Appendices

Appendix A: Bibliography by Source Type

The resources  in this bibliography are organized by the following source types:

Academic Institutions:

Christopherson, Susan, and Ned Rightor. “How Should We Think About the Economic Consequences of Shale Gas Drilling?” Working Paper Series: A Comprehensive Economic Impact Analysis of Natural Gas Extraction in the Marcellus Shale. Cornell University: May 2011. http://www.greenchoices.cornell.edu/downloads/development/shale/Thinking_about_Economic_Consequences.pdf

 

Cornell University Cooperative Extension. “Gas Exploration and Leasing on Private Land: Tips and Guidance for New York Landowners.” Updated July 2008. http://cce.cornell.edu/EnergyClimateChange/NaturalGasDev/Documents/PDFs/Gas%20Leasing%20on%20Private%20Land%20Tips.pdf

 

Cornell University Cooperative Extension. “Things to Consider When You Consider Leasing.” 2014. http://cce.cornell.edu/EnergyClimateChange/NaturalGasDev/Pages/Landowners.aspx

 

Explore Shale. Produced by Penn State Public Broadcasting. Accessed October 8, 2015. http://exploreshale.org.

 

FrackMap. Harvard University. Accessed October 15, 2015. http://worldmap.harvard.edu/maps/FrackMap.

 

Groat, Charles G. and Thomas W. Grimshaw. “Fact-Based Regulation for Environmental Protection in Shale Gas Development.” Energy Institute, The University of Texas at Austin: February 2012. http://heartland.org/policy-documents/fact-based-regulation-environmental-protection-shale-gas-development

 

Intermountain Oil and Gas BMP Project. “Best Management Practices.” University of Colorado Law School. Accessed October 15, 2015. http://www.oilandgasbmps.org/index.php

 

Intermountain Oil and Gas BMP Project. “Hydraulic Fracturing.” University of Colorado Law School. Accessed October 15, 2015. http://www.oilandgasbmps.org/resources/fracing.php

 

Intermountain Oil and Gas BMP Project. “Law Atlas:  Oil and Gas — Water Quality, Water Quantity, and Air Quality.” University of Colorado Law School. Accessed October 15, 2015. http://www.lawatlas.org/oilandgas

 

Intermountain Oil and Gas BMP Project. “LawAtlas: Water Quality — Permitting, Design, and Construction Map.” University of Colorado Law School. Updated April 30, 2014. http://www.lawatlas.org/query?dataset=water-quality-permitting-design-construction

 

Intermountain Oil and Gas BMP Project. “Law and Policy.” University of Colorado Law School. Accessed October 15, 2015. http://www.oilandgasbmps.org/laws/

 

Kay, David. “The Economic Impact of Marcellus Shale Gas Drilling: What Have We Learned? What Are the Limitations?” Working Paper Series: A Comprehensive Economic Impact Analysis of Natural Gas Extraction in the Marcellus Shale. Cornell University: April 2011. http://www.greenchoices.cornell.edu/downloads/development/shale/Economic_Impact.pdf

 

Maryland Institute for Applied Environmental Health. “Potential Public Health Impacts of Natural Gas Development and Production in the Marcellus Shale in Western Maryland.” University of Maryland School of Public Health:  July 2014. http://www.marcellushealth.org/uploads/2/4/0/8/24086586/final_report_08.15.2014.pdf

 

Pennsylvania College of Technology. “ShaleTEC:  Shale Training and Education Center.” Accessed November 23, 2014. http://www.shaletec.org

 

Pennsylvania State University Center for Dirt and Gravel Road Studies. “Better Roads, Cleaner Streams.” Accessed October 15, 2015. http://www.dirtandgravel.psu.edu.

 

Pennsylvania State University Center for Dirt and Gravel Road Studies. “Sample Road Use Maintenance Agreement.” Accessed November 23, 2014. http://www.dirtandgravel.psu.edu/sites/default/files/Center/Marcellus/Sample_RUMA.pdf.

 

Pennsylvania State University Extension Agency. “Drinking Water.” Accessed November 21, 2014. http://extension.psu.edu/natural-resources/water/marcellus-shale/drinking-water

 

Pennsylvania State University Extension Agency. “Negotiating Pipeline Rights-of-Way in Pennsylvania.” Accessed October 15, 2015.. http://extension.psu.edu/natural-resources/natural-gas/publications/negotiating-pipeline-rights-of-way-in-pennsylvania.

 

Raimi, Daniel and Richard G. Newell. “Shale Public Finance:  Local Government Revenues and Costs Associated with Oil and Gas Development.” Duke University Energy Initiative Report. Durham, NC:  May 2014. 

 

ShaleNet. Accessed October 5, 2015. http://www.shalenet.org.

 

University of Iowa, Environmental Health Sciences Research Center. “Exposure Assessment and Outreach to Engage the Public on Health Issues from Frac Sand Mining.” Accessed October 15, 2015. http://cph.uiowa.edu/ehsrc/fracsand.html

 

University of Pittsburgh Institute of Politics. “Shale Gas Roundtable: Deliberations, Findings, and Recommendations.” August 2013. http://iop.pitt.edu/shalegas/PDF/90696%20SHALE%20GAS%20FULL%20REPORT-final.pdf.  

 

Upadhyay, Sarita Rose, and Min Bu. “Visual Impacts of Natural Gas Drilling in the Marcellus Shale Region.” Cornell University:  Fall 2010. http://cce.cornell.edu/EnergyClimateChange/NaturalGasDev/Documents/City%20and%20Regional%20Planning%20Student%20Papers/CRP5072_Visual%20Impact_Final%20Report.pdf

 

Weinstein, Amanda L. and Mark D. Partridge. “The Economic Value of Shale Natural Gas in Ohio.” The Ohio State University Department of Agricultural, Environmental and Development Economics:  December 2011. http://aede.osu.edu/sites/aede/files/publication_files/Economic%20Value%20of%20Shale%20FINAL%20Dec%202011.pdf

 

Witter, Roxanna, Lisa McKenzie, Meredith Towle, Kaylan Stinson, Kenneth Scott, Lee Newman, and John Adgate. “Health Impact Assessment for Battlement Mesa, Garfield County, Colorado.” Colorado School of Public Health:  September 2010. http://www.garfield-county.com/public-health/documents/1%20%20%20Complete%20HIA%20without%20Appendix%20D.pdf.

Books:

Apostolopoulos, Yorghos and Sevil Sonmez, eds. Population Mobility and Infectious Disease. New York: Springer, 2007. http://www.springer.com/public+health/book/978-0-387-47667-4

 

Getches, David H. Water Law In a Nut Shell (4th ed). St. Paul: Thompson/Reuters, 2009.

 

National Research Council. Environmental Epidemiology, Volume 2: Use of the Gray Literature and Other Data in Environmental Epidemiology. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press, 1997. http://www.nap.edu/catalog/5804/environmental-epidemiology-volume-2-use-of-the-gray-literature-and.

 

National Research Council. Improving Health in the United States: The Role of Health Impact Assessment. Washington, DC:  National Academies Press, 2011. http://www.nap.edu/catalog/13229/improving-health-in-the-united-states-the-role-of-health

Consultants and Independent Practitioners:

Barron, Tania, Marla Orenstein, and Ame-Lia Tamburrini. “Health Effects Assessment Tool (HEAT): Innovative Guide for HIA in Resource Development Projects.” Habitat Health Impact Consulting & Environmental Resources Management. January 2010. http://www.erm.com/en/Analysis-and-Insight/publications/archived-publications-2009—2010/health-effects-assessment-tool-heat-an-innovative-guide-for-hia-in-resource-development-projects.

 

Dutton, Ron and George Blankenship. “Socioeconomic Effects of Natural Gas Development.” Paper prepared to support NTC Consultants under contract with the New York State Energy Research and Development Authority. Denver, Colorado: August 2010. 

 

Law Offices of Carolyn Elefant. “Knowing and Protecting Your Rights When an Interstate Gas Pipeline Comes to Your Community.” May 17, 2010. http://lawofficesofcarolynelefant.com/wp-content/uploads/2010/06/FINALTAGguide.pdf

 

Mifflin, Amy. Global Collaborations, Inc. Interview by Erica Bucki and Dana Goodson. June 2014. 

 

Rational Middle Energy Series. Realities of Drilling:  Extended and Recut. Updated 2014. Video (14:02). http://rationalmiddle.com/movie/realities-of-drilling-extended-and-recut/.

Government Entities:

Agency for Toxic Substances and Disease Registry. “Hydrogen Sulfide- ToxFAQs.” CAS # 7783-06-4. October 2014.  http://www.atsdr.cdc.gov/toxfaqs/tfacts114.pdf.

 

Agency for Toxic Substances and Disease Registry. “n-Hexane.” CAS ID # 110-54-3. Updated March 3, 2011.http://www.atsdr.cdc.gov/substances/toxsubstance.asp?toxid=68.

 

Agency for Toxic Substances and Disease Registry. “Toxic Substances Portal.” Updated May 23, 2014. http://www.atsdr.cdc.gov/substances/index.asp.

 

Agency for Toxic Substances and Disease Registry. “Toxicological Profile for n-Hexane.” July 1999. http://www.atsdr.cdc.gov/toxprofiles/tp113.pdf.

 

Agency for Toxic Substances and Disease Registry. “Xylene: Division of Toxicology and Environmental Medicine ToxFAQs.” August  2007.  http://www.atsdr.cdc.gov/toxfaqs/tfacts71.pdf.

 

Brown, Valerie J. “Industry Issues: Putting Heat on Gas.” National Center for Biotechnology Information, February 2007. http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC1817691/.

 

Bureau of Land Management. “Split Estate: Rights, Responsibilities, and Opportunities.” 2007. http://www.blm.gov/pgdata/etc/medialib/blm/wo/MINERALS__REALTY__AND_RESOURCE_PROTECTION_/bmps.Par.57486.File.dat/SplitEstate07.pdf

 

Bureau of Land Management. “Surface Operating Standards and Guidelines for Oil and Gas Exploration and Development.” Fourth Edition (2007). http://www.blm.gov/wo/st/en/prog/energy/oil_and_gas/best_management_practices/gold_book.html. 

 

California Office of Environmental Health Hazard Assessment. “Health Effects of Diesel Exhaust.” Accessed December 6, 2014. http://oehha.ca.gov/public_info/facts/dieselfacts.html

 

Canadian Center for Occupational Health and Safety. “Chemical Profiles.” Modified September 2, 2011. http://www.ccohs.ca/oshanswers/chemicals/chem_profiles/.

 

Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. “Facts About Benzene.” Updated February 2013.http://www.bt.cdc.gov/agent/benzene/basics/facts.asp.

 

Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. “Health-Related Quality of Life: HRQOL Concepts.” Modified March 17, 2011. http://www.cdc.gov/hrqol/concept.htm

 

Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. “Workplace Safety and Health Topics: Silica.” Updated June 18, 2015. http://www.cdc.gov/niosh/topics/silica/

 

Colorado Oil and Gas Conservation Commission. “Application for Permit to Drill – Form 2.” Video (8:26). Accessed December 10, 2014. https://cogcc.state.co.us/COGIS/DrillingPermits.asp

 

Esswein, Eric, Max Kiefer, John Snawder, and Michael Breitenstein. “Worker Exposure to Crystalline Silica During Hydraulic Fracturing.” NIOSH Science Blog. Updated June 12, 2015. http://blogs.cdc.gov/niosh-science-blog/2012/05/23/silica-fracking/

 

Federal Energy Regulatory Commission. “An Interstate Natural Gas Pipeline on My Land? What Do I Need to Know?” Updated August 2015. 

 

Garfield County, Colorado, Department of Public Health, “Water Treatment Decision Guide.” (No date.) http://www.garfield-county.com/public-health/documents/WaterTreatmentGuide_MECH.pdf.

 

Indiana Department of Natural Resources, Division of Oil and Gas, Division of Reclamation, and Indiana State Department of Health. “Methane Gas & Your Water Well: A Fact Sheet for Indiana Water Well Owners.” (No date.)  http://www.in.gov/isdh/files/OGMethaneInWellWater_(2).pdf

 

McCauley, Michael. “Air, Noise, and Light Monitoring Results for Assessing Environmental Impacts of Horizontal Gas Well Drilling Operations.” Prepared for the West Virginia Department of Environmental Protection. Morgantown, WV:  West Virginia University School of Public Health, May 3, 2013.http://wvwri.org/wp-content/uploads/2013/10/a-n-l-final-report-for-web.pdf.

 

Milligan, Mark R. “What Are Seismic Surveys and How Much ‘Shaking’ Do They Create?” July 3, 2004. Utah Geological Survey. http://geology.utah.gov/map-pub/survey-notes/glad-you-asked/what-are-seismic-surveys/.

