone Component of Global Change: Potential Effects on Agricultural and Horticultural Plant Yield, Product Quality, and Interactions with Invasive Species. Journal of Integrative Plant Biology 51(4): 337351. 2009. http://www.cals.cornell.edu/cals/plpath/upload/plpa_Bookeretal_O3review-JIPB09.pdf Cornell University. Effects of Ozone Pollution Threatens Ag Production on Long Island. Science Daily. August 22, 2000. http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2000/08/000816073609.htm Fiscus, EL, FL Booker, KO Burkey. 2005. Crop responses to ozone: uptake, modes of action, carbon assimilation and partitioning. Plant, Cell and Environment 28:997-1011. http://fnicsearch.nal.usda.gov/bitstream/10113/35187/1/IND43733887.pdf Fishman, J, JK Creilson, PA Parker, EA Ainsworth, GG Vining, J Szarka, FL Booker and X Xu. 2010. An investigation of widespread ozone damage to the soybean crop in the upper Midwest determined from ground-based and satellite measurements. Atmospheric Environment 44:2248-2256. http://www.ars.usda.gov/SP2UserFiles/ad_hoc/66452500Publications/Booker/FishmanBookerSoybeanMidwestO3Atmos Environ10.pdf Grantz, David. Ozone Reduces Crop Yields and Alters Competition with Weeds. California Agriculture UC Riverside. April June 2005. http://www.ncsu.edu/project/usda-ne-1013/GrantzAnilCalifAg05.pdf Heagle, AS. 1989. Ozone and crop yield. Annual Review of Phytopathology 27:397-423. http://www.annualreviews.org/doi/abs/10.1146/annurev.py.27.090189.002145 Heck, WW, AS Heagle, DS Shriner. 1986. Effects on Vegetation: Native, Crops, Forests. In: Air Pollution. 3rd Ed., Vol. VI. Supplement to Air Pollutants, Their Transformation, Transport and Effects. AC Stern, ed., pp. 248-333. Academic Press, New York, NY.

Howarth, Robert W DRAFT Preliminary Assessment of the Greenhouse Gas Emissions from Natural Gas obtained by Hydraulic Fracturing. Cornell University. April 2010. http://www.technologyreview.com/blog/energy/files/39646/GHG.emissions.from.Marcellus.Shale.April12010%20draft.p df Howarth, Robert W. Assessment of the Greenhouse Gas Footprint of Natural Gas from Shale Formations Obtained by High-Volume, Slick-Water Hydraulic Fracturing. Cornell University Department of Ecology and Evolutionary Biology. November15, 2010 http://www.eeb.cornell.edu/howarth/GHG%20emissions%20from%20Marcellus%20--%20November%202010.pdf Howitt, Richard E., Thomas W. Gossard, and Richard M. Adams. The economic effects of air pollution on annual crops. California Agriculture. 1985. http://ucce.ucdavis.edu/files/repositoryfiles/ca3903p22-62857.pdf Jrg Fuhrer. Ozone risk for crops and pastures in present and future climates. Air Pollution/Climate Group, Agroscope Research Station ART, Reckenholzstrasse 191, CH-8046 Zurich, Switzerland November 2008. http://kfrserver.natur.cuni.cz/global/pdf/3_B_FUHRER_ozone_crops_climate.pdf Krupa, S, MT McGrath, C Andersen, FL Booker, KO Burkey, A Chappelka, B Chevone, E Pell, B Zilinskas. 2001. Ambient ozone and plant health. Plant Disease 85:4-17. http://apsjournals.apsnet.org/doi/abs/10.1094/PDIS.2001.85.1.4

ENDOCRINE DISRUPTORS:
Colborn, Theo, PhD. "What You Need to Know About Natural Gas Production" TEDX Vidoe. http://www.endocrinedisruption.com/chemicals.videoplayer.php Petteway, Latisha. EPA to Expand Chemicals Testing for Endocrine Disruption. EPA Press Release. November 16, 2010 http://yosemite.epa.gov/opa/admpress.nsf/0/5F77E9903C4E2E48852577DD005BC7CE

SILICA SAND AND DUST

NOISE
Noise Pollution Clearinghouse. http://www.nonoise.org/epa/index.htm Earthworks. Noise Resources. http://www.earthworksaction.org/noiseresources.cfm --- What Does Noise Affect? Noisequest. Accessed October 30, 2010. http://www.noisequest.psu.edu/pmwiki.php?n=NoiseAffect.Domestic Algers, B., I. Ekesbo, and S. Stromberg. 1978. The impact of continuous noise on animal health. Acta Vet. Scand. Suppl. 67. 26 pp. Ames, D.R. 1978. Physiological responses to auditory stimuli. Pages 23-45 in J.L. Fletcher and R. G. Busnel, eds. Effects of noise on wildlife. Academic Press, New York.

Ames, D. R.and L. A. Arehart. Physiological Response of Lambs to Auditory Stimuli. Kansas State University, Manhattan 66502 J. Anim Sci. 1972. 34:994-998. 1972 American Society of Animal Science http://jas.fass.org/cgi/reprint/34/6/994?maxtoshow=&hits=40&RESULTFORMAT=&andorexacttitle=and&titleabstract=n oise%3B+sound&andorexacttitleabs=or&andorexactfulltext=and&searchid=1&FIRSTINDEX=0&sortspec=relevance&fd ate=//&resourcetype=HWCIT Ames, D.R. 1971. Thyroid responses to sound stress. J. Anim. Sci. 33:247. Arehart, L. A.and D. R. Ames. Performance of Early-Weaned Lambs as Affected by Sound Type and Intensity. Kansas State University, Manhattan, Kansas 66502 J. Anim Sci. 1972. 35:481-485. 1972 American Society of Animal Science http://jas.fass.org/cgi/content/abstract/35/2/481?maxtoshow=&hits=10&RESULTFORMAT=&fulltext=noise&searchid=1 &FIRSTINDEX=0&resourcetype=HWCIT Anthony, A., and E. Ackerman. 1957. Biological effects of noise in vertebrate animals. Tech. Rep. 57-647. Wright Air Develop. Center, Wright-Patterson Air Force Base, Ohio. 98 pp. Bond, J., T.S. Rumsey, J.R. Menear, L.I. Colber, D. Kern, and B.T. Weinland. 1974. Effects of simulated sonic booms on eating patterns, feed intake, and behavioral activity of ponies and beef cattle. Pages 170-175 in Proceedings of the International Livestock Environment Symposium, University of Nebraska, Lincoln. Am. Soc. Agric. Eng., St. Joseph, MI. Bromley, M. 1985. Wildlife management implications of petroleum exploration and development in wildland environments. General Tech. Rep. INT-191. U.S. Dep. Agric., Forest Serv., Intermountain Res. Sta., Ogden, Utah. 42 pp. Broucek, J., M. Kovalcikova, and K. Kovalcik. 1983. The effect of noise on the biochemical characteristics of blood in dairy cows. Zivoc. Vyr. 28(4):261-267. Espmark, Y., L. Falt, and B. Falt. 1974. Behavioral responses in cattle and sheep exposed to sonic booms and low-altitude subsonic flight noise. Vet. Rec. 94(6):106-113. Ewbank, R. 1977. The effects of sonic booms on farm animals. Vet. Annual 17:296-306. Fell, R.D., C.J. Ellis, and D.R. Griffith. 1976. Thyroid responses to acoustic stimulation. Environ. Res. 12:208-213. Gunn, W.W.H., and J.A. Livingston, eds. 1974. Disturbance to birds by gas compressor noise simulators, aircraft, and human activity in the Mackenzie Valley and the North Slope, 1972. Arct. Gas Biol. Rep. Ser. 14. 280 pp. Harbers, L.H., D.R. Ames, A.B. Davis, and M.B. Ahmed. 1975. Digestive responses of sheep to auditory stimuli. J. Anim. Sci. 41:654-658. Hanson, Carl E.. High-Speed Train Noise Effects on Livestock and Wildlife. Harris Miller Miller & Hanson Inc. Burlington, MA http://www.itre.ncsu.edu/adc10/PDFs/2007_Winter_Conference/session507/HighSpeed_Train_Noise_Effects_on_Livestock_and_Wildlife.pdf Hrubes, V., and V. Benes. 1965. The influence of repeated noise stress on rats. Acta Biol. Med. German. 15:592-596. [English summary.] Kovalcik, K., and J. Sottnik. 1971. The effect of noise on the milk efficiency of cows. Zivocisna Vyroba 16:795-804. Nayfield, K.C. and E.L. Besch. 1981. Comparative response of rabbits and rats to elevated noise. Lab. Anim. Sci. 31(4):386-390. Peterson, E.A., J.S. Augenstein, D.C. Tanis, and D.G. Augenstein. 1981. Noise raises blood pressure without impairing auditory sensitivity. Sci. 211:1450-1452.

