I. 

AL "'!' I(~ tA ti FOli lll A flaR IOA MID· pf,Cl nC NOln EA~ t ,I OR TH::11Il ROC KIES 


UQRT IIWi ST ROCKY Mourll AHI WAS IlIfI GTQIl . nr. III Tr RH ATl OfO.L 


August 4,2011 

BY HAND DELIVERY 

( 

Lisa P. Jackson, Administrator 

Environmental Protection Agency 

Ariel Rios Building 

1200 Pennsylvania Avenue, NW 

Washington, D.C. 20460 

Re: 	 Citizen Petition under Toxic Substances Control Act Regarding the Chemical Substances 

and Mixtures Used in Oil and Gas Exploration or Production 

Dear Administrator Jackson: 

The undersigned organizations ("Petitioners") hereby petition the U.s. Environmental 

Protection Agency ("EPA") pursuant to section 21 of the Toxic Substances Control Act 

("TSCA"), 15 U.s.c. § 2620, to promulgate rules protecting public health and the environment 

from the serious risks posed by chemical substances and mixtures used in oil and gas 

exploration or production ("E&P Chemicals"). Specifically, Petitioners request that EPA adopt 

a rule under TSCA section 4, requiring that manufacturers and processors of E&P Chemicals 

conduct toxicity testing of all E&P Chemicals and identify all chemical substances and mixtures 

tested. Sec id. § 2603. Petitioners also seek promulgation of a rule under TSCA section 8, 

requiring maintenance and submission of various records related to E&P Chemicals, calling in 

records of allegations of significant adverse reactions to E&P Chemicals, and requiring 

submission of all existing health and safety studies related to E&P Chemicals. See id. § 2607(a), 

(c), (d). Rulemaking under TSCA sections 4 and 8 is necessary to ensure that the health and 

environmental risks posed by E&P Chemicals are fully understood. 

EPA and the public lack adequate information about the health and environmental 

effects of E&P Chemicals, which are used in increasing amounts to facilitate the rapid expansion 

of oil and gas development throughout the United States. Within the next 20 years, the U.s. 

Department of Energy expects gas production to increase by more than four trillion cubic feet,' 

which could translate into the drilling of more than 60,000 wells in the Marcellus Shale in 

Pennsylvania alone.z on production, too, is on the rise for the first time in over 20 years, as a 

>+ All documents cited in the following footnotes are reproduced on the enclosed CD-Rom. 

I U.S. Dep'l of Energy, u.S. Energy Info. Admin., Annual Energy Outlook 2009, 77 (Mar. 2009), amilable al 

http://www.eia.doe.gove/oiaf/aeo/pdf/trend3.pdf. 

2 See Nels Johnson, PCllllsylvnllin Ellcrgy Il1Ipacts ASSCSSIIlClli, Report 1: lvlnrcellus Shale NnhfrnI Gas ami WhIrl, 

NATURE C ONSERVANCY, 12 (Nov. 15, 2010), http://www.nature.org/media/pa/ Inc_energy _",lOlysis.pdf. 

156 WILLIAM STREET, SUITE 800 NEW YORK, NY 10038-5326 

T; 212.791.1881 F: 212.918.1556 E: neoffice@earthjustice.org W: www .e arth]u st lce.org 
result of the recent exploitation of unconventional plays such as the Bakken and Niobrara 

Sha les. 

The growth of the oil and gas industry is attributable to the w idespread use of hydraulic 

fracturing, a techno logy that invo lves high-pressure injection of a mi x of fluid s, sand, and 

chemicals to stimulate the release of oi l and ga s from unconventional formations. Oil and gas 

development requires the use of both drilling muds, which are used to shorten drilling time and 

lubricate the drill bit, and fracturing fluids, which are used to create fractures in the formatio n 

and to hold the fractures open to release the oil and gas. Drilling muds and frac turing fluids 

require similar classes of chemical additi ves, including proppants, acids, breakers, bactericides, 

biocides, clay stabilizers, corrosion inhibitors, crosslinkers, friction reducers, gelling agents, iron 

controls, scale inhibitors, and surfactants.' Well operators vary the chemical additives that they 

use, based upon the characteristics of the well and production objectives.' More than ten 

thousand gallons of E&P Chemicals may be used to fracture a single well S 

Under the current regulatory scheme, manufacturers, processors, and distributors place 

substantial quantities of E&P Chemicals into commerce without first discl osing the chemicals' 

i~entity, toxicity, or health and environmental impacts. Chemical manufacturers and 

processors are, moreover, under no obligation to conduct toxicity testing or to develop or 

provide health and safety data for E&P Chemicals. As a result, the public lacks adequate 

information to evaluate the risks of harm to health and the environment posed by exposure to 

E&P Chemicals. Mounting reports of harm caused by E&P Chemica ls, including injury to 

people, animals, and aquatic life, and degradation of air, water, and soil quality, demonstrate 

tha t unregulated E&P Chemicals may present an unreasonable risk of harm to health and the 

environment. 

Congress enacted TSCA to ensure the availability of "adequate data" on the health and 

environmental effects of chemica ls and "to assure that ... chemical substances and mixtures do 

.. See N.Y. Dep't of Envtl. Conservation, Div. of Mineral Res., Draft Supplemental Gene ri c Environmental 

Impact Statement on the Oil, Gas, and Solution Mining Regulatory Program, 5-45 to 5-51 (2009), availal,le 

at ftp://ftp.dec.state.ny.us/dnm/download/OGdSGEISFull.pdf (hereinafter "DSGEIS"); Ronald E. Bishop, 

Ph.D., C/lt!llIicnl ami Biological Risk Assessllle" t/or Nnlllrni Gas Extractioll ill New YOl'k,]] (Mar. 28, 2011), 

http://www.ge.tt/#2VfEsZw(statingtl.at "most hydraulic fracturing additives are also used in drilli ng 


fluids (or 'muds'n. 


, DSGEIS, sllpm note 3, at 5-33 to 5-34, 5-99. 


5 Sct..' irl. at 5-34 (explaining that fracturing fluids typically are composed of 98 percent fresh water and 

sand and two percent chemicals), 5-92 to 5-93 (stating that the entire multi-stLi ge fracturing operation for a 

single well requires between 2.4 and 7.8 million gallons of water); cf Travis Madsen, Jo rdan Schneide r & 

Erika St.af, III tile Simriow of tile Marcel/lis BOOIII, PENN ENVIRONMENT RESEA RCH & POLICY CTR., 16 (May 

2011), http://www.pelmenvi ronment.org/u ploads/49/f3/49f38a45f956d58a21Od7e24a17ec26a/1 n-theShadow-of-the-Marcellus-Boom.pdf (estimating that one gas well that requires three million gallons of 

fluid would require approximately 250,000 pounds of chemicals). 

- 2 ­

156 WILLIAM STREET , SU ITE 800 NEW YORK, N Y 10038-5326 

T : 2 1 2791 .1881 F: 212.918.1 556 E: neo ffi ce@e ar th j ust i ce.org W: www.earthjust lce .org 
not present an unreasonable risk of injury to health or the environment.'" At present, EPA and 

the public lack adequate data about the identity of E&P Chemicals, the number of E&P 

Chemica ls in commerce, significant adverse reactions posed by E&P Chemicals, and hea lth an d 

environmental hazards, exposures, and risks posed by E&P Chemicals. Petitioners request that 

EPA ensure that E&P Chemicals do not present an unreasonable risk of harm to hea lth and the 

environment by promulgating rules under TSCA sections 4 and 8. 

I. 	 Neither EPA's Study of the Potential Drinking Water Impacts of Hydraulic Fracturing 

nor a Voluntary Online Chemical Registry Is a Substitute for Rulemaldngs Under 

TSCA Sections 4 and 8. 

EPA and other organizations recently have made attempts to address increased public 

concern about the potential risks to health and the environment posed by E&P Chemicals. EPA 

currently is conducting a study of the potential impacts of hydraulic fracturing on drinking 

water sources. 7 In addition, the Groundwater Protection Council ("GWPC") and the Interstate 

Oil and Gas Compact Commission ("IOGCC") recently created an online registry whereby well 

operators may voluntarily disclose the chemicals they use in their fracturing operations.' 

Neither EPA's study nor the voluntary registry imposes enforceable requirements upon 

manufacturers, processors, or distributors of E&P Chemicals, and rulemakings pursuant to 

TSCA sections 4 and 8 are necessary to fill this gap. 

A. 	 EPA's Study 

EPA's study of the possible relationships between hydraulic fracturing and drinking 

water will not replace rulemakings under TSCA sections 4 and 8. Although E&P Chemicals do 

threa ten drinking water supplies, their potential to cause harm to health and the environment 

does not stop there' E&P Chemicals also threaten human health when they become airborne, 

and they pose significant risks of harm to soil quality, habitat for both terrestrial and aquatic 

wildlife, and the healthy functioning of complex ecosystems. 

"15 U.S.c. §§ 2601 (b)(l), (3) (2006). 


7 See EPA, Office of Research and Dey., Draft Plan to Study the Potential Impacts of HydrauliC Fracturing 


on Drinking ';Vater Resources, at vii (Feb. 2011), available at 

http://water.epa.gov/type/groundwater/uic/class2/hydraulidracturing/uploadIHFStudyPlanDraft_SAB_O 

20711.pdf (hereinafter "EPA Study") ("The overa ll purpose of this study is to understand the relationship 

between hydraulic fracturing and drinking water resources."). 


S See GWPC & IOGCe. FracFocus Chemical Disclosure Registry, http://fradocus.org!(last visited Aug. 2, 


2011). 


<} See EPA Study. slIprn note 7, at viii ("EPA recognizes that there are important potential research llreas 


related to hydraulic fracturing other thlln those involving drinking wllter resources, including effects on 


air quality, aquatic and terrestrial ecosystem impacts, seismic risks, public safety concerns, occupational 


risks, and economic impacts. These topics are outside the scope of the current study, but should be 


examined in the fu ture."). 


- 3 ­

156 WILLIAM STREET, SUITE 800 NEW YORK. NY 10038- 5326 

To 2 12.791.1881 F, 2 12.918. 1 556 E: neoff i ce@earth j ustice.org W: wVlw.earth]ustice.org 
To facilitate its study, EPA directed informational requests to nine hydraulic fracturing 

service providers, yet only five of those service providers also manufactu re or process E&P 

Chemicals.'" By relyi ng large ly on service providers to relay second -hand information from 

manufacturers, EPA's requests fail to reach many of those responsible for introducing E&P 

Chemica ls into commerce in the first place. II Because manufacturers of E&P Chemicals often 

disclose minimal information abou t product compositions to their customers, any responses 

submitted by the service providers are likely to be incomplete." Service providers, moreover, 

frequently resist disclosure. In fact, none of se rvice providers respond ed to EPA's request 

within the 3D-day deadline established in the letters, and one of them - Halliburton - promised 

compliance only after EPA subpoenaed the info rmation. 

