iPhone app iPad app Android phone app Android tablet app More

Federal Fracking Regulations In Draft Report Would Require Disclosure Of Chemicals

Hydraulic Fracturing

First Posted: 02/ 6/2012 4:54 pm Updated: 02/ 7/2012 5:12 pm

WASHINGTON -- Natural gas drillers would be required to disclose the chemicals they use in hydraulic fracturing or "fracking" on public lands, according to draft rules created by the Department of Interior. The proposed regulations would also force companies to report the amount of any given chemical injected during the fracking process.

The move for increased regulation comes after President Barack Obama touted his commitment to expanding natural gas production while ensuring the drilling is done responsibly. "My administration will take every possible action to safely develop this energy," he said during his State of the Union address last month. Fracking, which involves the high-pressure injection of undisclosed chemicals into rocks containing oil or natural gas, has drawn increasing scrutiny from environmentalists who suggest the process contaminates groundwater and destroys ecosystems.

Under the proposed regulations, companies would be required to reveal the "complete chemical makeup of all materials used," according to a copy of the rules obtained by The Huffington Post. But environmentalists have noted that, while the regulations offer some "good elements," the rules still offer companies considerable protections for "trade secrets," an exemption some worry could negate the rule.

Interior Secretary Ken Salazar has said regulations will also cover well-bore integrity and regulation of flowback waters (the fluids that rise to the surface after hydraulic fracturing operations are complete). Further, reports detailing the ingredients used in the fracking fluids and a fluid treatment plan must be submitted 30 days before operations begin at any proposed well.

Interior spokesman Adam Fetcher elaborated in a statement.

"Those measures are straightforward: 1) requiring public disclosure of chemicals used in fracking, with appropriate protections for trade secrets; 2) improving assurances on well-bore integrity, so we know fluids going into the well aren't escaping; and 3) making sure companies have a water management plan in place for fluids that flow back to the surface," Fetcher said.

"We will continue to gather public input throughout this process," he added, "to ensure that the disclosure rule enhances public confidence in hydraulic fracturing on public lands, while also encouraging continued safe and responsible exploration and production for many decades to come."

The federal guidelines come after the Environmental Protection Agency conducted a study that showed that fracking was responsible for contaminated groundwater at an aquifer that supplied public drinking water to people in Pavillion, Wyoming.

The EPA has since been tasked with formulating rules on emissions from natural gas operations around the country. "EPA is also working on guidance for when diesel is used as a fracking fluid," an administration official said.

But the agency's report on water contamination is already under attack on Capitol Hill.

U.S. Senators Rob Portman (R-Ohio) and Mary Landrieu (D-La.) have voiced their skepticism of the report, arguing in a letter to the Office of Management and Budget's Cass Sunstein that the EPA must be forced to comply with legal standards of scientific integrity as it finalizes its report on Pavillion ground water contamination.

OMB's Information and Regulatory Affairs is responsible for policing the quality of agency science.

"A false-positive link between fracturing and groundwater contamination could form the basis for costly new regulation that will do little to protect human health," said the senators in their letter on Monday. "Natural gas development is estimated to contribute hundreds of billions of dollars to the United States economy ... There is little doubt that the regulatory response this report could generate may exceed the $500 million threshold."

Federal fracking regulations would apply only to the process when it is carried out on federal lands, not to the fracking industry as a whole, which is largely exempt from federal oversight. But if the proposed regulations are successfully implemented, they could help bring parity to fracking regulations, which vary widely by state.

"The president specifically focused on the disclosure issues because that's an area where the federal government can show leadership," an administration official acknowledged. "This is an area where often states are in the lead, but we do do fracking on public lands so the president is looking to Department of the Interior and the Bureau of Land Management."

Texas in December joined pioneering efforts in Wyoming and Arkansas to require the disclosure of fracking chemicals. Rules enacted shortly thereafter in Colorado went further, requiring that the concentrations of chemicals also be disclosed, according to the Associated Press.

Chesapeake Energy Corp, the second-largest U.S. producer of natural gas, says it voluntarily discloses data about its fracking practices on a website run by state water regulators. Participation in the well-by-well database is voluntary, but that hasn't stopped the Independent Petroleum Association from arguing the new federal regulations are superfluous.