 

National Energy Technology Laboratory. “Modern Shale Gas Development in the United States: An Update.” Prepared for the U.S. Department of Energy. September 2013. http://www.netl.doe.gov/File%20Library/Research/Oil-Gas/shale-gas-primer-update-2013.pdf.

 

National Institute for Occupational Safety and Health. “NIOSH Pocket Guide to Chemical Hazards.” Updated February 13, 2015. http://www.cdc.gov/niosh/npg/default.html

 

National Park Service. “Making a Difference.” Updated April 23, 2012. http://www.nature.nps.gov/night/difference.cfm.

 

New York State Department of Environmental Conservation. “High-Volume Hydraulic Fracturing in NYS: 2015 Final Supplemental Generic Environmental Impact Statement (SGEIS) Documents.”  April 2015.  http://www.dec.ny.gov/energy/75370.html.

 

New York State Department of Health. “A Public Health Review of High Volume Hydraulic Fracturing for Shale Gas Development.” December 2014.http://www.health.ny.gov/press/reports/docs/high_volume_hydraulic_fracturing.pdf.

 

Occupational Safety and Health Administration. “Oil and Gas Extraction: Safety and Health Topics.” Accessed October 15, 2015. https://www.osha.gov/SLTC/oilgaswelldrilling/

 

Occupational Safety and Health Administration. “Oil and Gas Extraction: Standards and Enforcement.” Accessed October 15, 2015. https://www.osha.gov/SLTC/oilgaswelldrilling/standards.html

 

Occupational Safety and Health Administration. “Oil and Gas Well Drilling and Servicing eTool.” Accessed October 15, 2015. https://www.osha.gov/SLTC/etools/oilandgas/index.html.

 

Occupational Safety and Health Administration. “OSHA Fact Sheet: Hydrogen Sulfide.” 2005.https://www.osha.gov/OshDoc/data_Hurricane_Facts/hydrogen_sulfide_fact.pdf

 

Occupational Safety and Health Administration. “OSHA-NIOSH Hazard Alert: Worker Exposure to Silica during Hydraulic Fracturing.” Accessed October 15, 2015. https://www.osha.gov/dts/hazardalerts/hydraulic_frac_hazard_alert.html

 

Occupational Safety and Health Administration. “OSHA’s Proposed Crystalline Silica Rule: Overview,” September 2013. https://www.osha.gov/silica/factsheets/OSHA_FS-3683_Silica_Overview.html

 

Office of Pipeline Safety. “Building Safe Communities: Pipeline Risk and Its Application to Local Development Decisions.” October 2010. http://pstrust.org/docs/PIPA-PipelineRiskReport-Final-20101021.pdf

 

Ohio Department of Natural Resources, Division of Oil & Gas Resources. “Shale Drilling Animation” (4:12).  Accessed October 15, 2015. http://oilandgas.ohiodnr.gov/shale#GEN

 

Ohio Environmental Protection Agency. “Guidance for Temporary Housing Associated with Oil and Natural Gas Drilling Operations.” May 2012. http://epa.ohio.gov/Portals/0/general%20pdfs/Guidance%20for%20Temporary%20Housing.pdf.

 

Oklahoma Corporation Commission. “OCC Announces Next Step in Continuing Response to Earthquake Concerns.” July 17, 2015. http://www.occeweb.com/News/DIRECTIVE-2.pdf.

 

Perma-Fix Environmental Services, Inc.”Technologically Enhanced Naturally Occurring Radioactive Materials (TENORM) Study Report.” Prepared for the Pennsylvania Department of Environmental Protection. January 2015. http://www.elibrary.dep.state.pa.us/dsweb/Get/Document-105822/PA-DEP-TENORM-Study_Report_Rev._0_01-15-2015.pdf.

 

Pipeline and Hazardous Material Safety Administration. “Guide for Communicating Emergency Response Information for Natural Gas and Hazardous Liquids Pipelines.” 2014. http://phmsa.dot.gov/pv_obj_cache/pv_obj_id_37BB02E8C1E593B753D80B876658B908C55A5000/filename/hmcrp_rpt_014.pdf.

 

Pipeline and Hazardous Materials Safety Administration. “Pipeline Incidents by System Type.” Data as of 11/21/14. http://www.phmsa.dot.gov/pipeline/library/datastatistics/pipelineincidenttrends

 

Pipeline and Hazardous Materials Safety Administration. “Pipeline Safety Awareness.” Accessed October 15, 2015. https://opsweb.phmsa.dot.gov/pipelineforum/pipeline_safety_update/image_library.html.

 

Pipeline and Hazardous Materials Safety Administration. “Reporting Criteria as of 2011.” March 2011. http://primis.phmsa.dot.gov/comm/reports/safety/docs/IncidentReportingCriteriaHistory1990-2011.pdf

 

Pipeline and Hazardous Materials Safety Administration. “State Pages.” Accessed October 15, 2015. http://primis.phmsa.dot.gov/comm/States.htm?nocache=9789

 

Pipelines and Informed  Planning Alliance. “Partnering to Further Enhance Pipeline Safety in Communities through Risk-Informed Land-Plan Use: Final Report of Recommended Practices.” November 2010. http://www.ingaa.org/File.aspx?id=11683

 

State of Alaska HIA Program, Department of Health and Social Services. “Technical Guidance for Health Impact Assessment (HIA) in Alaska,” Version 2. 2015. http://www.epi.alaska.gov/hia/AlaskaHIAToolkit.pdf and http://www.epi.alaska.gov/hia/

 

Town of Palisade and City of Grand Junction, Colorado et al. Watershed Plan for the Town of Palisade and the City of Grand Junction, Colorado. August 2007. http://www.oilandgasbmps.org/resources/casestudies/palisade.php.  

 

Transportation Research Board. “Transmission Pipelines and Land Use: A Risk-Informed Approach.” Special Report 281. 2004. http://onlinepubs.trb.org/onlinepubs/sr/sr281.pdf

 

United States Department of Energy. “Memo: Stakeholder Meeting on State, Local, and Tribal Issues.” August 6, 2014. http://energy.gov/sites/prod/files/2014/08/f18/20140808%20State-Local-Tribal%20Memo%20Final.pdf

 

United States Department of Energy. “Secretary of Energy Advisory Board Task Force Report on FracFocus 2.0.” March 28, 2014. http://energy.gov/sites/prod/files/2014/04/f14/20140328_SEAB_TF_FracFocus2_Report_Final.pdf

 

United States Department of Health and Human Services, CDC, NIOSH, and IMA-NA. “Dust Control Handbook for Industrial Minerals Mining and Processing.” January  2012. http://www.cdc.gov/niosh/mining/UserFiles/works/pdfs/2012-112.pdf.

 

United States Department of the Interior. “Interior Releases Updated Draft Rule for Hydraulic Fracturing on Public and Indian Lands for Comment.” May 16, 2013. http://www.doi.gov/news/pressreleases/interior-releases-updated-draft-rule-for-hydraulic-fracturing-on-public-and-indian-lands-for-public-comment.cfm.

 

United States Department of Transportation. “The State of the National Pipeline Infrastructure.” 2011. https://opsweb.phmsa.dot.gov/pipelineforum/docs/Long%20Version%20Preliminary%20Report%20on%20Infrastructure%20040711draftwDecadeCauseCharts.pdf.  

 

United States Energy Information Administration. “Natural Gas Explained:  Delivery and Storage of Natural Gas.” Last reviewed June 6, 2014.  http://www.eia.gov/energyexplained/index.cfm?page=natural_gas_delivery.

 

United States Energy Information Administration. “U.S. Expected to Become Largest Producer of Petroleum and Natural Gas Hydrocarbons in 2013,” October 4, 2013. http://www.eia.gov/todayinenergy/detail.cfm?id=13251.

 

United States Energy Information Administration, Office of Oil and Gas. “Natural Gas Compressor Stations on the Interstate Pipeline.” November 2007. http://www.eia.gov/pub/oil_gas/natural_gas/analysis_publications/ngcompressor/ngcompressor.pdf

 

United States Environmental Protection Agency. “A Citizen’s Guide to Radon: The Guide to Protecting Yourself and Your Family from Radon.” May 2012. http://www2.epa.gov/radon/citizens-guide-radon-guide-protecting-yourself-and-your-family-radon.

 

United States Environmental Protection Agency. “Compilation of Air Pollutant Emission Factors.” AP-42, Fifth Edition, 1995. http://www3.epa.gov/ttnchie1/ap42/ch13/final/c13s05.pdf.

 

United States Environmental Protection Agency. “Crude Oil and Natural Gas Waste.” Updated October 7, 2015. http://www.epa.gov/osw/nonhaz/industrial/special/oil/

 

United States Environmental Protection Agency. “EPA Identifies Noise Levels Affecting Health and Welfare.” Updated May 20, 2015. http://www2.epa.gov/aboutepa/epa-identifies-noise-levels-affecting-health-and-welfare.

 

United States Environmental Protection Agency. “EPA’s Air Rules for the Oil and Natural Gas Industry: Summary of Key Changes to the New Source Performance Standards.” Accessed October 15, 2015. http://www.epa.gov/airquality/oilandgas/pdfs/20120417changes.pdf.

 

United States Environmental Protection Agency. “Exemption of Oil and Gas Exploration and Production Wastes from Federal Hazardous Waste Regulations.” Washington DC:  October 2002. http://www3.epa.gov/epawaste/nonhaz/industrial/special/oil/oil-gas.pdf.

 

United States Environmental Protection Agency. “Fact Sheet: Underground Injection Control (UIC) Program Permitting Guidance for Oil and Gas Hydraulic Fracturing Activities Using Diesel Fuels, UIC Program Guidance #84 – Draft.” May 2012. http://water.epa.gov/type/groundwater/uic/class2/hydraulicfracturing/upload/hfdieselfuelsfs.pdf.

 

United States Environmental Protection Agency. “Ground-level Ozone:  Health Effect.” Updated October 1, 2015. http://www3.epa.gov/ozonepollution/health.html.

 

United States Environmental Protection Agency. “Health Effects of Ozone in the General Population.” Updated September 19, 2015.http://www.epa.gov/apti/ozonehealth/population.html#effects

 

United States Environmental Protection Agency. “Health and Environmental Agencies of U.S. States and Territories.” Updated October 14, 2015. http://www2.epa.gov/home/health-and-environmental-agencies-us-states-and-territories.

 

United States Environmental Protection Agency. “The Hydraulic Fracturing Water Cycle.” Updated June 1, 2015. http://www2.epa.gov/hfstudy/hydraulic-fracturing-water-cycle#1.

 

United States Environmental Protection Agency. “Natural Gas Drilling in the Marcellus Shale: NPDES Program Frequently Asked Questions.” Attachment to memorandum from James Hanlon, Director of EPA’s Office of Wastewater Management to the EPA Regions, “Natural Gas Drilling in the Marcellus Shale under the NPDES Program.” March 16, 2011. http://www.epa.gov/npdes/pubs/hydrofracturing_faq.pdf

 

United States Environmental Protection Agency. “Natural Gas STAR Program.” Updated October 14, 2015. http://www.epa.gov/gasstar/

 

United States Environmental Protection Agency. “Natural Gas STAR Program: Recommended Technologies and Practices.” Updated May 30, 2014. http://www.epa.gov/gasstar/tools/recommended.html

 

United States Environmental Protection Agency. “Proposed Climate, Air Quality and Permitting Rules for the Oil and Natural Gas Industry: Fact Sheet.” http://www3.epa.gov/airquality/oilandgas/pdfs/og_fs_081815.pdf.

 

United States Environmental Protection Agency. “Radiation Doses in Perspective.” Updated October 1, 2015. http://www.epa.gov/radiation/understand/perspective.html

 

United States Environmental Protection Agency. “Radiation and Health.” Updated October 1, 2015. http://www.epa.gov/radiation/understand/health_effects.html.

 

United States Environmental Protection Agency. “Radiation and Radioactivity.” Updated October 1, 2015. http://www.epa.gov/radiation/understand/radiation_radioactivity.html

 

United States Environmental Protection Agency. “Radionuclides in Drinking Water.” Updated March 6, 2012.http://water.epa.gov/lawsregs/rulesregs/sdwa/radionuclides/index.cfm

 

United States Environmental Protection Agency. Radionuclides Rule: A Quick Reference Guide.” June 2001.

http://water.epa.gov/lawsregs/rulesregs/sdwa/radionuclides/upload/2009_04_16_radionuclides_qrg_radionuclides.pdf.

 

United States Environmental Protection Agency. “Radon.” Updated October 7, 2015.http://www.epa.gov/radon/pubs/citguide.html

 

United States Environmental Protection Agency. “Regulation of Hydraulic Fracturing under the Safe Drinking Water Act.” Updated February 11, 2014. http://water.epa.gov/type/groundwater/uic/class2/hydraulicfracturing/wells_hydroreg.cfm.

