Microsoft Office Outlook - Memo Style - Montana Board of Oil and Gas
Microsoft Office Outlook - Memo Style - Montana Board of Oil and Gas
Microsoft Office Outlook - Memo Style - Montana Board of Oil and Gas
You also want an ePaper? Increase the reach of your titles
YUMPU automatically turns print PDFs into web optimized ePapers that Google loves.
Mr. Tom Richmond<br />
Department <strong>of</strong> Natural Resources <strong>and</strong> Conservation<br />
2535 St. Johns Avenue<br />
Billings, MT 59102<br />
Via e-mail to: FracComments@mt.gov<br />
157 Falls Creek Road<br />
Livingston, MT 59047<br />
June 21, 2011<br />
Please accept these comments regarding the adoption <strong>of</strong> New Rules I through V regarding oil <strong>and</strong> gas<br />
well stimulation as noticed in MAR Notice No. 36-22-157. I will directly address the proposed rules <strong>and</strong><br />
wish to make an additional comment at the end <strong>of</strong> my this communication.<br />
New Rule I: I support the rule as written.<br />
New Rule 2: I do not support the inclusion <strong>of</strong> Paragraph (4) <strong>and</strong> the subparagraphs (a) <strong>and</strong> (b). In the<br />
interests <strong>of</strong> the most complete public access to pertinent information, there should be no waiver<br />
provision. Additionally, a <strong>Montana</strong> state government Web site (preferably maintained b the <strong>Montana</strong><br />
Department <strong>of</strong> Natural Resources <strong>and</strong> Conservation) should be the primary site for <strong>Montana</strong>ns to access<br />
<strong>Montana</strong>-specific information. While the sites maintained by the Interstate <strong>Oil</strong> <strong>and</strong> <strong>Gas</strong> Compact<br />
Commission/Groundwater Protection Council are significant, a <strong>Montana</strong> state government site should<br />
be the primary repository.<br />
New Rule 3: I object to this rule in its entirety. There should be no trade secret provision. However, it<br />
would be marginally acceptable to require disclosure <strong>of</strong> a specific chemical presence but allow the<br />
withholding <strong>of</strong> the exact percentage <strong>of</strong> content within the total hydraulic fracturing fluid volume.<br />
The requirement for a health pr<strong>of</strong>essional to agree to a non-disclosure provision is, in my mind,<br />
unethical <strong>and</strong> morally repugnant. I also believe an unintended consequence <strong>of</strong> this provision may be to<br />
invite legal challenges <strong>and</strong> subsequent costs to be imposed on <strong>Montana</strong> state government.<br />
To put the non-disclosure provision in another context, if a citizen group or municipality is interested in<br />
monitoring its water sources for safety reasons, keeping the identity <strong>of</strong> a particular chemical(s) would<br />
completely thwart this public health safeguard because the community would not know for which<br />
specific chemical(s) to test.<br />
New Rules 4 <strong>and</strong> 5: I support all efforts by DNRC to ensure the integrity <strong>of</strong> well casings.<br />
As an additional comment, I urge that consideration be made in future rule-making in require or<br />
otherwise encourage closed-system drilling methods as means <strong>of</strong> protecting surface environments,<br />
protecting aquifers <strong>and</strong> conserving water resources required in hydraulic fracturing. The industry itself is<br />
embracing this technique.
Change language