EPA's study falls short of TSCA rulemakings because it will not require manufacturers 

and processors of E&P Chemicals to take proacti ve efforts to conduct testing or to develop 

hea lth and safety da ta needed to eva lua te the health and environmental risks of their substances 

and mixtures. Instead, EPA's study simply requires service providers to gather information 

available to them - much of which is obtained from the manufacturers - and submit it to EPA. 

EPA then will undertake its own effo rts to eval uate the information submitted to determine the 

effects of hydraulic fracturing on drinking water supplies. Rulemakings under TSCA sections 4 

and 8, on the other hand, would hold manufacturers and processors of E&P Chemicals 

responsible for gathering information, testing their products, and developing and submitting 

hea lth and safety reports." 

B. The Voluntary Registry 

The GWPC and the IOGCC recently created an online registry through which well 

operators may voluntarily disclose the chemicals that they use in hydraulic fracturing of oil and 

11) EPA issued voluntary information requests to the following nine natural gas service companies: B} 

Services, Complete Production Services, Halliburton, Key Energy Services, Patterson-UT1, PRe, Inc., 

Schlumbergef, Superior Well Services, and Weatherford. Sec Press Release, EPA, EPA Forma lly Reques ts 

In forma tion from Companies About Chemicals Used in Natural Gas Extraction (Sept. 9, 2010), 

http://yosemite.epa.gov/opa/admpress.nsf/e77fdd4f5afd88a3852576b3005a604f/ec57125b66353b7e8525779 

9005c1d64!OpenDocument. Only five of the companies - BJ Services, Inc., Halliburton, Schlumberger, 

Superior Well Services, and vVe[ltherford - [lIsa function as manufacturers or processors of E&P 

Chemicals. EPA did not serve information requests on other manufacturers and processors of E&P 

Chemicals, such as Cudd Energy Services, Nalco Energy Services, Sanjel USA, and Aquaness Chemica l. 

" See TEDX, Health Effects Summary Statement, 5 (Jan. 27, 2011), 

http://www.endocrinedis ruption.com/chemicals.multistate. php (follow link to "summary statement") 

(explaining that drilling and fracturing contractors companies largely rely on information from chemical 

manufacturers when responding to requests about the identity of the chemicals they use at well sites). 

" lrl. 

"See 15 USc. § 2601 (b)(l). 

- 4 ­

156 WILLIAM STREET . SU ITE 800 NEW YORK. NY 10038- 5326 

T : 2 12791 . 1881 F: 212.91 8. 1 556 E: neoffice@earth j ustice. org W: www.earth j ustice org 
gas wells." Well operators that choose to use the registry ha ve the opportunity to upload a 

va riety of information about the chemi ca ls they use at each well, including their functional 

purposes, ingredie nts, concentrations, and CAS numbers." This voluntary registry is designed 

to all ow the public to identify the chemica ls being used at specific wells - a t least those 

chemicals that are voluntarily discl osed. 

Like EPA's study, the voluntary registry is not aimed at the manufacturers, processors, 

and distributors of E&P Chemicals who are answerable under TSCA. Moreover, the registry 

does not impose any enforceable requirements upon the \'vell owners and operators that lllakeor choose not to make - vollUltary disclosures. Because the registry is based upon voluntary 

disclosures, operators may choose to disclose only those chemicals posing the least risk to 

health and the environment, and the public could receive misleading or selective information. 

II. 	 RuJemakings Under TSCA Sections 4 and 8 Are Necessary to Fill Significant Gaps in 

Federal Regulation of E&P Chemicals. 

Federal agencies have extremely limited authority to regulate E&P Chemicals." 

Hydraulic fracturing is exempt from regulation under the Underground Injection Control 

program of the Safe Drinking Water Act, excep t when injected fluids contain diesel fuel." Were 

hydraulic fracturing not specifically excluded from the definition of "underground injection:' 

the oil and gas industry would be required to disclose in mandatory permit applications the 

"source and analysis of the physical and chemical characteristics" of all of the chemicals injected 

below ground to stimulate oil and gas production. " This exemption, commonly known as the 

"Halliburton Loophole:' allows the oil and gas industry to conceal chemical formulas and to 

inject toxic fluids near drinking water supplies without EPA oversight." 

~ See Frac Focus Chemical Discl osu re Registry, sl/prn note 8. 


1.~ The Chemical Abstracts Service is a division of the American Chemical Society and the "worlds [sic] 


iJuthority for chemical information." CAS, FAQ List and Info rmation for New Visitors, 


http://www.cas.org/aboutcas/fag.html(last visited Aug. 2, 2010). A CAS Number "prOVides un 


unambiguous way to identify a chemical substance or molecular structure when there are many possible 


systematic, generic, proprietary, or trivial mimes." hi. 


16 See Memo randum from Henry A. Waxman & Edward 1. Markey to Members of the Subcommittee on 


Energy and Environment, Examining the Potential Impact of Hydraulic Fracturing. 2 (Feb. 18, 2010), 


mmilnble n t http://democra ts.energycommerce.h OLI se.gov / Press_l11 /201 00218/ 


ydrilu lic_fradurin~memo pdf. 

" 42 U.s.c. § 300h(d)(1)(B}(ii). 


18 EPA Form 7520·6: Underground Injection Control Permit Application, 5 (rev. Dec. 2008), available at 


http://www.epa.gov/safewater/uic/pdfs/reportingforms/7520-6.pdf. 


19 See Tracy Carluccio, Will We Sacrifice O"r Wlller!or Ga, ', OUTDOOR AMERICA, Spring 2010, at 27-28, 


available al http://www.iwla.org/index.php?ht=a/GetDocumentAction/i/4272. 


- 5 ­

1 56 WILLIAM STREET . SU I TE 800 NEW YORK. NY 10038-5326 

T : 2 1 2.79 1 .188 1 F: 212.918.1556 E: neotrice@earthjustice.org W: www.earthjust!ce.org 
The oil and gas industry also avoids regulation under the Resource Conservation and 

Recovery Act ("RCRA"), which sets the standards for handling and disposal of hazardous 

wastes.!!' Wastes created by oil and gas exploration and production, including E&P Chemicals 

present in drilling fluids and produced waters, are not subject to regulation under RCRA." 

Were oil and gas wastes subject to RCRA, those charged with handling the wastes would be 

required to demonstrate that the wastes were, for example, stored, transported, and disposed of 

in a way not harmful to the environnlent.22 

In addition, the oil and gas industry is exempt from the provision of the Emergency 

Planning and Community Right to Know Act ("EPCRA"), under which EPA requires industrial 

and federal facilities with more than ten employees to report the toxic chemicals they release, 

store, and transfer." Specifically, any facility that manufactures or processes a chemical in 

amounts over statutory thresholds must submit forms detailing the chemical identities, uses, 

and volumes; as well as onsite waste treatment and recycling methods and offsite transfer 

locations.N The chemical information contained in these reports, where otl1erwise mandated by 

EPCRA, is made publicly available in the Toxic Release Inventory, which is updated annually 

and serves to inform communities and citizens of chemical hazards to which they may be 

exposed.25 

Although a few federal regulations require storage facilities and manufacturers to 

disclose certain information about the chemicals they store and manufacture, the information 

gathered pursuant to these regulations is extremely limited and not readily available to EPA or 

the public. First, under EPCRA, owners and operators of storage facilities holding in excess of 

10,000 pounds of any hazardous chemical must submit chemical inventory information ("Tier II 

reports") to the state emergency response commission ("SERC"), local emergency planning 

committee ("LEPC"), and the local fire department in the area where the facilities are located." 

Every state implementing the federal program has different Tier II reporting requirements, and 

the forms required to be completed by the storage facilities may differ by COWlty and by 

2" See 42 U.s.c. § 6921 (b)(2)(A). 

21 See id. ("[Dlrilling fluids, produced waters, and other W<1stes associated with the ex ploration, 


development, or production of crude oil or natura l gas or geothermal energy sha ll be subject only to 


existing State or Federal regulatory programs in lieu of this subchap ter . . .."). 


22 See 42 U.s.c. § 6921. 


lJ 40 C.F.R. §§ 372.22.,372.23 (2011). 


" fri. §§ 372.25,375.28; EPA, Form R: Approved Olvm No. 2025-0009 (2010), 


http://www.epo.gov/tri/report/formR/RY201 O_FormR_01 0511 .pdf. 


!..; See id. 

"42 U.s.c. § 11022(0)(1); 40 C.F.R. § 317.10 (setting the threshold for Tier 1I reports at 10,000 pounds for 

hazardous substances and 500 pounds for extremely hazardous substances), 

- 6 ­

156 WILLIAM STREET, SUITE 800 NEW YORK, NY 10038-5326 

T: 212 791.1881 F : 212.918.1556 E: neoffice@earthjustice.org W: www.earthjustice.org 
companyF To obtain Tier II reports, moreover, the public must request them in writing from 

an SERC or LEPC." 

Second, under EPCRA and th e Occupational Safety and Health Act, manufacturers and 

importers of E&P Chemicals are' required to disclose certain chemicals o n material safety data 

shee ts ("MSDSs"), which are designed to protect employees working with ha za rdous chemicals 

by informing them about the risks associated with those chemicals." MSDSs are governed by 

regul a tions promulgated by the Occupational Safety and Health Administrati on ("OSHA")]IJ 

With or before the initial shipment, manufacturers and importers must provide MSDSs to any 

distributor or employer receiving their products, and employers must keep the MSDSs in the 

workplace and make them readily accessible to employees." Employers required to maintain 

MSDSs at their facilities must file them with the SERe, LEPe, and fire department with 

jurisdiction over the faci lity." The public may obtain MSDSs only upon written request to state 

and loca l agencies." 

MSDSs are the primary means by whi ch the public has been able to obtain information 

about E&P Chemicals, yet the informa tion they prOVide is inadequate to identify the full 

spectrum of E&P Chemicals or to eva luate the chemicals' health and environmental effects. 

This inadequacy results from OSHA's regulations governing MSDSs, which limit the 

information reqUired to be disclosed in several ways. First, only "hazardous chemi ca ls" need to 

be disclosed on MSDSs, and a chemical must have been subject to significant testing before it 

will be considered "hazardous" under the regulations.J.l There is, however, no requ irement that 

E&P Chemica ls ever be tested. Second, even where a chemical that has been sufficiently tested 

qualifies as "hazardous," the manufacturer may opt not to disclose it if it constitutes less than 

one percent of the volume of the product (or 0.1 percent of the volume of the product if the 

27 Sec, e.g., EPA, Tier Il Chemical Inventory Reports{fier II Submit, 

http://www.epa.gov/oem/content/epcra/tier2.htm (last visited Aug. 2, 2011) (providing links to the 

different reporting requirements o f each of the 50 states). 


