Drilling Accountability Bill Would Regulate Fracturing Too

by Abrahm Lustgarten
ProPublica
July 29,2010

Tucked inside the Senate bill aimed at cracking down on oil drillers after the Gulf spill is a long-sought measure to protect groundwater from natural gas drilling.

The bill, called The Clean Energy Jobs and Oil Company Accountability Act, would require that drilling companies make public a complete list of chemicals injected underground in proprietary formulas to break up rock deep underground and extract natural gas, a process called hydraulic fracturing.

It would not, however, reverse the exemption that prohibits the Environmental Protection Agency from regulating the fracturing process like other forms of underground injection, another important regulatory change that was initially proposed in House and Senate bills last June along with the chemical disclosure.

That bill, called the Frac Act, was sponsored by Sen. Bob Casey, D-Pa., who pushed for its inclusion in the accountability bill now being considered.

(See flaming Splashdown sidebar at left. Write letters now!)

"Proper regulation is another essential element in protecting drinking water and public health. That is a battle that we still need to fight," Casey told ProPublica in an e-mail. But he emphasized that disclosing the chemical names "is an important step toward informing the public and building accountability for oil and gas companies."

A push for disclosure and stricter regulation of the fracturing process began in earnest last year after a series of articles by ProPublica reported more than a thousand cases of ground and surface water contamination in drilling areas where the process was being used. The articles examined drilling records in more than seven states, and found both a consistent pattern of water contamination in drilling areas, and a gap in scientific knowledge about the way hydraulic fracturing affects underground layers of rock and aquifers.

Problems were severe in Casey's home state, where fast-paced development of the Marcellus Shale natural gas deposit quickly led to dozens of reports of drinking water well contamination in places where hydraulic fracturing had been employed. Residents reported flammable tap water, and state investigations found that methane had seeped into water supplies underground as a result of the drilling activity.

Investigating the cause of such incidents has been difficult in part because the EPA does not have the jurisdiction to regulate fracturing the way it does other injection processes, and because the chemical makeup of the fracturing fluids has been guarded as a trade secret.

Several states, including New York, Colorado and Wyoming, have recently passed disclosure laws of their own, and industry representatives have begun to support the notion. But the language of the Senate bill is the most specific, and would apply to all of the states where oil and gas is produced.

The disclosure proposed today would still allow companies to withhold the exact recipes they use, meaning they wouldn't have to disclose the concentrations to the public. But they would -- in case of emergencies -- be required to share that information on a confidential basis with doctors and hospitals responding to an accident.

It's not clear how far the bill will get in the face of Republican opposition. Sen. Harry Reid, D-Nev., who added the disclosure component to the accountability bill, has said he hoped to bring the bill to a vote next week. Even if it passes, it will need to be reconciled with a House version that does not include the fracturing disclosure language.

LINK

DEMAND ACCOUNTABILITY!

2 NEW REPORTS

PEC Releases Report on Marcellus Shale Development

Recommendations and Findings on Environmental Policy Needs for Pennsylvania

July 13, 2010- The Pennsylvania Environmental Council (PEC) released a report calling for swift action on new regulations and greater oversight of drilling and extraction of natural gas from the Marcellus Shale formation, a major gas field that lies deep beneath much of Pennsylvania.

Called "Developing the Marcellus Shale," the report challenges state government and the natural gas industry to adopt more stringent standards for drilling and extraction to prevent the kind of environmental impacts that have occurred throughout Pennsylvania's industrial past.

The report also includes a number of specific legislative and regulatory changes that PEC believes should be made to minimize the risk of accidents, environmental damage, and public health hazards stemming from drilling operations.

DOWNLOAD Developing the Marcellus Shale

LINK

Beneath the Surface: A Survey of Environmental Risks from Shale Gas Development | Worldwatch Institute

7/16/2010
Washington, D.C.- Improved drilling techniques have unlocked vast new reserves of shale gas, a resource that could be large enough to displace significant amounts of coal, and an energy source that emits less than half the carbon dioxide. But growing shale gas development has raised both environmental questions and public controversy. A new independent assessment by the Worldwatch Institute concludes that improved adherence to drilling best practice and better regulatory oversight are essential to assure environmental and public protection as shale gas production continues to expand.

The report, Addressing Environmental Risks from Shale Gas Development, details what happens beneath the surface during horizontal drilling and hydraulic fracturing in deep shale formations, evaluating the risks to local water quality and the environment, as well as the technologies and policies needed to overcome them.

"Microseismic data have shown us that a properly designed hydraulic fracture job stimulates gas production only within the shale formations, which are typically hundreds of feet thick and thousands of feet deeper than drinking water supplies," says Mark Zoback, a geophysicist at Stanford University and a report co-author. "For this reason, the risk of fractures propagating from deep shale formations to underground sources of drinking water, which has been the subject of much debate, appears to be extremely low."

The report concludes that faulty well construction, in particular poorly cemented steel casings needed to isolate the gas from shallow formations, as well as above-ground contamination due to leaks and spills of fracturing fluids and waste water, pose more significant risks to the environment. In addition, continued study and improved communication of the environmental risks associated with both individual wells and large scale shale gas development are essential for society to make well-informed decisions about its energy future.

"Although the technologies, best practices, and regulations that can help minimize these risks exist, they have not yet been universally adopted," says Worldwatch Fellow and co-author Saya Kitasei. "Experiences in Colorado, Wyoming, Pennsylvania, and New York demonstrate that strong public pressure exists for stricter oversight."

The report, authored by Mark Zoback of Stanford University, Saya Kitasei of the Worldwatch Institute, and Bradford Copithorne of Environmental Defense Fund, is the second in a series of briefing papers from Worldwatch's Natural Gas and Sustainable Energy Initiative, which examines critical environmental and policy issues surrounding natural gas.

Download Addressing Environmental Risks from Shale Gas Development by Mark Zoback, Saya Kitasei, and Bradford Copithorne.

LINK

DEMAND ACCOUNTABILITY!

$400,000 fine for Marcellus Shale blowout

By Andrew Maykuth, Staff Writer
The Philadelphia Inquirer
July 14, 2010

HARRISBURG - In the heftiest fine levied thus far against a Marcellus Shale natural-gas driller, state environmental officials socked a Texas company Tuesday with a $400,000 penalty for failures that caused last month's well blowout in central Pennsylvania.

John Hanger, secretary of the Pennsylvania Department of Environmental Protection (DEP), sharply rebuked EOG Resources Inc. for failing to maintain control of the Clearfield County well, which erupted June 3 and spewed natural gas and toxic wastewater for 16 hours before it could be capped.

Hanger said that EOG had employed only one mechanism to keep the high-pressure gas well under control and that that measure had failed at the hands of employees who were not certified in well-control techniques.

He also said EOG, which is based in Houston, wasted valuable hours by failing to promptly notify officials about the blowout.