 

United States Environmental Protection Agency. “A Regulators’ Guide to the Management of Radioactive Residuals from Drinking Water Treatment Technologies.” 2005. http://energy.wilkes.edu/PDFFiles/Library/EPA%20Guide%20to%20Treatment%20of%20Radionuclides%20in%20Wastewater%20Treatment.pdf.

 

United States Environmental Protection Agency. “Step 3: Exposure Assessment.” Updated October 7, 2015. http://www2.epa.gov/risk/conducting-human-health-risk-assessment#tab-4.

 

United States Environmental Protection Agency. “Water: Private Wells.” Updated March 6, 2012.http://water.epa.gov/drink/info/well/faq.cfm

 

United States Environmental Protection Agency Office of Air and Radiation. “Particle Pollution and Your Health.” September 2003.http://epa.gov/pm/pdfs/pm-color.pdf.

 

United States Environmental Protection Agency Office of Research and Development. “Analysis of Hydraulic Fracturing Fluid Data from the FracFocus Chemical Disclosure Registry 1.0.” Washington, DC:  U.S. EPA, March 2015. http://www2.epa.gov/sites/production/files/2015-03/documents/fracfocus_analysis_report_and_appendices_final_032015_508_0.pdf.

 

United States Environmental Protection Agency Office of Research and Development. “Assessment of the Potential Impacts of Hydraulic Fracturing for Oil and Gas on Drinking Water Resources” (External Review Draft). Washington, DC:  U.S. EPA, June 2015. http://cfpub.epa.gov/ncea/hfstudy/recordisplay.cfm?deid=244651#_ga=1.45665120.574819698.1432322953.

 

United States Environmental Protection Agency Office of Research and Development. “Review of State and Industry Spill Data:  Characterization of Hydraulic Fracturing-Related Spills.” Washington, DC:  May 2015. http://www2.epa.gov/sites/production/files/2015-05/documents/hf_spills_report_final_5-12-15_508_km_sb.pdf.

 

United States Geological Survey. “How Is Hydraulic Fracturing Related to Earthquakes and Tremors?” USGS FAQs. Modified August 19, 2015. http://www.usgs.gov/faq/categories/10132/3830.

 

United States Geological Survey. “Induced Earthquakes.” Modified October 1, 2015. http://earthquake.usgs.gov/research/induced

 

United States Geological Survey. “USGS FAQs.” Modified August 19, 2015. http://www.usgs.gov/faq/categories/9833/3424.

 

United States Government Accountability Office. “Oil and Gas: Information on Shale Resources, Development, and Environmental and Public Health Risks.” September 2012. http://www.gao.gov/assets/650/647791.pdf

 

United States House of Representatives, Committee on Energy and Commerce, Minority Staff. “Chemicals Used in Hydraulic Fracturing.” April 2011.

 

Vann, Adam, Brandon J. Murrill, and Mary Tiemann. Hydraulic Fracturing: Selected Legal Issues. Congressional Research Service Report. September 26, 2014.

 

Wisconsin Department of Natural Resources. “Locations of Industrial Sand Mines and Processing Plants in Wisconsin.” Last revised September 8, 2015. http://dnr.wi.gov/topic/Mines/ISMMap.html.

Industry:

American Petroleum Institute. “Community Engagement Guidelines.” ANSI/API Bulletin 100-3. First edition (July 2014). http://www.api.org/globalitems/~/media/Files/Policy/Exploration/100-3_e1.pdf.

 

American Petroleum Institute. “Environmental Protection for Onshore Oil and Gas Production Operations and Leases.” API  Recommended  Practice 51R. July 2009. http://www.api.org/~/media/Files/Policy/Exploration/API_RP_51R.pdf.

 

American Petroleum Institute. “Hydraulic Fracturing – Well Integrity and Fracture Containment.” ANSI/API Recommended Practice 100-1. October 2015. Accessed October 23, 2015. http://publications.api.org.

 

American Petroleum Institute. “Hydraulic Fracturing Operations – Well Construction and Integrity Guidelines.” API Guidance Document HF1. First Edition (October 2009). http://www.api.org/~/media/Files/Policy/Exploration/API_HF1.pdf.

 

American Petroleum Institute. “Managing Environmental Aspects Associated with Exploration and Production Operations Including Hydraulic Fracturing.” ANSI/API Recommended Practice 100-2. August 2015. Accessed October 23, 2015. http://publications.api.org.

 

Apache Corporation. “Greener Chemicals.” Accessed October 16, 2015. http://www.apachecorp.com/Sustainability/Environment/Chemicals/Greener_chemicals/index.aspx.

 

Appalachian Shale Recommended Practices Group. Accessed October 16, 2015. http://asrpg.org/.

 

BG Group. “Unconventional Gas.” Accessed October 16, 2015. http://www.bg-group.com/197/about-us/industry-challenges/unconventional-gas/.

 

Canadian Association of Petroleum Producers. “What to Expect When You’re Expecting a Well,” June 2014. http://www.capp.ca/publications-and-statistics/publications/250098

 

Chesapeake Energy. “Operations.” Accessed October 16, 2015. http://www.chk.com/operations/best-management-practices/pages/information.aspx

 

Chesapeake Energy. “A River Runs Through It: Environmentally Sensitive Operations in the Natural State.” Spring 2008. http://www.chk.com/media/publications/theplay/pages/spring2008.aspx

 

Cohen, Ken. “What Does It Mean to Frack a Well? Part 1.” ExxonMobile Perspectives. June 15, 2015. http://www.exxonmobilperspectives.com/2015/06/15/what-does-it-mean-to-frack-a-well-part-1/.

 

Independent Petroleum Association of America. “Induced Seismicity.” Accessed October 16, 2015. http://www.ipaa.org/wp-content/uploads/downloads/2015/06/IPAA-Induced-Seismicity-Fact-Sheet_6-1-15.pdf

 

International Association of Oil & Gas Producers. “Our Library.” Accessed October 16, 2015. http://www.iogp.org/Our-library/health-committee

 

International Association of Oil and Gas Producers (OGP). “Strategic Health Management: Principles and Guidelines for the Oil and Gas Industry.” Report No. 6.88/307. June 2000. http://www.ogp.org.uk/pubs/307.pdf

 

International Association of Oil and Gas Producers (OGP) and International Petroleum Industry Environmental Conservation Association (IPIECA). “Drilling Fluids and Health Risk Management: A Guide for Drilling Personnel, Managers, and Health Professionals in the Oil and Gas Industry.” OGP Report No. 396. London, UK:   2009. http://www.ipieca.org/publication/drilling-fluids-and-health-risk-management.

 

International Association of Oil and Gas Producers (OGP) and International Petroleum Industry Environmental Conservation Association (IPIECA). “A Guide to Health Impact Assessments in the Oil and Gas Industry.” London, UK:  2005. http://www.ogp.org.uk/pubs/380.pdf

 

International Association of Oil and Gas Producers (OGP) and International Petroleum Industry Environmental Conservation Association (IPIECA). “Managing Health for Field Operations in Oil and Gas Activities: A Guide for Managers and Supervisors in the Oil and Gas Industry.” OGP Report No. 343, Version 1. London, UK:  2011. http://www.internationalsosfoundation.org/?wpfb_dl=81

 

International Association of Oil and Gas Producers (OGP) and International Petroleum Industry Environmental Conservation Association (IPIECA). “Substance Misuse: A Guide for Managers and Supervisors in the Oil and Gas Industry.” OGP Report No. 445. London, UK:  2010. http://www.ogp.org.uk/pubs/445.pdf

 

International Council on Mining and Metals. “Community Development Toolkit.” July 20, 2012. http://www.icmm.com/news-and-events/news/articles/icmm-presents-updated-community-development-toolkit

 

International Council on Mining and Metals. “Good Practice Guidance on Health Impact Assessment.” 2010. 

 

International Council on Mining and Metals. “Planning for Integrated Mine Closure: Toolkit.” 2008. http://www.icmm.com/document/310

 

International Council on Mining and Metals. “Water Management in Mining: A Selection of Case Studies.” May 2012. http://www.icmm.com/document/3660.     

 

Interstate Natural Gas Association of America. “How Are Natural Gas Transmission Pipelines Regulated?” Accessed October 16, 2015. http://www.ingaa.org/cms/4923.aspx

 

Interstate Natural Gas Association of America Foundation. “North American Midstream Infrastructure through 2035: Capitalizing on Our Energy Abundance.” Prepared by ICF International, March 18, 2014. http://www.ingaa.org/File.aspx?id=21498

 

Marathon Oil Company. “Meth Education Program.” Video clip.  Accessed October 16, 2015. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nlmP2vhKn-Q

 

Marcellus Shale Coalition. “Recommended Practices.” Accessed October 16, 2015. http://marcelluscoalition.org/category/library/recommended-practices/.

 

National Industrial Sand Association. “Occupational Health Program for Exposure to Crystalline Silica in the Industrial Sand Industry,” 2011. http://sand.org/Silica/Occupational/Health/Program.

 

National Petroleum Council. “Natural Gas Pipelines: Challenges,” 2011. http://www.npc.org/prudent_development-topic_papers/2-19_gas_pipeline_challenges_paper.pdf

 

National Petroleum Council. “Plugging and Abandoning Oil and Gas Wells.” 2011. http://www.npc.org/Prudent_Development-Topic_Papers/2-25_Well_Plugging_and_Abandonment_Paper.pdf

  

Shell Oil Company. “Life of an Onshore Well.” Graphic animation. Accessed October 16, 2015. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=w9MMsEkadGw (5:52). 

 

Shell Oil Company. “Shell’s Principles for Producing Tight/Shale Oil and Gas.” Accessed October 16, 2015. http://www.shell.com/global/future-energy/natural-gas/gas/shell-operating-principles.html

Intergovernmental Bodies and International Institutions:

ATSM International. “Subcommittee D-18 on Hydraulic Fracturing.” Accessed October 16, 2015. http://www.astm.org/COMMIT/SUBCOMMIT/D1826.htm

 

FracFocus Chemical Disclosure Registry. A project of the Ground Water Protection Council and Interstate Oil and Gas Compact Commission. Accessed October 15, 2015. www.fracfocus.org.

 

Ground Water Protection Council. “Injection Wells:  An Introduction to Their Use, Operation, & Regulation.” September 1. 2013.  http://www.gwpc.org/sites/default/files/UIC%20Brochure%20Updated%209-2013_0.pdf

 

Ground Water Protection Council. “State Oil & Gas Regulations Designed to Protect Water Resources.” 2014. http://www.gwpc.org/sites/default/files/Oil%20and%20Gas%20Regulation%20Report%20Hyperlinked%20Version%20Final-rfs.pdf.

 

Ground Water Protection Council and ALL Consulting. “Modern Shale Gas in the United States: A Primer. Prepared for U.S. Department of Energy Office of Fossil Energy and the National Energy Technology Laboratory. April 2009. http://energy.gov/sites/prod/files/2013/03/f0/ShaleGasPrimer_Online_4-2009.pdf.

 

Ground Water Protection Council and Interstate Oil and Gas Compact Commission. “Potential Injection-Induced Seismicity Associated with Oil & Gas Development:  A Primer on Technical and Regulatory Considerations Informing Risk Management and Mitigation.” 2015. http://www.gwpc.org/sites/default/files/finalprimerweb.pdf.

 

Ground Water Research and Education Foundation. “White Paper II Summarizing a Special Session on Induced Seismicity:  Assessing and Managing Risk of Induced Seismicity by Injection,” November 2013. http://www.gwpc.org/sites/default/files/files/White%20Paper%20II%20Summarizing%20a%20Special%20Session%20on%20Induced%20Seismicity-%20November,%202013%20(GWPC).pdf.

 

International Finance Corporation. “Guidance Note 4: Community Health, Safety and Security.” January 1, 2012. http://www.ifc.org/wps/wcm/connect/dc3f4b80498007dca17ff3336b93d75f/Updated_GN4-2012.pdf?MOD=AJPERES

 

International Finance Corporation. “Lessons of Experience: Peru LNG: A Focus on Continuous Improvement.” No. 3, March 2013. http://www.ifc.org/wps/wcm/connect/4937c0804f612f0397f2ff0098cb14b9/IFC_LOE_PLNG.pdf?MOD=AJPERES

 

International Finance Corporation. “Performance Standards and Environmental and Social Sustainability.” January 1, 2012. http://www.ifc.org/wps/wcm/connect/115482804a0255db96fbffd1a5d13d27/PS_English_2012_Full-Document.pdf?MOD=AJPERES

 

International Finance Corporation. “Projects and People: A Handbook for Addressing Project-Induced In-Migration.” Accessed November 21, 2014. 