"40 CF.R. § 370.61. 


" 42 U.s.C § 11021 (a)(1); 29 U.s.c. § 655; 29 CF.R. § 1910.1200(g)(1) (requiring chemical manufacturers 


and importers to "obtain or develop" an MSDS for "each hazardous chemical they produce or import"). 


30 29 CF.R. § 1910.1200. 


31 Tri . § J910.1200(g)(6)(i), (8). 


" 42 U.s.C § 1102J(a)(1). 


" See 40 CF.R. § 370.60. 


" See 29 C F.R. § J9JO.l200(c). A "lhJazardous chemical means any chemical which is a physical hazard 


or a health hazard." lei. A "physical hazard" is a "chemical for which there is SCientifically valid evidence 


that it is a combustible liquid, a compressed gas, explosivel flammable, an organic peroxide, an oxidizer, 


pyropho ricl unstable (reactive) or water-reactive." /d. A "health hazard" is a "chemical for which there is 


statistically significant evidence based on at least one study conducted in accordance with estilblished 


scientific principles that acute or chronic health effects may occur in exposed employees." lri. 


- 7 ­

156 WILLIAM STREE T, SU ITE 800 NEW YORK, NY 1003 8 · 5326 

T.2 1 2 .791. 188 1 F.21 2.918 .1 556 E: neoffice@earth justice. org W: www .ea rth] ust lce.org 
chemical is a carcinogen)." Third, a "haza rd ous chemical" need not be disclosed if the 

manufacturer claims that its identity is a trade secret."" The manufacturer unilaterally ma y 

withhold specific chemical information as proprietary if it determines that the trade secret 

classifi cation ca n be "supported."" 

Above all, MSDSs are an inadequate sou rce of informa tion because the chemical 

manufacturers have wide discretion in preparing the sheets.311 OSHA publishes little guidance 

as to whether a chemical is hazardous and instead directs the manufacturers to "conduct a 

thorough evaluation" as to whether a chemical must be disclosed." OSHA recognizes four 

sepa rate lists identifying chemicals tha t are automa tically "haza rd ous" as de fined by the 

regulations,'" but these lists are incomplete, contain only chemicals th at already have been 

tested extensively, and are neither user-friendly nor readily understood by the ordina ry citizen. 

Moreover, federal regulators provide little oversight in the manufacturers' decision-making 

process:" Given the broad exceptions carved out in OSHA's regulations, the manufacturers' 

ample discretion, and OSHA's lack of oversight, the regulations do not provide much incentive 

for disclosure on MSDSs. 

In practice, when preparing MSDSs, manufacturers of E&P Chemicals take advan tage of 

the ample discretion provided by OSHA's regulations and omit vital information about the 

chen1ical composition of their prodllcts:~2 For example, although manufacturers have 

" See id. § 1910.l200(d)(S)(ii) . 


.., See id. § 19IO.l200(g)(2)(i) . 


." Id. § 191O.1200(i)(1)(i). 


" Sec, c.g., 29 C.F.R. § 1910.1200, App. B ("Hazard evaluation is a process which relies heavily on the 


professional judgment of the evaluator"); see nlso TEDX, Health Effects Summary Statement, slIpm note 


11, at 1 ( "The accuracy and completeness (of MSDSs] are entirely up to the company that produces the 


MSDS"). 


." 29 C.F.R. § 1910.1200, App. B. 


40 Chemical manufacturers must treat a chemical as hazardous and list it on an MSDS if it is listed (1) in 29 

C.F.R. part 1910, subpart Z, (2) on the Threshold Limit Va lues for Chemical Substances and Physical 

Agents in the Work Environment, American Conference of Governmental Industrial Hygienists (latest 

edition), (3) as a carcinogen by the National Toxicology Program, or (4) as a carcinogen by the Annual 

Report on Carcinogens, International Agency for Research on Cancer tvlonographs. 5tw irl. §§ 

191 O.1200(d)(3)-(4). 

~I See 29 C.F.R. § 19]0.1200, App. B. OSHA does not intervene in the decision-making process of the 

manufacturers w hen preparing MSDSs; however, upon OSHA's request, manufacturers must be able to 

"demonstrate that they have adequately asce rta ined the hazards of the chemica ls produced or imported." 

Id. 

1 Thea Colbo rn, Carol Kwiatkowski, Kim Schultz, & Mary Bachran, Nntural Gns Operaliolls frO Ill n Public 

Henltll Perspective, INT'L J. HUMAN & ECOLOGIC/'L RISK ASSESSMENT (forthcoming 201 1) (manuscript at 7), 

http://www.endocrinedisruption.com/files/Oct2011 HERAlO-48forweb3-3-11.pdf. TEDX studied what it 

refers to as chemical "products," w hich contilin a varie ty of chemical substances. Although TEDX does 

not use the term "mixture" as it is defined under TSCA, the fracturing products eVillu ilted in TEDX's 

- 8 ­

156 WIL L IAM STREE T, SU ITE 800 NEW YORK. NY 10038·5325 

T: 2 1 2.79 1 . 1 88 1 F : 212.918.155 6 E: neoffice@earthj ust ic e.org W: www.e arth j ust lce.o rg 
distributed hundreds of MSDSs for products used in gas development, a study performed by 

The Endocrine Disruption Exchange ("TEDX"), a non-profit organization that provides 

scientific information about endocrine disruptors, demonstrates that these MSDSs are "fraught 

with gaps."'" Of the 980 MSDSs gathered by TDEX, 421 of them - representing 43 percent of the 

chemical products - disclosed less than one percent of the products' chenli ca l composition:'" Of 

the remaining MSDSs, only 133 of them - representing only 14 percent o f the chemical products 

- disclosed more than 95 percent of the products' chemical composition.'" In addition, many of 

these MSDSs either provided functional descriptions in place of chemical ingredients or omitted 

CAS numbers." As TEDX explained, its review demonstrates that MSDSs can "easily be 

inaccurate and incomplete."·17 

III. 	 Rulemakings Under TSCA Sections 4 and 8 Are Necessary to Fill Gaps in State 

Regulation of E&P Chemicals. 

Most states do not routinely disclose to the public information they receive about E&P 

Chemicals, even when the information is not claimed to be proprietary, and no state is requiring 

toxicity testing or development of health and safety data. Wyoming has implemented the most 

far-reaching regulations governing disclosure of E&P Chemicals, yet even these regulations fall 

short of what a rulemaking under TSCA sections 4 and 8 would provide. Wyoming's rules 

require that well owners and operators disclose to the state's Oil a nd Gas Conservation 

Commission ("WYOGCC") the identities and concentrations of all chemicals that will be used at 

each well site:" Wyoming's rules, however, do not require toxicity testing or disclosure of 

health and environmental impacts of the chemicals. Moreover, like EPA's current study, 

Wyoming's rules do not reach manufacturers, processors, or distributors of E&P Chemicals, 

unless the well owner or operator is a company such as Halliburton or Schlumberger that also 

manufactures, processes, or dislTibutes E&P Chemicals. 

Wyoming's newly-enacted regulations and the oil and gas industry's response to them 

demonstrate that the oil and gas industry is resistant to disclosure of E&P Chemicals. In fact, 

since Wyoming's regulations were enacted in August 2010, the WYOGCC has received more 

study meet TSCNs definition of mixture. See 15 U.s.c. § 2602(8) ("The term 'mixture' means any 

combination of two or more chemical substances if the combination does not OCCLlr in nature and is not, in 

whole or in part, the result of a chemical reaction; except that such term does include any combination 

which occurs, in whole or in part, as a result of a chemical reaction if none of the chemical substances 

comprising the combination is a new chemical substance and if the combination could a have been 

manufactured for commercial purposes without a chemical reaction at the time the chemical substances 

comprising the mixture were combined."). 

H Colborn, slIpra note 42, manuscript at 7. 

H TEDX, Health Effects Summary Statement, slIpm note 11, at 2. 

·15 fd. 

" fri. at 1. 

7 Colborn, slipra note 42, manuscript at 7 . 

., See Wy. Code R. Oil Gen. Ch. 3 § 45(d). 

- 9 ­

156 WILLIAM STREET, SUITE 800 NEW YORK, NY 10038·5326 

T: 212.791.1881 F: 212.918.1556 E: neofflce @ea rthjust i ce.org W: w...·/w.earth]U 5tlce.org 
than 90 trade secret claims for E&P Chemicals.'" Although some of those submitting trade 

secret claims disclosed all ingredients except for those chemical substances claimed to be 

proprietary, others submitted blanket confidentiality claims and refused to disclose any of the 

chemica l substa nces used at th e well si tes on the grou nds that some of them were proprietary." 

Although TSCA also provides an opportunity for manufacturers, processors, and distributors to 

present trade secret claims, EPA currently is undertaking'efforts to ensure that TSCA's limited 

trade secret provisions are not abused and that hea lth and safety information submitted under 

TSCA is made publicly available." 

IV. 	 There Is Insufficient Information Available to Permit a Reasoned Evaluation of the 

Health and Environmental Effects of E&P Chemicals. 

In the absence of a federal rulemaking requiring disclosure of the identities of E&P 

Chemicals and information about the chemi ca ls' hea lth and environmental impacts, scientific 

organizations and state agencies, including TEDX and the New York State Department of 

Environmental Conservation ("NYSDEC"), have undertaken efforts to evaluate the health risks 

posed by E&P Chemicals. Two reports published by TEDX and NYSDEC, respectively, analyze 

the health effects of aU chemical substances for which TEDX and NYSDEC could locate a CAS 

number." These reports do not analyze any health effects related to chemical mixtures, in large 

part because manufacturers and processors rarely disclose the complete chemi ca l composition 

of their products." Read together, these reports demonstrate that the information currently 

49 See Telephone Conversation between Megan Klein, Associate Attorney, Earthjustice, and Gary Strong, 

Project Geologist, Wyoming Oil and Gas Conservation Commission (Mar. 21. 2011). Mr. Strong stated 

that, to his knowledge, 9] trLlde secret claims had been made since the regulations became effective on 

August 17, 2010, but he noted that this number could include duplicate claims or claims made fo r 

chemicals never actually used at the well sites. ltl. Wyoming's regulations provide that "confidentiality 

protection shall be provided" for trade secrets, and privileged and confidential information when the 

purty seeking to w ithhold disclosure provides written documentation of the "nature and extent of the 

proprietory information." Wy. Code R. Oil Gen. Ch. 3 § 45(f). 

5{1 St?e Telephone Conversation between Klein ilnd Strong, slIpra note 49. 