Rather than calling DEP's 24-hour emergency line, the driller left three phone messages at night with a DEP employee who was on vacation. Then, the Texans twice tried calling the county sheriff, who in Pennsylvania is not responsible for emergency response. Finally, three hours after the blowout, EOG called 911.

"This incident was preventable and should have never occurred," Hanger said at a news conference Tuesday at which he presented the findings of an independent oil-industry consultant.

John G. Vittitow Sr., a Fort Worth, Texas, petroleum engineer hired by the DEP to investigate the accident, blamed it on human error and procedures that fell short of the industry's best practices.

"I don't know any company that would cut corners like this, on this kind of well," Vittitow said.

The DEP, in addition to the penalties aimed at EOG and a contractor, C.C. Forbes L.L.C., also issued an industry-wide edict Tuesday setting stricter well-closure procedures aimed at preventing similar accidents.

Gary L. Smith, EOG's regional vice president, said in a statement that the company regretted the accident.

"EOG has worked cooperatively with the PADEP to resolve all issues," he said. "We will be implementing the new operational procedures as defined in the letter to all gas well operators and look forward to resuming our activities in the Commonwealth."

The DEP, after being criticized for accommodating the natural-gas industry as the Marcellus Shale frenzy took hold, has adopted a more stern tone this year as criticism has mounted about the industry's practices. About 1,600 Marcellus Shale wells are expected to be drilled this year.

The EOG fine surpassed the $240,000 penalty that the DEP levied in April against Cabot Oil & Gas Co., a Texas driller whose wells in Susquehanna County were blamed last year for polluting an aquifer supplying drinking water to at least 14 households in Dimock Township.

By contrast, the EOG blowout at a rural Clearfield County hunting club resulted in modest damage: There were no injuries; the well did not ignite; and the site has been cleaned up. Though some of the 35,000 gallons of wastewater that the DEP says gushed from the well contaminated a nearby spring, Hanger said that the pollution appeared to be dissipating and that he expected no permanent damage.

But Hanger, who repeatedly has called on the industry to adopt "world-class" standards to match the magnitude of the Marcellus resource, said he intended to send a strong signal to the industry with Tuesday's announcement.

"It's vital, in my mind, that this industry has strong oversight for its own good and for the good of the people of Pennsylvania," he said.

Vittitow, DEP's consultant, said the accident occurred during a well-completion phase, when a contractor - C.C. Forbes - took over the site to clean out obstructions left in the well after the drilling process was finished.

Rather than having multiple barriers to prevent high-pressure gas from escaping from the well, Vittitow said, EOG employed a blowout preventer that had only one fail-safe mechanism. That device, a pipe ram, is designed to clamp around the drilling pipe, sealing off the well bore.

As gas began to leak, the pipe ram was closed. But EOG's on-site supervisor ordered the drill pipe to be pulled up through the clamped closure, damaging the pipe ram's rubber seal. Over the next 90 minutes, the drillers lost control of the well. With no other backup, gas and wastewater shot as high as 75 feet into the air.

"This was just a bad decision, and it caught up with them," said Vittitow. "They were just doing what they've done in other places."

The DEP's order to the industry Tuesday includes a directive requiring operators to have at least two functioning barriers in place during completion operations.

The Marcellus Shale Coalition, an industry trade group, said that most operators have already incorporated the new practices. "Our industry is committed to continuously enhancing and improving our operations, and leveraging the opportunities of the Marcellus in a manner that's safe, efficient, and beneficial to all Pennsylvanians," said Kathryn Z. Klaber, the coalition's executive director.

State Rep. Camille "Bud" George (D., Clearfield), chair of the House Environmental Resources and Energy Committee, who has called for more rigorous oversight of the industry, said he was troubled by EOG's "apparent disregard" of best industry practices.

"No human endeavor is going to be mistake-free," he said, "but the report suggests disregard for basic safeguards, which should trouble everyone."

Coincidentally, the DEP's announcement occurred the same day as the Pennsylvania Environmental Council released a 47-page report calling for a severance tax on gas production and greater regulation of the industry to avoid the state's experiences from unregulated extraction of coal and timber.

"We have to get this right," said Don Welsh, the council's president. "Pennsylvania has been through a whole lot of resource extraction in the past, and we were left a big bill to clean it up."

LINK

DEMAND ACCOUNTABILITY!

A Look at Bradford County, PA

(click to enlarge these images)

Just outside Towanda

Why these water tanks at a Spring Lake residence?

Why the video monitoring?

Word locally is that DEP has ordered the Otten Wells shut down and cleaned up. Note the black plastic covered soil. The road is closed down on either side of this site for no apparent reason, and as shown in the signage photo above, the site warns of video surveillance!
Why haven't we heard about this???

THE OTTEN WELL SITE A YEAR AGO on SPLASHDOWN:
Thursday, July 16, 2009

SLUDGE PITS: Noxious, Toxic, Evaporating into the Atmosphere, Seeping into the Earth

From 5/18/09: Sludge pit at Otten Well Site, Asylum Twp. Bradford Co., PA
Note toxic water seeping into soil where liner has fallen into the pit.

7/8/09: Same Pit: Otten Well Site, Asylum Twp. Bradford Co., PA
Current Condition
Note partially exposed remnants of pit liner...

DEMAND ACCOUNTABILITY!

Robert Kennedy Jr., environmentalists hear of gas woes in Dimock

by laura legere (staff writer)
thetimes-tribune.com
Published: June 4, 2010

DIMOCK TWP. - Residents' complaints about spills, leaks and drinking-water contamination from Marcellus Shale natural gas drilling drew several high-profile environmentalists to Susquehanna County on Thursday.

They included Robert F. Kennedy Jr., one of the nation's foremost environmental attorneys, who called the natural gas industry "just completely and utterly untrustworthy."

Mr. Kennedy was joined by attorneys and activists with the Natural Resources Defense Council, a national environmental group for which he is senior attorney, Catskills Mountainkeeper and Riverkeeper, including actor Mark Ruffalo and former New York Rangers goalie Mike Richter.

The group gathered in the home of one resident among 14 in the township whose drinking water was found by state environmental regulators to have been contaminated with methane from natural gas drilling.

The group then took a tour of the concentrated area where more than 60 wells have been drilled.

The residents told stories about the persistence of methane contamination in their drinking water and inadequate solutions to remove or replace it. They also talked about spills on or around their properties and assurances they said the gas companies made and broke.

Mr. Kennedy, who believes natural gas is an important bridge fuel on the way to developing greener energy alternatives, said most of the problems caused by the industry are solvable, "but you need really tough oversight by the regulatory agencies" and for best practices to be required by law.

He referred to his work to restrict or clean up dirtier energy extraction processes, including a lawsuit he filed against BP for the Deepwater Horizon oil spill in the Gulf of Mexico. He was driving back to New York after spending most of the day in Dimock in order to speak about the spill on CNN on Thursday night.

"I see the coal industry blowing up mountains, and I filed the first lawsuit in the Gulf," he said. "I'm saying, gas has got to be better than this."