 

Interstate Oil and Gas Compact Commission. “Protecting Our Country’s Resources: The States’ Case.” 2007. http://iogcc.publishpath.com/Websites/iogcc/pdfs/2008-Protecting-Our-Country’s-Resources-The-States’-Case.pdf

 

Interstate Oil and Gas Compact Commission. “Summary of State Statutes and Regulations.” Accessed October 27, 2015. http://iogcc.publishpath.com/state-statutes.

 

National Association of Conservation Districts. “State Directory.” Accessed October 15, 2015. http://www.nacdnet.org/about/districts/directory.

 

National Association of State Departments of Agriculture. “State Directory.” Accessed October 15, 2015. http://www.nasda.org/9383/States.aspx.

 

National Conference of State Legislatures. “Compulsory Pooling Laws:  Protecting the Conflicting Rights of Neighboring Landowners.” October 24, 2014. http://www.ncsl.org/research/energy/compulsory-pooling-laws-protecting-the-conflicting-rights-of-neighboring-landowners.aspx.

 

National Conference of State Legislatures. “Natural Gas and Hydraulic Fracturing: A Policymaker’s Guide.” June 2012. http://www.ncsl.org/documents/energy/frackingguide_060512.pdf.   

 

Programme on Mental Health, World Health Organization Division of Mental Health and Prevention of Substance Abuse. “Measuring Quality of Life.” 1997. http://www.who.int/mental_health/media/68.pdf

 

State Review of Oil and Natural Gas. “STRONGER Publishes 2015 Guidelines.” Accessed October 16, 2015. http://www.strongerinc.org/.

 

Susquehanna River Basin Commission. “Overview of Remote Water Quality Monitoring Network.” Updated June 2014. http://mdw.srbc.net/remotewaterquality/

 

Tompkins County Council of Governments. “Community Impact Assessment: High-Volume Hydraulic Fracturing.” December 2011.

http://www.tompkinscountyny.gov/files/tccog/Gas_Drilling/TCCoG_Community_Impact_Assessment_12-15-11%20Final.pdf.

 

World Health Organization. “Health Impact Assessment.” Accessed October 16, 2015. http://www.who.int/hia/en/ and http://www.who.int/hia/examples/en

 

World Health Organization. “Night Noise Guidelines for Europe.” Copenhagen, Denmark: WHO Regional Office for Europe, 2009. http://www.euro.who.int/__data/assets/pdf_file/0017/43316/E92845.pdf

Journal Articles:

Adgate, John L, Bernard D. Goldstein, and Lisa M. McKenzie. “Potential Public Health Hazards, Exposures and Health Effects from Unconventional Natural Gas Development.” Environmental Science and Technology 48, no. 15 (February 24, 2014):  8307-8320. http://www.r-cause.net/uploads/8/0/2/5/8025484/adgate_et_al_2014_ph_risks.pdf

 

Allen, David T., Adam P. Pacsi, David W. Sullivan, Daniel Zavala-Araiza, Matthew Harrison, Kindal Keen, Matthew P. Fraser, A. Daniel Hill, Robert F. Sawyer, and John H. Seinfeld. “Methane Emissions from Process Equipment at Natural Gas Production Sites in the United States: Pneumatic Controllers.” Environmental Science and Technology 49 (2015). http://pubs.acs.org/doi/pdf/10.1021/es5040156.

 

Bishop R.E. “Historical Analysis of Oil and Gas Well Plugging in New York: Is the Regulatory System Working?” New Solutions 23, no. 1 (2013). http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/23552650

 

Bunch, A.G., C.S. Perry,  L. Abraham, D.S. Wikoff, J.A. Tachovsky, J.G. Hixon, J.D. Urban, M.A. Harris, and L.C. Haws. “Evaluation of Impact of Shale Gas Operations in the Barnett Shale Region on Volatile Organic Compounds in Air and Potential Human Health Risks.” Science of the Total Environment 468-469 (2014):  832-842.  http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0048969713010073.

 

Caulton, Dana R., Paul B. Shepson, Maria O.L. Cambaliza, David McCabe, Ellen Baum, and Brian H Stirm. “Methane Destruction Efficiency of Natural Gas Flares Associated with Shale Formation Wells.” Environmental Science and Technology 48, no. 16 (July 30, 2014):  9548-9554. http://pubs.acs.org/doi/abs/10.1021/es500511w.

 

Ferrar, Kyle J., Jill Kriesky, Charles L. Christen, Lynn P. Marshall, Samantha L. Malone, Ravi K. Sharma, Drew R. Michanowicz, and Bernard D. Goldstein. “Assessment and Longitudinal Analysis of Health Impacts and Stressors Perceived to Result from Unconventional Shale Gas Development in the Marcellus Shale Region.” International Journal of Occupational and Environmental Health 19, no. 2 (2013). Abstract at http://www.maneyonline.com/doi/abs/10.1179/2049396713Y.0000000024

 

Goldenberg, Shira M., Jean A. Shoveller, Aleck C. Ostry, and Mieke Koehoorn. “Sexually Transmitted Infection (STI) Testing among Young Oil and Gas Workers: The Need for Innovative Place-based Approaches to STI Control.” Canadian Journal of Public Health 99, no. 4 (July/August 2008). http://journal.cpha.ca/index.php/cjph/article/viewFile/1666/1850

 

Hammer, Monica S., Tracy K. Swinburn, and Richard L. Neitzel. “Environmental Noise Pollution in the United States: Developing an Effective Public Health Response.” Environmental Health Perspectives 122, no. 2 (February 2014). http://ehp.niehs.nih.gov/1307272/

 

Jacquet, Jeffrey B. “Review of Risks to Communities from Shale Gas Development.”  Environmental Science and Technology 48, no. 15 (2014):  8321-33.doi: 10.1021/es404647x.

 

Kang, Mary, Cynthia M. Kanno, Matthew C. Reid, Xin Zhang, Denise L. Mauzerall, Michael A. Celia, Yuheng Chen, and Tullis C. Onstott. “Direct Measurements of Methane Emissions from Abandoned Oil and Gas Wells in Pennsylvania.” Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences 111,  no. 51 (December 23, 2014): 18173-18177.  http://www.pnas.org/content/111/51/18173.full.pdf.

 

Kinnard Jr., William N., Sue Ann Dickey, and Mary Beth Geckler. “Natural Gas Pipeline Impact on Residential Property Values: An Empirical Study of Two Market Areas.” International Right of Way Association. June/July 1994. https://www.irwaonline.org/eweb/upload/0604d.pdf

 

Macey, Gregg P, Ruth Breech, Mark Chernaik, Caroline Cox, Denny Larson, Deb Thomas, and David O Carpenter. “Air Concentrations of Volatile Compounds near Oil and Gas Production: A Community-Based Exploratory Study.” Environmental Health 13  (2014):  1-18. http://www.ehjournal.net/content/13/1/82#B21.

 

Penning, Trevor M., Patrick N. Breysse, Kathleen Gray, Marilyn Howarth, and Beizhan Yan. “Environmental Health Research Recommendations from the Inter-Environmental Health Sciences Core Center Working Group on Unconventional Natural Gas Drilling Operations.” Environmental Health Perspectives 122, no. 11 (July 18, 2014). http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4216169.

 

Perry, S.L. “Using Ethnography to Monitor the Community Health Implications of Onshore Unconventional Oil and Gas Developments: Examples from Pennsylvania’s Marcellus Shale.” New Solutions 23, no. 1 (2013):  33-53. doi: 10.2190/NS.23.1.d.

 

Radow, Elizabeth N. “Homeowners and Gas Drilling Leases: Boon or Bust?” New York State Bar Association Journal 83, no. 9 (November/December 2011). Reprinted at http://cce.cornell.edu/EnergyClimateChange/NaturalGasDev/Documents/PDFs/NYSBA%20Journal%20nov-dec2011.pdf

 

Rawlins, Rachel. “Planning for Fracking on the Barnett Shale: Urban Air Pollution, Health Based Regulation, and the Role of Local Governments.” Virginia Environmental Law Journal 31 (2013): 226-306. http://lib.law.virginia.edu/lawjournals/sites/lawjournals/files/2.%20Rawlins%20-%20Barnett%20Shale.pdf.

 

Schmidt, Charles W. “Blind Rush? Shale Gas Boom Proceeds Amid Human Health Questions.” Environmental Health Perspectives 119, no.8 (August 2011). http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3237379

 

Shonkoff, Seth, Jake Hays, and Madelon L. Finkel. “Environmental Public Health Dimensions of Shale and Tight Gas Development.” Environmental Health Perspectives 122, no. 8 (August 2014). http://ehp.niehs.nih.gov/1307866/.

 

Walsh III, F. Rall and Mark D. Zoback. “Oklahoma’s Recent Earthquakes and Saltwater Disposal.” Science Advances 1, no. 5 (June 18, 2015), http://advances.sciencemag.org/content/1/5/e1500195

 

Webb, Ellen, Sheila Bushkin-Bedient, Amanda Cheng, Christopher D. Kassotis, Victoria Balise, and Susan C. Nagel. “Developmental and Reproductive Effects of Chemicals Associated with Unconventional Oil and Natural Gas Operations.” Reviews on Environmental Health 29, no. 4 (December 5, 2014). http://wyofile.com/wp-content/uploads/2014/12/fracking-study_ew-1.pdf.

 

Weingarten, M., S. Ge, J.W. Godt, B.A. Bekins, and J.L. Rubinstein. “High-Rate Injection Is Associated with the Increase in U.S. Mid-Continent Seismicity,” Science 348, no. 6241 (June 19, 2015). https://profile.usgs.gov/myscience/upload_folder/ci2015Jun1814143055600Weingarten_etal.pdf.

 

Wernham, Aaron. “Inupiat Health and Proposed Alaskan Oil Development:  Results of the First Integrated Health Impact Assessment/ Environmental Impact Statement for Proposed Oil Development on Alaska’s North Slope.” EcoHealth 4 (2007):  500-513.

 

Zielinska, B., D. Campbell, V. Samburova. “Impact of Emissions from Natural Gas Production Facilities on Ambient Air Quality in the Barnett Shale Area: A Pilot Study.” Journal of the Air Waste Management Association 64 (December 2014): 1369-1383,http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/25562933.

News Media:

“Agency Sends Final Fracking Rule to White House for Review.” Energywire, September 2014.

 

Associated Press. “Marcellus Shale Gas Drillers Recycling More Waste.” The Times-Tribune (Scranton, PA),February 17, 2012. 

 

Baca, Marie C. “Forced Pooling: When Landowners Can’t Say No to Drilling.” ProPublica, May 18, 2011. http://www.propublica.org/article/forced-pooling-when-landowners-cant-say-no-to-drilling

 

Baca, Marie C. “State Laws Can Compel Landowners to Accept Gas and Oil Drilling.” Propublica, May 19, 2011. http://projects.propublica.org/tables/forced-pooling.

 

Cama, Timothy. “Maryland Bans Fracking.” The Hill, June 1, 2015.  http://thehill.com/policy/energy-environment/243625-maryland-bans-fracking.

 

Clawson, Doug. “Hydraulic Fracturing: New International Subcommittee to Develop Needed Standards.” Standardization News, November/December 2012. http://www.astm.org/sn/features/hydraulic-fracturing-nd12.html.

 

Davenport, Coral. “Judge Blocks Obama Administration Rules on Fracking.” The New York Times, September 30, 2015. 

 

Gleason, Rachel. “Astronomers Look to Protect Earth’s Dark Skies.” Midland Reporter Telegram. Updated May 8, 2014. http://www.mrt.com/top_stories/article_5f897a0e-d71d-11e3-ad5b-0019bb2963f4.html

 

Gold, Russell and Tom McGinty. “Energy Boom Puts Wells in America’s Backyards.” The Wall Street Journal, October 25, 2013. http://www.wsj.com/articles/SB10001424052702303672404579149432365326304

 

Granberg, Al. “What is Hydraulic Fracturing?Propublica. Accessed November 23, 2014. 

 

“The Great Plains Oil Rush.” National Public Radio, originally broadcast January 29, 2014. http://www.npr.org/series/268211390/the-great-plains-oil-rush

 

Gronwold, Nathaniel. “Entrepreneurs Turn to Bacteria to Fight Fracking Corrosion.” Energywire, July 3, 2014. 

 

Hirji, Zabra. “‘Frac Sand’ Mining Boom: Health Hazard Feared.” Inside Climate News, November 5, 2013. http://insideclimatenews.org/news/20131105/frac-sand-mining-boom-health-hazard-feared-lawmakers-aim-ease-regulation

 

Kaplan, Thomas. “Citing Health Risks, Cuomo Bans Fracking in New York State.” The New York Times, December 17, 2014. http://www.nytimes.com/2014/12/18/nyregion/cuomo-to-ban-fracking-in-new-york-state-citing-health-risks.html?_r=0.