;, Sec 15 U.s.c. § 2613(a) (providing statutory authority under which the chemical industry, or EPA after 

obtilining the information from the chemical indllstry, may withhold certain information ilS confidential 

business information ("CBl")), irl. § 26J3(b) (indicuting that, outside of limited circumstances, information 

disclosed as part of health and sa fety data may not be withheld as CBI); 75 Fed. Reg. 29,754, 29,754 (May 

27,2010) (announcing that EPA will begin reviewing CBl claims for health and sufety dat" to ensure all 

CBt claims for chemical identities are supportable under TSCA); see also in. at 29,755 (indicating that its 

review of CBI claims "will make more health and sa fety information available to the public and support 

an impo rtant mission of the Agency to promote public unde rstanding of the potential risks posed by 

chemicill substances in commerce"). 

" Sec DSGEIS, sllpm note 3, at 5-25 (identifying 260 chemical substances); cf TEDX, Health Effects 

Summary Statement, slIprn no te 11 , ilt 3 (identifyi ng 649 chemical substances). 

5.1 Sec TEDX, He<1lth Effects Summary Statement, slfpra note 11, at 1. 

- 10 ­

156 WILLIAM STREET. SU ITE 800 NEW YORK. NY 10038·5326 

T: 212.791. 1 88 1 F: 2 12 . 918. 1 556 E: neoff i ce@ea rth justice. org W: www.earthjustlce.org 
available is insufficient to identify the fu ll spectrum of E&P Chemicals or to permit a reasoned 

eva luation of their health and environmental effects. 

A. TEDX Report 

In an attempt to determine the identity of E&P Chemicals and to eva luate the health 

effects associated with them, TEDX gathered information from multipl e sources, including 

lvISDSs, sta te Tier]] reports, Environmental Impact Statement and Environmental Assessment 

disclosures, rule-making documents, and accident and spill reports." TEDX's review spanned 

severa l years and required TEDX to match the chemical substances that could be identified by 

CAS number with available health data. After performing this extensive and labor-intensive 

review, TEDX concluded that health data was available for "only a sma ll percentage of the 

chemicals in use" in the gas industry.55 

Using the available information, TEDX was able to form a list of 980 products conta ining 

649 chemical substances." It was not possible reliably to determine the hea lth effects of almost 

half of the substances identified because TEDX could not locate CAS numbers for them.57 The 

remaining substances that could be identified by CAS number were associated with multiple 

health effects, including effects on human sensory, respiratory, gastrointestinal, nervous, 

immune, cardiovascular, and endocrine systems. Specifically, over 78 percent of the substances 

that could be identified by CAS number were associated with serious short-term health effects 

such as burning eyes, rashes, coughs, sore throats, asthma-like effects, nausea, vomiting, 

headaches, dizziness, h'emors, and convulsions" Beh"een 22 and 47 percent of the identifiable 

substances also were associated with longer-term health effects, including cancer, organ 

damage, and harm to the endocrine system' " In addition, 48 percent of the identifiable 

substances had "other" health effects not specifically classified as short- or long-term, such as 

changes in weight, effects on teeth and bones, and death.'" Because the full chemical 

composition of the vast majority of the products was not available, TDEX was not able 

comprehensively to evaluate the health effects of the mixtures used in gas development. 

.. TEDX, Health Effects Summary Statement, slIpm note 11, at l. 

55 Colborn, slfpra note 42, manuscript at 12. 

56 SccTEDX, Healtll Effects Spreadsheet (2010), http://www.endocrinedisruption.com/files/ 


M u I tista teSpreadsheet3-22-11Sta tes.xls. 


57 Sec TEDX, Health Effects Summary Statement, slIpm note II, at 3 (indicating the TEDX could not locate 


CAS numbers for 44 percent of the chemicals identified). 

;s Id . 

•, Id. 

nU Id. 

- 11 ­

156 WI L L I AM STREET, SU ITE 800 NEW YORK , NY 10038- 5326 

T: 212.791.1881 F: 212.918.1556 E: neoffice@earthjustice.org W: www .ea rthjustlce.org 
B. NYSDEC Analysis 

[n an attempt to ana lyze the hea lth effects of fracturing chemicals like ly to be used at 

well sites in New York State, NYSDEC collected MSDSs and sought ad d itiona l information 

from well se rvice providers and chemica l manufacturers.b1 From the in formation it obtained, 

NYSDEC compiled a list of 260 chemical substances used within 197 fracturing prod ucts, 

although full chemical composition information was available fo r on ly 152 products.'"' 

NYSDEC's review of the identifi able chemi ca l substances and mi xtures demonslTated that 

"[c]ompound-specific toxicity data are ve ry limited for many chemica l additives to fracturing 

fluid s."'" Lacking compound-specific toxici ty data, NYSDEC grouped the substances by their 

chemi ca l stru ctu res and then matched each group of substances wi th hea lth risks identified by 

the New York Sta te Department of Health." Listed below are some of the grou ps of chemical 

substances identified in the DSGEIS and the adverse health effects associated with those groups: 

• 	 BTEX compounds (benzene, toluene, ethylbei1Zene, and xylene): damage to the nervous 

system, liver, kidneys an d blood cell-forming tissues; 

• 	 Petroleum distill ate products: adverse effects on the gastrointestinal system and central 

nervous system, skin irritation, blistering, and peeling; 

• 	 Quarternary ammonium compounds, which can react with disinfectants used in 

drinking water systems to form nitrosamines: genetic damage and cancer; 

• 	 Microbicides: respiratory and gash·ointestinal damage as well as damage to the kidneys, 

liver, and nervous system; 

• 	 Formaldehyde: irritation of the skin, eyes, nose, and throat, along with increa sed tearing; 

nasopharyngeal and lymphohematopoietic cancer;(~ 

• 	 Glyco l ethers: damage to male reproductive systems and red blood cell formation; and 

• 	 l,4-dioxane: eye and nose irritation, li ver and kidney damage, and li ver cancer. 

Although NYSDEC was able to identify a range of adverse health impacts associated with 

groups of fracturing d lemica ls, NYSDEC acknowledged that its analysis of the hea lth effects of 

fracturing chemica ls was incomplete, because it was not able to identify hea lth data for every 

chemi cal in each group.61i 

61 DSGE fS, slIpra note 3, at 5-52 to 5-62. In addition to the 260 chemicals, the produ cts identified 8.lso 

contnined "40 compounds which require further disclosure since milll)' me mixtures." fri. at 5-35. 

" fd. at 5-35. 

" fd. at 5-53. 

" fd. at 5-52, 5-63 to 5-66. 

b; EPA recently re leased a draft formaldehyde-inhalati on il5sessment that identifies fo rmaldehyde i.15 il 

w idely-recognized carcinogen. EPA, IRIS Toxicological Review of Fo rmaldehyde-Inhalation Assessment 

(External Review Draft), EPA/635/R-IO/002A, at § 4.1.2 (2010). 

". See DSGEIS, supm note 3, at 5-61. 

- 12 ­

156 WILLIAM STRE ET. SU ITE 800 N EW YORK. NY 10038·5326 

T: 2 1 2.79 1.1 881 F: 2 1 2.918. 1 556 E: neoffice@earlhjustic e . org W; ww·w.earth ]ustlce org 
V. 	 E&P Chemicals May Present an Unreasonable Risk of Harm to Human Health, 

Terrestrial and Aquatic Life, and the Environment. 

Numerous incidents of exposure to E&P Chemicals demonstrate that E&P Chemicals 

may present an unreasonable risk of harm to health and the environment at eve ry stage of oil 

and gas development, including storage, transportation, treatment, and disposal. Leaks and 

spills of E&P Chemicals have been reported from Wyoming to Pennsylvani a.'" In 20"10 alone, at 

least 34 million gallons of crude oil and E&P Chemicals were spilled nationwide." The New 

Mexico Oil and Cas Conservation Division has identified close to 400 cases of groundwater 

contamination .from oil and gas pits sta tewide." Data gathered by the Colorado Oil and Cas 

Conservation Commission indicated that in the state of Colorado there were 134 spills of oil and 

gas products, including drilling muds and fracturing fluids, between 2003 and' 2008.'0 The 

Pennsylvania Land Trust reviewed records of violations by service companies operating in the 

Marcellus Shale between January 2008 and August 2010, and found that there were 1,056 

violations likely to have caused environmental ha rm." 

E&P Chemicals frequently are found in drinking water supplies near oil and gas 

development sites. Testing of drinking water wells in Dimock, Pennsylvania - a small town 

with more than 60 gas wells in a nine-squ are-mile area" - revealed high levels of toluene and 

ethylbenzene, which are carcinogenic chemicals believed to aid the fracturing process?] 

Residents of Sublette County, Wyoming tested their drinking water wells and found "f1uoridewhich is listed in Halliburton's hydrau lic fracturing patent applications and can cause bone 

damage at high levels - at almost three times EPA's maximum limit."'" A poorly lined pit near 

(., lad Mouawad & Clifford Krauss, Dork Side of0 Nolllrnl Gos BOOIII, N.Y. TIMES, Dec. 7, 2009, at B1, 


ovoiloble 01 http://www.nynmes.com/2009/12/0B/bl1siness/energy-environmen t/OBlracking.html. 


os Armen Keteyian, Oil olld Gos IlIdlls/r!! Spills /-loppell "AlIlile Ti/lle," CBS NEWS, Apr. 12, 2011, 


http://www.cbsnews.com/830I-31727_162-20054042-10391695.html. 


69 New Mexico Energy, Minerals, and Natural Resources Department, Ground 'wa ter Impact Update 


spreadsheet (2010), http://www.emnrd.stale.nm.us/ocd/documenls/GW _lmpact_updTbl_OOO.xls. 


iO Exhibit 1 to Consolidated Final Prehearing Statement of the Oil and Gas Accollntubility Project et aL, 111 


re Chnllges to R. & Regs. 01 Oil & Gns COllsel"valiolJ COJ/ll/J'1l of Colo., No. 0803-RM-02 (2008), nvailahlc at 


http://cogcc.sta te. co.us/Ru leMaki ng/Pa rtySta tus/Fi nal Prehea ringStm ts/OG APEx h I. pd f (i 11 dica ti I1g tha t 


there were 134 spills of "other" products, which "induded diesel fuel, glycol, amine, lubricating oil, 


hydruulic fracturing fluids, drilling muds, other chemicals, and natural gas leaks"). 


71 Pennsylvania Land Trust Association, Marcellus Drillers in Pennsylvania Amass 1,6]4 Violations Since 


2008 -1,056 Identified as Most Likely to Harm the Environment (Oct. 2010), 


http://conserveland.org/violationsrpt (Iollow link to "Download Report" ). 


i:!: See, e.g., Christopher Bateman, A Colossal Frnckillg Nll.'SS, VANITY F AIR, June 21 , 2010, availnble nt 


http://www.vanityfair.com/business/leatures/2010/06/fracking-in-pennsylvania-201006. 


n Michael Rubinkam, Reporl: Frncki1/g Chelllicois i1/ NE Po. Woler Wel/s, ABC NEWS, Sept. 16, 2010, 


http://abcnews.go.com/Business/wireSlory?id=11653140&page=1. 