Following the internal review and and consultation of tribal governments, a formal draft report will be released for a public comment period, during which feedback from industry, state, local and all other interested parties will be solicited.

Anna Staver contributed to this report

Related on HuffPost:

Clarification: This article has added language to include mention of measures in Wyoming and Arkansas that pushed for the disclosure of fracking fluids, alongside Texas' legal requirements.
FOLLOW HUFFPOST GREEN

WASHINGTON -- Natural gas drillers would be required to disclose the chemicals they use in hydraulic fracturing or "fracking" on public lands, according to draft rules created by the Department of Int...
WASHINGTON -- Natural gas drillers would be required to disclose the chemicals they use in hydraulic fracturing or "fracking" on public lands, according to draft rules created by the Department of Int...
 
 
  • Comments
  • 169
  • Pending Comments
  • 0
  • View FAQ
Post Comment Preview Comment
To reply to a Comment: Click "Reply" at the bottom of the comment; after being approved your comment will appear directly underneath the comment you replied to.
View All
Favorites
Recency  | 
Popularity
Page: 1 2  Next ›  Last »  (2 total)
03:53 PM on 02/08/2012
You can bet that if oil companies will risk billions foolishly with the likes of BP's Deepwater Horizon and Exxon's Valdeze that they don't give a crap about your or my water. I have heard from experienced, seasoned field developers abut how they routinely ignore rules such as recording in their well logs about contact with groundwater. I also talked recently with a drill tech out here in western Colorado who said many of his coworkers are untrained and with out any real oversight will get away with a lot of destruction. The EPA needs some real teeth as the drilling companies are hoping they can get most of the damage done before we can change the antiquated laws that protect them from any real responsibility. The very real and serious danger in this is that once the ground aquifers are destroyed out here in the dry west it will not be habitable for generations to come.
03:34 PM on 02/08/2012
You can
This user has chosen to opt out of the Badges program
02:42 PM on 02/08/2012
most people don't realize that half of the 5-7 million gallons of toxic frack fluid used per frack job (and a single well can be fracked a hundred or more times) flows right back on the surface to be "disposed" of all in highly dangerous ways....really impossible to recycle that stuff in any economical way....so vast majority (99%) will just be dumped somewere....out of the gas companies hair....
photo
intolleft
ObamaTAX...getting you shovel ready
12:15 PM on 02/08/2012
Why do you need a bill to list fracking fluid compositions when that info is readily available online at any state DEP website?

Apparently the authors of said bill are not up to speed.
bcunnin679
Political Correctness, the enemy of free speech
12:46 PM on 02/08/2012
Like most in an elected position
photo
intolleft
ObamaTAX...getting you shovel ready
01:04 PM on 02/08/2012
We have to pass the bill to see what's in it!!
01:05 AM on 02/08/2012
Game Changing Water Recycling Solution - Mobile, High Volume, Non-Chemical, Frac Water Management Solution
http://www.drillingcontractor.org/on-the-fly-system-treats-recycles-frac-water-12135
This user has chosen to opt out of the Badges program
02:39 PM on 02/08/2012
pure gas company PR and red herring....in reality these gas companies are lining up huge natural fresh water use rules for their frakcing from the states/cities/towns they are operating near...
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
kwaut lizard
Reductio ad Absurdum
12:15 PM on 02/07/2012
Amazing, this is bigger news than anyone seems to know. the US has invented the time machine.

Welcome back to those wonderfully heady days of 1972 when:

The 1972 amendments to the Federal Water Pollution Control Act (known as the Clean Water Act or CWA) provide the statutory basis for the NPDES permit program and the basic structure for regulating the discharge of pollutants from point sources to waters of the United States. Section 402 of the CWA specifically required EPA to develop and implement the NPDES program.

