California and fracking

This article is part of the FrackSwarm portal on SourceWatch, a project of CoalSwarm and the Center for Media and Democracy.

This article is part of the FrackSwarm coverage of fracking.
Sub-articles:
Fracking regulations Fracking and water pollution Fracking and air pollution Fracking studies State-by-state overviews International overviews
Related articles:
Chesapeake Energy American Legislative Exchange Council Marcellus Shale Natural gas as an alternative to coal SourceWatch water-related pages

According to the Los Angeles Times, the oil and gas industry is touting the potential of fracking in California to tap the largest oil shale formation in the continental United States, which they say contains up to 64 percent of the nation's deep-rock oil deposits. Fracking in California is primarily used to extract oil. In some cases fracking is taking place on private land without the owner's knowledge.

The Western States Petroleum Association (WSPA), whose members account for 80 percent of the oil and natural gas drilled in California, said a recent survey of its membership indicated that WSPA companies fracked 628 oil wells in 2011 -- about a quarter of all oil and gas wells drilled across the state that year.

In a February 2013 article in The New York Times, it was reported that California's Monterey Shale contains two-thirds of the U.S.’s shale oil reserves, or 15 billion barrels of oil. The oil field spans 1,750 square miles from Southern to Central California. (The estimate on technically recoverable oil is determined by multiplying the total amount of oil that the USGS estimates is under the Monterey Shale by the “recovery factor” -- the percentage of the oil that can be recovered with today’s technology. The estimate is speculative by nature.)

Introduction

The Division of Oil and Gas of the California Department of Conservation does not monitor, track or regulate hydraulic fracturing, stating in a Feb. 16, 2012 update to its website that “fracking is used for a brief period to stimulate production of oil and gas wells” in California, but “the Division doesn’t believe the practice is nearly as widespread as it is in the eastern U.S. for shale gas production,” negating the need for monitoring. What the Division does not say, according to the Environmental Working Group, is that most fracking in California is used for oil, not gas, production. In 2009, the Division reported oil and gas production in 31 of California’s 58 counties from a total of 52,186 oil wells and 1,639 gas wells.

Environmental Working Group (EWG) researchers uncovered documentation showing that hydraulic fracturing has taken place in at least six California counties: Kern, Los Angeles, Monterey, Sacramento, Santa Barbara and Ventura. The exact number of fracked wells in the state is unknown, but the EWG states that it "is clear that the total likely reaches into the thousands. Industry documents show that by the mid-1990s, more than 600 wells had been fracked in one Kern County oil field alone. Representatives of Halliburton told EWG in the fall of 2011 that 50-to-60 percent of new wells being drilled in Kern County were hydraulically fractured."

In a 2008 paper prepared for a meeting of the Society of Petroleum Engineers, Pinnacle Technologies reported the fracking process "has been applied to a large scale in many Central and Southern California fields to enable economic development and reasonable hydrocarbon recovery. Example formations include the Belridge Diatomite, Stevens Sands, Etchegoin, Antelope shale, McLure shale, McDonald shale, Point of Rocks sands, Kreyenhagen shale, Ranger sands, the UP Ford Shale, and the Monterey shale.” It also stated that "[b]ased on the initial experience and formation properties, it is believed that hydraulic fracturing has a significant potential in many Northern California gas reservoirs.”

The oil and gas industry has been touting the potential of fracking in California to tap what is says is the largest oil shale formation in the continental United States (64% of the nation's deep-rock oil deposits).

History

Hydraulic fracturing - creating fractures from a wellbore drilled into reservoir rock formations - has been used on thousands of wells in California for over fifty years, according to a review of scientific articles by the Environmental Working Group. The current fracking technique of high-pressure water, chemicals, and sand is often seen as originating in the late 1990s, in the Barnett Shale in Texas.