 

Kiger, Patrick J. “Green Fracking? 5 Technologies for Cleaner Shale Energy.” National Geographic Daily News, March 19, 2014. http://news.nationalgeographic.com/news/energy/2014/03/140319-5-technologies-for-greener-fracking/

 

King, Pamela. “Industry Initiative Helps Communities Embrace Boom-Time Opportunities.” E&E News, May 21, 2014. 

 

King, Pamela. “Texas Groups Strategize to Get Students Ready for Oil and Gas Jobs.” E&E News, April 14, 2014.

 

King, Pamela. “Texas Towns Consider Deep Makeovers to Prepare for Inevitable Oil Field Bust.” E&E News, May 20, 2014. http://www.eenews.net/stories/1059999739

 

Lee, Mike. “In North Dakota’s Oil Patch, Wrecks Increase as Trucks Push onto Farm Roads.” E&E News, April 11, 2014. 

 

Lee, Mike. “Nuns and Other Landowners Watching as Pennsylvania Reschedules ‘Forced Pooling’ Case.” E&E News, July 23, 2014.  

 

Levitan, Dave. “Algae in Glass Cases Could Determine Fracking’s Toll.” Scientific American, March 6, 2014. http://www.scientificamerican.com/article/algae-in-glass-cases-could-determine-frackinge28099s-toll/

 

McAllister, Edward.Ohio Links Fracking to Earth Quakes, Announces Tougher Rules,” Reuters, April 11, 2014. 

 

McMahon, Jeff. “Pollution Fears Crush Home Prices near Fracking Wells.” Forbes, April 10, 2014. 

 

“New York’s Highest Court Says Towns Can Ban Fracking.” Energywire, June 2014. 

 

“Ohio Links Fracking to Earth Quakes, Announces Tougher Rules.” Reuters, April 2014. http://www.reuters.com/article/2014/04/11/us-ohio-fracking-earthquakes-idUSBREA3A1J620140411

 

Petersen, Laura. “Public Lands: Drilling Boom Brings ‘Light Pollution’ to Southwest’s Pristine Night Skies.” E&E News, March 12, 2014. http://www.eenews.net/stories/1059996009

 

Sadasivam, Naveena. “Boom in Unregulated Natural Gas Pipelines Posing New Risks.” Inside Climate News, September 26, 2013. 

 

Schneider, Andrew. “In Texas, Traffic Deaths Climb Amid Fracking Boom.” National Public Radio, October 12, 2014. http://www.npr.org/2014/10/02/352980756/in-texas-traffic-deaths-climb-amid-fracking-boom.

 

Smith, Grant. “U.S. Seen as Biggest Oil Producer After Overtaking Saudi Arabia.” Bloomberg News, July 4, 2014. http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2014-07-04/u-s-seen-as-biggest-oil-producer-after-overtaking-saudi.html

 

Soraghan, Mike. “Oklahoma Agency Gets $1.8M to Study Seismic Links to Drilling.” E&E News, July 16, 2014. 

 

Urbina, Ian. “Deadliest Danger Isn’t at the Rig but on the Road.” The New York Times, May 14, 2012.   

 

Vaidyanathan, Gayathri. “White House Announces Plan to Slash Industry’s Methane Emissions.” E&E News, January 14, 2015. 

 

Wingrove, John. “Alberta’s Rate of Syphilis Infection Still Rising.” The Globe and Mail, updated August 23, 2012. http://www.theglobeandmail.com/life/health-and-fitness/health/conditions/albertas-rate-of-syphilis-infection-still-rising/article572646/

 

Wheeler, Timothy M. “Maryland Fracking Rules Proposed, but Hogan Gets Final Say.” The Baltimore Sun, December 12, 2014. http://www.baltimoresun.com/features/green/blog/bal-maryland-fracking-rules-proposed-20141212-story.html.

 

Wren, Bill. “Talk at Ten Interview: Bill Wren.” Hosted by Rachel Osier Lindley, Marfa Public Radio: Windows Media Audio, originally broadcast May 24, 2012. http://marfapublicradio.org/blog/talk-at-ten/bill-wren/

Nongovernmental Organizations and Public Health Associations:

Alliance of Nurses for Healthy Environments.  “Assessment Tools & More.” Accessed November 21, 2014. http://envirn.org/pg/pages/view/79769/assessment-tools-amp-more

 

Alliance of Nurses for Healthy Environments. “Facts on Fracking: What Health Care Providers Need to Know. Accessed November 21, 2014. http://concernedhealthny.org/wp-content/uploads/2013/10/ANHE-Fact-on-Fracking-Providers.pdf

 

American Public Health Association. “What Is Public Health?” Accessed December 8, 2014. https://www.apha.org/what-is-public-health

 

Bonnet, Vera. “Shale Extraction and Public Health: A Resource Guide.” Shale and Public Health Committee: League of Women Voters of Pennsylvania, 2013. http://shale.palwv.org/wp-content/uploads/2013/12/846114-League-of-Women-Voters-Shale-Resource-Guide.pdf

 

The Breast Cancer Fund. “Environmental Epidemological Studies.” Accessed August 15, 2015. http://www.breastcancerfund.org/clear-science/research-methods/enviro-epidemiological.html.

 

Common Ground Alliance. Accessed October 15, 2015. http://www.commongroundalliance.com.

 

Consumer Fraud Reporting. “State Attorney General Contact List.” Updated April 16, 2015. http://consumerfraudreporting.org/stateattorneygenerallist.php.

 

Earthworks. “Oil and Gas at Your Door? A Landowner’s Guide to Oil and Gas Development. Durango, Colorado: Oil and Gas Accountability Project, 2005. http://www.earthworksaction.org/library/detail/oil_and_gas_at_your_door_2005_edition#.UxjPSj9dWSo.

 

Earthworks Action. “Hydrogen Sulfide.” Accessed October 17, 2015. http://www.earthworksaction.org/issues/detail/hydrogen_sulfide#.VZwpomAreFI.

 

Feyereisn, Wayne. “Potential Public Health Risks of Silica Sand Mining and Processing.” Slide show, available as a power point presentation through the Sand Point Times. Accessed December 7, 2014. 

 

Food and Water Watch. “The Social Costs of Fracking: A Pennsylvania Case Study.” September 24, 2013.http://www.foodandwaterwatch.org/reports/the-social-costs-of-fracking/

 

FracDallas. “Pipeline Explosions Since 2001.” Updated February 26, 2013. http://fracdallas.org/docs/pipelines.html.

 

FracTracker Alliance. Accessed October 16, 2015. http://www.fractracker.org/about-us/.

 

Freyman, Monica. “Hydraulic Fracturing & Water Stress: Water Demand by the Numbers.” Ceres. February 2014.  

 

Grand Valley Citizens’ Alliance. The Rifle, Silt, New Castle Community Development Plan:  A Collaborative Planning Document between the RSNC Defined Area Residents, Antero Resources Corp. and Galaxy Energy. January 1, 2006. http://www.oilandgasbmps.org/docs/CO68-RSNCCommunityDevelopmentPlan.pdf and http://www.oilandgasbmps.org/resources/casestudies/RSNC-CDP.php

 

International Dark-Sky Association. IDA Energy Brochure. 2008. http://www.darksky.org/assets/documents/ida_energy_brochure.pdf.

 

Liroff, Richard, Danielle Fugere, Lucia von Reusner, and Steven Heim. “Disclosing the Facts 2014:  Transparency and Risk in Hydraulic Fracturing.” A Collaborative Project of As You Sow, Boston Common Asset Management, LLC, Green Century Capital Management, Inc., and the Investor Environmental Health Network.  http://disclosingthefacts.org.

 

Look Before You Lease. Accessed September 27, 2015.  http://lookbeforeyoulease.org/about.

 

McFeeley, Matthew. “State Hydraulic Fracturing Disclosure Rules and Enforcement: A Comparison.” Natural Resources Defense Council. July 2012. http://www.nrdc.org/energy/files/Fracking-Disclosure-IB.pdf

 

National Association of County and City Health Officials. “Hydraulic Fracturing: What Local Health Departments Need to Know.” Issue Brief. Washington, DC:  November 2014. http://eweb.naccho.org/eweb/DynamicPage.aspx?WebCode=proddetailadd&ivd_qty=1&ivd_prc_prd_key=3a169831-6bc6-4605-a89f-a61b76a7c573&Action=Add&site=naccho&ObjectKeyFrom=1A83491A-9853-4C87-86A4-F7D95601C2E2&DoNotSave=yes&ParentObject=CentralizedOrderEntry&ParentDataObject=Invoice%20Detail

 

Neighbor Works America. Accessed October 16, 2015. http://nw.org/network/index.asp,

 

Noise Pollution Clearing House. Accessed October 16, 2015. http://www.nonoise.org/index.htm.

 

Noise Pollution Clearing House. “Noise Regulations and Ordinances of U.S. Cities, Counties, and Towns.” Accessed October 16, 2015. http://www.nonoise.org/lawlib/cities/cities.htm

 

Northern Plains Resource Council. “Good Neighbor Agreement.” Accessed October 15, 2015. https://www.northernplains.org/issues/good-neighbor-agreement.

 

Northern Plains Resource Council. Good Neighbor Agreement Between Stillwater Mining Company and Northern Plains Resource Council, Cottonwood Resource Council, and Stillwater Protective Association, originally signed May 8, 2000; amended November 11, 2009. https://www.northernplains.org/wp-content/uploads/2013/06/2009AmendedGNA.pdf

 

Northern Plains Resource Council. “Good Neighbor Agreement: A Unique Solution for Local Protection.” Accessed October 16, 2015. https://www.northernplains.org/wp-content/uploads/2013/06/GNA_Citizens_Guide.pdf

 

Northern Plains Resource Council. “10th Anniversary Good Neighbor Agreement Newsletter.” Accessed October 16, 2015. https://www.northernplains.org/wp-content/uploads/2013/06/2010GNAjoint-newsletter.pdf

 

Pipeline Safety Trust. Accessed October 16, 2015. http://pstrust.org.

 

Southwest Pennsylvania Environmental Health Project. “Air.” Accessed October 16, 2015. http://www.environmentalhealthproject.org/health/air

 

Southwest Pennsylvania Environmental Health Project. “Guideline Values for Community Noise in Specific Areas.” Accessed October 16, 2015. http://www.environmentalhealthproject.org/wp-content/uploads/2014/05/WHO-community-noise-table-adapted.5.15.14.pdf.

 

Southwest Pennsylvania Environmental Health Project. Noise-Light.”  Accessed October 16, 2015. http://www.environmentalhealthproject.org/health/noise-light

 

Southwest Pennsylvania Environmental Health Project. “Water.” Accessed October 16, 2015. http://www.environmentalhealthproject.org/health/water

 

Wisconsin League of Conservation Voters. “Frac Sand Mining.” Accessed October 16, 2015. http://conservationvoters.org/issues/frac-sand-mining

Policy and Research Institutions:

Christian-Smith, Juliet. “Improving Water Management through Groundwater Banking: Kern County and Rosedale-Rio Bravo Water Storage District. Pacific Institute. 2013. http://resources.pacinst.org/wp-content/uploads/sites/21/2013/02/groundwater_banking3.pdf.

 

Geological Society of America. “GSA Critical Issue: Hydraulic Fracturing.” Updated March  2015. http://www.geosociety.org/criticalissues/hydraulicFracturing/index.asp.

 

Headwaters Economics. “Fossil Fuel Extraction as a County Economic Development Strategy: Are Energy-focusing Counties Benefiting?September 2008. http://headwaterseconomics.org/pubs/energy/HeadwatersEconomics_EnergyFocusing.pdf

 

Headwaters Economics. “Impacts of Energy Development in Colorado. November 2008. http://headwaterseconomics.org/energy/western/colorado-mesa-garfield-counties and http://headwaterseconomics.org/pubs/energy/ImpactsofEnergyDevinCO_Digest.pdf.

 

Headwaters Economics. “Oil and Natural Gas Fiscal Best Practices: Lessons for State and Local Governments.” November 2012. http://headwaterseconomics.org/wphw/wp-content/uploads/Energy_Fiscal_Best_Practices.pdf.   