Rennison, D.C., and A.K. Wallace. 1976. The extent of acoustic influence of off-road vehicles in wilderness areas. Pages 169-183 in J.P. Wood and R.W. Robertson, eds. Off-road vehicles: some policy, planning, and management considerations. Proc. Natl. Symposium on Off-road Vehicles in Australia, Australian Inst. of Parks and Recreation, Northcote, Victory, Australia. Sackler, A.M., A.S. Weltman, M. Bradshaw, and P. Jurtshuk, Jr.1959. Endocrine changes due to auditory stress. Acta Endocrin. 31:405-418. Shepherd, J.G., and J.W. Horwood. 1979. The sensitivity of exploited populations to environmental "noise", and the implications for management. J. Cons. Int. Explor. Mer. 38:318-323. Stadelman, W.J. 1958. Observations with growing chickens on the effects of sounds of varying intensities. Poult. Sci. 37:776-779. Stadelman, W.J. 1958. The effect of sounds of varying intensity on hatchability of chicken eggs. Poult. Sci. 37:166-169.

SONG BIRDS and BENEFICIAL INSECTS

ECONOMIC CONCERNS
Barth, Jannette M. Unanswered Questions About The Economic Impact of Gas Drilling In the Marcellus Shale: Dont Jump to Conclusions. JM Barth & Associates, Inc. March 22, 2010. http://occainfo.org/documents/Economicpaper.pdf Berman, Arthur E. Shale gasAbundance or mirage? Why the Marcellus Shale will disappoint expectations. The Oil Drum. October 28, 2010. http://www.energybulletin.net/stories/2010-10-28/shale-gasabundance-or-mirage-whymarcellus-shale-will-disappoint-expectations Brundage, Tracy L. et al. Marcellus Shale Workforce Needs Assessment: Southwest Pennsylvania Counties of Beaver, Washington, Greene, Fayette, and Westmoreland. Marcellus Shale Education & Training Center. June 2010. http://www.msetc.org/docs/NeedsAssessmentwithcoverSW.pdf Coffman, Steve. QUESTIONS YOU NEED TO ASK ABOUT HYDROFRACKING IN OUR FINGER LAKES. http://www.preservethefingerlakes.com/id60.html Coffman, Steve. The Real Cost of Hydrofracking. http://catskillcitizens.org/learnmore/REALCOST.PDF Cohen, Dave. Betting the House on Shale Gas. Decline of the Empire Blog. March 28, 2010. http://www.declineoftheempire.com/2010/03/betting-the-house-on-shale-gas.html Cohen, Dave. Shale Gas Shenanigans. Decline of the Empire Blog. March 29, 2010. http://www.declineoftheempire.com/2010/03/index.html Cohen, Dave. The Shale Gas Shell Game. Decline of the Empire Blog. November 16, 2010. http://www.declineoftheempire.com/2010/11/the-shale-gas-shell-game.html Considine, Timothy J. The Economic Impacts of the Marcellus Shale: Implications for New York, Pennsylvania, and West Virginia. A Report to The American Petroleum Institute. July 14, 2010. http://www.api.org/policy/exploration/hydraulicfracturing/upload/API%20Economic%20Impacts%20Marcellus%20Shale .pdf

Fields, Linda. Houses for Shale. The Pike County Courier. June 3, 2010. http://www.strausnews.com/articles/2010/06/08/pike_county_courier/news/1.txt Hall CA, Cleveland CJ. Petroleum drilling and production in the United States: yield per effort and net energy analysis. Science. 1981 Feb 6;211(4482):576-9.PMID: 17840957 Related citations Headwaters Economics. Fossil Fuel Extraction as a County Economic Development Strategy Are Energy-focusing Counties Benefiting? Energy and the West Series. September, 2008 - Revised July 11, 2009. http://www.headwaterseconomics.org/energy/HeadwatersEconomics_EnergyFocusing.pdf Jacquet, Jeffrey. Energy Boomtowns & Natural Gas: Implications for Marcellus Shale Local Governments & Rural Communities. NERCRD (Northeast Regional Center for Rural Development Rural Development) Paper No. 43. January 2009. http://nercrd.psu.edu/Publications/rdppapers/rdp43.pdf Jacquet, Jeffrey. Community and Economic Impacts Of Marcellus Shale Natural Gas Development. Cornell Cooperative Extension Department of Natural Resources. Webinar May 12th, 2010 http://cce.cornell.edu/EnergyClimateChange/NaturalGasDev/Documents/PDFs/CCE%20Webinar%20social%20and%20e conomic%20impacts%20051210.pdf Jacquet, Jeffrey. Economic Impacts of Natural Gas Development In Wyoming. 2008 Annual Meeting of Tioga County Cornell Cooperative Extension. Power point presentation December 8th 2008. Jacquet, Jeffrey. Wyoming Boomtowns: Local Government Impacts & Natural Gas Drilling. Natural Gas Drilling and Local Government Workshop Penn State University. November 18th 2008. http://catskillcitizens.org/learnmore/SUBLETTEECON.pdf Kelsey, Timothy W. Potential Economic Impacts of Marcellus Shale in Pennsylvania: Reflections on the Perryman Group Analysis from Texas. Penn State Cooperative Extension. Kosnik, Renee Lewis. The Oil and Gas Industrys Exclusions and Exemptions to Major Environmental Statutes Earthworks Oil and Gas Accountability Project. Oct 2007. http://www.earthworksaction.org/pubs/PetroleumExemptions1c.pdf Legere, Laura. Study pegs $18B impact from gas drilling; critics say it ignores environmental costs. Times Tribune. May 26, 2010. http://thetimes-tribune.com/study-pegs-18b-impact-from-gas-drilling-critics-say-it-ignores-environmentalcosts-1.813827 Lowenstein, James. "Bradford County Placing Kids in Foster Care Due to Housing Shortage." The Daily Review (Towanda, PA). July 29, 2010. http://thedailyreview.com/news/bradford-county-placing-kids-in-foster-care-due-tohousing-shortage-1.908485 Nearing, Brian. Energy Busts Create Mess. Times Union. November 8, 2010. http://www.timesunion.com/local/article/Energy-busts-create-mess-801773.php Skrapits, Elizabeth. So far, gas jobs mainly in related fields. The Times Tribune, November 7, 2010. http://thetimestribune.com/news/so-far-gas-jobs-mainly-in-related-fields-1.1060490 Slottje, Helen. We know of no insurance carrier that would provide coverage in this instance. http://un-naturalgas.org/weblog/2010/03/a-we-know-of-no-insurance-carrier-that-would-provide-coverage-in-thisinstance/ Smith-Heavenrich, Sue. Tabulating True Costs of Gas Drilling. Tompkins Weekly. April 12, 2010. http://ithaca.wishingwellmagazine.org/blogs/tompkins-weekly/2010/04/tabulating-true-costs-gas-drilling Smith-Heavenrich, Sue. Three Bedrooms, Two Baths, and a Gas Lease. Broader View Weekly, March 20, 2009. http://www.tiogagaslease.org/images/BVW_03_20_09.pdf

Sweeney, Mary Beth et al. League of Women Voters of Pennsylvania. Marcellus Shale Natural Gas Extraction Study 2009-2010 Study Guide III: MARCELLUS SHALE NATURAL GAS EXTRACTION: ITS ECONOMIC IMPACT. http://palwv.org/issues/MarcellusShale/Marcellus%20Shale%20Study%20Guide%20III%20%20Economic%20Impact.pdf Swift, Robert (Harrisburg Bureau Chief) State officials cite increased crime, road damage as negative drilling impacts. Times Tribune. May 26, 2010 http://thetimes-tribune.com/state-officials-cite-increased-crime-road-damage-as-negativedrilling-impacts-1.813093 The Perryman Group. Drilling for Dollars: An Assessment of the Ongoing and Expanding Economic Impact of Activity in the Barnett Shale on Fort Worth and the Surrounding Area. March 2008. www.bseec.org/images/summaryreport.pdf Toland, Bill. Where Are All the Marcellus Shale Jobs? Pittsburgh Post-Gazette. April 09, 2010. http://www.damascuscitizens.org/Economic.html Tompkins County Gas Map. Economic and Social Costs of Gas Drilling. May 5. 2010. Wilbur, Tom. New report shows natural gas economic impact will be minimal. Press and Sun Bulletin. April 01, 2010. http://www.stargazette.com/article/20100401/NEWS01/4010400/New-report-shows-natural-gas-economic-impact-willbe-minimal

HEALTH IMPACTS
Colborn, Theo, PhD., et al. Natural Gas Operations from a Public Health Perspective. International Journal of Human and Ecological Risk Assessment. Sep 4, 2010.