In November 2011, the Los Angeles Times reported that Gov. Brown fired Derek Chernow, then head of the Department of Conservation, as well as Chernow's deputy, Elena Miller, after they generated a memo highly critical of an oil extraction method called underground injection, referring primarily to steam injection. The process was put under a microscope in 2011 after an oil company worker died in Kern county from falling into a boiling cesspool of fracking discharge. Brown pushed Chernow to relax the regulations in 2011, but instead Chernow generated the memo concluding that relaxing regulations would violate federal laws. Shortly thereafter, Brown fired Chernow and his deputy, and installed Mark Nechodom, who sided with Brown and reduced the heightened scrutiny that had been placed on underground injection. In January 2012, The Times reported that Occidental Petroleum made a $250,00 contribution to Brown, which will be used to fund Brown’s effort to win voter approval for a ballot measure to raise taxes. With regard to fracking, the state Division of Oil, Gas and Geothermal Resources said it did not plan to monitor or manage use of the technology unless the legislature requires it or the agency is handed “evidence of manifest damage and harm.”

In 2012, regulators told the Los Angeles Times that although they monitor drilling operations "quite thoroughly" under existing law, there is a "need for more disclosure of what chemicals are used in oil production." According to the Times: "State Sen. Fran Pavley (D-Agoura Hills), chairwoman of the Committee on Natural Resources and Water, wrote to state regulators [in 2011] asking basic questions: Where does fracking take place; How often is it used; And what are the potential risks? Regulators had few answers, saying they had 'limited data' because the state has no reporting requirements." The Times went on to say that many state regulators assert that fracking in California is "radically different" from drilling in other parts of the U.S.; in California, the process has long been performed for shorter duration with much less water to loosen crude in depleted oil wells. State regulators say existing environmental laws protect the state's drinking water but also say they have little information about the scale or practice of fracking in California, the fourth-largest oil producing state in the nation.

At a March 28, 2012 hearing, lawmakers criticized the Gov. Brown administration's actions on fracking as little more than cosmetic tweaks, saying that regulations are long overdue for a state that is widely considered the birthplace of the modern environmental movement. That day, state environmental officials requested that energy companies disclose where they conduct fracking operations and what chemicals they inject into the ground to tap oil deposits. Currently, only 78 of the tens of thousands of oil field injection wells in California, where fracking might occur, are listed on a national fracking registry. Regulators also are considering whether to launch an independent study to assess effects of the practice, and are planning to undertake a statewide "listening" tour for public comment.

Oil and gas estimates

Montery Shale Formation in California.

California is estimated to have much more tight oil than shale gas. Most estimates focus on the Monterey Shale, a rib-shaped formation that extends from northern California down to the Los Angeles area, offshore, and onto the outlying islands, spanning 1,750 square miles. Counties include Kern County, Orange County, Ventura County, Monterey County and Santa Barbara County, California. The Monterey Shale is composed of a concoction of many substances including folded mud deposits and highly dense chert, and the shale bed is not flat like some other shales due to frequent earthquakes.

Estimates vary about how much oil lies in the state's shale rock formations. Venoco, one of the companies with a significant presence in Monterey, once said there might be 300 billion barrels of oil in the Monterey Shale, but their first well was labeled "uneconomical," and their estimate has been seen as too high. In 2011, the U.S. Energy Information Administration said there could be 15 billion barrels of crude in the Monterey Shale, an estimate repeated by the Department of Energy and NY Times.

Some companies have called the Monterey Shale "arguably the largest shale play in the US." Others note that the estimate of technically recoverable oil is determined by multiplying the total amount of oil that the USGS estimates is under the Monterey Shale by the “recovery factor” -- the percentage of the oil that can be recovered with today’s technology -- and is therefore speculative by nature. (Fifteen billion barrels is based upon an estimated 500 billion barrels of original oil in place in the Monterey Shale multiplied by a recovery factor of 2.8 percent.)

Production

The Energy Information Administration estimated that Monterey would produce 550 million barrels per well, but “operators today are reporting typical flowrates averaging only around 350 to 400″ barrels per day, according to a November 2012 article in World Oil (fee required). According to Dave Roberts at Grist: "At 400 barrels a day, it would take a well 3,767 years to hit 550 million barrels."

Drilling wells

The database maintained by the oil and gas industry’s website Frac Focus, where companies can voluntarily disclose information about their fracking practices, lists 78 wells in California as of Feb. 21, 2012. According to the Environmental Working Group: "Of these, one is in Los Angeles, one in Ventura County and two are off the coast of Long Beach. One is shown near Santa Barbara on a map, but the attached documentation places the well in Kern County. The other 73 wells are also in Kern County. All of these wells were fracked sometime in 2011 or 2012. Listings on Frac Focus are entirely voluntary and are known to be incomplete, so this accounting is not likely to be comprehensive."

