Re “State Issues Potential Fracking Rules – Still Months Before Anything Is Official”
Dr. Suzanne DeBenedittis was one of the first activists to respond to the prospective new statewide fracking rules Gov. Brown issued on Tuesday:
“Remember last year the governor fired the two DOGGR permit-givers (and replaced them with these two 'company men') because they were not issuing permits fast enough. This is nothing but a cover to expedite permits, as Brown seeks to placate the public while ramping up oil and LNG production.”
For a different perspective, John Kuechle is the Chair of the CAP, the Community Advisory Panel, the residents’ watchdog over developments at the Inglewood Oil Field.
“I actually am looking at them right now,” the attorney told the newspaper. “When I started reading them last night and came to the first definition, it looked awfully technical to me. What I really know, so far, is what I have read in the Los Angeles Times.”
Although the state presented the documents as preliminary to the preliminary process, reality is otherwise.
“My understanding about regulations,” Mr. Kuechle said, “is that the state puts out a pre-release draft for people to comment. Then they put out a real draft, based on comments they have received.
“Then that goes through the formal review process with hearings and those sorts of things. After that, they put out a final draft.
“This is the set of regulations. It is just very early in the drafting process.
“The goal is to have a fully enforceable set of regulations that I think will do some good things,” Mr. Kuechle said.
A permanent set of new fracking rules is expected by summertime.
Does Mr. Kuechle believe these presumably toughened oil drilling regulations – calling for identifying the chemicals used in fracking and naming the location of all oil wells – will mollify the most ardent anti-fracking activists?
“It is clear nothing will satisfy them,” he said. “Their notion is we shouldn’t be using fossil fuels. Whenever there is an issue, it always comes back to ‘It’s bad to be using gasoline, and we shouldn’t be doing it. So why are we taking any risk at all to take this stuff out of the ground?’
“This isn’t going to satisfy them. Nothing will satisfy them.
“From my perspective, after reading the Times, it seems the state has picked off some of the low-hanging fruit – like we want disclosure of the chemicals used. That seems like an easy step.
“There is a legitimate concern about whether the state is bending too much to the proprietary trade secret argument – bending to Halliburton and their ilk.
“The notion that someone explained once, ‘we want the ingredients not the formula,’ makes sense to me.
“It seems to me that should be enough to protect the trade secrets of people who deserve to have trade secrets protected, and enough to protect us.
“I believe,” Mr. Kuechle said, “we should know everything that goes into the ground.”
(To be continued)