Technology has come so far!
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
lambdin1
What's this?
11:01 AM on 02/07/2012
Yes! Tell us what you are putting in the ground. Then we will study this for years to come and decide if it is harmful. But in the meantime go ahead and frack! Greed is good! Government by geniuses. Give me (us) a break!
10:21 AM on 02/07/2012
Ecosphere Technologies, Inc., a diversified engineering, technology development, and manufacturing company, provides clean technologies and services for use in various applications in the industrial waste market in the United States. The company designs and builds mobile water filtration equipment to treat energy exploration related wastewaters; provides water recycling services to energy exploration companies; and develops Ecosphere Ozonix, an oxidation process to treat industrial wastewater. It offers its patented Ecosphere Ozonix technology to assist gas and oil companies in treating water used to fracture natural gas wells; in eliminating the use of chemicals to treat bacteria and reduce scaling in the fracturing process; in eliminating the need to dispose of contaminated water, which flows back after fracturing wells; and in improving the productivity of natural gas wells.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
observingstupiditydaily
Nice to be important,but more important to be nice
03:36 PM on 02/07/2012
So they've manufactured this miracle filtration equipment that addresses fracking "brine" without knowing the contents? It must be a miracle or the biggest hoax, well next to fracking the biggest hoax yet.
03:53 PM on 02/07/2012
Ecosphere Technologies Inc. website to learn more http://www.ecospheretech.com They have done many tests in cooperation with Southwestern Energy and Newfield Exploration knowing the contents of the water before and after processing. They have already treated over 1 billion gallons of frac water using the technology. Miracle are your words, but may be appropriate for those who want to see this industry grow in an environmentally friendly way.
lastpost
see biography
06:50 AM on 02/07/2012
"Those measures are straightforward:"
4) Used substances detrimental to life, shall be reported to the authorities. Such that the subsequent removal of this form of contamination, shall be the responsibly of the company concerned and its officers. Subject to a maximum term of incarceration, not exceeding the period for which the area affected is deemed polluted.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
kwaut lizard
Reductio ad Absurdum
12:18 PM on 02/07/2012
Precedent setting ... incarcerations with a sentence in geological time scales.

Let's go from one unenforceable extreme to another system burdening unenforceable extreme, yah, that'll work.
04:40 AM on 02/07/2012
For heaven's sake...STOP DESTROYING our one and only 'home' - we ain't got no other place to go!!! Rather than always looking for new oil, new gas, new coal...how about seriously finding ways to work with nature instead of against her. Must profits always come before people and our environment? Must we always fight tooth and nail for the right to have a safe and healthy home?
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
Sister Bluebird
09:47 AM on 02/07/2012
Oh Vera, I wish you were in charge of this mess. These money grubbing jerks don't care what they destroy as long as they get their cash. Profiteers the whole lot of them. :(
11:19 AM on 02/07/2012
I appreciate the vote of confidence but...you people have to start taking to the streets an masse and be in their faces every single day. And go after the corrupt officials who make this possible.
11:01 PM on 02/06/2012
Isn't it just common sense to have laws that require disclosure of what they are pumping into the ground?

Republicans are so blinded by money and power that common sense, safe water and clean air do not matter to them. They will leave the clean up to the tax payers after they make all the profits.
02:07 AM on 02/07/2012
There are millions of septic drainfields discharging wastewater into shallow groundwater aquifers all over this country. Do you know what every individual system is discharging? Why are their pharmecuticals, personal care products, and herbicides commonly detected in samples collected from private drinking water wells completed in shallow aquifers. Come on people quit being duped by anti-energy propaganda and take some personal responsibility and educate yourself. There are real problems out there that need to be addressed and instead you all buy into this time-wasting NGO fantasy of widespread "fracking" pollution--BTW the correct terminology is hydraulic fracturing. It would be laughable to me if it were not so sad.
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
alteredstory
Hold on to the center
03:31 AM on 02/07/2012
Nobody is making a huge profit off of septic systems. We need them to avoid having our civilization overflow with sewage.

Not the same.

As to herbicides, they SHOULD be regulated.

I'm not anti-energy, I'm anti-fossil fuel, and if you think they're the same, you REALLY need to go educate yourself.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
Living ECO
05:24 AM on 02/07/2012
News Flash! What you are referring too, dumping personal care products into water supplies for example, is called POLLUTING and if you are caught polluting, you could be fined because polluting is illegal!

Also, unlike the chemicals used in fracking, many of the products you speak of, which people dump into their sewers, etc, are subject to the clean air and water act!