In 2011 notices to drill new natural gas wells in Northern California were received at a rate not seen in over twenty years. As of August 2011, the California Department of Conservation issued 178 permits to drill new wells in Butte, Colusa, Contra Costa, Glenn, Solano, Sutter, Yolo, San Joaquin, Sacramento and Tehama counties. At that rate, 267 notices would be filed by the end of 2012, compared to 137 in 2000 and 78 in 1995.

Use of diesel fuels

In 2011, a Congressional investigation determined that 26,444 gallons of diesel fuel had been injected into California wells in hydraulic fracturing fluids from 2005-2009.

Inglewood

In 2012 it was reported that PXP was using fracking in the Inglewood oil field, the nation's largest urban oil field, which has been operating in Los Angeles since the 1920s and extends up through parts of the central coast and San Joaquin Valley.

A 2006 release of noxious gases at the Inglewood Field galvanized community members and environmental groups to sue Los Angeles County, forcing it to augment protections the county had previously created in partnership with PXP. The parties reached a settlement in 2011 that further limited PXP's oil drilling activities, including reducing the number of wells the company could drill. As part of the settlement agreement, PXP agreed to conduct a study that examined the feasibility and impact of current and future fracking at the oil field. It would be the first study to look at the impact of fracking in California, including its impact on groundwater.

According to the Natural Resources Defense Council, the community that surrounds the oil field did not know about the 2012 test fracking until March 9, after the fracking was complete. According to FracFocus, the two vertical wells were fracked in September 2011 and January 2012. PXP used up to 168,000 gallons of water laced with chemicals in one well to a depth of about one and half miles. The Regional Water Quality Control Board, Los Angeles Region, is concerned the impact such practices may have on the above water supplies.

Over one million people live within five miles of the site. The fracking site also sits atop a fault line capable of 7.4 magnitude earthquake.

On October 10, 2012, the environmental consulting firm Cardno ENTRIX released a report commissioned by PXP, entitled “Hydraulic Fracturing Study: PXP Inglewood Oil Field,” which concluded that fracking could be done safely in the area and seismicity could be mitigated. Cardno Entrix had previously been hired by TransCanada to do the environmental impact statement (EIS) for the Keystone XL Pipeline. PXP and Los Angeles County contracted with JPMartin Energy Strategy LLC to peer review the report. J.P. Martin is director of the Shale Resources and Society Institute, which was created after a gas industry-funded lecture series on shale gas at SUNY Buffalo. SSRI produced a study in May 2012 finding no averse effects with fracking; all four co-authors were later found to have ties to the oil and gas industry, prompting 83 SUNY Buffalo faculty and staff members to call for an independent investigation into the origins of the SRSI.

Kern County

As of May 2012 there are 95 drilling wells posted on FracFocus, with the vast majority of the fracking projects reported in Kern County. FracFocus pinpoints a cluster of 58 wells fracked in 2011 between Lost Hills and McKittrick by XTO Energy/ExxonMobil. Many of the frack jobs pumped several hundred thousand gallons of water into wells about 3,000 feet deep. Another cluster of 12 wells in the Wasco-Shafter area was fracked in 2011 by Occidental Petroleum.

In May 2012, Kern County's biggest oil producers, consenting to a request by state regulators, agreed to share information about their fracking operations by the end of June 2012. Chevron, Berry Petroleum Co., Bakersfield's Aera Energy LLC and other members of the Western States Petroleum Association will disclose data on their work with fracking on fracfocus.org.

Monterey County

As of 2012 Venoco holds about 256,000 gross acres in the Monterey Shale formation, which starts in Monterey County and stretches across central California. An additional 60,000 acres have already been drilled. The firm has drilled more than 20 wells across the formation since 2010, and invested $100 million -- or nearly 40 percent -- of its 2012 expenditure budget to exploring for oil. The company has drilled four exploratory wells in Monterey County and plans for nine more.