Collaborative on Health and the Environment. Fracking: Implications for Human and Environmental Health. Partnership Call. Nov 9, 2010 http://www.healthandenvironment.org/partnership_calls/8138 Colson, John. Link between mans cancer, fracing fluids questioned Glenwood Springs Post Independent. Sep 2010.http://www.postindependent.com/article/20100925/VALLEYNEWS/100929911/1083&ParentProfile=107 4
Earthworks. Health Survey Results of Current and Former DISH/ Clark County Residents. Earthworks Oil and Gas Accountability Project. Earthworks. Public Health and Toxics Oil and Gas Accountability Project (OGAP) website. http://www.earthworksaction.org/Health%20and%20Toxics.cfm

Evans, Brandon. Toxic emissions force family to leave home. WCMessenger. September 23, 2010 http://www.wcmessenger.com/news/content/EklVEZEyuVBmtmajzo.php
HEINKEL-WOLFE, Peggy. Tests detect Barnett Shale emissions toxins in DISH residents' blood, urine. Denton RecordChronicle April 15, 2010. http://www.dallasnews.com/sharedcontent/dws/news/localnews/stories/041310dnmetdishtoxins.2437d1dcf.html

Hopey, Don and David Templeton. Region at risk: Can higher rates of death be linked to air pollution? Pittsburgh Post-Gazette. December 12, 2010. http://www.post-gazette.com/pg/10346/1109168114.stm#ixzz1AHLcTUBD
London, Eric. Electronic letter to EPA Re: Hydraulic Fracturing Study Comments. September 27, 2010.

Mall, Amy. Protecting Western Communities from the Health and Environmental Effects of Oil and Gas Production. Drilling Down. Natural Resource Defense Council. October 2007. http://www.nrdc.org/land/use/down/down.pdf Occupational Hazards in Oil and Gas Industry http://www.slideshare.net/mechportal/occupational-hazards Rom WN, Lee JS, Craft BF. Occupational and environmental health problems of the developing oil shale industry. Am J Ind Med. 1981;2(3):247-60. PMID: 6285698 http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/6285698

Shaw, William PhD The Unique Vulnerability of the Human Brain to Toxic Chemical Exposure and the Importance of Toxic Chemical Evaluation and Treatment in Orthomolecular Psychiatry. Journal of Orthomolecular Medicine Vol 25, No 3, 2010. http://www.orthomed.org/jom/jomcurrent.html
Volzke, Henry. Occupational Exposure to Ionizing Radiation Is Associated with Autoimmune Thyroid Disease. Journal of Clinical Endocrinology and Metabolism. Vol 90 No. 8 4587-4502. 2005. Witter, Roxana MD, MSPH. Potential Exposure-Related Human Health Effects of Oil and Gas Development. Colorado School of Public Health University of Colorado Denver. August 1, 2008. http://docs.nrdc.org/health/files/hea_08091702a.pdf Macintyre EA, Karr CJ, Koehoorn M, Demers PA, Tamburic L, Lencar C, Brauer M. Residential Air Pollution and Otitis Media During the First Two Years of Life. Epidemiology. 2010 Oct 27. [Epub ahead of print] http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/21030866

GENERAL RESOURCES
Arnold, Carl. No Regulation Can. Email sent November 15, 2010 Clark, Bryan M. Dirty Drilling: The Threat of Oil and Gas Drilling in Lake Erie. Ohio PIRG Education Fund Policy Paper. January 2002. Food and Water Watch. Not So Fast Natural Gas: Why Accelerating Risky Drilling Threatens Americas Water. July 2010. http://www.foodandwaterwatch.org/water/report/natural-gas/view-in-full/ Hazen and Sawyer. DEP Briefing to the NYC Water Board on the Natural Gas Impact Assessment Project. September 25, 2009. http://www.nyc.gov/html/dep/pdf/natural_gas_drilling/dep_natural_gas_impact_assessment_project_briefing09252009.pd f Hazen and Sawyer. Final Impact Assessment Report: Impact Assessment of Gas of Natural Gas Production in the New York City Water Supply Watershed; December 2009. Hazen and Sawyer. The Threat From HydroFracking. Journal AWWA September 2010. http://www.hazenandsawyer.com/uploads/files/The_Threat_From_Hydrofracking.pdf Horwitt, Dusty. Drilling Around the Law. Environmental Working Group. 2009. http://www.ewg.org/files/EWG2009drillingaroundthelaw.pdf Koop, Will. ENCANAS CABIN NOT SO HOMEY: CUMULATIVE ENVIRONMENTAL EFFECTS AN UNFOLDING AND EMERGING CRISIS IN NORTHEASTERN BRITISH COLUMBIAS SHALE GAS PLAYS AN INTRODUCTORY JOURNEY INTO BCs DIRTY DOMINO ZONE. B.C. Tap Water Alliance. November 9, 2010. http://www.bctwa.org/FrkBC-EnCanasCabin-Nov9-2010.pdf

Lewis, Kevin. A Broad Look at the Environmental Issues of Natural Gas Drilling. Meredith Landowner Coalition. Good Times, Bad Times: A Residents Guide to Gas Drilling. Issue #1. Spring 2010. http://www.meredith-coalition.org/gas-news-1.pdf Meredith Landowner Coalition. Good Times, Bad Times: A Residents Guide to Gas Drilling. Issue #3. Autumn 2010. http://www.meredith-coalition.org/gas-news3-web.pdf Michaels, Craig; with James L. Simpson and William Wegner. Fractured Communities. Case Studies of the Environmental Impact of Gas Drilling. Riverkeeper. September 2010. http://www.riverkeeper.org/wpcontent/uploads/2010/09/Fractured-Communities-FINAL-September-2010.pdf Moss, Kerry. Potential Development of the Natural Gas Resources in the Marcellus Shale New York, Pennsylvania, West Virginia, and Ohio. National Park Service. December 11, 2008. http://fli.hws.edu/marcellus/NatParkService-GRD-M-Shale_12-11-2008_view.pdf Myers, Robert. Environmental Dangers of Hydro-Fracturing the Marcellus Shale. Lockhaven University. Website accessed November 29, 2010. http://www.lhup.edu/rmyers3/marcellus.htm National Geographic Special Report: The Great Shale Rush. Oct 7, 2010. Accessed at: http://news.nationalgeographic.com/news/energy/2010/10/101022-energy-marcellus-shale-gas-rush/ Parfitt, Ben. FRACTURE LINES: Will Canadas Water be Protected in the Rush to Develop Shale Gas? For the Program on Water Issues. Munk School of Global Affairs at the University of Toronto. September 15, 2010 http://beta.images.theglobeandmail.com/archive/00942/Fractured_Lines_942842a.pdf Penningroth, Stephen. Letter to the NYSDEC Division of Mineral Resources Bureau of Oil and Gas Regulation Subject: Comments on draft scoping document for Draft Supplemental Generic Environmental Impact Statement on Oil and Gas Drilling. December 9, 2008. http://communityscience.org/documents/Gas%20Wells%20%20Comments%20on%20scoping%20document%20for%20dSGEIS,%20Dec.pdf Riverkeeper, Inc. Industrial Gas Drilling Reporter - Vol. 1. June 15, 2009. http://www.cwconline.org/news/riverkeeper_gas_report_1.pdf Sportsmen for Responsible Energy Development. Recommendations for Responsible Oil and Gas Development. 2008. http://www.sportsmen4responsibleenergy.org/images/stories/S4RED_Recommendations_Final-3.pdf

Steingraber, Sandra. The Whole Fracking Enchilada: Violating the bedrock, the atmosphere, and everything in between. Orion magazine September/October 2010 issue. http://www.orionmagazine.org/index.php/articles/article/5839
Sullivan County Gas Drilling Research Task Force; PREPARING FOR NATURAL GAS DEVELOPMENT: UNDERSTANDING IMPACTS AND PROTECTING PUBLIC ASSETS; February 13, 2009 Sumi, Lisa. Oil and Gas at Your Door? A landowner's guide to oil and gas development. Earthworks Oil and Gas Accountability Project. Jan 2006. http://www.earthworksaction.org/publications.cfm?pubID=91 Sumi, Lisa. Shale Gas: Focus on the Marcellus Shale Earthworks Oil and Gas Accountability Project. May 2008. http://www.earthworksaction.org/pubs/OGAPMarcellusShaleReport-6-12-08.pdf Weidenhof, Emily (editor). Hancock and the Marcellus Shale. Columbia University Urban Design Research Seminar. Spring 2009. http://www.urbandesignlab.columbia.edu/sitefiles/file/HancockAndTheMarcellusShale.pdf Wilderness Society. Not at any cost: Government policies to make natural gas drilling safer for people and the environment. Science and Policy Brief. September 2010.

Wiseman, Hahhan. Untested Waters. The Rise of Hydaulic Fracturing in Oil and Gas Production and the Need to Revisit Regulation. 20 Fordham Environmental Law Review. Rev.115. 2009.