Foremost among his concerns about the shale gas extraction process, he said, is the industrialization of landscapes where drilling occurs, like the hills and valleys of Dimock.

But there are models in other areas, including Arkansas, where well development is restricted to one pad per square mile in order to avoid unnecessary roads, pipelines and development, he said. Advances in horizontal drilling, where the drill bit turns and burrows laterally through the shale, have allowed companies to extract gas from up to seven miles underground from one well pad.

But he cautioned the Dimock residents that his experiences have taught him never to trust "any of these gas companies."

"They all seem to be pathological liars," he said. "You can make deals with them, and they're going to break the deals. You've seen that happen at the local level; I've seen it at the national level."

Victoria Switzer, the resident who hosted the meeting, said advances in the industry's technology and best practices are encouraging, but it will not change what she and her neighbors suffered because of laxer practices, some of which are still allowed by law.

"Why don't we stop them behaving this way?" she said.

LINK

DEMAND ACCOUNTABILITY!

Gas, fluids spew for hours from blown-out Pa. well

By MARC LEVY and JENNIFER C. YATES
Associated Press Writer
KansasCity.com

A blowout at a natural-gas well in a remote area shot explosive gas and polluted water as high as 75 feet into the air before crews were able to tame it more than half a day later, officials said Friday.

The gas never caught fire, and no injuries were reported, but state officials worried about an explosion before the well could be controlled. The well was brought under control just after noon Friday, about 16 hours after it started spewing gas and brine, said Elizabeth Ivers, a spokeswoman for driller EOG Resources Inc.

Pennsylvania, historically an insignificant source of natural gas, is trying to adapt its laws to respond to a furious rush to tap a gas-rich shale formation under its land. The blowout could test the ability of state regulators, who promised an aggressive investigation into the accident. (see DEP Press Release below)

"The event at the well site could have been a catastrophic incident that endangered life and property," Department of Environmental Protection Secretary John Hanger said in a statement. "This was not a minor accident but a serious incident that will be fully investigated by this agency with the appropriate and necessary actions taken quickly."

If the agency finds that mistakes were made, it will take steps to prevent similar errors, he said. It was too early to tell the extent of any environmental damage, he said.

Details about the accident were still sketchy, but the agency was told that unexpectedly high gas pressure in the new well prevented the crew from containing it, said Dan Spadoni, a spokesman for the Department of Environmental Protection.

EOG declined to explain how the accident happened, citing the ongoing investigation. Public safety and protection of the environment are of the utmost importance, the company said in a statement.

President Barack Obama and others have touted exploration of shale as a major new source of clean, homegrown energy. However, lawmakers who are battling for more stringent oversight of such drilling to protect clean drinking water quickly seized on the accident.

"Incidents like this blowout are a reminder that there are dangers and that precautions must be taken to protect the health and well-being of Pennsylvanians," U.S. Sen. Bob Casey said in a statement.

Casey has sponsored a bill to require the industry to comply with the Safe Drinking Water Act and force it to disclose the chemicals it uses in its hydraulic fracturing processes - in which millions of gallons of water, sand and chemicals are blasted underground to shatter tightly compacted shale and release trapped natural gas.

Amy Mall, Senior Policy Analyst, writes on Switchboard, the staff blog of the Natural Resources Defense Council:

"Today a natural gas well blew out in a Pennsylvania state forest during a hydraulic fracturing operation. Officials have estimated that one million gallons of hydraulic fracturing fluid, including chemical additives, plus an undetermined amount of wet natural gas, has blown out of the well. Wet natural gas can contain highly flammable hydrocarbons, like propane and butane, and hazardous substances, such as hydrogen sulfide. These are separated out before natural gas makes its way to your stove or furnace.

Campers and others in the forest were evacuated. While no one wants this kind of toxic explosion in a state forest, imagine if it were near a school or hospital? In this case, the Federal Aviation Administration even had to issue flight restrictions. These hazardous substances will be carried by the air and will settle on land and vegetation. It will be very important to know what chemicals were being used in this hydraulic fracturing operation. Will the company doing the hydraulic fracturing disclose this information to the public?"

LINK

David Rensink, the incoming president of the American Association of Petroleum Geologists, said gas well blowouts are very rare and can be very dangerous to control, since a spark can set off an explosion.

Typically, a blowout preventer - a series of valves that sit atop a well - allows workers to control the pressure inside, he said.

Just such a device figured into the massive oil spill off the coast of Louisiana. The oil rig's blowout preventer was supposed to shut off the flow of oil in the event of a catastrophic failure but failed to do so.

The Pennsylvania well is on the grounds of a hunting club in a heavily forested section of Clearfield County, near Interstate 80 and about 90 miles northeast of Pittsburgh.

Houston-based EOG, formerly part of Enron Corp., was drilling into the Marcellus Shale reserve, a hotly pursued gas formation primarily under Pennsylvania, West Virginia, New York and Ohio that some geologists believe could become the nation's most productive natural gas field.

There are more than 1,000 Marcellus Shale wells in Pennsylvania alone, some of them within view of homes, farmhouses and public roads.

There were no homes within a mile of the well, and polluted drilling water was prevented from reaching a waterway, said Spadoni, the department spokesman.

On Friday afternoon, a worker blocked a dirt road to the site, while trucks hauling tanks to remove the polluted water streamed past him. He said he was not allowed to talk about what had happened.

The accident happened just after the crew finished hydraulic fracturing. The crew was clearing out debris from the well when gas shot out of it, Spadoni said.

Workers evacuated the site and contacted county authorities before 10 p.m., said John Sobel, a Clearfield County commissioner. A Pennsylvania Emergency Management Agency spokeswoman said the agency got word after midnight and within the hour notified the DEP. The DEP said it wasn't notified until 1:30 a.m., more than five hours after the blowout.

The polluted water flowing out of the well and into the woods was stopped by a trench and a pump installed by a contractor, Spadoni said. Companies that specialize in securing blown-out wells were called in, he said. ...

LINK to complete report

DEP Plans Thorough Investigation in to Marcellus Shale Well Blowout in Clearfield County

FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE
06/4/2010

COMMONWEALTH OF PENNSYLVANIA
Dept. of Environmental Protection
Commonwealth News Bureau
Room 308, Main Capitol Building
Harrisburg PA., 17120

CONTACT:
Neil Weaver, Department of Environmental Protection
717-787-1323

EOG Resources Well Released Fracking Fluid, Natural Gas for 16 Hours

HARRISBURG -- Department of Environmental Protection Secretary John Hanger said today that his agency intends to investigate aggressively the circumstances surrounding a blowout at a Marcellus Shale natural gas well in Lawrence Township, Clearfield County, and take the appropriate enforcement action.

At approximately 8 p.m. on Thursday, June 3, the operators of the well, which is owned by EOG Resources, Inc., lost control of it while preparing to extract gas after hydrofracturing the shale. As a result, the well released natural gas and flowback frack fluid onto the ground and 75 feet into the air. The well was eventually capped around noon on June 4.