,., Abrahm Lustgarten & ProPublica, Drill for Nolllrni Gos, POl/II Ie Waler, SCIENTIFICAMERICAN, Nov. 17, 


200S, mIni/nNe nt http://www.scientificamerican.com/a rtide .cfm ?id=d rill-for-na tu ral-gas-poll u te-w ate r. 


- 13 ­

156 WILLIAM STR EET. SUITE 800 NEW YORK. NY 10038- 5326 

T: 212.791 .1881 F: 212.918.1556 E: neoff ice@ earth j usti ce .org W: www.earthjustice.org 
Parachute. Colorado, leaked 2,500 barrels of drilling muds into a tributary of Garden Gulch, and 

sa mples performed on the receiving waters demonstrated high levels of benzene and ace tone." 

In 2009 and again in 2010, EPA informed residents of Pavillion, Wyoming, that a number of 

drinking water wells in their area were contaminated with 2-butoxyethanol ("2-BE"), a chemical 

used as a general solvent that is associated with health effects such as narcosis, pulmonary 

edema, and severe liver and kidney damage.'" More recently, sa mpl es of oil and gas 

wastewater discharged into public drinking water supplies in Indiana County, Pennsylvania, 

revealed concentrations of 2-BE at levels at more than 55 times the minimum risk level for 

intermediate exposure by chiidren.7I In response to complaints of cloudy and foul-smelling 

water by residents living near gas wells in Hickory, Pennsylvania, EPA performed testing of 

drinking water wells and found acrylonitrile, a chemical that Halliburton has listed on two U.s. 

patents for E&P Chemicals.78 Water samples a lso have shown dramatic increases in levels of 

acrylonitrile, as well as benzene and styrene, in water wells located near gas development in 

Wetzel County, West Virginia." Just recently, a breach of a containment area at a gas well in 

Canton, Pennsylvania, caused thousands of gallons of drilling fluids to spill, cross over farm 

fields, and reacll a nearby stream." 

In addition to threatening human hea lth via drinking water contamination, E&P 

Chemicals have proven fatal to animals and aquatic life. Again in Dimock, Pennsylvania, Cabot 

Oil and Gas reported spilling 8,500 gallons of fracturing fluid, much of which made its way into 

i5 Col orado Oil and Gas Conserviltion Commission, March 31,2008 Update on Garden Gulch Releases, at 

slides 13-14 (2008), http://oil-gas.state.co.us/Library/PiceanceBasin/Garden_Gulch_Releases_03-31­

OS_Update. pdf. 


" See Fritz Mayer, EPA 111l'estigates 11 Pollllterl Wells, THE RIVER REPORTER, Aug. 20, 2009, 


http://www.riverreporter.com/issues/09·08-20/news-wells.html (indiGlting EPA's investigation of the 

contamination); EPA, Glycol Ethers Hazard Summary (rev. 2000), 

http://www.epa.gov/tmatwOl/hlthef/glycolet.html#ref4 (indicating the uses and associated health 

hazards of 2-BE); Abrahm Lustgarten, Feds \,yam ResideH/s Near Wyomillg Gns Drillil/g Siles Not to Drillk 

rlleir Water (Sept. 1, 2010), http://www.propublica.org/article/feds-warn-residents-near-wyotning-gas­


drilling-sites-not-to-drink-their-wate (noting thilt EPA warned Pavillion residents not to drink their water 


and to lise ventilation while bathing). 


77 See Conrad D. Volz et aI., COl/tallliHall1 Cltaraclerizatioll of Efflilelltfrom PCllllsylPnllia Brille Trcnt/IlCIl! 111C., 


jasephhll! Facilill) Beillg Released illto Blacklick Creek, llldimin COlll1ll}r PCllllSylvflllifl, Mar. 25, 2011, at 10-11, 


http://ia600608.us.archive.org/6/items/ContaminantCh<lf<lcteriza tionOfEffluentFromPennsylvaniaBrineTr 


eah11ent/]osephine_ V2_CHEC_2011.pdf. 


'" Christie Campbell, Water Problem Gets Closer Lookfrom DEP, EPA, OBSERVER-REPORTER (Washington, 


PAl, Mar. 26, 2010, at Bl. 


79 Isaac Wolf, Rural Residents Say Nahlral Gns Drillillg Has Taillted Their DriJlkiHg Water, METROWEST DAILY 

NEWS, Nov. 23, 2010, http://www.metrowestdailynews.com/lifestyle/health/x14S5353677/Rural-residenls­


say-natu ral-gas-dri II ing-has-tLlinted-thei r-d rinking-\va ter. 


80 Associated Press, Driller Temporarily Stops OperalioHs at Pa. lA/ells, SAN DIEGO UNION-TRIBUNE, Apr. 21, 


2011, http://www.signonsandiego.com/news/2011 /apr/21 /driller-temporarily-stops-operations-at-pa­


lVelis. 


- 1 4 ­

156 WILLIAM STREET, SUITE 800 NEW YORK, NY 10038· 5326 

T, 2 1 2 .7 9 1.1881 F, 212.918.1556 E: neoffice@earthjustice.org W: wVlw.earthjust i ce.org 
Stevens Creek and killed fish and other aquatic life." In May 2010, the Pennsylvania 

Department of Environmenta l Protection ("DEP") fined a drilling company $1 41; 175 for leaking 

250 barrels of diluted wastewater into a stream in Washington County, Pennsylvani a, and 

thereby killing small fish, sa lamanders, a nd frogs." A farmer living w ithin 200 ya rds of gas 

wells in Grandview, Texas, witnessed six of his animals die after his ,vater well became 

contaminated with at least one of the BTEX compounds."' The drilling company denied that its 

drilling operations had any relation to the water contamination, even though several other 

families li ving within 200 feet of the wells reported identical instances of water contamination." 

Tn Spring Ridge, Louisiana, seventeen cows died after ingesting fracturing fluid that spilled into 

their pasture from a nearby gas well operated by Chesapeake Energy." 

Leaks and spills of E&P Chemicals endanger air quality as well as water supplies, 

sometimes even before the chemicals have a chance to reach the well sites. In June 2006, a 

chemical plant in Farmington, New Mexico operated by Halliburton Energy Services spilled 

approximately 30-60 gallons of a hydraulic fracturing product called Acid izing Composition." 

The spill crea ted a large cl oud of acid vapors, which caused vomiting and nausea in the people 

living near the plant and prompted the evacuation of more than 220 people from their homes." 

Despite the immediate health effects resulting from acute exposure to Acidizing Composition, 

its MSDS indicates "not determined" for all toxicity tests, including those for carci nogenicity 

and reproductive/developmental toxicity." In additi on to adverse health impacts caused by 

acute exposures, people also have reported injuries from prolonged exposure to E&P 

Chemicals. For example, a resident of Arlington, Texas, reported poor air quality and an 

increase in hea lth problems immediately fo llowing the commencement of drillin g operations by 

!oi l Steve McConnell, Fractllril-Ig Fllfids Spill into SlIsqllehmllln COllllly Stremll, vVAYNE INDEPENDENT, Sept. ]7, 

2009, http://www.wayneindependent.com/arehive/x57651 0049/F ractu ring-flu ids-spiII-in to-SusquehannaCounty-stream; Abrahm Lustgarten, Fmck Fluid Spill ill Dimock COll tall/innks Strealll, Killing Fish, 

ProPubliea, Sept. 21, 2009, http://www . propu blica.org/artic\e/frack -fl u i d -spi II -i n-d imock-con taminates­


stream-killing-fish-921. 


~ Press Release, Pennsylvania Department of Env ronment~1 Protection, DEP Penalizes Rilnge Resources 


$141,175 for Spill in High Quality Wa terway (May 14, 2010), 


http://www.portaLstate.pa.us/portal/server.pt/community/newsroom/14287.id=11412&typeid=1 . 


., Peter Gorman, Waler FOllI, FORTH WORTH WEEKLY, Apr. 30, 2008, 


http://arehive.fwweekly .com/eon tent. asp?a rtic\e=6885. 


1\-1 See id. 

Ii;; Vickie Wellborn, CliesllpC!flke. SclIIlllllberscr Filled $22.,000 Each ill Cows' Denths, SHREVEPORT T IMES, Ma r. 

25, 2010, http://www.shreveporttimes.com/a rtic\e/201 00325/N EWS01/1 00325018/Chesa peakeSchlumberger-fined-22-000-each-in-cows-dea ths. 

" Hallilmrtoll Spill Res lIlts ill Acid Clolld, More Thall 220 People EvaclIaledlo Mall, THE DAI LYTIME5, 

FARMINGTON, NEW MEXICO, June 7, 2006, avnilable nl http://www.youri awyer.com/artic\es/read/l1832. 

87 See in. 

Ii:! Halliburton, Material Safety Data Sheet, Product Trude Name: FE-1A Acid izing Composition. 1, 4 (Dec. 

2006), amilaMe 01 http://newyork.sierrac\ub.org/fingerlakes/gasinfo.html(foll ow link to prod uct name 

under heading "MSDS Data Sheets"). 

- 15 ­

156 W I LLI AM STREET , S UITE 800 NEW YORK, NY 10038- 53 26 

T, 212 791.1881 F,212.918.15 56 E : neoffice@earth]us t i ce.org W : www. ear lhjustice.org 
Carrizo Oil and Cas near her home' " Although Carrizo denied any responsibility, the resident 

received test results confirming the presence of ethylbenzene, xylene, hexane, and 

methylpentanes in her bloodstream, and her doctor issued an opinion that her inability to 

recover from her ongoing health problems \I\'a5 related to her continual exposu re to diesel 

fumes an d E&r Chemicals used at the Carrizo wells.911 

E&r Chemicals can degrade soil and air quality in ways that may not be .readily 

ascertaina ble to the public. In August 2006, a breach in surface casing at a gas well in Crosby, 

Wyoming, caused several releases of drilling muds, contaminating soil over an area of 

approx imately 25,000 square feet." Although no immediate impacts were reported, an ana lysis 

of the leaked chemicals indicated that 50 percent of them may cause ecological effects (harm to 

aquatic species, birds, amphibians, or invertebrates), and 32 percent of them were volatile, 

potentially causing injury to human respiratory systems, skin, sensory organs, and 

gastrointestinal systems" In addition, while analysis of E&r Chemicals' effects on air quality 

are limited, researchers predict that emissions from Marcellus Shale gas wastewater stored in 

centralized impoundments have the potential to cause exceedances of the annual guidelines for 

acrylamide, glutaraldehyde, formaldehyde, and heavy naphtha." When exposed to the air, 

BTEX compo unds incorporated into E&r Chemicals have the potential to mix with nitrogen 

oxides from the exhaust of diesel-fueled equipment at the well sites and produce ground-level 

ozone.').! Chemical exposures at and around well sites are exacerbated by certa in common 

" Jason Joyce, Pyrrhic PollllliO/l Fillriillg, FORT WORTH WEEKLY, Oct. 13,2010, 

httpJ/lvwwJwweekly.com/index.php?option=colTI_con tent&view=article&id=426S:pyrrhic-pollutiollfind ing&ca tid ~76: metropolis&Itemid 377. 