WATER WARS
Svadlenka, Robert. The Corporate Exploitation of the World's Freshwater Supply. World Hunger Year. Accessed at: http://www.whyhunger.org/news-and-alerts/why-speaks/497.html

Letter from Farmer about Hydrofracking and the Foodshed. Hello all, This is a powerful statement on the part of Brewery Omegang. My prediction is that there will be more of such statements from food and beverage companies. From my discussions with wholesale buyers of beef, hydrofracking is a big concern, which is already impacting on purchasing decisions. Id like to offer my recent experience. During a recent meeting with a nutritionist with a large regional supermarket chain, she mentioned out of the blue that she was avoiding purchases of meat from northern PA where there is hydrofracking. (I had not brought up gas drilling, as that was not the original topic of the meeting.) And from my conversations with my wholesale buyers in NYC and locally (who are buying whole steers on a regular basis) they are very aware of hydrofracking. They have expressed deep concern about chemical contamination of the food they are purchasing and the regional foodshed. They are also quite clear that they will try to lower the risk of purchasing contaminated food by avoiding purchases from farms near active gas drilling. Given what I am hearing from wholesale buyers, its hard for me to visualize my business surviving with gas drilling nearby. As is true of many sustainable agriculture enterprises, 100% of my overhead, and 100% of my sales are local, with both upstream and downstream economic multipliers benefiting other regional business. With the elimination of businesses like mine, these other enterprises will be harmed as well. Ken Ken Jaffe Slope Farms Meredith, NY 607-746-2294 917-543-0169 cell www.slopefarms.com

Outdoor Tourism at Risk

By Edward Wilson, vice president
10,000 Friends of Pennsylvania

Dont let what happened in Wyoming happen here!

The Jonah Field is 30,000 acres, and authorized for a total of 3600 wells. Pinedale, (locally called "The Mesa") is about 198,000 acres, and authorized for a total of 900 wells--and there's a proposal to add thousands more.

Hunting and Fishing at Risk

In the 12-county Pennsylvania Wilds region of north central Pennsylvania, DCNR has spent more than $140 million over six years to construct elk-watching facilities, build trails, upgrade state parks and enhance the experience of visitors to the region. Other agencies made complementary investments in tourism marketing, infrastructure improvements and environmental restoration projects. Research shows that these investments already are paying off in terms of increased visitation, visitor spending, tourism-related employment and tax revenues in a part of the state that desperately needs new economic opportunities. By rushing to open tens of thousands of additional acres of state forest land to gas drilling, however, the state risks killing the goose that lays the golden egg of tourism. Excessive drilling will permanently change the aesthetics of the state forests, restrict access to trails, disturb habitat, interfere with hunting and fishing, and generally make our public lands less attractive to visitors. State forests should be managed to benefit all Pennsylvanians, and that includes extracting resources in ways that are compatible with sound environmental stewardship. Let's not balance the budget on the back of our public land

But as those numbers go up, other numbers are going down. Mule deer usage of winter range in Pinedale has decreased 46 percent over the last five years. Sage grouse populations closest to development areas are threatened. As for antelope, their 6,000-year-old migration corridor between Grand Teton National Park and the Upper Green River Basin is being squeezed. Early studies indicate radio-collared pronghorns are avoiding newly-developed areas. Links to hunting, fishing and outdoor-interest publications can be found at

Open pit on BoosLaw Road, Smyrna, Chenango County

Has your quarry been drinking from drill cutting pits?

Gas drilling threatens

www.un-Naturalgas.org/hunting

To contact your local action organization, go to:

www.GasMain.org

WILDLIFE HABITAT ACCESS SAFETY

Wildlife at Risk
Drilling waters are toxic. A sagging three foot snow fence will not keep game from open pits of salty water. Migratory birds are attracted to these poisoned "ponds". USDA and state food safety and inspection services quarantine livestock that come into contact with drilling fluids to prevent human consumption of potentially contaminated meat. Wildlife agencies are not taking the same safeguards: hunter-harvested game is being consumed despite possible health risks. The Eastern Brook Trout Joint Venture, a multi-agency partnership, found in its comprehensive review that habitat fragmentation and sedimentation are two of the major impacts limiting the health of brook trout populations. Gas development has harmed sage grouse populations in western Wyoming, while in Alaska, geese have been affected. Out west, drilling activities have impacted elk and their habitat, especially during the construction and drilling phases. Drilling activities have forced pronghorn antelope and mule deer to increase their winter ranges.

Habitat at Risk
In late August 2009, inspectors found evidence that Marcellus Shale waste fluids had impacted Alex Branch, a wild trout stream and high-quality fishery, and damaged the drinking water at a nearby hunting camp, where water tests found barium that was four times above the state and federal drinking water limits -- an amount that can cause vomiting, diarrhea and muscle weakness after drinking it for even a short period of time. (Field and Stream ,March 2007) Some hunters have been affected by gas drilling. One sporting goods store owner said hunters told him that they lost their traditional hunting spots in

Access and Safety at Risk Before you hunt, ask yourself:

Will the lease allow for hunting on leased land? Is it safe to fire a gun in a gas field? What happens if theres a leak and a gun is fired? What happens if a bullet hits a wellhead or pipeline? Will drilling activity put all the people involved at risk? Will well workers wear hunter orange? Will they remain in a designated area?

Planning to Eat What You Hunt?

How vulnerable is game to the pollution that inevitably comes with hydro-fracking? How can wildlife, especially deer, be protected from consuming poisonous material at a drill site? Will it be safe to consume the meat from any wild game if the animal drinks from pits? Who will test venison for pollutants? Will the DEC or NYSDAM decide if hunter-harvested game can be consumed? How will the venison donation program be affected?

Susquehanna County (PA) last deer season when the areas were deemed off limits due to gas drilling activity. (Wilkes-Barre Times Leader May 23, 2010) Conservationists and labor leaders testified that energy development on public land is failing wildlife and squeezing out hunters and anglers. (Field and Stream, March 2007) Even where gas companies halted operations for the first week of deer season, hunters were affected. Customers told one store owner that in the Hop Bottom and Springville areas, the gas companies were out before the season with helicopters laying cables for seismic testing. The process was noisy and that scared a lot of deer out the area and changed their patterns. (Wilkes-Barre Times Leader May 23, 2010)

Compressor Station in the Susquehannock State Forest

OZONE DAMAGE My name is Ken Jaffe. I practiced family medicine for 25 years. I then studied public health at Columbia University, where I became interested in how our health is affected by the way we feed livestock. Currently I raise beef on pasture in Meredith. I want to talk briefly about what public health and agriculture researchers and officials say will happen to our air quality from gas drilling, and how this air pollution will affect our families health, and the production of our farms. Ozone is produced when two byproducts of gas drilling (ozone precursors) combine in sunlight. First are VOCs (volatile organic compounds) that are produced by the wells and evaporate into the air. Next are nitrogen oxides in exhaust fumes from trucks and diesel compressor engines. Each well requires thousands of truck trips to bring equipment, piping, water and drilling chemicals, and to remove waste water, and very large compressors that run 24 hours a day. Tons of these nitrogen oxides are released into the air and combine with the VOCs to produce ozone that we breathe. Because ground-level ozone damages health and crops, its one of six air pollutants regulated by the Federal Clean Air Act. Most of this ozone comes from cars and trucks. But in areas with gas drilling, these ozone levels rise dramatically. Studies by the current head of the US Environmental Protection Agency in Texas show more than half of the very high level of ozone in Dallas-Ft. Worth comes from gas drilling.1 Sublette County in Wyoming has hundreds of gas wells in an area so rural it has 1/40 the population density of Delaware County, with so little traffic that there are no stop lights. The county has the same type of high density gas drilling that Chesapeake, the largest gas company in our area, says they plan to use. Sublette has worse ozone levels than Los Angeles.2 Chautauqua County, a rural county with by far the most gas wells in NY State, has higher ozone levels than NYC. 3 Most of us know children with asthma, or an adult with lung disease like emphysema. Researchers at the NY State Department of Health say: Asthma hospitalizations are significantly associated with increased ozone levels... We found stronger associations among younger children. 4 Using the NY DOH ozone risk numbers, a rise of ozone to the same levels we see in Sublette County from gas drilling would result in the hospitalization of 405 additional New York residents in the Marcellus Shale counties each year.5 At the current cost of hospitalizations for asthma (more than $15,000 per hospitalization), this would cost over $6 million each year, paid for by higher insurance premiums and higher costs of government programs like Medicaid or Medicare. With these higher ozone levels, deaths from respiratory disease would increase 10%: 174 more of our neighbors with lung disease like emphysema will die each year. 6 We hear a lot about how good gas drilling would be for farmers. But anyone who actually wants to continue farming should pay attention to what the USDA says about how ozone will affect their farms. The USDA says: Ground-level ozone causes more damage to plants than all other air pollutants combined.7

