Model Regulatory Framework for Hydraulic Fracturing in the Works
The State Journal
28 October 2011
By Pam Kasey
An environmental nonprofit and an oil and gas producer have teamed
up resolve some of the major environmental issues related to
hydraulic fracturing.
Their product, a model regulatory framework for hydraulic
fracturing, has helped a couple of states improve their own
regulations and will soon be available to the general public.
The project was presented by Mark Boling, executive vice president
and general counsel for Southwestern Energy, and Matt Watson,
senior energy policy manager for the Environmental
Defense Fund, at "Drilling Down on Regulatory Challenges," a
conference hosted Oct. 27-28 by the West Virginia University
College of Law's Center for Energy and Sustainable Development.
It started, in part, as EDF began looking at cases of groundwater
contamination associated with hydraulic fracturing, according to
Watson.
"We knew the real issue was probably well integrity, casing,
cementing," Watson said. "That confirmed what we thought: in every
case there was a problem with well integrity."
About that time, Boling called the organization with an idea for
model regulatory framework, regulatory language that state
agencies could use to update their regulations for well
construction and operation.
They put together a group of stakeholders from both sides and
followed three principles, Watson said: that the framework should
be as environmentally protective as possible, that it should
recognize the important role of natural gas with regard both to
the economy and the environment, and that it should acknowledge
interim progress and variation among states' regulations.
The overall goal of the collaboration, Boling said, was to refocus
the debate: to identify the real obstacles to responsible
development of the resource and to propose workable solutions.
The group conducted a review of existing information and began
drafting, eventually seeking feedback from about 10 industry
partners.
"We found (the feedback) was reasonable," Watson said. "We
incorporated probably two-thirds of it. It gave EDF the confidence
that there was a basis for this cooperation."
Boling reviewed the subsurface aspect of the framework, relating
to EDF's original research into wellbore integrity.
"There are four step to ensuring wellbore integrity," said.
First, evaluate stratigraphic confinement. What geographic
formations lie between the lowest freshwater zone and the target
formation? Those will be expected to contain the migration of
fluids.
Second, observe quality well construction standards. Most states
that have histories of oil and gas development have some
standards, he said, and most could be improved.
Third, evaluate internal and external mechanical integrity of the
well before hydraulic fracturing begins. Several types of problems
can develop during casing and its ability to withstand the high
pressure of hydraulic fracturing should be confirmed.
Finally, monitor the fracturing job and the producing well.
No state law the group reviewed had affirmative obligation on the
part of the fracturing or producing party to conduct monitoring
and to take preventive action or responsive action in the event of
a problem, Boling said.
Arkansas and Pennsylvania already have adopted portions of the
model framework, according to Watson.
The model framework runs to about 40 pages and is still in draft.