“The event at the well site could have been a catastrophic incident that endangered life and property,” said Hanger. “This was not a minor accident, but a serious incident that will be fully investigated by this agency with the appropriate and necessary actions taken quickly.

“When we arrived on scene, natural gas and frack fluid was flowing off the well pad and heading toward tributaries to Little Laurel Run and gas was shooting into the sky, creating a significant fire hazard. That’s why emergency responders acted quickly to cut off electric service to the area.

“Right now, we’re focused on limiting any further environmental damage, but once that work is complete, we plan to aggressively look at this situation and see where things went wrong and what enforcement action is necessary. If mistakes were made, we will be certain to take steps to prevent similar errors from happening again.” (Once again... -Splashdown)

DEP learned of the leak at approximately 1:30 a.m. on Friday after it was informed by the Pennsylvania Emergency Management Agency. DEP immediately dispatched its Emergency Response and Oil and Gas program staff to the site.

PEMA, which elevated its activation level to coordinate resources among multiple state agencies, also worked with PennDOT to initiate an airspace restriction above the well, which the Federal Aviation Administration authorized on a temporary basis earlier today. The restriction prohibits flights at and below 1,000 feet of ground level within a three nautical mile radius of the well site. The restriction is in effect until further notice.

The EOG well pad is located in a rural area near the Penfield/Route 153 exit of Interstate 80 in northwestern Clearfield County. Three other wells on the same pad that have been drilled and fractured remain plugged and are not in danger.

EOG Resources, formerly known as Enron Oil & Gas Co., operates approximately 265 active wells in Pennsylvania, 117 of which are in the Marcellus Shale formation.

For more information, call visit www.depweb.state.pa.us.

DEMAND ACCOUNTABILITY!

As EPA Takes Action, Trade Secrets Continue Threatening Health and Safety

© OMB Watch
Posted on June 2, 2010

The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) has taken a significant step toward making more chemical health and safety information available to the public even as trade secrets claims continue to conceal such information elsewhere. A new EPA policy will reject most industry claims that chemical identities included in health and safety studies are trade secrets. Meanwhile, the oil and gas industry continues to use trade secrets privileges to thwart attempts to disclose chemical information related to the BP oil spill and controversial natural gas drilling operations.

On May 27, the EPA announced a new "general practice" where the agency will review all claims by manufacturers that a chemical's identity should be treated as confidential business information (CBI) when the identity is part of a health and safety study or the study's underlying data. The agency expects that unless the disclosure of the chemical identity explicitly reveals how the chemical is produced or processed, the secrecy claim will be rejected, allowing the public to link the chemical to its health and safety information.

This is the third recent major action by EPA to rein in overuse of trade secrets claims by the chemicals industry under the nation's primary chemicals statute, the Toxic Substances Control Act (TSCA). Earlier, the agency announced that chemical identities that were public in the TSCA inventory (a list of more than 83,000 chemical substances) could not be claimed as trade secrets and that the agency would provide free access to the inventory, which had only been available for a fee.

According to EPA, the new practice "is part of a broader effort to increase transparency and provide more valuable information to the public by identifying data collections where information may have been claimed and treated as confidential in the past but is not in fact entitled to confidentiality under TSCA." By late August, EPA plans to begin reviewing new and existing confidentiality claims for chemical identities found in health and safety studies, as well as associated data.

TSCA generally prohibits chemical health and safety information from being withheld from the public. Up to this point, however, the public might have had access to the health studies but not the identity of the chemicals the health studies referred to, rendering the studies and data practically useless. The practice of claiming chemical identity as CBI has been widespread at EPA despite regulatory language that clearly states that "chemical identity is part of, or underlying data to, a health and safety study" and also states, "Chemical identity is always part of a health and safety study."

EPA "believes that Congress generally intended for the public to be able to know the identities of chemical substances for which health and safety studies have been submitted." EPA announced that it "believes these actions will make more health and safety information available to the public and support an important mission of the Agency to promote public understanding of the potential risks posed by chemical substances in commerce."

EPA further acknowledges that TSCA was not intended "to limit the uses of information from a health and safety study" by keeping the public – including a chemical company's competitors – in the dark about chemical identities. Manufacturers have argued that their competitors could use disclosed chemical identities to learn about the proprietary manufacturing processes. EPA has rejected this argument, stating that "[disclosing] the end product of a process (i.e., a chemical identity) is not the same thing as disclosing the process to make that end product."

Oil and Gas Drillers Push for Secrecy

Despite EPA's actions, the disclosure of chemical identities remains a major issue on other fronts. At a recent House Energy and Commerce Committee mark-up, an amendment to the Safe Drinking Water Act that would have required the disclosure of the identities of chemicals used in a near-ubiquitous natural gas drilling process called hydraulic fracturing was withdrawn by its sponsor (Diana DeGette, D-CO) following strong industry criticism.

Hydraulic fracturing (or fracking) is a process where water, chemicals, and other materials are pumped under high pressure into a well to create and prop open fissures in underground rock, thus allowing trapped natural gas to flow out and be recovered. Fracking chemicals may include known carcinogens and other toxins.

Hydraulic fracturing, which was exempted from federal regulation in 2005, is linked to numerous cases of groundwater contamination. Fracking fluids may also leak or spill on the surface, creating additional ecological and public health threats. The House measure, sponsored by Rep. Diana DeGette (D-CO), only would have required the chemical constituents used in hydraulic fracturing to be posted on the Internet, with no other federal regulations placed on the process.

Another fracking disclosure measure is included in the discussion draft of climate change legislation now pending in the Senate. The language in the climate bill and other measures would only require disclosure of chemical constituents, imposing no other regulation of natural gas drilling. Regardless, the oil and gas drilling industry has fought vociferously against the disclosure of the chemicals being pumped underground, claiming the information is proprietary.

The day after the House mark-up, during which DeGette withdrew her disclosure amendment, a subcommittee of the same House Energy and Commerce Committee held a hearing to examine the BP oil spill catastrophe in the Gulf of Mexico. The poor flow of information to the public and Congress was a topic of concern.

Significant concerns have been raised regarding the use and identity of chemical dispersants on the BP oil spill. The dispersants are chemicals that attempt to break down oil before it can reach the shoreline. So far, BP has used more than 980,000 gallons of dispersants. The identities of the chemicals being poured into the Gulf of Mexico are considered to be trade secrets, and the EPA has not released this information to the public. The toxic effects – both short-term and long-term – of the dispersants are not fully understood. Scientists remain concerned about the ultimate fate of the chemicals and how they travel and interact with marine life and other chemicals in the Gulf.

EPA states, "All the information EPA can make public about these dispersants can be found on the Product Schedule. Some of the ingredients are listed as confidential. This is because the manufacturer has chosen to keep this information proprietary, and as a result EPA is obligated to withhold this information."