NASA has been using satellites to study the effect of ozone on crop yields. And NASA researchers say: weve crossed the line to where modest increases in surface ozone result in crop growth being stunted. 8 National Agricultural Statistics Service showed a 25% drop in crop yields of soybeans when ozone levels went from low to the higher levels found in Sublette or Chautauqua counties. 9 Research from NC State showed similar losses occur with pasture grasses and legumes, especially white and red clover.10 For me, or anyone else grazing livestock, these pasture plants are critical to soil health and animal nutrition. Alabama Cooperative Extension lists 94 plants that are very sensitive to ozone, including alfalfa, orchardgrass, bromegrass, red clover, maple, oats and potato. 11 Researchers at MIT say that 30% crop yield losses occur at these higher ozone levels. 12 This is part of the price we will pay for gas drilling: more hospitalization and more deaths from air pollution; farms that cannot compete because of lower crop and pasture yields. This information from experts in public health and agriculture may be news to our Board of Supervisors. I respectfully ask them to listen.
Footnotes
http://www.edf.org/documents/9235_Barnett_Shale_Report..pdf; http://www.mcclatchydc.com/2008/10/12/53815/gas-wellemissions-worry-epa.html 2 http://deq.state.wy.us/aqd/Ozone%20Nonattainment%20Information.asp http://www.subletteexaminer.com/V2_news_articles.php?heading=0&page=72&story_id=1089 http://www.eenews.net/public/Landletter/2010/01/14/1 http://iaspub.epa.gov/airsdata/adaqs.summary?geotype=st&geocode=WY&geoinfo=st%7EWY%7EWyoming&year=2008&fld= county&fld=stabbr&fld=regn&rpp=25 3 http://www.waytogoto.com/wiki/index.php/New_York http://www.dec.ny.gov/chemical/8536.html 3 http://www.epa.gov/glo/pdfs/CountyPrimaryOzoneLevels0608.pdf 4 http://ehp03.niehs.nih.gov/article/fetchArticle.action?articleURI=info%3Adoi%2F10.1289%2Fehp.11184 5 https://apps.nyhealth.gov/statistics/environmental/publichealth_tracking/tracker/asthma/mapaction.map?ct=CAGQIIOW-WL12YO4E-WQQF-O7WZ-KPHO-C05P&activeTool=showtabular&maptype=0 6 http://www.health.state.ny.us/nysdoh/vital_statistics/2008table38.htm http://www.nejm.org/doi/pdf/10.1056/NEJMoa0803894 7 http://www.ars.usda.gov/Main/docs.htm?docid=12462 8 http://www.nasa.gov/topics/earth/features/soybeans.html 9 http://www.its.ucdavis.edu/publications/1999/UCD-ITS-RP-99-03.pdf 10 http://ddr.nal.usda.gov/bitstream/10113/35860/1/IND44279520.pdf - see effects on grasslands 11 http://www.aces.edu/pubs/docs/A/ANR-0913/ANR-0913.pdf 12 http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2007/10/071027203000.htm http://web.mit.edu/globalchange/www/MITJPSPGCReprint07-21.pdf
1

THE MEDICAL SOCIETIES

ONEIDA, HERKIMER, MADISON, CHENANGO, OSWEGO & CAYUGA
4311 Middle Settlement Road, New Hartford, New York 13413-5317 Telephone (315) 735-2204 Fax (315) 735-1608 E-mail: kdyman@medsocieties.com
of the Counties of

Kathleen E. Dyman Executive Vice President

As medical practitioners, we write to bring to your attention: Primum, no nocere First, do no harm. Physicians care first and foremost about the health of our community. When an activity raises potential harm to human health, precautionary measures should be taken until cause and effect relationships are fully established scientifically. The extraction of natural gas in the Marcellus and similar shales involves high-pressure injection of millions of gallons of water and chemicals per well into the shale formations to allow the release of natural gas. Some of these chemicals are known carcinogens and endocrine disruptors. While natural gas may be a cleaner fuel once it is refined for consumer use, extracting it is a process that pollutes the air with diesel fumes and volatile organic compounds and causes methane gas and other chemicals to migrate in unpredictable directions underground. Hydraulic Fracturing takes clean water and creates billions of gallons of toxic waste fluid for which there is no treatment. In addition to the chemical additives, this flowback contains brine, heavy metals, and radioactive materials. Given the vast scale of the proposed drilling, this amounts to an unprecedented level of toxins being released into the air and water. Extensive drilling activity has already caused health problems, environmental disasters and irrevocable damage to water resources in other parts of the country. Accumulating incidents of explosions and spills, dead fish and cattle and contaminated water make Hydraulic Fracturing an unacceptable practice at this time The effects of this process on human health, livestock and wildlife have not been subject to rigorous research by the medical, agricultural or forestry communities. The review reported by the New York State Department of Environmental Conservation in the draft Supplemental Generic Environmental Impact Statement does not include high quality medical data and lacks any analysis of the cumulative effects of thousands of wells. We seek colleagues from professional and consumer communities to assist us in our support and advocacy for the EPA study and a moratorium on the process of High Volume, Slick-water Hydraulic Fracturing until conclusive analysis of the health effects to humans, livestock and wildlife can be completed. Respectfully, Nameer Haider, MD. President Oneida County Medical Society Suresh K. Sharma, MD President Herkimer County Medical Society Jeffrey Kramer, MD President Chenango County Medical Society Bashar Omarbasha, MD President Madison County Medical Society Corliss Varnum, MD President Oswego County Medical Society Muhammad Iqbal, MD President Cayuga County Medical Society

GAINING MOMENTUM IN OPPOSITION TO HYDRAULIC FRACTURING RESOLUTIONS PASSED AND LOCAL GROUPS OPPOSING FRACTURING AS OF DECEMBER 1, 2010 State Senate voted for moratorium August 3, 2010 State Assembly voted for moratorium November 29, 2010

NY Counties Calling For State Wide Moratorium On Gas Drilling Pending Further Study Nov 29, 2010 Albany County Sept 13, 2010 Yates County June 27, 2010 Westchester County May 18, 2010 Tompkins County April 22, 2010 Cortland County March 2, 2010 Onondaga County See also, November 6, 2010 State Grange March 18 Town of DeWitt NY Counties Banning Hydro Fracking on Public Property March 16, 2010 Sullivan County Environmental Committee

NY Counties Banning Seismic Testing on Public Property Chenango County Otsego County Towns/Villages Passing Resolutions Seeking More Study December, 2009 Cherry Valley December, 2009 Springfield February 16, 2010 Village of Cooperstown Otsego County Towns Favoring State-Wide Moratorium November 9, 2010 Middlefield

Otsego County Groups Opposed to Hydraulic Fracturing as now Proposed Action Otsego Advocates for Cherry Valley Advocates for Springfield Brewery Ommegang Butternut Valley Alliance Cooperstown Presbyterian Church Concerned Citizens of Butternut Valley Crumhorn Lake Association Delaware-Otsego Audubon Society Fly Creek Neighbors Landowners Against Natural Gas Drilling Otsego 2000 OCCA Otsego Land Community Advocates, Otsego Lake Association Otsego Soil & Water Conservation Committee Otsego Watershed Supervisory Committee Middlefield Neighbors Residents Of Crumhorn Mountain Sustainable Otsego Upper Unadilla Valley Association Medical Societies Opposed to Hydrofracking Cayuga County Medical Society Chenango County Medical Society Herkimer County Medical Society Madison County Medical Society Oneida County Medical Society Oswego County Medical Society

13ACTIONSYouCanTakeNOW toPreventUnsafeNaturalGasDrilling
1. Contactyourlocal,state,andfederalelectedofficials.Makeaphonecall. Writealetter.Sendanemail.Whentheydosomethingyoulike,thankthem. (Seeattachedsheetsforcontactinformationandsuggestedcomments.) 2. Attendameetingofyourlocallyelectedofficials.Requestthefloorandspeakout. 3. TaketheNoLeasePledgeatwww.sustainableotsego.org. 4. SignthepetitiontowithdrawthedsGEISwww.toxicstargeting.com/MarcellusShale. 5. Gettoknowyourneighbors.Worktogethertomonitordrillingactivitiesinyour neighborhood.Organizeneighborhoodmeetings. KEEPRECORDS!PhotographwithdatestampandloganyandALLdrillingactivitythat isillegal/questionable/justplainodd.Keepacamerainyourcar. Donottrespassexchangewrittenpermissionwithneighborstowalkeachothers landsoyoucanlegallyaccessanddocument. 6. Ifyouhavesignedalease,considerconsultingalawyeraboutitstermsandthe circumstancesunderwhichyousigned.Isitpossibleforyoutogetoutofit?Oratleast nothaveitautomaticallyrenew? 7. Writealettertotheeditorforyourlocalpaperaswellasstateandnationalpapers. 8. Organizeorattendarallyinoppositiontounnaturalgasdrillingbringsigns.Issuepress releasestogettheeventcoveredinpapersandontelevision. 9. DonatemoneytoorganizationslikeOtsego2000,CAUD(theCoalitionAgainstUnsafe Drilling),SustainableOtsego,ActionOtsego,andOCCA,earmarkedforantidrilling. 10.Bevisibleandvocalaboutyouropinions.Putasigninyouryardorbusiness.Puta bumperstickeronyourcar.WearaNoFrackbuttonoratshirttoalargepublic gathering.Whensomeonecommentsonyourdisplay,talktothemcalmlyaboutthe facts.(Buttonsandsignsatwww.shaleshock.org.Tshirts:www.actionotsego.org.) 11.Includeinformationaboutfrackinginyourholidaycards,callingyourfriendsandfamily toaction.Includelegislatorscontactinfoandinfoabtfederallegislation(e.g.FRACAct). 12.Supportbusinessesthatarepubliclyopposedtofracking.Ifyouownabusiness,clearly showyoursupportfortheantifrackingmovementwithsigns,etc... 13.Visitwww.actionotsego.orgforacalendarofeventsyoucanattendandsupport.