Santa Barbara and Ventura Counties

Based on information gathered from a 2010 oil prospectus from Venoco, investigated by the Environmental Defense Center (EDC), and confirmed by the federal government, there was fracking done in 2009 on the Gail oil platform in the Sockeye field in federally controlled waters near Santa Cruz Island in the Channel Islands.

In another financial disclosure document there are hints from Venoco's public filings that the company planned to enhance, through prop fracture (an older method of enhancing older wells) or possibly fracking, their other active offshore oilfield in California state waters, known as the South Ellwood -- a field approximately seven miles long and part of the northern flank of the Santa Barbara channel and extending to the Ventura basin.

Fracking wastewater

The average fracked well in California used 166,714 gallons of water, according to a 2013 Ceres report.

In 2011, onshore oil and gas drilling wells in California produced more than 2.5 trillion barrels of produced water; over 126 million was produced at the Inglewood oil field of Los Angeles County.

Regulations

As of 2012, California has never assessed fracking’s risks to California’s groundwater, according to a 2012 Environmental Working Group report. The report cites a 2011 letter in which Sen. Fran Pavley asked state regulators to “provide the results of any risk assessments that the State of California has conducted regarding potential groundwater contamination associated with hydraulic fracturing.” The agency responded: “The division does not know of any state risk assessment regarding potential groundwater contamination associated with hydraulic fracture.”

Injection wells

Over 25,000 oilfield injection wells are operating in the state. Injection wells are used to increase oil recovery and to dispose of the salt and fresh water produced with oil and natural gas. Class II wells involve injecting fluids associated with oil and natural gas production operations - generally the brine that is produced when oil and gas are extracted from the earth.

According to USGS Earthquake Science Center’s Art McGarr, there are no high-volume waste-water injection wells in California located within areas of high population density, to his knowledge. There is also, however, no way to verify this due to the lack of state and federal disclosure laws. Wastewater injection into disposal wells has been linked to a series of small earthquakes in Ohio and the U.S. mid-continent.

Exemptions

A 2012 ProPublica investigation into the threat to water supplies from underground injection of waste found the EPA has granted energy and mining companies exemptions to release toxic material in more than 1,500 places in aquifers across the country. The EPA may issue exemptions if aquifers are too remote, too dirty, or too deep to supply affordable drinking water; however, EPA documents showed the agency has issued permits for portions of reservoirs that are in use, assuming contaminants will stay within the finite area exempted. More than 100 exemptions for natural aquifers have been granted in California, some to dispose of drilling and fracking waste in the state's driest parts. Though most date back to the 1980s, the most recent exemption was approved in 2009 in Kern County, an agricultural area.

Leaks, spills, and accidents

In 2009, a jury in Kern County found that 96 million barrels of wastewater from drilling had leached from holding ponds onto a farmer's property, resulting in contamination of the aquifer beneath his land. According to the Environmental Working Group: "It’s unknown if any of this wastewater came from hydraulic fracturing; what is clear is that California’s ground and drinking water are not being adequately protected from the hazards of fracking and oil and gas operations in general."

In 2010, contaminants from a wastewater injection well bubbled up in a west Los Angeles dog park.

Citizen activism

Lawsuits

State lawsuit

On October 16, 2012, environmental groups sued the state of California, accusing state regulators at the California Department of Conservation, Division of Oil, Gas, and Geothermal Resources with failing to evaluate the risks of fracking, even as fracking was used for 600 wells in 2011. Earthjustice filed the lawsuit in Alameda County Superior Court on behalf of the Center for Biological Diversity, Earthworks, the Environmental Working Group, and the Sierra Club.

"Public outcry has finally forced the Department to take a look at fracking," Earthjustice attorney George Torgun said in a statement. "They've held workshops and say they're considering regulations. But the problem needs attention now before too much damage is done."

Federal lawsuit

Hydraulic Fracturing in Inglewood

In late December 2011, environmental groups including the Center for Biological Diversity and the Sierra Club filed a lawsuit against the Bureau of Land Management claiming the bureau leased more than 2,500 acres of public land in Monterey and Fresno counties to oil companies without doing a thorough analysis of the potential environmental impacts of fracking. The lessees have 10 years to develop the land, after which it reverts back to the federal government if not drilled.

