Microsoft Office Outlook - Memo Style - Montana Board of Oil and Gas

issue of fracking has garnered a great deal of attention across the country. As you are
well aware, EPA has initiated a Hydraulic Fracturing Study Plan, with the intent to better
understand the relationship between hydraulic fracturing fluids and drinking water. TU
provided substantive comments to the EPA on this study. Further, it should be noted that
New York’s Attorney General Eric Schneiderman has filed a lawsuit on behalf of the
State of New York alleging that NEPA (National Environmental Protection Act) analysis
must be completed prior to the completion of hydraulic fracturing rules to be adopted by
the Delaware River Basin Commission, with the ultimate goal being a requirement for a
full Environmental Impact Statement (EIS). One could conclude that there is a significant
chance that federal agencies could, in the future, require a programmatic EIS and require
states to adopt federally established guidelines. We contend that that state of Montana is
better suited to adopt its own rules relative to hydraulic fracturing that allow for enhanced
resource recovery while addressing local concerns on drinking water, surface waters, and
fish and wildlife habitat.
For TU and all our chapters across the country, disclosure of the components of
fracking fluids is a common sense, fundamental step towards sound, responsible
management. Regulators, land managers, landowners, and the public have a right to know
what chemicals are being used to assist in the extraction of natural gas regardless of the
composition or volume. It is important to note that we are not advocating for the exact
“recipe”, for lack of a better word, of the fracking stimulation fluids but rather the generic
names and volumes of chemicals being used.
Our comments to the proposed changes are as follows:
New Rule I: Well Stimulation Activities Covered By Drilling Permit.
(2)(a). TU suggests that notification describing the fracturing treatment must be
provided at least one week before commencement of well stimulation activities. Our
concern is whether BOGC staff will have sufficient time to address any issues and
potentially conduct a field site visit given the current 24-hour proposal. Further, there
must be sufficient time given for baseline monitoring. Industry will know well in
advance whether they will need to fracture a well or not.
(3)(b). Please consider adding the words “…of the components or chemicals to
be used in the fracturing/stimulation process” after “the trade name or generic name.”
TU recommends that the Board require storage of hydraulic fracturing fluids to be
contained in metal tanks rather than potentially leaky pit liners in areas containing
aquifers less than 100 feet in depth or within 300 feet of surface water. Further, the
companies must conduct freshwater aquifer tests prior to drilling with the results of the
tests filed with the BOGC.
2 Trout Unlimited Comments to BOGC on Hydraulic Fracturing Rules