Both the general rules EPA uses to make CBI determinations and the specific rules that apply to TSCA's CBI determinations contain emergency provisions that allow the EPA to disclose CBI under conditions where public health and the environment face "imminent and substantial danger" or "an unreasonable risk of injury."

The chemical reportedly being used by BP to disperse the oil is banned in Britain but approved for use in the United States and Canada. Recent reports of fishermen becoming ill after possibly being exposed to the dispersants, combined with the unprecedented quantities of dispersants being used and the unique situation involving their use at extreme ocean depths, would seem to qualify the situation for the same level of openness that EPA is applying to chemical identities elsewhere. As the EPA made clear in describing its new TSCA CBI policy, without knowing what the chemicals are, researching their impacts is considerably more difficult.

LINK

DEMAND ACCOUNTABILITY!

Write to your Senators and Representatives in support of public health and safety. Demand disclosure legislation now!

Beyond Burlington

In Bradford County, more and more residents appear to be dealing with "water mysteries".

On May 5th Splashdown! reported properties in the Plank Road vicinity of Towanda, PA. with new above ground water tanks sitting in their yards... replacing what must be wells whose water has become contaminated. Reports of this situation did not appear in local papers.

Here now are additional recently installed replacement water tanks, and evidence of a newly drilled well... this time in the area around Spring Lake, where drilling is also going on, with roads torn up and closed.

LOCATION OF J.T. PLACE RESIDENCE, SITE OF CONTAMINATED WELL ON SPRING LAKE ROAD

J.T. PLACE RESIDENCE, WITH 2 NEW "WATER BUFFALOS"

NEW ELECTRIC SERVICE FOR WATER BUFFALOS
(Note on post reads: To Chesapeake, Do not take any water from the well. J.T. Place)

The people of Bradford County NEED to know when and where wells and aquifers are being contaminated. If the water at this residence, across from Spring Lake is contaminated, what about Spring Lake??? This is a matter of public health and safety. And yet... the facts are not being reported to the public.

EVIDENT NEW WELL AT THIS SPRING LAKE AREA RESIDENCE...

WHY are we not reading about these important newsworthy items in our local paper? And why, when asked, are residents unwilling to talk about the situation?

Finally... why is the Bradford County Council on the Arts (BCRAC) unwilling to show the award-winning documentary "GASLAND" to the people of Bradford County? Invited repeatedly, the film was termed "unbalanced" and filled with "scare tactics" by Brooks Eldredge-Martin, the art council's executive director, who ruled the film therefore unsuitable, depriving the people of Bradford County of the ability to make up their own minds about the film!
Aside from the fact that this raises a lot of issues, fortunately "GASLAND" will be shown in Montrose, Elmira and Ithaca (see the Announcements sidebar) and has recently been screened in Williamsport, where approximately 1000 people turned out to see it. In each case, filmmaker, Josh Fox is there to answer questions from the audience...

DEMAND ACCOUNTABILITY!

"The Big Deception"... Calvin Tillman Addresses Paid Liars

When I first decided that we needed to have some biological testing accomplished here in DISH, TX, I was cautioned against getting our state health department involved. Most figured that they would run up here and began covering the back side of the oil and gas industry like they have done so many times before. However, I also have some very smart and nationally recognized people who help me in these decisions and we decided that if they would take our input on the testing, we might be OK. So we asked the Texas Department of State Health Services (DSHS) to test the air and a tentatively identified compound test in conjunction with the tests they were running. But they ignored the request from a nationally recognized scientist, who has more scientific recognition in her little toe, than anyone who works for the DSHS will ever have. Therefore, their report subsequently has turned out more political than scientific.

As one well known citizen who lives in the barnett shale has stated, "everything you hear from the natural gas industry in either a lie, or half truth". Here in DISH, we are used to the paid liars from this industry coming in and feeding us the normal lines like what good neighbors they want to be. However, when you get this from your state agencies that are sworn to protect you, it does not set as well. Many people believe everything these people say, and they are never held accountable when they are wrong...or deceitful. The DSHS showed up just like many of the other paid liars, thinking that they would blow smoke up the rear ends of a bunch of country bumpkins that didn't know any better, and just like the other paid liars, they left with their tails between their legs. Country bumpkins typically recognize the smell of BS pretty quickly.

After thinking about this, and doing some research into the matter, it was clear that no matter what was detected, the DSHS would have found a way to say there is nothing wrong. They have a history of doing just that, please see the following link, where they failed to protect the public interest in Texas once again.

http://www.dshs.state.tx.us/epitox/consults/delroc_hc.pdf

In this "investigation" the community was worried about water run-off from a former refinery (hmm same industry), and subsequent surface water contamination. However, the same characters who came to DISH, decided the surface water didn't need testing. The soil and sediment were tested and both exceeded the Health Based Assessment Comparison for aluminum, arsenic, BaP TEQ (benzene derivative), and vandium. Conclusion - "no apparent public health hazard". In my line of business we call people like this "hacks".

In our case, they were looking hard for criticisms from us before the meeting, so that they could prepare to answer them. I made some comment to the media about the number of folks who had toluene and xylene in their systems, and oddly enough they came up with statistics that show we are actually lower than the rest of the United States, this was not in the report, just the presentation. At this point I started getting that familiar smell that we have grown accustomed to here in DISH... and not the natural gas smell. I then asked for the source of the statistics they used to determine this and they sent me to NHANES, said "just google it". Maybe that was their joke, because me and others searched for hours with no success finding this data. I did find a statement that said VOCs are present in most everyone at some level, but it would not be in detectable levels in everyone, so that may have been one of those "half truths".

During my several hours of research, I did find that the 95th percentile used in the DISH study appears to be a hand picked by the "hacks", and likely hand picked for a purpose. Apparently, you do not need a percentile reference number, but when one is used the 90th percentile seems to be the number used by real scientists. If 50% of the households in DISH were above the 95th percentile for chemical exposure, I wonder how many are over the 90th percentile. However, if they would have figured that, it is likely that they would have that trend they were looking for, and we damn sure wouldn't want that, now would we? I think similar lying with statistics was accomplished in Flower Mound as well. If they start finding problems, the boys and girls in Austin would not get those critical campaign contributions they have grown accustom to. In my business we look for trends, and I am starting to see a trend with these "hacks".

If the above blatant failures were not enough to show what a joke this was, you must hear the rest of the story. Dr. Bradford admitted when questioned that the study was not a scientific study. However, they came to a very solid conclusion, with this non-scientific study. The conclusion goes something like...we see exposure but have no idea where the exposure is coming from, but it damn sure aint coming from that compressor station that we smelled those horrible odors from.

They then admitted that they did not know how close any of the citizens lived to the compressor sites, nor did they know the number of males vs females that were tested, and did not even know the age range of those who were tested. You would think they would have known the answers to the easy stuff if they wanted to appear believable. The data that they used for comparison in DISH was seven years old. Outdated data is something they also used in Flower Mound to help them reach their objective. I guess they figured they had this one in the bag like all the others before, too bad the country bumpkin's weren't buying.