 

Muehlenbachs, Lucija, Elisheba Spiller, and Christopher Timmins. “The Housing Market Impacts of Shale Gas Development. Resources for the Future. December 2013. http://www.rff.org/RFF/Documents/RFF-DP-13-39.pdf

 

Municipal Research and Services Center. “Pipeline Safety.” Updated November 3, 2014. http://www.mrsc.org/subjects/pubsafe/pipesafety.aspx

 

Paleontological Research Institution. “Water: Into the Wells.” Marcellus Shale 7, November 2011. http://www.museumoftheearth.org/files/marcellus/Marcellus_issue7.pdf

 

Paleontological Research Institution. “Water: Out of the Wells.” Marcellus Shale 8, November 2011. http://www.museumoftheearth.org/files/marcellus/Marcellus_issue8.pdf

 

Pew Charitable Trusts. “Case Study:  Oil Development, North Slope of Alaska.” December 30, 2006. 

 

Pew Charitable Trusts. “The Health Impact Project.” Accessed October 16, 2015. http://www.pewtrusts.org/en/projects/health-impact-project

 

Resources for the Future. “Shale Gas Development Linked to Traffic Accidents in Pennsylvania.” March 2014. http://www.rff.org/RFF/Documents/RFF-Resources-185_Infographic.pdf.

 

Resources for the Future. “A Review of Shale Gas Regulations by State: Setback Restrictions from Buildings.” Updated May 22, 2013. http://www.rff.org/centers/energy_and_climate_economics/Pages/Shale_Maps.aspx

 

Richardson, Nathan, Madeline Gottlieb, Alan Krupnick, and Hannah Wiseman. “The State of State Shale Gas Regulation.” Resources for the Future. June 2013. http://www.rff.org/rff/documents/RFF-Rpt-StateofStateRegs_Report.pdf

 

Sperger, Courtney, Kristin Cook, and Kenneth Klemow. “Does Marcellus Shale Pose a Radioactivity Risk?” Institute for Energy and Environmental Research of Northeastern Pennsylvania. August 1, 2012. http://energy.wilkes.edu/pages/184.asp.

Appendix B: Working Group Member Bios

Dave Baker, Working Group Chair and RESOLVE Board Member

Dave Baker’s career has spanned 38 years in the mining industry. He recently retired after 32 years with Newmont Mining Corporation. He joined Newmont in 1980 as a geologist where in 1985, he moved to Newmont’s fledgling Environmental Department. He was elected Vice President, Environmental Affairs in 1991. Mr. Baker spent a significant amount of his career addressing the regulatory implications on mining operations with extensive experience in the permitting and development of major mining projects in the United States, Africa, Indonesia, Peru, Ghana, Australia, Canada and Uzbekistan. He has also been involved in financing major mining projects through the IFC, the United States Export/Import Bank and the European Bank for Reconstruction and Development, among others. He participated in the Global Mining Initiative and the Mining, Metals and Sustainable Development (MMSD) and the founding of the International Council on Mining and Metals (ICMM).

Mr. Baker served as Newmont’s first Chief Sustainability Officer, where he had broad responsibility for developing and implementing Newmont’s global strategy for sustainability during an era of increasing stakeholder focus and expectations on corporate transparency, substantive community engagement, and the broader issues around sustainability, value creation and shared value.

Mr. Baker received his Bachelor of Science degree in Earth Sciences – Geology from the University of Arizona and completed the Harvard Business School’s Advanced Management Program for International Managers in 1997.

Mr. Baker has been actively involved in the evolution of the mining industry’s environmental and social responsibility and sustainability philosophy and approach, including the Global Mining Initiative and others.

Stephen D’Esposito, President, RESOLVE

Stephen D’Esposito is President of RESOLVE. RESOLVE is an independent organization with an over thirty-year track record of success helping diverse interests engage in dialogue, collaborative decision-making and action. RESOLVE strengthens the capacity of others to act as collaborative leaders. The Solutions Network (www.solutions-network.org) is a RESOLVE initiative designed to catalyze, incubate and reward solutions to urgent environmental challenges. 

From 1997 through September 2008, Steve was President and CEO of EARTHWORKS, a nonprofit organization dedicated to protecting communities and the environment from the adverse impacts of mineral and energy development while promoting sustainable solutions. Steve built EARTHWORKS into the leading, independent NGO on mining, oil and gas issues, enhancing its reputation for providing policy and technical support to community groups, expanding to address international issues, strengthening its policy and science capacity, and launching new initiatives to engage directly with leading companies in the sector. 

From 1993 through 1995, Steve was Deputy Director and then head of the Executive Committee of Greenpeace International, based in Amsterdam, the Netherlands, where he helped strengthen a number of national offices and programs and worked to integrate corporate engagement strategies into advocacy campaigns. During his tenure at Greenpeace International, Steve was a key decision-maker on the Brent Spar campaign, which many think led to a shift in corporate strategy and response to environmental campaigns as well as lessons-learned for NGOs.

Steve received a bachelor’s degree in political science from Tulane University in New Orleans in 1982. He currently serves on an advisory council to the World Economic Forum; the board of Center for Science in Public Participation; the steering committee for the Responsible Mineral Development Initiative (of the World Economic Forum); the board of Resource Media; the steering committee for the Responsible Minerals Sector Initiative at Simon Fraser University; and the Advisory Panel, Kinross Professorship and Chair, Department of Mining Engineering, Queens University, Kingston.

David Dyjack, Executive Director, National Environmental Health Association

David T. Dyjack, Dr.PH, CIH, is Executive Director of the National Environmental Health Association, the largest professional association in the world dedicated to the practice of environmental health, a position he recently accepted. Prior to this, he was the Associate Executive Director for Programs at the National Association of County and City Health Officials (NACCHO) where he led the organization’s grant and contract portfolio and 75 health professionals in support of the nation’s 2800 local health departments.  In this role he supervised projects in emergency preparedness and response, public health informatics, infectious disease, workforce development, governmental infrastructure, environmental health, maternal and child health, health equity, and chronic disease.

Throughout a 30-year career he has led workforce capacity building efforts in excess of 40 states and 60 countries.  He has been Principal Investigator for a CDC-funded Center for Public Health Preparedness, where he led efforts to enhance the knowledge, skills, and abilities of local, tribal, state and ministerial governmental public health workforce throughout the Western United States and Pacific Rim, with emphasis on environmental health. Dyjack created an environmental health emergency preparedness training program in partnership with the California Conference of Directors of Environmental Health, has been an instructor for CDC’s Environmental Health Training in Emergency Response (EHTER), and been instrumental in community resilience research bridging at-risk communities and governmental environmental health.

Additionally, he has provided management and leadership in varied public health activities since the mid-1980s. These efforts include work supported by the National Institutes of Health, the U.S. Health Resources and Services Administration, the U.S. Centers for Disease Control & Prevention, the U.S. Department of Labor, the U.S. Department of Defense, the U.S. Agency for International Development, the International Labor Organization (ILO), and the California Department of Health Services. He earned a doctorate in public health from the University of Michigan, an MSPH from the University of Utah, and is a board certified industrial hygienist (CIH).

Aaron Wernham, President and CEO, Montana Healthcare Foundation

Aaron Wernham, MD, MS, is the first President and CEO of the Montana Healthcare Foundation, which makes grants to improve the health and wellbeing of all Montanans largely by strengthening public health services and increasing the quality and accessibility of healthcare services across the state. Most recently, Dr. Wernham founded and directed the Health Impact Project, a collaboration of the Robert Wood Johnson Foundation and The Pew Charitable Trusts, established to promote and support the use of Health Impact Assessment (HIA) in the United States.

Dr. Wernham was a member of the National Research Council’s Committee on HIA, led multiple HIAs and HIA trainings, and collaborated with and advised numerous state and federal agencies on HIA. Dr. Wernham also served as a senior policy analyst with the Alaska Native Tribal Health Consortium, where he headed a joint state-tribal-federal working group that developed HIA guidance for federal and state environmental regulatory and permitting efforts.

Dr. Wernham received his medical degree from the University of California, San Francisco and his master’s degree in health and medical sciences from the University of California, Berkeley. He is board certified in family medicine, and served as clinical faculty in a University of California, Davis family practice residency program.

Shell Oil Company

Shell staff also participated on the Working Group and provided input and feedback on the guidebook.

Appendix C: Overview of the U.S. Legal and Regulatory Framework for Shale Development

Legal and regulatory issues are in flux for this rapidly expanding and evolving industry, with many unsettled questions pertaining to environmental protection, technical applications, nuisance laws, the role of local governments, zoning, split estates, forced pooling, and landowner rights. In September 2014, the Congressional Research Service examined some of the legal issues related to hydraulic fracturing and found both gaps and uncertainties in policy that are, in some instances, being addressed through litigation. 1 Below is an overview of current policy related to some of the key issues, as of mid-2015.

U.S. Federal Legislation & Regulation

The United States Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) has responsibility for most of the key federal laws relevant to shale development, including the Clean Air Act (CAA), the Clean Water Act (CWA), and the Safe Drinking Water Act (SDWA). Several other federal laws also apply to shale development, including the Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation, and Liability Act (CERCLA or Superfund), which authorizes the EPA to respond to releases or potential releases of hazardous substances that threaten human health and the environment; the Resource Conservation and Recovery Act (RCRA), which regulates the generation, transport, treatment, storage, and disposal of hazardous wastes; and the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA), which requires federal agencies to integrate environmental impact statements (EIS) and recommendations for mitigation into their project planning. Oil and gas development on federally owned lands is managed by the U.S. Department of the Interior’s Bureau of Land Management (BLM) and the U.S. Forest Service (USFS), an agency within the U.S. Department of Agriculture. For information on pipeline regulation, see Appendix E.

Notes:

  1. Adam Vann, Brandon J. Murrill, and Mary Tiemann, Hydraulic Fracturing:  Selected Legal Issues, Congressional Research Service Report (September 26, 2014), https://www.fas.org/sgp/crs/misc/R43152.pdf.

Appendix C: Overview of the U.S. Legal and Regulatory Framework for Shale Gas Development

U.S. Federal Legislation & Regulation

AIR QUALITY

In 2012, the EPA issued enhanced regulations under the CAA, requiring that natural gas emissions from new hydraulically fractured and re-stimulated shale gas wells be flared (burned), as opposed to vented, thus reducing the level of toxic emissions when the well is prepared for production. Beginning in January 2015, 95 percent of all volatile organic compounds (VOCs) emitted during the well completion stage must be captured through a process known as green completion, whereby commercially useful gas and liquid hydrocarbons are separated from flowback in a closed-system technology. 1

In August 2015, the EPA issued proposed rules to reduce methane emissions under the CAA, with the goal of reducing emissions by 40 to 45 percent below 2012 levels by 2025. 2 Building on the 2012 standards for natural gas wells, the proposed  rules will require reductions of  methane emissions from shale oil wells and more downstream (associated with natural gas transmission) equipment and infrastructure. The proposed rules require operators to locate and plug leaks from equipment and infrastructure, including pneumatic pumps, pneumatic controllers, and compressor stations, which can be a significant source of emissions. 3 Operators of shale oil wells will be required to implement green completions, which capture both VOCs and methane. These rules will apply only to sources newly constructed or modified after the date of proposed rule publication in the Federal Register (September 18, 2015). In addition, the agency offers guidelines for states to reduce VOC emissions from existing oil and gas sources in areas with smog problems. The proposed rules have been issued with a 60-day comment period, and the agency intends to have the final rules in place in 2016.

Notes:

  1. U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA), “EPA’s Air Rules for the Oil and Natural Gas Industry: Summary of Key Changes to the New Source Performance Standards,” accessed November 21, 2014, http://www.epa.gov/airquality/oilandgas/pdfs/20120417changes.pdf
  2. U.S. EPA, “Proposed Climate, Air Quality and Permitting Rules for the Oil and Natural Gas Industry: Fact Sheet,” 1, http://www3.epa.gov/airquality/oilandgas/pdfs/og_fs_081815.pdf.
  3. U.S. EPA, “Proposed Climate, Air Quality and Permitting Rules for the Oil and Natural Gas Industry: Fact Sheet,” 1.

Appendix C: Overview of the U.S. Legal and Regulatory Framework for Shale Gas Development

U.S. Federal Legislation & Regulation

WATER QUALITY

At the request of Congress, the EPA has been studying the potential impact of shale development operations on drinking water resources. The agency released a draft assessment summarizing existing science and new EPA research in June 2015. 1 The draft is currently undergoing review by EPA’s Science Advisory Board. Once finalized, it is anticipated to serve as a resource for the protection of drinking water resources. 2

Safe Drinking Water Act

The EPA protects underground sources of drinking water (USDW) through its regulatory authority under the SDWA. The Underground Injection Control (UIC) Program is the principal means of protecting USDWs, which requires permits for the use of underground injection as a means of waste disposal. States that have demonstrated an ability to meet EPA’s requirements for enforcement of the UIC program have been granted primary enforcement authority, called primacy. These states have established regulations for the protection of USDWs for Class II injection wells, including on injection pressure and monitoring, well testing, and reporting. In states that have not received primacy, the EPA directly implements the regulations.

