II 

112TH CONGRESS 

2D SESSION S. 2248 

To clarify that a State has the sole authority to regulate hydraulic fracturing 

on Federal land within the boundaries of the State. 

IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES 

MARCH 28, 2012 

Mr. INHOFE (for himself, Ms. MURKOWSKI, Mr. VITTER, Mr. SESSIONS, Mr. 

CORNYN, Mr. RISCH, Mr. HOEVEN, and Mr. LEE) introduced the following bill; which was read twice and referred to the Committee on Energy and Natural Resources 

A BILL 

To clarify that a State has the sole authority to regulate 

hydraulic fracturing on Federal land within the boundaries of the State. 

1 Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representa2 tives of the United States of America in Congress assembled, 

3 SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE. 

4 This Act may be cited as the ‘‘Fracturing Regula5 tions are Effective in State Hands Act’’. 

6 SEC. 2. FINDINGS. 

7 Congress finds that— 


rfrederick on DSK5VPTVN1PROD with BILLS
2 

•S 2248 IS

1 (1) hydraulic fracturing is a commercially viable 

2 practice that has been used in the United States for 

3 more than 60 years in more than 1,000,000 wells; 

4 (2) the Ground Water Protection Council, a na5 tional association of State water regulators that is 

6 considered to be a leading groundwater protection 

7 organization in the United States, released a report 

8 entitled ‘‘State Oil and Natural Gas Regulations De9 signed to Protect Water Resources’’ and dated May 

10 2009 finding that the ‘‘current State regulation of 

11 oil and gas activities is environmentally proactive 

12 and preventive’’; 

13 (3) that report also concluded that ‘‘[a]ll oil 

14 and gas producing States have regulations which are 

15 designed to provide protection for water resources’’; 

16 (4) a 2004 study by the Environmental Protec17 tion Agency, entitled ‘‘Evaluation of Impacts to Un18 derground Sources of Drinking Water by Hydraulic 

19 Fracturing of Coalbed Methane Reservoirs’’, found 

20 no evidence of drinking water wells contaminated by 

21 fracture fluid from the fracked formation; 

22 (5) a 2009 report by the Ground Water Protec23 tion Council, entitled ‘‘State Oil and Natural Gas 

24 Regulations Designed to Protect Water Resources’’, 

25 found a ‘‘lack of evidence’’ that hydraulic fracturing 


rfrederick on DSK5VPTVN1PROD with BILLS
3 

•S 2248 IS

1 conducted in both deep and shallow formations pre2 sents a risk of endangerment to ground water; 

3 (6) a January 2009 resolution by the Interstate 

4 Oil and Gas Compact Commission stated ‘‘The 

5 states, who regulate production, have comprehensive 

6 laws and regulations to ensure operations are safe 

7 and to protect drinking water. States have found no 

8 verified cases of groundwater contamination associ9 ated with hydraulic fracturing.’’; 

10 (7) on May 24, 2011, before the Oversight and 

11 Government Reform Committee of the House of 

12 Representatives, Lisa Jackson, the Administrator of 

13 the Environmental Protection Agency, testified that 

14 she was ‘‘not aware of any proven case where the 

15 fracking process itself has affected water’’; 

16 (8) in 2011, Bureau of Land Management Di17 rector Bob Abbey stated, ‘‘We have not seen evi18 dence of any adverse effect as a result of the use of 

19 the chemicals that are part of that fracking tech20 nology.’’; 

21 (9)(A) activities relating to hydraulic fracturing 

22 (such as surface discharges, wastewater disposal, 

23 and air emissions) are already regulated at the Fed24 eral level under a variety of environmental statutes, 

25 including portions of— 


rfrederick on DSK5VPTVN1PROD with BILLS
4 

•S 2248 IS

1 (i) the Federal Water Pollution Control 

2 Act (33 U.S.C. 1251 et seq.); 

3 (ii) the Safe Drinking Water Act (42 

4 U.S.C. 300f et seq.); and 

5 (iii) the Clean Air Act (42 U.S.C. 7401 et 

6 seq.); but 

7 (B) Congress has continually elected not to in8 clude the hydraulic fracturing process in the under9 ground injection control program under the Safe 

10 Drinking Water Act (42 U.S.C. 300f et seq.); 

11 (10) in 2011, the Secretary of the Interior an12 nounced the intention to promulgate new Federal 

13 regulations governing hydraulic fracturing on Fed14 eral land; and 

15 (11) a February 2012 study by the Energy In16 stitute at the University of Texas at Austin, entitled 

17 ‘‘Fact-Based Regulation for Environmental Protec18 tion in Shale Gas Development’’, found that ‘‘[n]o 

19 evidence of chemicals from hydraulic fracturing fluid 

20 has been found in aquifers as a result of fracturing 

21 operations’’. 

22 SEC. 3. DEFINITION OF FEDERAL LAND. 

23 In this Act, the term ‘‘Federal land’’ means— 


rfrederick on DSK5VPTVN1PROD with BILLS
5 

•S 2248 IS

1 (1) public lands (as defined in section 103 of 

2 the Federal Land Policy and Management Act of 

3 1976 (43 U.S.C. 1702)); 

4 (2) National Forest System land; 

5 (3) land under the jurisdiction of the Bureau of 

6 Reclamation; and 

7 (4) land under the jurisdiction of the Corps of 

8 Engineers. 

9 SEC. 4. STATE AUTHORITY. 

10 (a) IN GENERAL.—A State shall have the sole au11 thority to promulgate or enforce any regulation, guidance, 

12 or permit requirement regarding the underground injec13 tion of fluids or propping agents pursuant to the hydraulic 

14 fracturing process, or any component of that process, re15 lating to oil, gas, or geothermal production activities on 

16 or under any land within the boundaries of the State. 

17 (b) FEDERAL LAND.—The underground injection of 

18 fluids or propping agents pursuant to the hydraulic frac19 turing process, or any components of that process, relating 

20 to oil, gas, or geothermal production activities on Federal 

21 land shall be subject to the law of the State in which the 

22 land is located. 

Æ 


rfrederick on DSK5VPTVN1PROD with BILLS