Children were not tested as part of this "investigation". There apparently was no data to compare the results; however, in my wild goose chase that Dr. Bradford sent me on, I found several studies that referenced children. The one mentioned above showed how these chemicals affect children differently than adults...and yea it is much worse. She avoided the question during the meeting when asked about how children are affected differently than adults. Frankly, I believe that they were sent here to not find anything and they would likely find exposure in our children. If they find toluene and xylene in kids they would not be able to blame it on smoking. Even us country bumpkins don't let our five year olds smoke. They would not have been able to give us the "half truths" that they did, and people don't play when it come to their kids. If us nice country folk knew our kids have BTEX chemical exposure, we may not be so nice any more. I am hopeful that the light will shine on some of the roaches who are responsible for these illusions, and I think there is another facility I would rather see them at, and it is located in Huntsville, Texas.

The house of cards they built came down very quickly. I am extremely disappointed that these folks did not take their oaths seriously, and are allowing the public to continue being put at risk. I had originally felt sorry for those who were likely on the puppets for the higher ups, but it is all too apparent that this is not there first deception, so they should have moved on to something else if they weren't committed to covering things like this up. They have actually offered to come back for another round of testing. I think I would rather see if the Chesapeake or Devon environmental department is available, they are much better liars.

In closing I would like to say that this "investigation" brings more questions than answers, and it is time for us to demand a stop to the social injustices that these state agencies are allowed to impose. Many people have no other options than to take their word for it, and no recourse when they are wrong. We apparently have not only been sacrificed for the good of the shale by these companies, but also the State of Texas. It is time for us to hold these paid liars accountable for their actions. Please let me know if you have any skills to help me investigate similar injustices.

Fortunately, the last state agency that left the DISH town hall with their tails between their legs was shamed into installing a permanent air monitor. Frankly, I am delightfully surprised by the improvements in our air quality over the last month. I am certainly not calling all clear, but it may be that we don't even need more testing, but I know that another community will face the same situation if there is not something done. If this industry would just do it right, we would not have many of these problems. The Gulf would not be becoming the dead sea and our children would not be exposed to cancer causing toxins. Please post on your blogs and websites.

See report here:
http://www.dshs.state.tx.us/epitox/consults/dish_ei_2010.pdf

Calvin Tillman
Mayor, DISH, TX
(940) 453-3640

DEMAND ACCOUNTABILITY!

"It’s a world-class gas resource,” said Hanger, “and we need a world-class regulatory system to match it.”

Pennsylvania DEP, gas companies talk about drilling regulations in light of Marcellus Shale-related boom
By DONALD GILLILAND
The Patriot-News
May 13, 2010

More than 90 technical experts on Marcellus Shale from 40 companies involved with natural gas drilling in Pennsylvania sat down with technical staff from the state Department of Environmental Protection Thursday to review new, tougher drilling regulations.

The current oil and gas regulations were written for shallow wells, not the deep wells and millions of gallons of water employed in Marcellus drilling.

DEP Secretary John Hanger addressed the group. “They needed to hear from me that these rules are going to be enforced strongly,” said Hanger. “The companies have a key role here. They need to have a culture here in Pennsylvania that accepts the importance of rules and respects government oversight. Companies that have a culture of contempt or seeking shortcuts are going to have a lot of problems with me.

“It’s a world-class gas resource,” said Hanger, “and we need a world-class regulatory system to match it.”

Industry leaders echoed that after the meeting. Strengthening the regulations on drilling in Pennsylvania “absolutely has to be done right, and it absolutely has to be done now,” said Ray Walker, senior vice president of Range Resources Corp. in Cannonsburg and chairman of the Marcellus Shale Coalition. ...

Walker said tougher regulations are better for the industry in the long run. “It’s a case of pay now or pay a lot, lot more later,” he said. “Problems cost money. We want to do it right the first time.” ...

Multiple private wells in Dimock Twp. in Susquehanna County have been contaminated with natural gas after Cabot Oil & Gas Inc. began Marcellus drilling in the area.
LINK.

DEMAND ACCOUNTABILITY!

Some Marcellus Shale drilling put on hold

By Sandy Bauers, Staff Writer
The Philadelphia Inquirer
May 6, 2010

Drilling for natural gas in the Marcellus Shale in Pennsylvania's easternmost counties has been put on hold for months, if not longer.

On Wednesday, the Delaware River Basin Commission voted unanimously to draft new regulations to govern natural gas projects and not to issue any permits until the new rules are in effect.

The decision means that even as activity escalates throughout the state - nearly 900 Marcellus permits have been issued this year - no production drilling can be done in the Delaware watershed.

Adopting new rules could take six months to a year, commission executive director Carol R. Collier said Thursday. ...

"I know there are many that want the gas-well drilling to move along quickly because of the economics and the issue of national security and providing clean fuel," Collier said. "But I really think we have to do it correctly and smartly. There's just too much at stake in the Delaware River basin."

Environmental groups cheered the decision, saying it was the "pause button" they have long sought statewide as the tally of explosions, spills, and pollution incidents mounts. So far this year, the state Department of Environmental Protection has initiated 116 enforcement actions against drillers. ...

John Hanger, secretary of the state Department of Environmental Protection, which also has regulatory authority over natural gas drilling, said the two agencies should work together so no conflicts arise and "to provide strong oversight of this industry."

The commission is an interstate agency, formed by a federal compact, that has legal authority over water quality and quantity in the basin. The governors of the four basin states - Pennsylvania, New Jersey, New York, and Delaware - plus a federal appointee are commissioners, but they often send representatives.

The New Jersey representative at Wednesday's meeting, Fred Sickels of the state DEP water-supply division, said that with all the activity, "the cumulative impacts could be significant if there aren't appropriate safeguards."

Pennsylvania's northeastern counties - where the shale region and the Delaware watershed overlap - have been deemed a high-stakes area.

The pressure to drill there could be even more intense than elsewhere. Geological maps indicate that corner of Pennsylvania is a sweet spot with huge quantities of natural gas.

More than 6,000 leases have been signed in Wayne County alone, said Brian W. Smith, chairman of the Wayne County supervisors.

No drilling other than test wells, which are still allowed, has been done in the watershed.

But environmental concerns are high. The Delaware River from Hancock, N.Y., south to Trenton is so clean that it is under stricter, "special protection waters" regulations. Also, the federal government has designated portions of the river wild and scenic areas worthy of enhanced protection.

And downstream - where the river's quality is the sum of everything that has occurred upstream - are Philadelphia's water intakes.

Proponents say natural gas drilling is adding millions of dollars to local economies and has environmental benefits because the fuel burns cleaner than coal.

Critics say the drilling process is fraught with hazards and the regulatory baseline is inadequate.

In March, Philadelphia City Council unanimously passed a resolution asking the commission not to approve any applications in the Marcellus Shale until a full environmental impact assessment is done. ...

During a public-input period, the commission received more than 2,000 comments.