There are six categories (or classes) of UIC injection wells, depending on the kind of fluid and depth at which the fluid is injected. The oil and gas industry uses Class II injection wells to 1) permanently dispose of wastewater; 2) reinject it at the site of a production well in order to improve the recovery of the resource; and 3) to store hydrocarbons beneath the surface to be pumped out later for processing and use. As of September 2013, the Ground Water Protection Council estimated that 31 states host approximately 168,000 Class II injection wells. 3

Prior to well construction, the site is evaluated to ensure that the injected fluids will be appropriately isolated from drinking water sources and that construction and operation procedures will be protective of USDWs. Well construction techniques use layers of steel casing and cement to prevent any subsurface fluid migration. Once constructed, the wells are tested prior to injection. After the wells enter into operation, they are monitored for injection pressures and volumes to ensure proper operation and to allow for the identification of any problems. Wells must also be tested at least once every five years to check the performance of the well and the subsurface conditions. When operations cease, wells must be closed in a manner that protects USDWs and are typically sealed with a series of cement plugs.

Is hydraulic fracturing considered underground injection?

Some stakeholders have raised the question of whether hydraulic fracturing constitutes underground injection and should be regulated under the UIC program. 4 In response to such questions, Congress declared in the Energy Policy Act of 2005 that the injection of hydraulic fracturing fluids for oil and gas development activities (except those containing diesel fuel) is not considered underground injection and is therefore excluded from regulation under the SDWA. 5 Following on this decision, in May 2012 the EPA issued draft guidance indicating that when operators use hydraulic fracturing fluids containing diesel fuel, they are required to obtain a permit under the UIC program. 6 

Clean Water Act

The discharge of oil and gas wastewaters into the surface waters of the United States is regulated by the EPA under the CWA. The CWA controls industrial discharges directly to surface waters (e.g., through stormwater systems) and industry’s indirect discharges to publicly owned treatment works (POTWs). Any discharges to surface waters must be below the limits set under the CWA National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES). NPDES may authorize a permit that allows discharging of chemicals into U.S. waters, provided that they are below EPA standard limits. 7 Permitting generally occurs at the federal level; however, NPDES has authorized some states to issue permits directly.  

Waste Disposal

As with other oil and gas wastes, shale development wastes are classified as “special waste” and are therefore exempt from hazardous waste regulations under Subtitle C of the Resource Conservation and Recovery Act (RCRA). 8While exempt from RCRA Subtitle C pertaining to hazardous wastes, wastes from shale development are still subject to other federal regulations (e.g., CWA, SDWA), RCRA Subtitle D solid waste regulations, and state regulations. 9 If hazardous substances from shale development contaminate a site and pose a threat to public health or the environment, operators can potentially be liable under CERCLA for natural resource damages, cleanup costs, and the cost of public health studies. 10

Shale Development on Federal and Tribal Lands

In March 2015, the BLM issued new standards for shale development on federal and tribal lands. The BLM controls 700 million acres of federal subsurface minerals and is the regulatory agency for an additional 56 million acres of tribal subsurface minerals. 11 To date, there are over 100,000 oil and gas wells on federal lands, with 90% of the wells currently being drilled using hydraulic fracturing techniques. 12 The new rule includes new requirements for ensuring well integrity, the disclosure of the chemicals used in hydraulic fracturing, higher standards for wastewater storage, and a requirement that operators provide additional information on preexisting wells, with the goal of reducing the potential for cross-well contamination. In September 2015, however, a federal judge issued an injunction blocking the implementation of the new regulations until an industry challenge to the regulations can be heard in court later in the year. 13

Notes:

  1. U.S. EPA Office of Research and Development, Assessment of the Potential Impacts of Hydraulic Fracturing for Oil and Gas on Drinking Water Resources:  Executive Summary (External Review Draft) (Washington, DC:  June 2015).
  2. U.S. EPA, “Questions and Answers about EPA’s Hydraulic Fracturing Study” last updated October 8, 2015.
  3. Ground Water Protection Council (GWPC), “Injection Wells:  An Introduction to Their Use, Operation, & Regulation” (September 1. 2013), 13.
  4. GWPC, “Injection Wells,” 28.
  5. U.S. EPA, “Regulation of Hydraulic Fracturing under the Safe Drinking Water Act,” last updated February 11, 2014.
  6. U.S. EPA, “Fact Sheet: Underground Injection Control (UIC) Program Permitting Guidance for Oil and Gas Hydraulic Fracturing Activities Using Diesel Fuels, UIC Program Guidance #84 – Draft” (May 2012).
  7. U.S. EPA, “Natural Gas Drilling in the Marcellus Shale:  NPDES Program Frequently Asked Questions,” attachment to memorandum from James Hanlon, Director of EPA’s Office of Wastewater Management to the EPA Regions titled, “Natural Gas Drilling in the Marcellus Shale under the NPDES Program” (March 16, 2011): 6.
  8. U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, “Crude Oil and Natural Gas Waste,” last updated 4/7/14.
  9. U.S. EPA, “Exemption of Oil and Gas Exploration and Production Wastes from Federal Hazardous Waste Regulations,” 5, 20.
  10. Adam Vann, Brandon J. Murrill, and Mary Tiemann, Hydraulic Fracturing. 
  11. U.S. Department of the Interior Bureau of Land Management (BLM), “Interior Department Releases Final Rule to Support Safe, Responsible Hydraulic Fracturing Activities on Public and Tribal Lands” (March 20, 2015). 
  12. BLM, “Interior Department Releases Final Rule.”
  13. Coral Davenport, “Judge Blocks Obama Administration Rules on Fracking,” The New York Times (September 30, 2015).

APPENDIX C: OVERVIEW OF THE U.S. LEGAL AND REGULATORY FRAMEWORK FOR SHALE GAS DEVELOPMENT

Tribal Governments

Native American lands are often held in trust by the federal government, and therefore potential energy development on or near tribal lands involves coordination and negotiation with both the tribal government and relevant federal government agencies, including the Bureau of Indian Affairs. There can also be unique laws and regulations pertaining to energy development on tribal lands.

State Legislation & Regulation

States regulate shale gas development and production on their territory and are often the primary administrators of relevant federal laws. They regulate well permitting, potential environmental impacts, and certain pipelines through their state public service commissions (see Appendix E). As is the case federally, many states have been updating legislation, with more than 100 bills passed in 19 states between 2010 and 2013. 1  State legislatures are particularly focused on severance taxes, impact fees, well spacing, well pad setbacks, waste treatment and disposal, and disclosure of the chemicals used in hydraulic fracturing.

A Resources for the Future study of state regulations found a significant amount of divergence in the ways that states are regulating shale development. 2 In a 2014 review of state oil and gas regulations relevant to groundwater protection, the Ground Water Protection Council (GWPC) noted that states have been revising their regulations since its initial 2009 review. 3 The GWPC identified some trends in new regulations, including increased requirements for disclosure of hydraulic fracturing fluid ingredients, increased mechanical integrity testing, and improved requirements for wastewater disposal pits and liners.

While many states have been updating their oil and gas regulations in response to shale development, some states have declared moratoria while policy reviews are underway. In December 2014, after the release of a seven-year review of the potential environmental and health impacts of shale development in New York, the governor instituted a ban on shale development in the state. 4 In June 2015, Maryland established a two-year moratorium on shale development while the state writes appropriate regulations. 5

Disclosure

In a February 2014 report, the U.S. Department of Energy recommended enhancements to the largely voluntary FracFocus database that tracks materials used in shale development. The recommended changes would include mandatory “full disclosure of all known constituents added to fracturing fluid” as well as the possible inclusion of area well water data pre-stimulation and post-production. 6According the GWPC review cited above, chemical disclosure has recently been a common focus of state rulemaking, with almost every major oil-and-gas producing state considering the issue. 7

Local Governments

Local county and municipal governments often play a regulatory role in or near populated areas, where they may manage issues such as noise levels, traffic flow, and setbacks from residences. The primary tool for local governments to control oil and gas development in their area is through zoning laws and other land use regulations. With the growth of shale development, some local residents and communities have expressed concerns about potential health, environmental, and property value impacts and have attempted to impose increased regulations on shale development activities.

In some of these cases, local governments’ efforts to regulate the industry and land use have come into conflict with the state’s authority to manage the development of its natural resources, raising the question of when states can overrule (or preempt) local land use and zoning authority. Some of these cases are playing out in the state courts. To date, the state courts have tended to uphold local laws when they pertain to zoning and land use, as a New York court concluded when two municipalities imposed zoning restrictions on the oil and gas industry within their boundaries. 8 When local laws have attempted to regulate oil and gas procedures and operations, however, the courts have determined that the state’s authority preempts local laws. For example, when the city of Longmont, Colorado, imposed a ban on hydraulic fracturing, a Colorado district court ruled that the ban interfered with the state’s regulatory authority to permit hydraulic fracturing. 9

Selected Resources

Overview

  • Ground Water Protection Council and ALL Consulting, “Modern Shale Gas Development in the United States:  A Primer,” prepared for the U.S. Department of Energy and the National Energy Technology Laboratory (April 2009). This 2009 primer on shale gas development in the United States includes an overview of the applicable federal, state, and local regulatory environments on pages 25-42. In 2013, the National Energy Technology Laboratory issued an update to this primer, “Modern Shale Gas Development in the United States: An Update,” to address evolving concerns and regulations. The regulatory framework is covered on pages 55-57.
  • Adam Vann, Brandon J. Murrill, and Mary Tiemann, “Hydraulic Fracturing:  Selected Legal Issues,” Congressional Research Service Report (September 26, 2014). Report by the Congressional Research Services gives an overview of the legal issues pertaining to hydraulic fracturing, including applicable federal laws such as the SDWA, the CAA, and RCRA; the issue of disclosure of hydraulic fracturing fluid ingredients; state preemption of local laws, state tort law, and legislation before the 113th Congress.

Tracking Legislation & Regulation

As indicated above, the legal and regulatory framework for shale development is continually evolving. There are several organizations tracking these developments that can serve as resources for legal and regulatory information on oil and gas development, as well as shale development specifically:

  • FracFocus, the chemical disclosure registry, has a database of oil and natural gas regulations by state.
  • Fracking Insider is an environmental law and energy blog.
  • The National Conference of State Legislatures (NCSL) has a guidebook for state lawmakers, “Natural Gas and Hydraulic Fracturing: A Policymaker’s Guide” (June 2012). NCSL also has a webpage on the topic of compulsory or forced pooling, “Compulsory Pooling Laws:  Protecting the Conflicting Rights of Neighboring Landowners.”  It describes forced pooling, gives definitions of relevant terms, and describes the different state approaches to compulsory pooling. It also has a map and table of state compulsory pooling laws.
  • Resources for the Future, an independent nonprofit research organization, conducted a review of shale gas regulations in 31 states with current or potential shale development operations. There is a report, comparative tables, and maps on the website.
  • The University of Colorado Law School’s Intermountain Oil and Gas BMP website hosts several relevant resources:

State Assistance and Guidance

The following are organizations that provide assistance and guidance to states in developing oil and gas policy:

  • The Interstate Oil and Gas Compact Commission is an organization representing the governors of member states on the responsible development of oil and gas resources.
  • The State Review of Oil & Natural Gas Environmental Regulations, or STRONGER, is “a non-profit, multi-stakeholder organization whose purpose is to assist states in documenting the environmental regulations associated with the exploration, development and production of crude oil and natural gas.” STRONGER’s guidelines for state oil and gas exploration and production waste regulatory programs can be found here. The guidelines also contain a section relating to hydraulic fracturing.

Notes:

  1. National Conference of State Legislatures website, accessed November 22, 2014, http://www.ncsl.org.
  2. Nathan Richardson, Madeline Gottlieb, Alan Krupnick, and Hannah Wiseman, The State of State Shale Gas Regulation, Resources for the Future, June 2013.
  3. GWPC, State Oil & Gas Regulations Designed to Protect Water Resources (2014), 6.
  4. Thomas Kaplan, “Citing Health Risks, Cuomo Bans Fracking in New York State,” The New York Times (December 17, 2014).
  5. Timothy Cama, “Maryland Bans Fracking,” The Hill (June 1, 2015).
  6. U.S. Department of Energy, Secretary of Energy Advisory Board Task Force Report on FracFocus 2.0 (March 28, 2014)
  7. GWPC, State Oil & Gas Regulations Designed to Protect Water Resources (2014), 8.
  8. Adam Vann, Brandon J. Murrill, and Mary Tiemann, Hydraulic Fracturing:  Selected Legal Issues, 27.
  9. Adam Vann, Brandon J. Murrill, and Mary Tiemann, Hydraulic Fracturing:  Selected Legal Issues, 28-9.