That doesn't mean that you obey the law and don't dump gasoline down your toilet, but if you did, that's called "polluting"! That's why there are laws against polluting! Now do you get it?

You're essentially saying that because people can and often do pollute, that all pollution should be legal, no matter what? You're saying that because people _do_ pollute, it should be legal for anyone to pollute, including huge multinational corporations and no one should care?

... and then you call other people sad? LOL!
04:41 AM on 02/07/2012
Nothing should be pumped into the ground. STOP THIS FRIGGING FRACKING!!!
This user has chosen to opt out of the Badges program
photo
09:30 PM on 02/06/2012
Ms Landrieu is a Democrat that is TOTALLY IN THE BACK POCKET OF BIG OIL. I have voiced my opinion to her numerous times only to have my concerns rebuked by the oil industry talking points. This legislation will do some good but by the time it is implemented there will be no protections for the public, all gutted by oil industry politicians. I hope Ms Landrieu has a challenger this next election, I would vote for ANYONE ACTUALLY INTERESTED IN IMPROVING HUMANITY. Before any fracking would be done on my property I would DEMAND a clause be installed stating, " a complete water analysis shall be conducted by the oil company with ALL results be made public (at no cost) to any interested party AT ANY TIME REQUESTED. If at ANY TIME IN THE FUTURE there is ANY CONTAMINATION NOT IN THE FIRST SAMPLE THE OIL COMPANY HAS TO PROVIDE ANY AND ALL CLEAN WATER UNTIL ALL PROPERTY OWNERS RELEASE THEM FROM LIABILITY. Without them agreeing to these stipulations there would be NO FRACKING on my property.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
Sister Bluebird
09:49 AM on 02/07/2012
All you have to do is look at the Gulf of Mexico and see how those lives and livelihoods were ruined with government compliance.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
kwaut lizard
Reductio ad Absurdum
12:27 PM on 02/07/2012
Yep, but she is not the lone oil Democrat, just the most vocal and obvious one.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
Zariana
For SCIENCE!!!
09:08 PM on 02/06/2012
Y'all who are freaking out about putting benzene (C6) into a well do realize that it's a hydrocarbon atom that's already present in the rock (and hence the well), right? And if the reservoir has heavier liquids that it has effectively got the longer hydrocarbon atoms that are in diesel, right?

By that logic, the whole process is an environmental boon. These companies leave less benzene and diesel in the ground when they are done because they sell it to you for a profit.

There are real issues to focus on--wellbore integrity being one of them.
This user has chosen to opt out of the Badges program
photo
09:40 PM on 02/06/2012
Fracking SHALE cannot be predicted. Shale fractures in linier patterns and those "cracks " can run for MILES. Well bore integrity is easy to monitor, but a seam crack running for a mile is impossible to predict. Fracking hard rock has been successful for 40 years, fracking shale close to water aquifiers is an exersize in gambling, if you win "you're rich", if you lose milllions could lose the water needed for life. WHO WILL PAY THEN? WE all know oil company are gamblers, do you want to gamble your future on another gamblers desires for profit?
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
Zariana
For SCIENCE!!!
10:28 PM on 02/06/2012
"Well bore integrity is easy to monitor..."

And this knowledge is based on what? Ask a service company to guarantee a good cement job based on a cement bond log and get back to me.

The issue I was addressing was the use of hydrocarbon fluids in wells that already have hydrocarbons in them. Nice deflection to OMG FRACKING.
12:35 PM on 02/08/2012
The cracks are propagated in the direction of the most pressure - deep underground, it's vertical. Closer to the surface, it's lateral. There's minimal risk of frack jobs opening a seam from Hell all the way to Heaven.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
Living ECO
10:26 PM on 02/06/2012
Benzene levels increase _dramatically_ around hydraulic fracturing sites. Check out the interview with Josh Fox, the director of Gas Land. See what he says about benzene emissions around the well sites in and around Pavilion Wyoming where benzene is now at 50 times the levels deemed safe by the EPA - http://www.democracynow.org/shows/2012/2/2 - check around 29:15 in the video:

"In Pavilion they've shown that there's 50 times the safe levels of benzene in their ground water"

Well integrity, benzene and other harmful chemicals, greenhouse gas emissions, ... all are MAJOR problems.

