Mr. Parsons: 

I urge you to do what is necessary to establish the strictest possible controls upon those who are 

engaged in and supporting the oil and gas drilling operations, as the federal level, because these controls 

will not be established by either the local or the state governments. 

There is a tremendous amount of money being used by these industries to secure rights to drill, often in 

very close proximity to homes, schools, parks, businesses and other permanent buildings with extended 

exposure to whatever chemicals are used in the process. The representatives of the companies engaged 

in drilling do not reveal what chemicals they are using and expect everyone to trust them. The "default" 

mineral leases used by these companies are writtten to protect their interests only, not the people who 

live here. The people here are easily swayed by the money, and do not ask the critical questions needed 

to perform the critical thinking. The drillers should be forced to reveal the chemicals that they are using 

in our neighborhoods. 

The details of the proven methods and devices used to contain these chemicals, to detect their offsite

presence, and deal with them (hopefully recovery) in the event that they are found where they are not 

supposed to be should all be public knowledge. Unbiased descriptions of the effects of exposure to 

these chemicals that accounts for variations in age and prior health conditions, range of possible 

exposure duration, and range of possible concentrations should also be provided to citizens and 

government representatives. 

The Fort Worth City Council has compromised any shred of integrity they ever had by inviting 

representation from the gas drillers on the team working on Fort Worth's Air quality. The Fort Worth 

Mayor want's to dissolve the team and let city people follow up on this before the job is complete. This 

is a blatent attempt to change the scope of the work that was to be done. 

Our local leaders cannot be trusted with this, because they have too many ties to the industry - A 

DIRECT CONFLICT OF INTEREST EXISTS. As a result of this conflict, our leaders DO NOT 

enforce the noise ordinances, DO NOT restrict the use of heavy trucks on our neighborhood streets 

when they have the power to do so, and DO NOT adequately protect us from the short term risks that 

these operations bring into the area, much less the long term risks. The only way the citizens of the

community learn of these risks is through a combination of news investigations and by word of mouth. 

We do NOT hear about them from our leaders. 

What we have heard, is the noise from the trucks and the drilling site construction and 

operations. When I confronted city officials about the noise problems, the city told the gas company to 

send a representative to our home to measure the noise. I do not consider a company that routinely does 

a noise metering and mitigation business with the drillers to be an impartial third party, and am 

concerned that any and all measurements made by them are in question. In spite of the conflict of 

interest problem this highlights, the data supplied to me by the company showed the following: 

Noise measurements were using a frequency/amplitude weighting that under-represents the content of 

low frequency regions where the equipment was emitting tremendous amounts of sound.

My proposed comment to Air Quality effects of Oil and Gas Drilling.

Daniel Q.O'Leary 

to: 

Nick Parsons 

08/02/2010 06:30 PM 

Show Details 

Page 1 of 3

file://C:\Documents and Settings\nparsons\Local Settings\Temp\notesFCBCEE\~web5701.h... 8/9/2010
The amplitude versus frequency components of the noise was supposed to be recorded in 1/3-octave 

increments, but the data supplied to me only contained coarse 1-octave data. 

 The stated limits within the ordinance are +6dB for daytime operation and +3dB above existing 

ambient for nighttime operation. No relationship between the chosen daytime and nightime noise limits

that are used as a "baseline" and the actual conditions in our neighborhood was ever revealed. The 

chosen limits were so high that the recorded background plus noise emitted by the rig almost never 

exceeded them, but the actual background noise prior to rig operations was not revealed. 

No measurements for the actual baseline noise were made in our area prior to rig construction and 

operation - They were apparently made in the proximity of the rig or elsewhere. I have researched this 

topic and found instances where such baselines were recorded while construction was in progress - this

is inexcusable. 

The logging data provided only identiified noise sources that exceeded the arbitrarily high 

threshold. Other significant changes in noise amplitude were not identified. The sampling graphs 

showed the presence of much lower noise levels at various times than these thresholds. The chosen 

measurement technique hide the contribution of the noise of the rig from the background. My personal 

observation was that the noise was permeating my house at very objectionable levels that kept me 

awake at night for many nights. 

Some data had incorrect time/date stamps. This dilutes the integrity of either the collection, post 

processing or report processes. The person sent to download data from the device was inexperienced, 

having been "shown the procedures" on the first day of the measurements. 

When I questioned the city inspector on these issues, as well as my request to review the test procedure, 

data processing procedures, or the procedures and data used to determine the "noise baseline", I never

got a response. 

Our leaders allow drillers to use disgraceful amounts of water in these operations, when the citizens 

must carefully meter their own usage. Their trucks connect to fire hydrants in the area. I have noted

large open pits and wonder what is contained in them. These open pits and injection wells are a cause

for concern too. Is it possible for the chemicals in the sludge stored in these pits to reach the ground, or 

pollute lakes and other water sources nearby due to accident or natural occurrence, such as a storm? 

When these chemicals are injected back into the ground, what proof do we have that they will not 

EVER reach the underground aquifers that supply various water wells? 

The few individuals who are directly responsible to oversee these operations, cannot possibly monitor 

the sheer number of sites that are being constructed or are already in operation, but constant monitoring 

should be required on all sites. Obviously automation should be brought to bear on the problem, but the 

drillers will not pay for monitoring (either vi automated means or manually accomplished) unless they 

are forced to do so. 

On the state level, the situation is just as bad if not worse. 

The drillers will eventually be gone, but the long term impact to the health of these communities will

remain long after the drillers are gone. 

As a 50+ year old engineering professional with life-long breathing problems, I'm begging you, for my 

family, my neighbors and myself, to please do whatever is possible to bring in rigourous, scientificallysound air and water quality controls to this industry.

Page 2 of 3

file://C:\Documents and Settings\nparsons\Local Settings\Temp\notesFCBCEE\~web5701.h... 8/9/2010
Thank you for your time. 

Daniel O'Leary 

Concerned Citizen of Fort Worth, and Tejas Trails Homeowner

532 Verna Trail North 

Fort Worth TX, 76108 

Home:

 817-367-2558 

 daniel_oleary1@sbcglobal.net

Work:

 817-935-4185 

 daniel.q.oleary@lmco.com

Page 3 of 3

file://C:\Documents and Settings\nparsons\Local Settings\Temp\notesFCBCEE\~web5701.h... 8/9/2010