On April 8, 2013 a federal judge ruled that the Obama Administration violated the National Environmental Policy Act when it issued oil leases in Monterey County, Calif., without considering the environmental impacts. As reported by Bloomberg: "U.S. Magistrate Judge Paul Grewal in San Jose, California, said the BLM violated the National Environmental Policy Act by relying on outdated reviews, conducted before the extraction process known as fracking spurred massive development of energy deposits, when the U.S. sold four leases in 2011 for 2,700 acres of federal land in Monterey and Fresno counties."

Santa Barbara County

In June 2011, Los Alamos rancher and vineyard owner Steve Lyons contacted Santa Barbara county officials after discovering that Venoco had fracked a well on his property. After a series of public hearings and forums, the Santa Barbara County Board of Supervisors decided unanimously in December 2011 that companies planning to frack would have to apply for a special permit from the county planning commission.

Monterey County

After a Monterey county administrator approved a Venoco permit for nine exploratory wells using hydraulic fracturing, a local land trust appealed. The issue was set to be heard at an Oct. 26, 2011 planning commission meeting, but Venoco pulled its permit application after the commission released a meeting agenda noting that it recommended supporting the appeal and denying the project.

Los Angeles County

On May 15, 2012, Food & Water Watch joined with Gasland's Josh Fox, Environment California, Citizens Coalition for a Safe Community, Grassroots Coalition, and residents of surrounding neighborhoods to call for a ban on fracking in California, presenting the signatures of 50,000 Californians who have signed petitions supporting a ban. The protest was held at the Inglewood Oil Field in Baldwin Hills, the largest urban oilfield in the nation that also sits atop a fault line capable of 7.4 magnitude earthquake.

On June 12, 2012 Food & Water Watch held a protest outside Culver City City Hall, demanding that fracking in Culver City and beyond be banned. In addition, a group called “Moms Against Fracking + Dads Too” was also meeting to participate in the protest event.

On February 20, 2013 a group of California residents yesterday denounced the state's proposed rules on hydraulic fracturing of oil and gas. About 80 people who filled a hotel ballroom here rattled off what they saw as flaws with the draft regulations, including that the proposed rule fails to provide enough advance warning when fracking will occur and would not force public disclosure of all chemicals used.

Culver City

On July 2, 2012, the Culver City Council approved a resolution urging Gov. Jerry Brown and the California Department of Conservation's Division of Oil, Gas & Geothermal Resources to impose a ban on hydraulic fracturing until regulations have been adopted ensuring the protection of public health, safety, and the environment. The council’s unanimous decision came a week before the completion of a PXP fracking study at the Inglewood oil field.

Legislative issues

Moratorium

AB 972 - the bill would "Bar the supervisor from issuing a permit for an oil and gas well that will be hydraulically fractured until regulations governing its practice are adopted." Passed by the Senate Environmental Quality Committee on July 2, 2012.

Disclosure bill stalled

AB 591 - introduced by Assemblyman Bob Wieckowski (D-Fremont) in 2011 would require oil companies to disclose where they employ the fracking process, what chemicals they use, and how much water they pump. The lawmaker described it as a "deliberately modest step." Among the chief opponents was Halliburton, who argued that full disclosure of the chemicals in its fracking fluid would compromise valuable trade secrets.

According to the Los Angeles Times: "although Halliburton never registered as an official opponent, Halliburton and its lobbyists ran a quiet campaign to weaken the legislation, meeting privately with lawmakers and state agencies. During a committee hearing, lobbyist Terry McGann of the California Strategies firm, acknowledged that Halliburton does "want to protect the tens of millions of dollars in investments they've made for their particular hydrofracking fluid combination." The bill later stalled.

The amended version of the chemical disclosure bill, AB 591, allows energy firms to withhold certain chemicals from public disclosure by filing a trade secret claim with state regulators.

Notification of drilling

SB1054, as amended (March 29, 2012), would require the drilling operator to file a written notice of intention to commence drilling, and submit to the Legislature an annual written report regarding the implementation of the notice requirement. The bill does not call for a public disclosure of the chemicals being used. On May 30, 2012, the Senate defeated the legislation by a bipartisan vote of 17-18. According to Republican Senator Jean Fuller of Bakersfield: "This bill would have resulted in the delay of gas and oil production in California."