Why bother when clean energy is cheaper and better? We know the reason, ... the reason is control. Clean energy represents energy democracy and freedom, and therefore the major energy produces lose control over energy production. This is why the major dirty energy producers hate clean, renewable energy. Because they hate democracy and freedom.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
Zariana
For SCIENCE!!!
11:14 PM on 02/06/2012
"...all are MAJOR problems."

AGREED. The repurcussions of environmental failure here are real. The destruction of an aquifer is a disaster. But we need to examine all the data and look at all the risks. The focus on omg-fracking distracts from a systemic view.

Benzene. Bad. I get it. But is the benzene from the fluids that are pumped in the hole or is benzene leaking up through a bad cement job? Fracturing? Natural seepage? Wells drilled 100 years ago with little regard for environmental concerns?

My point is that all the issues need to be addressed.

Oil companies aren't holding anyone hostage. Conserve. Live with a small footprint. Drive a car with 40+mpg. You can blame the dealer all you want. The addict is the problem.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
mhh310351
Roosevelt Democrat
11:43 PM on 02/06/2012
Why bother when clean energy is cheaper and better? "

I wished it was that simple, I really do. It's not. I've worked from making uranium pellets, coal co-generation, developing bio-degradable drilling fluids, and to making commercially sellable bio diesel from waste cooking oil.

Most don't know but most solar cells are made using massive amounts of coal energy and have high emissions of NF3. NF3 is 17,000 times stronger than CO2 and longed lived 500+ years (Methane last about 10 years).

Large wind is dependent on rare earths but mining for rare earths makes coal mountain top removal look good and it's also a finite resource.

Geothermal also requires fracking or as they like to call it hydro-shearing but they are looking to the natural gas industries for help in fracking fluids. They have some unique temperature concerns.

Then we get into the discussions of batteries. Lithium or lead? Look lithium makes fracking for natural gas look like a water miser!

No Easy Button here.
photo
Son of Liberty 1765
Exposing Government Lies.
09:07 PM on 02/06/2012
Obama wants to regulate the industry out of business by crippling the ability to extract and increasing the cost for all so he can have the 99% forced to pay more for his solar and wind bundlers who have already proven the business model for alternative energy is a failure and the technology is inferior.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
Living ECO
09:48 PM on 02/06/2012
I don't care what Obama wants. I want clean energy. I do NOT want polluting energy. Using fossil fuel pollutes. Using solar does not. I like clean air. I like mountain tops. I like clean drinking water. Using fossil fuel pollutes the air, the water, the soil. Using solar, wind, wave, geothermal, micro-hydro does NOT pollute. I don't care what Obama wants. I want an energy that does NOT pollute when I use it. If Obama supports an energy that does NOT pollute over one that DOES pollute, then I'm all for it.
photo
Son of Liberty 1765
Exposing Government Lies.
10:22 PM on 02/06/2012
What you want doesn't exist... yet, and won't anytime soon. The facts get in the way of your utopian ideal, which I think is admirable, but unrealistic.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
kwaut lizard
Reductio ad Absurdum
12:35 PM on 02/07/2012
The Clean Water Act dates back to 1972, Obama would have been 11 years old at the time. Please keep on trying to spin responsibility off on him for instilling responsibility that was originally implemented in 1972. You are insuring his heralded place in the history books.
08:46 PM on 02/06/2012
The solution for fraccing pollution is waterless fraccing; Gasfrac has done over a 1000 fracs with gelled propane; you don’t need any water; you don’t produce any waste fluids (no need for injection wells); no need to flare (no CO2 emissions)­; truck traffic is cut to a trickle from 900 trips per well for water fraccing to 30 with propane fracs; and on top of that the process increases oil and gas production­; it is a win for the industry, a win for the community and a win for the environmen­t.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
Sister Bluebird
09:53 AM on 02/07/2012
Thanks to all the other lies told to us in this country regarding drilling of all kinds, I find anything that comes from that industry to be trustworthy at all.

So in short, I don't believe you and there is nothing historically to counter my disbelief and distrust.
09:59 AM on 02/07/2012
You don't have to believe me; google LPG fracturing; all the information is out there.

Regards,
Nawar