Points

to Communicate to Elected Officials

Urgeyourlocalrepresentativestopassmoratoriums,enforceandstrengthenzoninglawsand noiseordinances,andimproveemergencymanagementplans. UrgeGov.PatersontosignthemoratoriumbillintolawandwithdrawthedraftsGEIS.(Why? Itsproposedregulationsfordrillingarewoefullyinadequate.Itshouldbewithdrawnand rewrittenwithlessindustryinput,moreinputfromscientists,economists,andresidents.) UrgeGov.electCuomotowithdrawthedraftsGEISimmediatelyuponassumingoffice. UrgeallNewYorkstateelectedofficialstodothefollowing: IncreasethenumberofDECgasandoilinspectors(currently17forthemorethan13,000 activewellsinNYState). Eliminatecompulsoryintegrationforshalegasdrilling.(Throughthiscompulsory integrationprocessmediatedbytheDEC,thestategivesthedrillingcompanytherightto taketheunwillingseller'smineralresource,withsome,nonnegotiable,compensation.) AmendNewYorkEnvironmentalConservationLaw230303tostrengthentheabilityof localgovernmentstoenforcezoning,noise,andotherlocalordinancestoprotecttheir residentsandsensitiveareasfromgasdrilling. MakelocalgovernmentsautomaticallybecomeinvolvedagenciesforSEQRreview,which increasestheirabilitytorequiremitigationmeasuresinsensitivelocalareas. Requirethatlocalgovernmentofficialsbenotifiedwhenadrillingpermitisrequested withintheirjurisdictionratherthanexpectingcommunitiestomonitortheEnvironmental NoticeBulletin. ContactyourcongresspeopleandsenatorsinWashingtonaboutthefollowingfederalissues: PasstheFRACAct:H.R.2766andS.1215.ThesebillsrepealtheSafeDrinkingWaterAct Exemptionforgasandoil(alsoknownastheHalliburtonloophole)andrequirepublic disclosureofthechemicalconstituents(butnottheproprietarychemicalformulas)used inthefracturingprocess. Repealthegasindustryexemptionsfromotherenvironmentallaws:CleanWaterAct (includingwetlandsprotection),CleanAirAct,SuperfundLaw(CERCLA),Resource ConservationandRecoveryAct(RCRA),andtheToxicReleaseInventoryoftheRightto KnowAct.

ContactInformationforNYElectedOfficialsServing MiddlefieldandEnvirons
Constituentsshouldcall,write,emailonadailybasis,liketakingyourvitaminsorflossingyourteeth, untiltheactionrequestedoftheelectedofficialistaken. Federal: USSenatorKirstenGillibrandAlbany:(518)4310120,D.C.:(202)2244451 USSenatorCharlesSchumerAlbany:(518)4314070,D.C.:(202)2246542 http://www.nysenate.gov/contact_form CongressmanelectRichardHannah(315)6249440andinfo@richardhannaforcongress.com State: GovernorDavidPaterson(518)4748390 Gov.ElectAndrewCuomo(212)2093314andinfo@andrewcuomo.com AttorneyGeneralElectEricSchneiderman(212)2425301 NYStateSenatorJamesSeward(518)4553131or(607)4325524andhttp://www.nysenate.gov/contact_form NYAssemblymanWilliamMageeAlbany(518)4554807;Oneonta4321484 NYAssemblymanPeterLopezAlbany(518)4555363;Sidney5632919 NYAssemblymanMarcButlerAlbany(518)4555393;Herkimer(315)8661632 NYAssemblySpeakerSheldonSilverAlbany(518)4553791;NYC(212)3121420 Local: (SeeattachedsheetforcompletelistofOtsegoCountyBoardmembers.) TownofMiddlefieldBoardMembers: DaveBliss(Supervisor)2209Co.Hwy.33,Cooperstown,13326,5472510 TimDubben(HwySuperintendent)3709Ct.Hwy.35,Cooperstown,5478800 BillBlanco(Councilman)209RoscoeJonesRd.,Cooperstown,13326,5475376 DavidEdwards(Councilman)156SaddleBrookCt.,Cooperstown,13326,5471161 RobertTabor(Councilman)1820St.Hwy.166,Cooperstown,13326,5477076or5479007 AlanYerdon(Councilman)3911Co.Hwy.33,CherryValley,13320,2648256 MiddlefieldTownClerk/TaxCollector:BethMoaklerPOBox961,Cooperstown,5475093 MiddlefieldZoningOfficer:NeilMcManus(607)4355949(cell)or5475182 MiddlefieldAttorney:DaveClinton,101MainSt.Cooperstown,13326,5472522 OtherUsefulNumbers: DECOfficeinStamford(Contactre:DrillingPermitsisKentSanders):(607)6524125 DECOfficeinAlbany:(518)4028545 DECOilandGasBureau TedLoukides,DECrepresentativeinchargeofpermits:(518)4028056 DECDivisionofMineralResources BradleyField,Director(518)4028076,bjfield@gw.dec.state.ny.us NYstateOilandGasSearchableDatabase:http://www.dec.ny.gov/cfmx/extapps/GasOil/

ElectedOfficialsServingOtsegoCounty
Federal: State: County: CongressmanelectRichardHanna POBox118 Utica,NY13508 GovernorelectAndrewCuomo POBox683 ChurchStreetStation NewYork,NY10089 315/6249440 info@richardhannaforcongress.com

Tel:212/2093314 Fax:646/5976195 www.andrewcuomo.com/contact

AttorneyGeneralelectEricSchneiderman 131VarickStreet,Suite924 NewYork,NY10013 StateSenatorJamesSeward NewYorkStateSenate,room711B LegislativeOfficeBuilding Albany,NY12247 AssemblymanMarcButler LegislativeOfficeBuilding,room318 Albany,NY12248 AssemblymanPeterLopez LegislativeOfficeBuilding,room429 Albany,NY12248 AssemblymanWilliamMagee LegislativeOfficeBuilding,room828 Albany,NY12248 Seeattacheddirectory.

Tel:212/2425301 friends@schneiderman.org

Tel:607/4325524(districtoffice) seward@senate.state.ny.us

Tel:315/8661632(district)

Tel:518/2957250(district)

Tel:607/4321484(district)

OtsegoCountyBoardofRe o epresentat tives

Representative n Address & Contact on Informatio
Gregory J. Relic District No. 1 Unadilla 236 Main St PO Box N Unadilla, NY 13849 369-2704 H. (607) 3 W. (607) 3 369-9285 E-mail Re epresentative nty 719 Coun Highway 18 South New Berlin, NY 13 3843 w H.(607) 7 64-8358 epresentative E-mail Re

James P. Powers District No. 2 Butternuts, sfield Morris, Pitts Kathleen C Clark District No. 3 Laurens, Ot tego

121 Circ Dr cle Otego, NY 13825 H. (607 ) 988-7844

E-mail Representativ ve

Richard A. Murphy District No. 4 Oneonta To own

35 Ceperlley Ave Oneonta, NY 13820 H. (607) 4 432-6495 E-mail Re epresentative

Stephen r D. Fournier District No. 5 Hartwick, w Milford, New Lisbon Donald g L. Lindberg District No. 6 Decatur, Maryland, Westford, Worcester Floyd "Sam m" Dubben, Jr r. (Chairman) District No. 7 ey, Cherry Valle Middlefield, Roseboom

Hwy 28 2582 St H Oneonta, NY 13820 432-2973 H. (607) 4 Cell. (607 287-8423 7) E-mail Re epresentative

12 Elm St. x PO Box 391 Worces ster, NY 12197 H. (607 ) 397-9467 Cell (60 643-5259 07) en 550 Reze Rd Roseboom NY 13450 m, H. (607) 5 547-5301 E-mail Re epresentative