90 lri. {including a statement by Dr. Alfred Johnson that "it is my medical opinion that (Sandra 

DenBraber's] current illness and inability to recover is related to her constant and continual exposure to 

diesel exhaust fumes and other chemicals associated with the oil and gas drilling/fractionating and 

compressor station"). 

" TEDX, Analysis of Products Used for Drilling Crosby 25-3 Well- Windsor Energy, Park County, 

Wyomi ng, 1 (2009), h tlp:/ /www.endocrinedisruption.com/fi les/Crosby25-3weIisu mma ry4-20-09FinaI. pel f. 

~ SCI! irl. at 3-4. 


Y3 See Susan I-lurvey, Review of DSGEI5 and Identificati on of Best Technology and Best Practice 


Recommendations 31-33 (Dec. 29, 2009), submitted as Attachment C to Memorandum by Philip Sears, 


ARKF, to Kate Sinding et aI., regarding comments on the Draft Supplemental Generic Environmenta l 


Impact Statement on the Oil, Gas, and Solution Mining Regulatory Program (Dec. 30, 2009) (on file with 


au thor). 


'J~ Colborn, supra note 42, manuscript Lit 5 (stating that ozone has a runge of serious health and 


environmental effects, induding various lung diseases as well as damage to conifers, flspen, forage, 


r.lfalfa, and other crops); see also Mead Gruver, Gns OriJJillg Blnmed for Som·illS Ozolle i" '!\IyomiIlS, THE 


TIMES TRIBUNE, Mar. 9, 2011, http://thetimes-tribune.com/news/health-science/gas-drilling-blamed-for­


soa ring-ozone-in-wyorning-l.11161 78 (reporting that ozone levels detected near gr.s drilling in western 


Wyoming were two-thirds higher than EPA's maximum healthy limit). 


- 1 6 ­

156 W ILLI AM STREET, SUITE 800 NEW YORK, NY 10038· 5326 

T: 212.791.188 1 F: 212.918.1556 E: neoffice@earth]ustice.org W: www.earlhju sti ce.org 
practices. such as air- and foam-lubricated drilling and the use of impoundments for f10wback 

fluids.''' 

The hea lth risks posed by E&P Chemicals have been most severe in cases involving 

direct human contact. In April 2008, an emergency room nurse in Durango, Colorado, was 

admitted to the intensive care unit after treating a gas industry employee who was caught in a 

fracturing fluid spill an" tracked the chemical ZetaFlow into the hospital on his boots.'''' The 

nurse presented symptoms of yellow skin, vomiting, a swollen liver, erratic blood counts, and 

lungs filled with fluid and was diagnosed with chemical pOisoning. To determine the exact 

nature of her chemical poisoning, the doctors looked at the MSDS for ZetaFlow, which 

indicated th at Ze taFlow contained methanol and two undisclosed "proprietary" compounds. 

When the hospital requested the identity of the proprietary compounds to aid treatment of the 

nurse, Weatherford, ZetaFlow's manufacturer, refused to disclose the information. 

Weatherford continues to deny responsibility for the nurse's illness, yet it suspended its use of 

ZetaFlow following the incident." 

Finally, a recent report eva luating gas development in the Marcellus Shale demonstrates 

that E&P Chemicals threaten the people most vulnerable to injury from exposure to hazardous 

chemicals, such as children in day care facilities and schools and people hospitalized due to 

severe illness. 9!1 Children in particular face increa sed risk of harm due to exposure to toxic 

pollutants as a result of their vulnerable immune systems and their limited ability to detoxify." 

Hundreds of well sites in Pennsylvania are situated within one or two mi!es of places designed 

to care for children and sick people, including 320 day care facilities, 67 schools, and nine 

hospitals HIO In addition, at those same well sites, the Pennsylvania DEP reported almost 300 

violations of regulations intended to protect water quality and the environment. IUI 

The instances of harm and reports of potential harm cited above demonstrate that E&P 

Chemicals may present an unreasonable risk of harm to children and adults, terrestrial and 

aquatic life, water and air quality, and soil composition. With oil and gas exploration and 

production poised to grow exponentially, incidents of harm linked to it a lso are likely to 

!}5 See Bishop, supra note 3, at 2. 


% Jim Moscou, A Toxic Spew? Officials \lVo,./"y Abolllllllpact of "Frnckillg" 0IOil nlld Gas, Newsweek, Aug. 20, 


2008, http://www.newsweek.com/idI154394. 

'" Irl. 

98 St!c Madsen, sl/pm note 5, at 30-35; scc also EPA, Environmental Assessment, Children's Health, 

http://cfpub.epa.govlncea/CFM/nceaQFind.cfm?keyword=Children's%20I-lealth (last visited Aug. 2, 2011) 


(recognizing that children and the elderly are more susceptible than healthy ud ults to health risks posed 


by pollutants in the environment). 


!)9 Madsen, sllpra note 5, at 30-31. 


11)0 Irl. at 30. 

101 Irl. at 34. 

- 17 ­

156 WILLIAM STREET, SU ITE 800 NEW YORK, NY 10038-5326 

T, 212 791.1881 F, 212.918.1556 E: neoffice@earthjustice.org W: www.earthjustice.org 
increase. especially if EPA fails to promulgate regulations requiring disclosure and testing of 

E&P Chemica ls and reporting of related hea lth and environmen tal effects. 

VI. 	 Request for Relief 

Petitioners hereby requ est that EPA take the following actions pursuant to TSCA section 

21, '15 U.s.c. section 2620: 

1. 	 Adopt a rule pursuant to TSCA section <I to require manufacturers and 

processors of E&P Chemicals to develop test data sufficient to eva lu ate the 

toxicity and potential for health and environmental impacts of all substances and 

mi xtures that they. manufacture and process. This rule must include a 

requirement for the manufacturer or processor to iden tify any substance or 

mi xture for which testing is required. 

2. 	 Adopt a rule pursuant to TSCA section S{a) requiring manufa'cturers and 

processors of E&P Chemicals to maintain records and submit reports to EPA 

disclosing the identities, categories, and quantities of E&P Chemicals, 

descriptions of byproducts of E&P Chemicals, all existing data on potential or 

demonstrated environmental and health effects of E&P Chemicals, and the 

number of individuals potentially exposed to E&P Chemicals. 

3. 	 Call in all records of allega tions of significant adverse reactions received and 

maintained by manufacturers, processors, and distributors of E&P Chemicals 

pursuant to TSCA section 8{c) and 40 C.F.R. section 717. 

4. 	 Adopt a rule pursuant to TSCA section 8{d ) to require submittal of all existing, 

not previously reported health and safety studies related to the health and/or 

environmental effects of E&P Chemicals. 

A. 	 Section 4 Testing 

EPA and the public lack adequate data and experience u pon which the health an d 

environmen tal risks posed by E&P Chemicals can reasonably be determined or predicted. 

Petitioners request that EPA adopt a rule pursuant to TSCA section 4, "equiring that 

manufacturers and processors of E&P Chemicals conduct acute and chronic toxiCity studies 

suffi cient to characterize and eva luate the hazards and potential hea lth and environmental 

effects associa ted with the substances and mi xtures they manufacture and process for lise in oil 

and gas ex ploration and producti on. A TSCA section 4 rule may require testing of (1) effects on 

human respiratory, neurological, cardiovascular, reproductive, gastrointestinal, endocrine, 

sensory, and immune systems, including cancerous and developmenta l effects; and (2) effects 

on terrestrial and aquatic life and water, soil, and air qualityw, A mle adopted under this 

section must function to ensure that EPA an d the public can full y eva lua te the hazards of all 

"" See 15 Us.c. § 2603(b){2)(A) 

- 1 8 ­

156 WILLIAM STREET . SUI TE 800 N EW YORK, NY 10038-5326 

T: 2 12.791 .1881 F: 2 12. 918 .1 556 E: neoffi ce@e arth]ustice.org W: www.earthj ustlce.o rg 
substances and mixtures used in oil and gas exploration and production and thereby determine 

whether those substances and mixtures may pose an unreasonable risk of harm to health and 

the environment. In addition, this rule must require the i·d entification of each chemical 

substance or mixture for which testing is performed. JU) 

EPA has ample and sufficient basis to issue a TSCA section 4 test rule. First, as 

illustrated in detail in section V above, E&P Chemicals meet the requirements in sec lion 4(a) 

that "the manufacture, distribution in commerce, processing, use, or disposal of a chemical 

substance or mixture, or that any combination of such activities, may present an unreasonable 

risk of injury to health or the environment."II" Second, the significant volume of E&P 

Chemicals necessary to fracture a single well, combined with the number of wells anticipated 

throughout the United States, demonstrate that E&P Chemicals also meet the requirements of 

section 4(b) for an "exposure" finding, under which EPA shall by rule require that testing be 

conducted on a chemical substance or mixture that "is or will be produced in substantial 

quanti ties."]()5 

B. 	 Section 8(a) Reporting 

Petitioners request that EPA adopt a rule pursuant to TSCA seclion 8(a) to require 

manufacturers and processors of E&P Chemicals to maintain certain records and submit to EPA 

reports on those records. SpeCifically, insofar as known to the person making the reports or 

insofar as reasonably ascertainable to that person, a rule issued pursuant to TSCA section 8(a) 

concerning the chemical substances and mixtures used in oil and gas exploration or production 

should require maintenance of records and reporting with respect to the follov.,ring information: 

1. 	 The common or trade name, the chemical identity, and the molecular structure of 

each chemical substance or mixture for which such a report is required; 

2. 	 The categories or proposed categories of use of each substance or mixture; 

3. 	 The total amount of each substance or TIlixture manufactured or processed, 

reasonable estimates of the total amount to be manufactured or processed, the 

amount manufactured or processed for each of its categories of use, and 

reasonable estimates of the amount to be manufactured or processed for each of 

its categories of use or proposed categories of use; 

4. 	 A description of the byprod ucts resulting from the manufacture, processing, use, 

or disposal of each such substance or mi xture; 

5. 	 All existing data concerning the environmental and health effects of such 

substance or mixture; 

103 See iri. § 2603(b)(l)(A). 

II" [ri . § 2603(0)(1 )(A)(i). 

lOS [ri. § 2603(a)(1 )(8)(i). 