"We're looking at things that have happened to the west of us and what needs to be put in place to prevent that," Collier said. "We're learning a lot, and we want to do it right."

LINK

HOORAY FOR SENSIBLE PRIORITIES! Hopefully the DRBC's actions will serve as a bellwether for the rest of the state! Clearly the same perspectives were lacking when the DCNR chose to allow drilling under the Susquehanna River... for a "whopping" (just joking) $6.15 million! -Splashdown

DEMAND ACCOUNTABILITY!

Water woes aired in Burlington: a Daily Review Report...

BY ERIC HRIN (STAFF WRITER)
thedailyreview.com
May 5, 2010

BURLINGTON - Some residents in Burlington Borough are dealing with a water mystery.

The matter came to the surface at the borough council meeting Tuesday.

According to council member Jerri Renzo, at least five residents on the Berwick Turnpike have been dealing with the problem for a year.

"We're finding like a grit in the bottom of our tub, which we never had before," she said. "We've always had iron, but we learned to live with that. But we've had problems with our water softener, so we had someone come and check it, and they said it was the water ... it wasn't that we needed a new one or anything like that."

She said her water was tested, and it showed high levels of magnesium and strontium. Now, she said they're buying bottled water to drink, noting it's an inconvenience and can be costly.

She said they just don't know what's causing it. "We don't know," she said. "We want to find out."

According to Renzo, the state Department of Environmental Protection (DEP) advised the residents not to drink it or brush their teeth or cook with it, so they're not ingesting it.

"We've never had good water in this town, no one has, but over the past year, it's gotten worse," she said.

Judy Parmenter said a test showed high levels of manganese, iron, sodium, and chloride in her water.

During the meeting, she showed a cup with a dark-colored residue in it from her water.

She thought about 10 people were affected in the borough.

But the residents may have an answer soon.

According to Parmenter, someone from state Sen. Gene Yaw's office informed her that John Hanger, DEP secretary, is reviewing the situation and maybe already delegating it to the proper people.

"We should be hearing from them in a week, we hope," she said.

"It's gets to be very smelly," she said of the water. "The smell is terrible, it goes through the whole house. It sometimes makes you nauseated. When you take a shower, sometimes it burns, sometimes it itches."

Hmmm... sounds familiar!

"Some people got a rash, not all of us."

Parmenter said the whole experience has been inconvenient with having to get bottled water to use.

"I'm hoping they're (DEP) going to tell me that they're going to send in officials to help us find the cause, to help us find a way to clear it up and stop it from going to other residents."

LINK

and now... some things the Daily Review hasn't been reporting!

According to a report dated April 30, 2010, titled New York State Senator Antoine Thompson Makes a Second Fact Finding Trip to Towanda and Dimock, PA, on Thursday, April 29 Senator Thompson, Chair of the NY Senate Environmental Conservation Committee, went on a second fact finding trip to gas drilling sites in northern PA, heading a group of state senators, NYC DEP officials and an assembly person.

"As on the first trip, the morning was devoted to a Chesapeake-guided tour of one of their model well sites near Towanda PA. Mayor Calvin Tillman of DISH, Texas had been invited to join the group. At the 11th hour, the Senator's office received a call from Chesapeake, reportedly at the behest of influential NY O&G lawyer Tom West http://www.westfirmlaw.com/ that Mayor Tillman would not be welcome.

Michael Lebron, a principal of New Yorkers for Sustainable Energy Solutions State Wide (NYSESS) and a board member of Damascus Citizens for Sustainability (DCS), stepped in and took Mayor Tillman on a different tour: to locations where water well contamination has occurred in association with gas drilling activity by Chesapeake in Bradford County. In each instance, a pattern of contamination was described as follows: tap water would first turn black, then it would acquire a foul odor, and then methane levels increased to the point where the water could be lit. In one instance, the contamination occurred after a gas well was drilled one mile away. In another, it was reported that a one acre pond turned black, then became bubbly, and that electrical had to be cut off from a woodworking shop and a utility transformer moved across the street because methane levels risked an explosion."

CONTAMINATION: PLANK ROAD and VICINITY, TOWANDA, BRADFORD CO. PA

REPLACEMENT WATER TANK, LUCE PROPERTY, MAHONEY RD., TOWANDA

PLANK ROAD HOME WITH 2 "WATER BUFFALOS" AND 10' WELL VENT PIPE

The people of Towanda, and other communities in Bradford County NEED to know when and where wells and aquifers are being contaminated. This is a matter of public health and safety. And yet... the facts are not being reported to the public.
These are not the only instances of contamination in Bradford County. Why aren't they being reported?
Subsurface contamination can and does migrate. It can and has affected water wells at unpredictable distances from the gas drilling site. People, domestic animals and wildlife have become sickened or died of contamination resulting from gas drilling. This is a serious matter. It is hard to conceive that the daily newspaper is not striving to be vigilant and intent on keeping the people in the communities it serves informed and aware of potential dangers...

DEMAND ACCOUNTABILITY!

DEP head wants tougher laws on shale gas drilling

Monday, May 03, 2010

By Don Hopey, Pittsburgh Post-Gazette

Pennsylvania needs tougher regulations for Marcellus shale gas drilling, aggressive, independent enforcement and a severance tax on the gas extracted, according to state Department of Environmental Protection Secretary John Hanger.

And yesterday would not be soon enough to get all of that done and "done right" to protect the state's water resources, said Mr. Hanger in a forceful keynote speech opening the Marcellus Shale Policy Conference at Duquesne University today.

Citing environmental damage done by Pennsylvania's early history of unregulated coal mining, the oil well disaster and widening slick in the Gulf of Mexico and the 29 dead miners at the Upper Big Branch Mine in West Virginia, Mr. Hanger challenged state legislators, regulators and the natural gas industry not to make those kinds of mistakes again.

"Let me be clear: Self regulation doesn't work. That's not contestable," Mr. Hanger said to the audience of about 250, including a significant number of gas industry representatives. "We've made mistakes before. We have to get this right or the costs will overwhelm the benefits."

Mr. Hanger said Pennsylvania needs stronger regulations to protect its rivers and creeks from well waste water pollution, tougher and more comprehensive well construction standards, rules limiting toxic air pollution from wells and compressor pumping stations and bigger bonds to cover capping of wells when they stop producing.

"The bonding regulations are pitiful -- $2,500 a well or $25,000 for all the wells a company drills in the state," Mr. Hanger said, provoking a couple of chuckles from the audience. "Well the joke will be on us when the first company leaves Pennsylvania. Right now clearly the rational economic decision would be forfeit the bond and walk away."

Read more HERE.

DEMAND ACCOUNTABILITY!

Chorus of operators calling for frac fluid disclosure grows

(But What Does It Mean???)
Fort Worth Business Press
By JOHN-LAURENT TRONCHE
April 26, 2010

When the nation’s largest oil and gas exploration and production company offered its support for making the chemicals used in hydraulic fracturing public, concerned U.S. residents who want transparency got perhaps their biggest boost from a somewhat unlikely source.