James V. Johnson (V Vice Chairman) District No. 8 Otsego

434 Be edbug Hill Rd PO Box 233 x Fly Cre eek, NY 13337 H. (607 547-2095 7) Cell (60 282-0108 07) E-mail Representativ ve
5503 US Hwy 20 East Sprin ngfield, NY 13333 H. (607) 2 264-8417 E-mail Re epresentative

Keith y O. McCarty District No. 9 Richfield, Springfield

Betty Anne Schw werd District No. 10 Burlington, Edmeston, Exeter, Plainfield Martha M. Stayton District No. 11 Oneonta Cit ty Wards 1 & 2

806 Be Annes Rd etty Hartwic NY 13348 ck, H. (607 293-7931 7) Cell (60 435-6948 07) E-mail Representativ ve
6 Draper St Oneonta, NY 13820 432-8874 H. (607) 4 E-mail Re epresentative

Catherine M. ger Rothenberg District No. 12 Oneonta Cit ty Wards 3 & 4 Linda Rowinski District No. 13 Oneonta Cit ty Wards 5 & 6

17 Lind en Avenue Oneonta, NY 13820 H. (607 ) 433-1264 07) Cell (60 435-1603

E-mail Representativ ve
1 Scramb bling Ave Oneonta, N.Y. 13820 432-1095 H. (607) 4 E-mail Re epresentative

Katherine Stuligross District No. 14 Oneonta Cit ty Wards 7 & 8

10 Walnu t St Oneonta, NY 13820 432-6974 H. (607) 4 E-mail Re epresentative

Shale Gas
What A New York Town Should Do

Separating Fracks from Fiction

James Chip Northrup Cooperstown & Texas

New York Is Unprepared

Not prepared to capture economic benefits Not prepared for the environmental impacts Regulations not in place at any level

Meet the Frackers . . .

Not your usual well

Not your usual well Massive truck traffic Massive wastewater 21st century tech. 20th century NY regs.

Frackonomics For NY State

Gas production is tax exempt in NYS Out-of-state producers avoid income tax Local government absorb unfunded costs Crews are not New Yorkers

Frackonomics For Local Government

Property taxes fail to capture value - valuation of wells is tricky Unfunded road repairs - road use plans must be in place Residential property will lose value - wells can be drilled anywhere in NYS

Frackonomics for Individuals

Property values go down for homeowners Quality of life goes down for most A few benefit - for awhile Crews and suppliers are not locals

Frack Baby Frack !

We need the money/jobs When did we not ? Sold too much too soon NY drillers are prospectors Rules are not in place

Haste Makes Waste

Copyright 2009 FIREHOW LLC

Dont Let Your Town Get Fracked

Be Prepared with Rules and Regulations Upfront

Pass a moratorium Road use agreements in place Property fully appraised Protect residential values

Environmental Problems

Massive amounts of truck traffic

County and towns must address this New York water wells vulnerable

Spills and blowouts pollute groundwater

Frack wastewater must be disposed of

forever

New York More Vulnerable Than Texas

Shale gas fracking was developed in Texas

Frack wastewater disposal wells: Environmental agency:

Texas
12,000 does not issue well permits Flat, treeless

New York
none DEC issues well permits Hilly and wet

Terrain Climate:

Water wells:

Tap aquifers

Tap groundwater

NY Not as Prepared as Texas

no trout streams in Texas . . . . . .

Texas
Lakes and aquifers Revenues Local controls Work force owned by municipalities taxes gas production directly road use, zoning All locals

New York
owned by NYS except NYC gas production tax exempt No controls Few locals

A Lot of Fracking Trucks

1,200 tankers per well 6 wells per site 7,200 trips No road use agreements No funds to repair roads

Frack Truck Solutions

Road use agreements must be in place Routes limited and designated Permits issued

Get Proactive on Road Use

Most Pollution is at the Surface

Probability of water pollution 15 - 30% New York water uniquely vulnerable

QuickTime and a decompressor are needed to see this picture.

Dimock, Pa. well water

Drilling and Frack Pits Overflow

Containment of Fluids Onsite

Solution = No Open Pits in your Town

QuickTime and a decompressorand a QuickTime are needed to see this 2009-2010 Copyright Rodale. picture. decompressorand a QuickTime are needed to see this picture. decompressor are needed to see this picture.

2010 HVPA

Frack Fluid Is Hazardous to Your Health

propargyl alcohol glutaraldehyde methanol dibromoacetonitrile butoxyethanol ethylene glycol Mystery Ingredients

Tests Wells Before Fracking Begins

Frack Fluids Contaminate

200,000 gallons per drilling site New York water wells tap groundwater No protection for NY lakes

Todays spill is tomorrows drinking water

Protect Your Town From Spills

Drill/ frack operations contaminate water 33% of Cabot Dimock wells cited for spills 13% Cabot wells gassed groundwater Pa.DEP has cited over 1,500 violations

Design Conditions vs New York

Water contamination less an issue in arid, sparsely populated area with deep water wells and city-owned lakes, like Texas
Posted by David Kozlowski on May 09, 2010

Water contamination is a show stopper in New York

NY Groundwater Wells Vulnerable Tex Aquifer Wells Less Vulnerable

Who Controls the Water ?

Texas lakes and aquifers owned or controlled by cities Only New York City owns its lake water

QuickTime and a decompressor are needed to see this picture.

QuickTime and a decompressor are needed to see this picture.

Open season on other NY lakes

How to Protect Your Water

Non-toxic fracking fluids near water sources Test wells before fracking begins and after No fracking within 1000 feet of a water well No open pits for drilling or fracking fluid State Environmental Quality Review (SEQR)

in watersheds of sole source drinking water lakes In floodplains and wetlands

Mass Quantities of Frack Wastewater

1. Inject hazardous fracking fluids into ground 2. 10,000 psi pressure @ 200+ degrees 3. Frack leaches radium from shale 8,000,000 gallons toxic wastewater per site

DEC classifies fracking fluids as Hazardous waste but classifies the fracking flowback as Industrial waste

Radium In New York Frack Flowback

Frack fluids leach it from shale Marcellus loaded with radium 267 x the safe limit No place to dispose of it in NY

Fracking Wastewater Pollutants

Radium 226 Uranium ? Radon

Hydrochloric acid Methanol Glutaraldehyde Propylene glycol Propargyl alcohol

Where To Get Rid of all this Fracking Wastewater ?

Nowhere in New York . . .

No frack water disposal wells in New York

closest are in Ohio

No frack water treatment plants in New York

none planned

DECs response?

The Used Uranium nonSolution

Industry proposes to recycle frack wastewater This increases its toxicity with each use Nuclear plants built without fuel disposal plans Re-use of frack flowback repeats that mistake

Fracking Wastewater Solutions

Classify frack wastewater as hazardous No open frack flowback pits Keep disposal wells out of your town Keep wastewater out of your town

An Unfunded Burden on Your Town

DEC under-funded and under-staffed DEC trumps local controls No protection for roads or residences No money from state for spills or roads

The Big Apples Big Carve Out

DEC gave NYC reservoirs special protection from shale gas fracking based on politics, not science Radiation and toxic chemicals from spills and wastewater are not sediment . . .

Your Town Needs NYC Safeguards

Just how Bad is the dSGEIS?

1st draft, well set-back 50 from lake 2nd / current draft, set-back moved to 150 DEC Director quit/ fired

Scrap the dSGEIS

Tell Albany To Do This

Tax gas at the wellhead Scrap the proposed draft regs. Equal protection for all water Local controls over local problems

Until you get all of the above . . .

What Your Town Can Do Now

Pass a moratorium Prohibit industrial uses Adopt local controls

steep slope, tree ordinances, flood plain

Enforce road use agreements Fully assess well values

Moratorium on Shale Gas Fracking

Send a message to Albany Today

No shale gas fracking in township until NYC regulations applied to all towns EPA study on shale gas is complete Gas production is taxed by the state County road use plans are in place

Prohibit Noxious Industrial Uses

Prohibit all industrial uses in the township

No frack wastewater facilities No frack waste disposal wells No compressor stations Ag exempt

Steep Slope Ordinance

Well pads and gas lines ruin hillsides

Prohibit development on slopes > 15% Ag exempt Residential by SEQR

Tree Ordinance
Well sites and gas lines clear-cut forests

All large felled trees must be replaced Or new trees planted off site Ag and forestry exempt

Road Use Plan Finished

Be proactive with your county

Town center is off-limits to frack convoys Road use permits enforced Routes enforced

Property Tax Assessment on Wells

New York regulations inadequate Assessments wont capture value Town assessors must get prepared Fully value the wells on tax rolls
Details available from Otsego 2000

Resources

Road Use Plans and Permits

Todd Mathes tmathes@woh.com Steve Penningroth spenningroth@communityscience.org Michelle Kennedy mkennedyesq@hotmail.com

Water Testing

Municipal Regulations

Now Go Get Busy

TAKE THE NO-LEASE PLEDGE!