- 19 ­

156 WILLIAM STREET, SUITE 800 NEW YORK, NY 10038-5326 

T: 212.79 1.1 881 F: 212.918.1556 E: neoffice @ea rthjustice org W : www.earth Ju stlce.org 
6. 	 The number of individuals exposed, and reasonable estimates of the number 

\vho will be exposed to such substance or mixture in their places of employment, 

including the duration of such exposures; and 

7. 	 The lTIanner or method of disposal of any slich substance or mixture. 

Submission of this information is necessary for the effective enforcement of TSCA. In issuing a 

rule under TSCA section 8(a), EPA sliould consider the need to require periodic reporting as 

needed to account for all new substances and mixtures as well as for significant new 

information obtained by manufacturers and processors ',vith respect to existing substances and 

mixtures. 

C. 	 Section 8(c) Call-In 

Under TSCA section 8(c) and 40 C.F.R. section 717.12, chemical manufacturers, 

processors, and dish"ibutors must record and maintain all significant adverse reactions to 

human health or to the environment that are reported to or known by them and that are alleged 

to have been caused by chemical substances or mixtures that they manufacture, process, or 

distribute. A significant adverse reaction is one "that may indicate a substantial impairment of 

normal activities or long-lasting or irreversible damage to health or the environment. "1Gb 

Petitioners request that EPA exercise its authority under 40 C.F.R. section 717.17 and request 

submission of copies of any information related to significant adverse reactions to human health 

or the environment alleged to have been caused by E&P Chemicals manufactured, processed, or 

distributed by the following companies: 

1. 	 Baker Hughes d/b/a AquaNess Chemical and B) Services Company"" 

2. 	 Halliburton Energy Services, Inc. HI8 

3. 	 Schlumberger Technology Corporation "" 

4. 	 RPC Inc. d/b/a Cudd Energy Services 

5. 	 Superior Well Services, Inc. 11II 

106 40 C.F.R. § 717.3(i). 

107 Petitioners are aware that Baker Hughes has acquired B) Services Company. This request encompasses 

all records maintained by B) Services Compilny prior to the acquisition as \-vell ilS all records maintained 

by BLiker Hughes folluwing the acquisition. 

lOS EPA's request should make it clem that the reports from Halliburton Energy Services must include all 

allegations that it has received related to its chemical substances and mixtures as manufactured by 

Halliburton Energy Services (in the United Stiltes and the United Kingdom) and Halliburton Australia 

Pty Ltd. 

lU9 EPA's request should make it clear that the reports from Schlumberger Technology Corporation must 

include all allegations it has received related to its chemical substances and mixtures as manufactured by 

Schlumberger Technology Corpuration in the United States, Schlumberger Canada, Ltd., and 

Schlumberger Ltd. 

- 20 ­

156 WILLIAM STREET, SUITE 800 NEW YORK, NY 10038-5326 

T, 212 791.1881 F,212.918.1556 E: neoffice@earthjustice.org W: www.earthjustlce.org 
6. Sanjel USA 

7. Weatherford International Ltd." 1 

8. Calfrac Well Services 

9. Frac Tech Services 

Petitioners believe these companies are the primary rnanufacturers, processors, and distributors 

of E&P Chemicals in the United States. Because a request involving nine entities "vQuld not be 

subject to the Paperwork Reduction Act notice requirements, EPA could act quickly.l12 

D. Section 8(d) Submission Request 

Petitioners request that EPA adopt a rule pursuant to TSCA section 8(d) to require 

manufacturers, processors, and distributors of E&P Chemicals to submit to EPA lists and copies 

of all existing health and safety studies conducted or initiated by or for them, known to them, or 

reasonably ascertainable by them. Health and safety studies are defined broadly under EPA's 

regulations as "any study of any effect of a chemical substance or mixture on health or the 

environment or both, including underlying data and epidemiological studies, studies of 

occupational exposure to a chemical substance or mixture, toxicological, clinical, and ecological 

or other studies of a chemical substance or mixture, and any test performed under TSCA." 113 

Petitioners request that this rulemaking encompass all health and safety studies related to any 

substance or mixture used in oil and gas exploration or production, including, as called for 

under 40 C.F.R. section 716.3, the identity of the chemical substances and mixtures'I.1 

Submission of health and safety studies related to all E&P Chemicals is necessary to ensure that 

substances and mixtures do not present an unreasonable risk of injury to health or the 

environment. 

"oPetitioners are aware that Nabors Industries Ltd. recently acquired Superior Well Services, Inc. This 

request encompasses all records maintained by Superi~r Well Services, Tnc. prior to the i:lcquisition i:lS 

well as all records maintained by Superior Well Services, Inc. and Nabors Industries Ltd. fnllovving the 

acquisition. 

I I I EPA's request should make it clear that the reports from Weatherford International Ltd. must include 

all allegations that it has received related chemical substances and mixtures manufuctured by its 

subsidiary, Clearwater International, LLC. 

I" See 44 U.s.c. § 3502(3)(A)(i) (defining a "collection of information" subject to regulation under the 

Paperwork Reduction Act ns a request imposed on ten or more persons). 

I" 40 C.F.R. § 716.3 

11.\ Sec irl. ("It is intended that the term health and safety study be interpreted broadly. Not only is 

information which arises as <l result of n formal, disciplined study included, but uther informntion 

relating to the effects of a chemical substance or mixture on health or the environment is also included. 

Any data that bear on the effects of a chemical substance on health Of the environment would be 

included. Chemical identity is part of, or underlying data to, a health and safety study.") 

- 21 ­

156 WILLIAM STREET, SUITE 800 NEW YORK. NY 10038- 5326 

T,212.791.1881 F,212.918.1556 E: neoffice@earth justice.org W: www.earthjustice.org 
VII. Conclusion 

In the absence of rulemakings pursuant to TSCA sections 4 and 8, EPA and the public 

lack the information necessary to assess the potential health and environmental effects of E&P 

Chemicals. To hold manufacturers, processors, and distributors of E&P Chemicals accountable 

for the consequences of placing their products into commerce, Petitioners respectfully request 

that EPA initiate rulemakings under TSCA sections 4 and 8. 

Respectfully submitted, 

Megan 

D~=b~~ Klein 

Earthjustice 

156 William Street, Suite 800 

New York, NY 10038 

Phone: (212) 791-1881 x8227 

Fax: (212) 918-1556 

dgoldberg@earthjustice.org 

On behalf of signatory organizations listed 

on the following pages 

Enclosure 

. cc: 	 Wendy Cleland-Hanmett 

Office Director, EPA Office of Pollution Prevention and Taxies ' 

- 22 ­

156 WILLIAM STREET. SUITE 800 NEW YORK, NY 10038·5326 

T: 212 . 791.1881 F: 212.918.1556 E: ncolfice@earthjlJstice.org W: www.earthjusticc.org 
Maureen Dill 

Facilitator 

Advocates for Morris 

Morris, New York 

Matthew S. Tejada, PhD 

Execu ti ve Oi rector 

Air Alliance Houston 

Houston, Texas 

Monona Rossol 

Industrial Hygienist 

Arts, Crafts & Theater Safety, Inc. 

New York, New York 

Jeanette Vosburg 

President 

Ballona Network 

Los Angeles, California 

Cheryl Johncox 

Executive Director 

Buckeye Forest Council 

Columbus, Ohio 

Wes Gillingham 

Program Director 

Catskill Mountainkeeper 

Youngsville, New York 

Rachel Meeropol 

Staff Attorney 

Center for Constitutional Rights 

New York, New York 

Lois Marie Gibbs, PhD 

Executive Director 

Center for Health, Environment & Justice 

Falls Church, Virginia 

Harry Levine 

President 

Advocates for Springfield 

Springfield, New York 

David Moryc 

Senior Director of River Protection 

American Rivers 

Washington, DC 

Philip S. Wallis 

Execu ti ve Oi rector 

Audubon Pennsylvania 

Harrisburg, Pennsylvania 

Jeanne Rizzo 

President and CEO 

Breast Cancer Fund • 

San Francisco, California 

Thomas B. Wilinsky 

Catskill Citizens for Safe Energy 

Fremont Center, New York 

Rebecca Noblin 

Alaska Director 

Center for Biological Diversity 

Anchorage, Alaska 

Caroline Cox 

Research Director 

Center for Environmental Health 

Oakland, California 

Gary Simpson 

President 


Chatham Citi zens for Effective Communities, 


Inc. (CCEC) 


Pittsboro, North Carolina 


- 23 ­

156 WILLIAM STREET, SUITE BOO NEW YORK , NY 10038-53 26 

T: 212.791.1881 F; 212.918. 1556 E: neoffice@earth )usti ce .org W: www.earthjus tice . org 
.. 


Ellen Rendulich 

Director 

Citi zens Aga inst Ruining the Environment 

Lockport, Illinois 

Barbara]. Warren 

Executive Director 

Citi zens' Environmental Coalition 

Albany, New York 

Deb Thomas 

Organizer 

Cla rk Resource Council 

Clark, Wyoming 

Ann Brewster Weeks 

Lega I Di rector 

Clea n Air Task Force 

Boston, Massachusetts 

Hope Taylor, MSPH 

Executive Director 

Clean Water For North Carolina 

Du rham, North Carolina 

Elyse Kunz 

Co-Founder 

Community Advocates for Safe Emissions, Inc. 

Ravena, New York 

Be rnard Handler 

Spokesperson 

Damasclis Watch 

Damascus, Pennsylvania 

Stephen M. Brittle 

Presi dent 

Don't Waste Ari zona 

Phoeni x, Arizona 

Sarah Eckel 

Legislati ve & Policy Director 

Citi zens Campaign fo r the Environ ment 

SyraclIse, N ew York 

Vera Scroggins 

Citizens for Clean Wate r 

Brackney, Pennsylvania 

Joseph O. Mi nott, Esq. 

Executive Director 

Clean Air Council 

Philade lphia, Pennsylvania 

Lynn Thorp 

National CaInpaigns Coordinator 

Clea n Water Action 

Washington, DC 

Elizabeth Wheeler 

Staff Attorney 

Clean Wisconsin 

1vladison, Wisconsin 

Michael Ashkin 

Associate Professor of Economics and Public 

Policy 

Corpora te Toxics Information Project, 

University of Massachusetts Amherst 

Amherst, Massachusetts 

Tracy Carluccio 

Deputy Director 

Delaware Ri ve rkeepe r Ne twork 

Bristol, Pennsylvania 

Jim Schermbeck 

Director 

Do \,vllw inciers at Risk 

Dall as-Ft. Worth, Texas 

- 24 ­

156 WILLIAM STREE T, S UITE 800 NEW YORK, NY 10038-5326 

T : 212.791. 1881 F : 212.918.1 556 E: neol fic e@earthjustice.org W: www. ea rthj ustlce. org 
Margaret McCasland 

Convenor 

Earthcare Committee, Ithaca Monthly 

Meeting, Religious Society of Friends 

(Quakers) 

Ithaca, New York 

Judy Braiman 

President 

Empire State Consumer Project 

Rochester, New York 

Richard A. Denison 

Senior Scientist 

Environmental Defense Fund 

Washington, DC 

Ellen Z. Harrison 

Director 

Fleased 


Ithaca, New York 


Julie Huntsman 


Spokesperson 


Fly Creek/Otsego Neighbors 


Fly Creek, New York 


Kathleen G. Hundley, M.Ed. 


