The NRDC’s recommendations in this document are already largely in place or literally make no sense. Yet they remain opposed. Is this about safety, or just moving the goalposts?

“[Hydraulic fracturing] requires smart regulation, smart rules of the road. What it doesn’t necessarily require…is that all that smart rule of the road setting be done at the federal level. There are states that have been regulating oil and gas development for a long time.” –Lisa Jackson, EPA Administrator2

“I have no information that states aren't doing a good job already [with regulating hydraulic fracturing].” –Steve Heare, Director of EPA’s Drinking Water Protection Division1

Oil and gas operations must already comply with countless regulations and standards set by the U.S. EPA, the Bureau of Land Management, the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, and the U.S. Forest Service, in addition to regulatory bodies at the state level.

Any waste sent to public treatment plants must already meet pretreatment guidelines established by EPA’s National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System.3 Waste sent to an underground injection well is also tightly regulated by the U.S. EPA.4

The source of this claim is a study by Tom Myers that makes a series of flawed assumptions12 to arrive at what can only be described as a predetermined conclusion. According to hydrogeology expert Don Siegel of Syracuse University, Myers’ conclusions are “not grounded in either science or experience.”

According to the Tarrant Regional Water District – the largest water provider in the Barnett Shale region of north Texas – the water provided for oil and gas development was 0.96 percent of the total water distributed in 2009, 0.66 percent in 2010, and 0.54 percent 2011.5

Surely NRDC recognizes that hydraulic fracturing does not occur on the surface, but rather thousands of feet below the surface. So why are they describing what happens on the surface as “hydraulic fracturing”?

“Calculations indicate that water use for shale gas development will range from less than 0.1% to 0.8% of total water use by basin.” –U.S. Department of Energy and the Ground Water Protection Council6

States have extensive and strict regulations in place to guarantee that pits are effectively constructed.7 In states like Pennsylvania, operators have already shifted away from using pits altogether to focus on recycling and reuse technologies.8

“Many reports of groundwater contamination occur in conventional oil and gas operations (e.g., failure of well-bore casing and cementing) and are not unique to hydraulic fracturing.” –Energy Institute, University of Texas at Austin9

“In no case have we made a definitive determination that the fracking process has caused chemicals to enter groundwater” –Lisa Jackson, U.S. EPA Administrator 10

In the Barnett and Marcellus Shales – two of the largest shale plays – there is between 2,100 and 7,600 feet of impermeable rock separating treatable water supplies from where hydraulic fracturing actually occurs. 11

The mixture of additives used during fracturing operations is often times adjusted during the process in response to underground stimuli, which helps guarantee that the well is efficiently and effectively completed. This recommenda-tion is a recipe for failure.

Industry is already light years ahead of the staffers at the NRDC on this. For example, in Pennsylvania, as much as 90 percent of the water is already being recycled or reused.14

Buffer zones are already established by state regulators and/or federal regulators. The EPA’s Spill Prevention, Control, and Countermeasures15 rule also ensures nearby surface waters are protected.

All disposal wells are already tightly regulated under the EPA’s Underground Injection Control (UIC) program.16 States often have their own requirements, and many of those are actually more stringent than even the EPA’s.

Geology is not uniform across even a single state, and thus specific standards for one state often differ from those in another. Hunting licenses and vehicle registration – to name two examples – are also state specific, because what’s needed in Virginia may not even be relevant in Vermont, and vice versa.

The website FracFocus.org already provides not only a listing of the chemicals used, but also allows users to search for this information on a well-by-well basis.

“As an administration, we believe that FracFocus is an important tool that provides transparency to the American people.” –Heather Zichal, Deputy Assistant to the President for Energy and Climate Change13

Companies already do this, and it gives them a competitive advantage in understanding how best to produce hydrocarbons from a particular formation.

Companies already do this, and indeed must do it to make sure their operations are being completed efficiently.

Once the qualities of the formations are understood based on initial surveying, the fracture treatment can be designed without any additional seismic monitoring. Thus, this recommendation would increase costs without providing any real value.

1 “Fracking oversight OK says EPA water chief,” Houston Chronicle, February 20102 Remarks at Richard Stockton College of New Jersey, February 2012 (as seen in Truthland)3 U.S. EPA, National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES), Accessed on July 24, 20124 U.S. EPA, Underground Injection Control Program, Accessed on July 30, 20125 “Hydraulic Fracturing and water Use in the Barnett Shale,” Barnett Shale Energy Education Council, July 24, 20126 “Modern Shale gas Development in the United States: A Primer,” U.S. Department of Energy, April 2009 (p. ES-4)7 The Texas rules can be found here, Pennsylvania’s can be found here, and Louisiana’s can be found here (starts on page 15).8 “Campers learn about the gas industry first-hand,” Towanda Daily Review, July 24, 20129 “Separating Fact from Fiction in Shale Gas Development,” University of Texas at Austin, February 201210 “EPA’s Lisa Jackson on safe hydraulic fracturing,” YouTube, April 201211 Ibid.12 Don Siegel, “Errors in Myers’ Groundwater Paper from Start to Finish,” Energy In Depth, May 13, 201213 “White House officials backs FracFocus as preferred disclosure method,” E&E News, Jun 21, 201214 “Marcellus waste reports muddy,” Scranton Times-Tribune, February 27, 201115 U.S. EPA, Spill Prevention Control and Countermeasures (SPCC) Rule, Accessed on July 25, 201216 U.S. EPA, Underground Injection Control Program, Accessed on July 30, 2012