2013 Bills introduced

In April 2012 a bill regulating water use by oil producers cleared its first legislative test. The bill, authored by Assemblymember Mark Stone, D-Scotts Valley, would require companies to "disclose the source and amounts of water used in production, including fracking. It also demands they get approval from state water regulators on how the water would be disposed."

The bill passed the Assembly's Natural Resources Committee on a 6-3, party-line vote.

In May 2013 a trio of bills aiming to impose a moratorium on fracking in California were given the go-ahead from the state Assembly's Appropriations Committee. It was reported, "Assemblyman Richard Bloom's (D-Santa Monica) bill would put a moratorium on fracking and require legislative action to lift it, while Assemblywoman Holly Mitchell's (D-Los Angeles) bill would only lift the moratorium after an independent commission studies the practice's environmental effects. Assemblyman Adrin Nazarian's (D-Van Nuys) bill only applies to the area surrounding sources of groundwater that could theoretically be contaminated by the release of fracking wastewater."

Regulations

As of 2012, California has no rules specific to fracking, although the California Division of Oil, Gas and Geothermal Resources (DOGGR) engineers approves fracking wells on a case by case basis. The Department of Conservation, DOGGR's parent agency, has announced plans to contract an independent scientific study of hydraulic fracturing in California. Depending on the results of that study and input gathered at community workshops, the department may begin drafting fracking regulations in 2013.

Governor Brown considers fracking standards

In March 2012 California Governor Jerry Brown stated that his administration is looking into standards for fracking in the state. Brown stated that “California is the fourth-largest oil-producing state, and we want to continue that.” That month, the lower house's subcommittee on resources tabled the Gov. Brown administration's request for an additional 18 positions in the state's oil and gas agency, saying that 35 positions and $3.2 million had already been approved in the last two years, in part to develop fracking regulations that have yet to be developed. The state's nonpartisan legislative analyst reported that 13 of those slots remain vacant.

On May 9, 2012, the Assembly Subcommittee on Resources and Transportation approved Gov. Jerry Brown's request for an additional 18 positions. Lawmakers also set guidelines for fracking rules, adopting budget language that gives regulators until 2014 to finalize regulations.

Regulations proposed

In December 2012, CA Gov. Brown proposed regulations that would require energy companies to disclose their fracking plans to the state 10 days before starting operations. The companies also would be required to post to an online database - FracFocus - with the locations of their work and the chemicals used, and they would face new rules for testing and monitoring their wells.

Critics said the rules would require only three days public notice of the fracking site before work begins, do not require notification of adjacent property owners, and do not include an appeals process for property owners who oppose the fracking work. The rules require for the first time that energy companies disclose the chemicals they are using, but the database for that information - FracFocus - is not subject to public records laws. And companies may claim "trade secrets" exemptions to withhold the names of the chemicals they inject.

"The road we're headed down will heap a cloak of secrecy around trade secrets," said Bill Allayaud, a lobbyist for Environmental Working Group.

It was reported on February 13, 2013 that California state lawmakers voiced doubts that Gov. Brown's proposal to regulate fracking was tough enough to protect public health and safety. The lawmakers also stated that they questioned whether the state's oil regulators can be trusted to enforce it. These state senators convened a joint legislative hearing to review draft regulations, which represent California's first attempt to govern the controversial drilling process known as fracking.

Although the proposed rules, released in December 2013, would require energy companies to disclose many of the chemicals used in fracking. Lawmakers said the regulations should go further, including advance notice to nearby landowners and water monitoring around fracking operations.

Well classification type

In 1983, the EPA granted the California Division of Oil, Gas and Geothermal Resources (DOGGR) “primacy,” or primary authority, for regulating what are known as Class II injection wells -- including wells in which operators inject fluid deep into the earth to enhance oil recovery or to dispose of fluid wastes associated with oil and gas production (disposal wells). Class II injections wells use well injecting fluid associated with the production of oil and gas. Congress in 2005 exempted fracking from the Safe Drinking Water Act, putting the responsibility on states.

In 2011 the EPA evaluated how the California state agency “oversees and manages the permitting, drilling, operation, maintenance and plugging/abandonment of Class II [underground injection wells].” The federal regulators found that the California agency’s program did not meet a number of federal requirements, and in July 2011, sent a letter to the division highlighting a variety of “program deficiencies that require more immediate attention and resolution.”