Most people say NO! to fracking. How many acres do you have?
We are offering landowners the option of signing a non-binding pledge not to sign a gas lease for so long as the proposed method of gas extraction known as horizontal hydrofracking poses a threat to drinking water, air quality, and public health. This is a way of protecting your property and your community. If enough landowners sign the pledge, it will become difficult for gas companies to obtain the concentration of leases necessary for them to operate profitably. In addition, blocks of land pledged not to sign leases may, if large enough, frustrate "compulsory integration," whereby one can be forced into a lease if most surrounding properties are already leased. To sign the No-Lease pledge, please visit www.sustainableotsego.org and click on the No-Lease Pledge button or fill out the reverse and mail to Otsego 2000, PO Box 1130, Cooperstown, NY 13326.

TAKE THE NO-LEASE PLEDGE!

Most people say NO! to fracking. How many acres do you have?
We are offering landowners the option of signing a non-binding pledge not to sign a gas lease for so long as the proposed method of gas extraction known as horizontal hydrofracking poses a threat to drinking water, air quality, and public health. This is a way of protecting your property and your community. If enough landowners sign the pledge, it will become difficult for gas companies to obtain the concentration of leases necessary for them to operate profitably. In addition, blocks of land pledged not to sign leases may, if large enough, frustrate "compulsory integration," whereby one can be forced into a lease if most surrounding properties are already leased. To sign the No-Lease pledge, please visit www.sustainableotsego.org and click on the No-Lease Pledge button or fill out the reverse and mail to Otsego 2000, PO Box 1130, Cooperstown, NY 13326.

TAKE THE NO-LEASE PLEDGE!

Most people say NO! to fracking. How many acres do you have?
We are offering landowners the option of signing a non-binding pledge not to sign a gas lease for so long as the proposed method of gas extraction known as horizontal hydrofracking poses a threat to drinking water, air quality, and public health. This is a way of protecting your property and your community. If enough landowners sign the pledge, it will become difficult for gas companies to obtain the concentration of leases necessary for them to operate profitably. In addition, blocks of land pledged not to sign leases may, if large enough, frustrate "compulsory integration," whereby one can be forced into a lease if most surrounding properties are already leased. To sign the No-Lease pledge, please visit www.sustainableotsego.org and click on the No-Lease Pledge button or fill out the reverse and mail to Otsego 2000, PO Box 1130, Cooperstown, NY 13326.

www.otsego2000.org

www.otsego2000.org

www.otsego2000.org

AGREEMENT
NOT TO LEASE LAND ON THE MARCELLUS/UTICA SHALE FOR HORIZONTAL HYDROFRACKING
I agree at this time not to lease my land for natural gas drilling using horizontal hydrofracking. Horizontal hydrofracking uses millions of gallons of water laced with chemicals, identified and not identified, to shatter the shale and obtain the natural gas. This process is a threat to the health and safety of area residents, subjects our drinking water resources, wells and aquifers to the risk of contamination and industrializes our rural community. Air pollution from increased diesel truck traffic and noise pollution from drilling and compressors are just a couple of the noxious adjuncts to hydrofracking. In not leasing my land, I am protecting myself, my family, and my neighbors from the adverse effects of hydrofracking. Name:* Street: City:* State:* Email:* Acreage:* Location:*
This pledge is an expression of your intentions and is not legally binding. Your email and contact information will not be shared.

AGREEMENT
NOT TO LEASE LAND ON THE MARCELLUS/UTICA SHALE FOR HORIZONTAL HYDROFRACKING
I agree at this time not to lease my land for natural gas drilling using horizontal hydrofracking. Horizontal hydrofracking uses millions of gallons of water laced with chemicals, identified and not identified, to shatter the shale and obtain the natural gas. This process is a threat to the health and safety of area residents, subjects our drinking water resources, wells and aquifers to the risk of contamination and industrializes our rural community. Air pollution from increased diesel truck traffic and noise pollution from drilling and compressors are just a couple of the noxious adjuncts to hydrofracking. In not leasing my land, I am protecting myself, my family, and my neighbors from the adverse effects of hydrofracking. Name:* Street: City:*

AGREEMENT
NOT TO LEASE LAND ON THE MARCELLUS/UTICA SHALE FOR HORIZONTAL HYDROFRACKING
I agree at this time not to lease my land for natural gas drilling using horizontal hydrofracking. Horizontal hydrofracking uses millions of gallons of water laced with chemicals, identified and not identified, to shatter the shale and obtain the natural gas. This process is a threat to the health and safety of area residents, subjects our drinking water resources, wells and aquifers to the risk of contamination and industrializes our rural community. Air pollution from increased diesel truck traffic and noise pollution from drilling and compressors are just a couple of the noxious adjuncts to hydrofracking. In not leasing my land, I am protecting myself, my family, and my neighbors from the adverse effects of hydrofracking. Name:* Street: City:*

Zip:*

State:* Email:* Acreage:* Location:*

Zip:*

State:* Email:* Acreage:* Location:*

Zip:*

This pledge is an expression of your intentions and is not legally binding. Your email and contact information will not be shared.

This pledge is an expression of your intentions and is not legally binding. Your email and contact information will not be shared.

TO KNOW MORE ABOUT HORIZONTAL HYDROFRACKING

The organizations and websites listed here and on the reverse are just a few of the many which offer valuable information on natural gas drilling, the environment, and the process known as horizontal hydrofracking. Otsego 2000, Inc. www.otsego2000.org Chenango Delaware Otsego Gas Drilling Opposition Group www.un-naturalgas.org Sustainable Otsego www.sustainableotsego.org Shaleshock Action Alliance www.shaleshock.org Binghamton Regional Sustainability Coalition www.binghamtonsustainability.org Otsego County Conservation Association www.occainfo.org Catskill Mountainkeeper www.catskillmountainkeeper.org Action Otsego 2000 www.actionotsego.org Catskill Citizens for Safe Energy www.catskillcitizens.org

TO KNOW MORE ABOUT HORIZONTAL HYDROFRACKING

The organizations and websites listed here and on the reverse are just a few of the many which offer valuable information on natural gas drilling, the environment, and the process known as horizontal hydrofracking. Otsego 2000, Inc. www.otsego2000.org Chenango Delaware Otsego Gas Drilling Opposition Group www.un-naturalgas.org Sustainable Otsego www.sustainableotsego.org Shaleshock Action Alliance www.shaleshock.org Binghamton Regional Sustainability Coalition www.binghamtonsustainability.org Otsego County Conservation Association www.occainfo.org Catskill Mountainkeeper www.catskillmountainkeeper.org Action Otsego 2000 www.actionotsego.org Catskill Citizens for Safe Energy www.catskillcitizens.org

TO KNOW MORE ABOUT HORIZONTAL HYDROFRACKING

The organizations and websites listed here and on the reverse are just a few of the many which offer valuable information on natural gas drilling, the environment, and the process known as horizontal hydrofracking. Otsego 2000, Inc. www.otsego2000.org Chenango Delaware Otsego Gas Drilling Opposition Group www.un-naturalgas.org Sustainable Otsego www.sustainableotsego.org Shaleshock Action Alliance www.shaleshock.org Binghamton Regional Sustainability Coalition www.binghamtonsustainability.org Otsego County Conservation Association www.occainfo.org Catskill Mountainkeeper www.catskillmountainkeeper.org Action Otsego 2000 www.actionotsego.org Catskill Citizens for Safe Energy www.catskillcitizens.org

Committee to Preserve the Finger Lakes www.preservethefingerlakes.org Gas Main www.gasmain.org Marcellus Drilling News www.marcellusdrilling.org New York Well Watch www.nywellwatch.org Tioga County Landowners Group www.tiogagaslease.org Toxics Targeting www.toxicstargeting.com Citizens Campaign for the Environment www.citizenscampaign.org New York Department of Conservation www.dec.ny.gov/energy/46288.html

Committee to Preserve the Finger Lakes www.preservethefingerlakes.org Gas Main www.gasmain.org Marcellus Drilling News www.marcellusdrilling.org New York Well Watch www.nywellwatch.org Tioga County Landowners Group www.tiogagaslease.org Toxics Targeting www.toxicstargeting.com Citizens Campaign for the Environment www.citizenscampaign.org New York Department of Conservation www.dec.ny.gov/energy/46288.html

Committee to Preserve the Finger Lakes www.preservethefingerlakes.org Gas Main www.gasmain.org Marcellus Drilling News www.marcellusdrilling.org New York Well Watch www.nywellwatch.org Tioga County Landowners Group www.tiogagaslease.org Toxics Targeting www.toxicstargeting.com Citizens Campaign for the Environment www.citizenscampaign.org New York Department of Conservation www.dec.ny.gov/energy/46288.html