In a U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission filing, Irving-based ExxonMobil Corp. said it would support the disclosure of chemicals used in hydraulic fracturing. ...the injection of millions of gallons of water, sand and chemicals – so far not publicly disclosed by oilfield services companies – into the ground to break up porous shale and allow for enhanced recovery of natural gas and oil.

“ExxonMobil supports the disclosure of the identity of the ingredients being used in fracturing fluids at each site,” according to the April 13 filing. “While we understand the intellectual property concerns of service companies when it comes to disclosing the proprietary formulations in their exact amounts, we believe the concerns of community members can be alleviated by the disclosure of all ingredients used in these fluids.”

The company’s stance is seen as a move aimed at curbing possible federal regulation of fracing, which so far has been overseen by state agencies, such as the Railroad Commission of Texas. ExxonMobil’s statement also echoes similar stands by two other companies: Chesapeake Energy Corp. and Range Resources Corp., whose top executives last year offered their support for disclosure.

Although several big names support disclosure, transparency isn’t their decision to make. The oilfield services companies perform the process for the operators, and therefore must choose to make the chemicals public information, which isn’t likely.

...

The top three firms – Halliburton, Schlumberger and BJ Services Co. – either did not return multiple requests for comment by the Business Press’ time of publication or skirted the question of whether they would consider disclosing the chemicals used.

ExxonMobil can’t force services companies to disclose, said Lisa K. Vaughn, a partner in the Fort Worth office of Shannon, Gracey, Ratliff & Miller LLP, “but as they and the other bigwigs of the world put more pressure on the suppliers to disclose that might lead the,” push toward disclosure.

Operators “are beginning to feel legislative pressure against their potential environmental contaminants,” she added...

Insistence on safety

A driving force behind the move toward disclosure is public pressure.

“Part of what’s going on is this recognition by the oil and gas companies that there’s this fear by the public about what’s in the frac fluid, and this fear is caused by not knowing,” Vaughn said.

Despite public fears, the Railroad Commission of Texas insists the process is safe and effectively regulated.

Yadda yadda yadda:

“Even with the recent intense hydraulic fracing activity in the Barnett Shale of more than 13,000 gas wells, there have been no documented cases of groundwater pollution caused by fracing in Texas,” said Ramona Nye, a commission spokeswoman. “One reason for this is that the commission has strict well construction requirements that require several layers of steel casings and cement to protect groundwater. Another reason is that most of the fracing that is occurring, such as in the Barnett Shale, for example, occurs in geologically confined formations that are more than a mile deep. In contrast, the groundwater in the Barnett Shale region goes no deeper than 500 feet.

Meanwhile...

Although the Texas officials say no contamination has yet occurred, last week, about 135 Caddo Parish, La., families were evacuated after an EXCO Resources Inc. drilling crew reported “irregular pressure readings and signs of natural gas in the air” at a well site, according to KSLA-TV, a local news organization. Two wells of the three wells at the Dallas company’s site were cemented shut as a result; however, testing of private water wells also revealed at least 10 wells contaminated with natural gas, according to the Louisiana Department of Environmental Quality.

Little data available because chemicals untracked

The Railroad Commission of Texas does not require operators to list the specific chemicals used in their frac jobs; however, in the commission’s Form G-1, required for each well drilled, companies fill out how much water and sand they used, according to a commission spokeswoman. For example: 2.3 million barrels of water (which would include the chemicals) and 250,000 pounds of sand. (Each well’s drilling data is accessible to the public via the commission’s Web site.)

While the commission does not track how many wells drilled are fractured, “it is safe to assume that all of the more than 13,000 wells in the Barnett Shale have been hydraulically fractured at least once,” Nye said.

Both the state agency and the federal government are in the dark. The U.S. Occupational Safety and Health Administration requires companies to keep a list of the chemicals used at drill sites in case of accidental spills or an incident in which someone is exposed to the chemicals; however, OSHA itself does not have the information.

Oilfield services companies have resisted disclosure because they argue their formulas are proprietary.

“It’s the same concept as Coca-Cola – water, sugar and natural flavors,” said Vaughn, adding it’s that last vague component other companies want to know.

Couldn’t companies patent their recipes?

“It can be hard to get intellectual property protection for the recipes they’re using because those recipes can change day to day, week to week (and) site to site due to all these different variables,” she said.

Although companies claim their specific formulas are trade secrets, operators have sought to dispel concerns by shedding some light on the process; for example, Chesapeake Energy created a Web site, hydraulicfracturing.com, that reveals some of the chemicals – though not the amounts in which they’re used.

“What is not fully disclosed are the specific quantities of each chemical used in the blending of frac mixtures on location. That varies, well-by-well, and is proprietary to the service providers,” according to a company spokesman. “We have encouraged the providers to be more transparent with this information but we respect that they are in a highly competitive industry and have trade secrets to protect.”

And this is, of course, more important than public health and safety or protecting our most vital, irreplacable resource (water), among other environmental concerns.

Possible federal regulation

Last summer, four legislators from Colorado, New York and Pennsylvania introduced a bill aimed at giving the federal government oversight into hydraulic fracturing, arguing a process being used in more than half of the United States requires even-handed regulation across the board. Industry groups counter the bill would result in thousands of lost jobs and billions in unrealized revenue.

The FRAC Act, or Fracturing Responsibility and Awareness of Chemicals Act, would amend the Safe Drinking Water Act of 1974 to require oil and gas companies to disclose the chemicals they use in their hydraulic fracturing processes.

If companies opt to disclose, it’s likely it would be an all or none approach, because if just one company offered its formula it would put itself “at a business disadvantage,” Thompson said. “If there’s governmental regulation, then they’re all going to have to disclose.”

ExxonMobil has an interest in thwarting federal oversight; a stipulation in its proposed about $30 billion acquisition of Fort Worth’s XTO Energy Inc. says the former can walk away from the deal if Congress passes federal regulation.

Not all operators support disclosure

While some companies have offered their support for disclosure, EOG Resources Inc. will not. A March 25 proxy statement includes a proposal, expected to be put forth April 28 at the company’s annual meeting by a group of stockholders owning about 245,000 shares, that calls for a study into using “less toxic fracturing fluids, recycling or reuse of waste fluids and other structural or procedural strategies to reduce fracturing hazards.”

EOG Resources’ Board of Directors opposes the proposal, calling the process “a well-established reservoir stimulation technique” that poses “minimal impact to the environment and to human health.” The board recommends shareholders vote against the proposal. (An EOG Resources spokeswoman said the company would not provide further comment.)

A virtually identical proposal in ExxonMobil’s proxy statement, submitted by San Francisco’s The Park Foundation, also will receive a no vote by the company’s board of directors; however, as previously noted, ExxonMobil does support disclosure. (It's an easy public relations ploy... looks good, costs nothing.)

Editorial comments by Splashdown in red.

LINK

DEMAND ACCOUNTABILITY!