According to the state Department of Conservation (DOC), DOGGR has regulations in place for enhanced oil recovery (EOR) utilizing steam flood and water flood injection through its Underground Injection Control (UIC) program, and "any alternative methods for EOR – such as hydraulic fracturing -- would require additional regulations and/or statutes." In some locales, environmental groups have made a push that fracking should be considered as “injection,” and the well that is being fractured should be considered as a UIC Class II injection well. Other state regulators in the oil and gas arena have countered that hydraulic fracturing should be considered a “well treatment” not subject to UIC. If hydraulic fracturing were considered as UIC, it would bring in a host of review and testing requirements along with oversight by USEPA: the DOC states that "injection project permits often include conditions, such as approved injection zones, allowable injection pressures, and testing requirements. State regulations were designed to ensure that injected fluids are confined to the project area and zone, and that formation pressures are not exceeded to the extent that damage occurs."

According to the California Independent Petroleum Association, fracking is not a Class II well, and fracking is indirectly regulated by the state's regulation of non-disposal drilling wells.

Public disclosure

On March 28, 2012, the California Division of Oil, Gas and Geothermal Resources sent letters asking California's oil producers, on a voluntary basis, to post records of their fracking activity to FracFocus. In May 2012 the oil industry group Western States Petroleum Association said its members that use fracking to extract oil will voluntarily post information about their operations on the industry website, likely by the end of June 2012. Rules proposed in December 2012 would make that posting mandatory, although the information is not be subject to public records laws, and companies could claim "trade secrets" exemptions to withhold the names of the chemicals they inject.

Lobbying

As of 2012, the oil and natural gas industry spends more than $4 million a year lobbying the California legislature.

Citizen groups

• Citizens Coalition for a Safe Community
• Food & Water Watch

Companies

• Occidental Petroleum
• PXP
• Venoco
• XTO Energy

Reports

USC

A March 2013 study by USC and the Communications Institute, a Los Angeles think tank, estimated that development of the Monterey Shale could generate half a million new jobs by 2015 and 2.8 million by 2020, and boost the state’s economy by 14 percent. As reported in DeSmogBlog: "the report acknowledges financial support - though failing to disclose how much funding - from the Western States Petroleum Asssociation (WSPA)" and "one of the co-authors of the 'study' - Fred Aminzadeh - is currently an oil and gas industry employee." Aminzadeh is founder and President of global oil and gas industry consultancy firm FACT-Corp. and on the Advisory Board of both Western Standard Energy Corp. and Saratoga Resources.

EWG

The 2012 Environmental Working Group report, "California regulators: See no fracking, speak no fracking," examines the issue of fracking, oil and gas, and regulations in the state and recommends that:

1. The Division of Oil and Gas update its fact sheet to acknowledge that fracking is currently taking place in California and has been for decades.
2. The Division should identify and track where fracking is taking place and post the information on a state-run website.
3. California state agencies should develop regulations that require oil and gas companies to disclose what chemicals they are using to frack each well (with volume and concentrations), the amount of water used, the source of the water, and whether any radioactive tracers are being used, to allow regulators, scientists and landowners to learn what substances to test for in nearby water supplies.
4. Landowners within at least two miles of proposed drilling or fracking operations should be notified and given an opportunity to weigh in on permit decisions.
5. Oil and gas companies should be required to pay for testing and monitoring of nearby groundwater before and after drilling and fracking by independent laboratories selected by potentially affected landowner, similar to an EPA recommendation to New York State authorities.
6. Water recycling should be mandatory for oil and gas operations.
7. Drilling and fracking should not be allowed close to residential areas or drinking water sources, to prevent risks.

Resources

Related SourceWatch articles

• Monterey Shale
• Inglewood oil field
• Long Beach Oil Field
• Salt Lake oil field
• United States and fracking
• Shale formations in the United States

Click on the map below for state-by-state information on fracking:

External links

• FracTracker
• California Shales, Oxy Website.
• Map of fracked oil and gas wells and water supply wells, California State Water Resources Control Board.

External Articles

• Dave Roberts, 10 reasons why fracking for dirty oil in California is a stupid idea, Grist, March 18, 2013.