President 


Friends of the Rocky River (FORR) 


Chatham County, North Carolina 


Roberta Frampton Benefiel 


Vice President 

Grand Riverkeeper Labrador, Inc. 

Happy Valley-Goose Bay, Canada 

Jennifer Krill 

Executive Director 

Earthworks 

Washington, DC 

Brian Segee 

Staff Attorney 

Environmental Defense Center 

Santa Barbara, California 

Elsie Rhodes 

Pastor 

First Presbyterian Church 

Cooperstovvn, New York 

Joyce Tarnow 

President 

Floridians for a Sustainable Population, Inc. 

Cross City, Florida 

Barbara Jarmoska 

President 

Freshlife, Inc. 

Williamsport, Pennsylvania 

Sheila Cohen 

Outreach Chair 

Gas Drilling Awareness for Cortland County 

(GDACC) 

Cortland County, New York 

Stephen Ashkin 

Executive Director 

Green Cleaning Network 

Blomnington, Indiana 

- 25 ­

156 WILLIAM STREET. SUITE 800 NEW YORK. NY 10038·5326 

T : 2 12.791.1881 F : 212.918.1556 E: neoiiice@earthjuslice.org W: www.earlhJustice org 
• 


Vickie Hennessy 

President 

Green Environmental Coalition (GEC) 

Ye llow Springs, Ohio 

Rachel Lincoln Sarnoff 

Interim Executive Director/CEO 

Hea lthy Child Healthy World 

Los Angeles, California 

Brian Sauder 

Policy Coordinator 

Illinois Interfaith Power and Li ght 

Champaign, Illinois 

Stan Kotala, M.D. 

Conservation Chair 

juniata Valley Audubon 

Hollidaysburg, Pennsylvania 

Olivia Thorne 

President 

League of Women Voters of Pennsylvania 

Harrisburg, Pennsylvania 

jerry Renning 

Chairman 

Michigan Citizens Against Toxic Substa nces 

(MCATS) 

Milan, Michigan 

Kimberl ee Wright 

Executive Director 

Midwest Environmental Advocates 

Madison, Wisconsin 

Daniel Rosenberg 

Seni or Attorney 

Natura l Resources Defense Counci l (NRDC) 

New York, New York 

Elaine Chiosso, Haw Riverkeeper 

Haw River Assembly 

Bynum, North Carolina 

Debra Hall 

Founder 

Hopewell junction Citizens for Clean Wa ter 

Hopewell junction, New York 

james R. Nelson, MS 

Executive Director 

Illinois Public Health Association 

Springfield, Illinois 

Betsey Swan 

President 

League of Women Voters of New York State 

Albany, New York 

judy Duffy 

Advocacy Chair 

League of Women Voters of the United States 

Washington, DC 

Drew j. Koslow 

Choptank Riverkeeper 

Midshore Riverkeeper Conservancy 

Easton, Maryland 

Todd Kostyack 

Vice President, Wildlife Conservation 

Nationa l Wildlife Federation 

Washingto n, DC 

Gradie McCallie 

Policy Director 

NC Conservation Network 

Rale igh, North Carolina 

- 26 ­

156 WILLIAM STR EET. SU ITE 800 NEW YORK. NY 1003 8-5326 

T: 2 12.791.1881 F: 212 . 918 .1 556 E: neoffice@earthjusti ce.org W: www.ea rth jus tlce.org 
Va nessa Pesec 

President 

Network for Oil an d Gas Accounta bili ty and 

Protection (NEOGAP) 

Concord Township, Ohio 

Gavin Kearney 

Director of Environmental Ju stice 

New York Lawyers for the Public Interest 

New York, New York 

Rebecca Roter 

Northern Tier Impacted Citizens Coa lition 

(NTlCC) 

Kin gsley, Pennsylvania 

Patrice McDermott 

Director 

Openthegovernment.org 

Washin gton, DC 

John Fenton 

Chair 

Pavilion Area Concerned Citizens 

Pavilion, Wyoming 

Jan Jarrett 

President 

PennFuture 

Harrisburg, Pennsylvania 

Ron Evans 

Chair 

Pennsylva nia Environmental Defense 

Fou ndation 

Camp Hill, Pennsylvania 

Ri ck Engler 

Director 

New Jersey Work Environmental Council 

Trenton, New Jersey 

Mich ael Lebron 

Principal 

New Yorkers for Sustainable Energy Solutions 

Statewide 

New York, New York 

Sean Moulton 

Director, Federal Informa tion Policy 

OMB Watch 

Washington, DC 

Nicole A. Dillingham 

President, Board of Directors 

Otsego 2000, Inc. 

Cooperstown, New York 

Maria Payan 

Director 

Peach Bottom Concerned Citizens Group 

De lta, Pennsylvania 

Patricia Eakin 

President 

Pennsylvania Association of Staff Nurses and 

Alli ed Professiona ls 

Conshohocken, Pennsylvania 

Richard A. Martin 

Coordinator 

Pennsylvan ia Forest Coalition 

Harrisburg, Pennsylvania 

- 27 ­

1 56 WILLIAM STREET, SU I TE 800 NEW YORK. NY 10038·5326 


T, 21 2 791. 1881 F, 212 . 9 18. 1 556 E: neoffice@earthjust ic e . org W: www.earthjustlce.org 

\ 

Melian McKee 

Director 

Possibiliti es Retreat 

tvlontoursville, Pennsylvania 

Kevin Lind 

Director 

Powder River Basin Resource Council 

Sheridan, Wyoming 

Jeff Ruch 

Executive Director 

Public Employees for Environmental 

Responsibility (PEER) 

Washington, DC 

Ra lph Kisberg 

President 

Responsible Drilling Alliance 

Willi amsport, Pennsylvania 

Allegra Schecter 

Founder 

Roseboom Owners Awareness Response 

(ROAR) 


Roseboom, New York 


Christine Canaly 


Director 


San Luis Valley Ecosystem Council 


Alamosa, Colorado 


Charles Winterwood, Chair, Sierra Club 


Nationa l Tax ies Committee 

Deborah J. Nardone, Director, Natura l Gas 

Reform Campa ign 

Sierra Club 

San Francisco, California 

Jeff Kelble 

Shenandoah Riverkeepe r 

Potomac Riverkeeper Inc. (DBA Shenandoa h 

Riverkeeper) 

Boyce, Virginia 

Traci Barkley 

Water Resources Scientist 

Prairie Rivers Netvvork 

Champaign, Illinois 

Brian Urbaszewski 

Director of Environmental Hea lth Programs 

Respiratory Health Association of 

Metropolitan Chicago 

Chicago, Illinois 

Kate I-Iudson 

Watershed Program Director 

Riverkeeper 

Ossining, New York 

Dan Randolph 

Executive Director 

San Juan Citizens Alliance 

Durango, Colorado 

Robert Nied 

Co-Director 

Schoharie Valley Watch 

Richmondville, New York 

Gopa Ross 

Oil and Gas Committee Chair 

Sierra Club Rocky Mountain Chapter 

Denver, Colorado 

- 28 ­

1 56 W I LLIAM STREET, SU I TE 800 NEW YORK, NY 100 38-5326 


T,212.79 1. 188 1 F, 212.918. 1 556 E: neoff ic e@earthjustlce.org W: www.e art h]u stice .org 

Peter J. Wray 

Chair, Conservation Committee 

Sierra Club, Allegheny Group 

Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania 

JeffTittel 

Director 

Sierra Club, New Jersey Chapter 

Trenton, New Jersey 

Liz Kirchoffer Pectol 

President and CEO 

Southern Sustainable Resources 

Charleston, South Carolina 

Adrian Kuzminski 

Moderator 

Sustainable Otsego 

Cooperstown, New York 

Renee Hoyos 

Execli tive Oi rector 

Tennessee Clean Water Network 

Knoxville, Tennessee 

Darlene Schanfald 

The Olympic Environmental Council 

Sequim, Washington 

John L. Barone 

Vice President of Conservation 

Theodore Gordon Flyfishers, Inc. 

New York, New York 

Roderick Jude 

Chair 

Sierra Club, Montana Chapter 

ivlissoula, Montana 

Thomas Au 

Conservation Chair 

Sierra Club, Pennsylvania Chapter 

Harrisburg, Pennsylvania 

Michael Helfrich 

Lower Susquehanna Riverkeeper 

Guy Alsentzer, Dir. Stewards of the Lower 

Susquehanna 

York, Pennsylvania 

William Callahan 

Founder and Owner 

Tamalpais NatureWorks 

San Rafael, California 

Juan Parras 

Executive Director 

Texas Environmental Justice Advocacy 

Services (T.E.J.AS) 

Houston, Texas 

Thomas Ryder, CWB 

President 

The Wildlife Society 

Bethesda, Maryland 

Elizabeth G. Thomas 

Chair 

Tompkins County Council of Governments 

Gas Drilling Task Force 

Tompkins County, New York 

- 29 ­

156 WILLIAM STREET. SUITE 800 NEW YORK . NY 10038- 5326 

T : 2 12.791.1881 F : 212.918. 1 556 E: neoff i ce@earthjustice.org W: www.earthjustice org 
Fawn Pattison 

Executive Director 

Toxic Free North Carolina 

Raleigh, North Carolina 

Larraine McNulty 

President 

Upper Unadilla Valley Association 

West Winfield, New York 

Susan Van Doisen 

Co-Organizer 

Westchester for Change 

Harrison, New York 

Jeremy Nichols 

Director, Climate and Energy Program 

Wild Earth Guardians 

Santa Fe, New Mexico 

Rita Yelda 

Organizer 

WNY Drilling Defense 

Buffalo, New York 

Monona Rossol 

Safety Officer 

United Scenic Artist's, Local USA82-­

International Alliance of Theatrical Stage 

Employes (IATSE) 

New York, New York 

Nicholas Occhipinti 

Policy and Community Activism Director 

West Michigan Environmental Action Council 

Grand Rapids, Michigan 

Gretchen Nicholoff 

President 

Western Colorado Congress 

Grand Junction, Colorado 

Sloan Shoemaker 

Executive Director 

Wilderness Workshop 

Carbondale, Colorado 

Erin Switalski 

Executive Director 

Women's Voices for the Earth 

Missoula, Montana 

- 30 ­

lit 1 ,3 ...-.. ;~ 156 WI LLIAM STR EET, SU ITE 800 NEW YQR K, NY 10038-5326 

._.___ .:-~Jl J21 .1881 F : 212.918.1556 E: neoffice@earthjustice.o rg W: www.earthjustice org