Appendix D: Voluntary Principles and Standards for Shale Gas Development Operations

International

Over the last decade, shale gas exploration and production have increased dramatically in the United States. 1 International interest is also growing, especially in China and parts of Eastern Europe, although every continent on earth has potential shale gas basins that could be exploited in coming years (see Figure 7 below). In fact, over the next two decades, shale gas production worldwide is projected to increase threefold. 2

On an international level, principles of responsible natural resource development have increasingly been incorporated into voluntary standards and guidance documents. The International Finance Corporation (IFC) of the World Bank, for example, has established a set of Environmental and Social Performance Standards, which are part of the organization’s approach to risk management with regard to its investments and represents the standards that its clients must meet throughout an IFC-funded project. Performance Standard #4 Community Health, Safety, and Security is particularly relevant for community health issues. Guidance notes on the implementation of Performance Standard #4 are also available. 

With regard to the technologies used in hydraulic fracturing, the American Society for Testing and Materials (now ASTM International), has set out to develop an internationally-applicable set of best practices and standards. The ASTM Subcommittee D18.26 on Hydraulic Fracturing is composed of representatives of industry, environmental groups, engineers, federal regulators, state and local government, permitting bodies, and academics who are working together to develop standards and principles that will apply specifically to the technology of hydraulic fracturing. The subcommittee’s proposed and active standards can be found here.

Notes:

  1. U.S. Department of Energy, Modern Shale Gas Development in the United States: An Update (National Energy Technology Laboratory: September 2013), Shale Gas Geographical Distribution pp. 19-46.
  2. ATSM International.  “Subcommittee D-18 on Hydraulic Fracturing,” accessed November 21, 2014. 

Appendix D: Voluntary Principles and Standards for Shale Gas Development Operations

Figure 7. Map of basins with assessed shale oil and gas formations, as of May 2013

Appendix D: Voluntary Principles and Standards for Shale Development Operations

United States

In the United States, where shale gas development has principally been taking place to date, some organizations have begun to offer guidance on best practices for the use of hydraulic fracturing and horizontal drilling:

  • The State Review of Oil & Natural Gas Environmental Regulations (STRONGER) is “a non-profit, multi-stakeholder organization whose purpose is to assist states in documenting the environmental regulations associated with the exploration, development and production of crude oil and natural gas.”
  • The Center for Sustainable Shale Development, a collaboration among industry, environmental, and philanthropic organizations, aims to develop innovative best practices for sustainable shale development through the establishment of performance standards and a certification process that evaluates whether companies achieve those standards.

Industry Principles and Standards

The oil & gas industry has long established principles and guidance for best practices with regard to community health, recognizing that good stakeholder engagement can help to reduce project risks. The International Association of Oil & Gas Producers (OGP)  and the International Petroleum Industry Environmental Conservation Association (IPIECA), a global oil and gas industry association for environmental and social issues, have produced several relevant guidance documents, including:

The American Petroleum Institute (API), an industry association, has produced several industry guidance documents and recommended practices on shale development operations:

  • Hydraulic Fracturing Operations – Well Construction and Integrity Guidelines,” API Guidance Document HF1, First Edition (October 2009)
  • “Hydraulic Fracturing – Well Integrity and Fracture Containment” (ANSI/API Recommended Practice 100-1)
  • “Managing Environmental Aspects Associated with Exploration and Production Operations Including Hydraulic Fracturing” (ANSI/API Recommended Practice 100-2)

The recommended practice documents 100-1 and 100-2 are newly released documents that are available for free public viewing (or for sale to download) on the API website. To access, register, select “Browse read-only documents now,” then select “Exploration and Production,” and scroll to recommended practices 100-1 and 100-2. 

Other industry associations that have developed recommendations for best practices on shale gas development include:

Many individual operators have elaborated their own sets of principles with regard to shale development. Some examples can be found here:

Appendix E: Pipelines—Transporting Shale Gas to Markets

A complex distribution system for natural gas has been in place for decades in the United States, which – until recently – principally carried gas from the Southwest to other regions of the country. With the advent of shale gas development, additional distribution infrastructure is needed. In response, pipeline companies are hurrying to meet demand, with plans for pipeline construction that have the potential to impact many more communities and property owners than do the shale gas wells themselves. Projections suggest that, through 2035, the country’s natural gas pipeline infrastructure will triple. 1

As the development of this network will have health and other impacts around the country, this section offers an overview of the pipeline system, how it is regulated, potential community health effects, and management options. 

Pipeline under construction in WV. By Samantha Malone 2013.

The Pipeline Network – What Is It?

Gas produced at the wellhead is transported to markets through a series of pipelines:

  • flowlines carry raw gas and fluids at or near the wellhead and within a production facility
  • gathering lines bring the gas from a production facility to a central collection point
  • transmission lines are the long-distance haulers, transporting processed gas to and from storage facilities and compressor stations, and to distribution lines
  • distribution lines, or mains, carry gas under reduced pressure from large high-pressure transmission lines to low-pressure customer service lines

The pipeline network is illustrated in Figure 8 below.

Notes:

  1. Interstate Natural Gas Association of America (INGAA) Foundation, “North American Midstream Infrastructure through 2035: Capitalizing on Our Energy Abundance,” prepared by ICF International: March 18, 2014.

Appendix E: Pipelines—Transporting Shale Gas to Markets

Figure 8. Illustration of natural gas pipeline systems

Source:  PHMSA, “Pipeline Safety Awareness.”

Appendix E: Pipelines—Transporting Shale Gas to Markets

Who Oversees and Regulates Pipelines?

Federal agencies:  The Federal Energy Regulatory Commission (FERC) approves the construction, siting, and operation of interstate transmission lines. It also manages abandonment of interstate pipelines. The Office of Pipeline Safety (OPS), which is part of the Pipeline and Hazardous Materials Safety Administration (PHMSA), regulates interstate transmission lines, intrastate pipelines for a few states, gathering lines in populated areas, and some distribution lines that deliver gas to customers. Their primary responsibility is assuring pipeline integrity from a public safety and environmental perspective. Emergency response is also one of their mandates. The National Transportation Safety Board (NTSB), the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA), and the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS) also play regulatory roles related to their specific mandates.

Tribal governments:  For approval of interstate pipelines traversing tribal lands, FERC must coordinate with the federal Bureau of Indian Affairs (BIA), and the federal agencies must engage in government-to-government consultation with tribal authorities during the pipeline planning and review process. Intrastate pipelines that cross tribal lands must be approved by the federal government (regarding environmental and cultural impacts) and by the Bureau of Indian Affairs. Pipeline safety and emergency management are also the responsibility of tribal governments, with training and technical support from OPS. As more pipeline infrastructure is needed, there is an increasing need for improved coordination between the federal government, states, and tribal authorities. 1

State agencies:  States regulate flowlines at production facilities (i.e., well pads, processing plants, compressor stations, storage facilities) and gathering lines in rural areas. This is generally done through the permitting process. Most states regulate intrastate pipelines with OPS guidance, often to a more stringent standard than required by the federal government. 2 Many states also regulate distribution lines with OPS guidance.

Regulatory capacity:  The pipeline network is currently managed by multiple state and federal agencies, yet these entities do not always have the resources to provide for robust management. 3 For example, PHMSA has funding for only 137 inspectors to inspect the 2.5 million miles of natural gas pipelines operated by about 3,000 companies throughout the country. 4

Gathering lines – 90% of which are rural and are therefore regulated by states – have recently emerged as a cause for concern. Newly-installed lines for servicing shale gas are usually larger and carry gas at higher pressure than traditional gathering lines, presenting the possibility of more serious incidents. State officials are often not aware of the location of many of these rural gathering lines, particularly older pipelines; and when an incident occurs, operators are often not required to report it. 5

Notes:

  1. U.S. Department of Energy, “Stakeholder Meeting on State, Local, and Tribal Issues” (memo, Washington, DC, August 6, 2014), http://energy.gov/sites/prod/files/2014/08/f18/20140808%20State-Local-Tribal%20Memo%20Final.pdf.
  2. Interstate Natural Gas Association of America (INGAA), “How Are Natural Gas Transmission Pipelines Regulated?” accessed November 20, 2014, http://www.ingaa.org/cms/4923.aspx
  3. The National Petroleum Council, “Natural Gas Pipelines: Challenges,” 2011, http://www.npc.org/prudent_development-topic_papers/2-19_gas_pipeline_challenges_paper.pdf
  4. FracDallas, “Pipeline Explosions Since 2001,” updated February 26, 2013,  http://fracdallas.org/docs/pipelines.html
  5. Novena Sadasivam, “Boom in Unregulated Natural Gas Pipelines Posing New Risks,” Inside Climate News (September 26, 2013), http://insideclimatenews.org/news/20130926/boom-unregulated-natural-gas-pipelines-posing-new-risks

Appendix E: Pipelines—Transporting Shale Gas to Markets

What health considerations are there?

Given that a certain amount of methane leakage occurs throughout the pipeline network, health impacts for people living, working, and recreating near pipelines need to be considered.  

Appendix E: Pipelines—Transporting Shale Gas to Markets

What health considerations are there?

Air Quality

For health impacts of natural gas emissions, refer to the Air Quality section under Stage 3.

Appendix E: Pipelines—Transporting Shale Gas to Markets

What health considerations are there?

SAFETY

Pipelines carry hazardous materials and therefore entail safety risks. Typically, natural gas pipeline accidents that cause explosions and/or fires are most frequently due to excavation and pipeline corrosion or defects. 1 According to PHMSA, from 2004 to 2013, the ten-year incident average for natural gas pipelines was as follows: 117 incidents on transmission lines; 16 on gathering lines (rural gathering lines do not require incident reporting) 2; and 137 on distribution lines. 3

Notes:

  1. U.S. Department of Transportation, “The State of the National Pipeline Infrastructure” (2011).
  2. Pipeline and Hazardous Materials Safety Administration (PHMSA), “Pipeline Incidents by System Type,” data as of 11/21/14.
  3. Incidents that are recorded by OPS involve a release of gas that results in death or in-patient hospitalization, and/or property damage of $50,000 or more. (PHMSA, “Reporting Criteria as of 2011,” March 2011.)

Appendix E: Pipelines—Transporting Shale Gas to Markets

What health considerations are there?

Quality of Life – Economic Impacts

Eminent domain is a legal process by which a state, municipality, private person, or corporation can acquire rights to private property for public use. Allowed under the Fifth Amendment of the Constitution of the United States and referenced in most state constitutions, eminent domain is specifically granted for interstate natural gas transmission pipelines under the 1938 Natural Gas Act. Good faith negotiations should precede the exercise of eminent domain, and property owners should receive just compensation.

Other types of pipelines — intrastate, gathering, and distribution — may or may not fall under eminent domain, depending on the constitution of the state involved. States vary significantly in their application of eminent domain to natural gas pipelines, in granting private companies the privilege to use eminent domain, and in what is considered just compensation to property owners. 

In terms of potential benefits to communities, pipeline companies pay taxes to the municipalities in which they operate. A pipeline construction project also generates temporary economic activity for a community and could create a few permanent jobs. In some cases, natural gas may be made available to communities along the pipeline route if they are not presently being serviced by a gas utility company.

Research suggests that real estate values and insurance rates are generally not affected by the presence of a natural gas pipeline on or near the property. 1 Property owners receive financial compensation (or an easement), in the form of an up-front payment per linear foot, with a signing bonus added on occasion; property owners continue to pay taxes on the easement unless they can show cause for tax abatement. If the easement is in an agricultural area, farming can continue to take place, but other activities may be restricted (e.g., cattle grazing may require fencing and arrangements for access by the pipeline operator).

Quality of Life – Psychological Impacts

When communities and property owners first learn about a proposed natural gas pipeline, they often have concerns about the project. Their concerns tend to cluster around issues of land value, eminent domain, and the safety of living near a natural gas line. The company and FERC invite potentially impacted landowners to public meetings for clarification and input on the process. FERC and the operator may take certain environmental or safety concerns raised by community members into consideration (e.g., land subsidence over abandoned mine sites), which can result in the alteration of the proposed route. 2

Quality of Life – Visual Impacts

During construction, the right-of-way for a transmission line may be 75 to 100 feet or more, depending on soil conditions and topography. Trees are cut and vegetation is removed. While grassy vegetation is planted after construction is complete, no trees are permitted for fear of tree roots damaging the pipeline, as well as to allow for aerial inspection of the route. The permanent easement is usually 50 feet wide, which the operator maintains. Above-ground components such as valves may remain visible. 3

Notes:

  1. William N. Kinnard, Jr., Sue Ann Dickey, and Mary Beth Geckler, “Natural Gas Pipeline Impact on Residential Property Values: An Empirical Study of Two Market Areas,” International Right of Way Association (June/July 1994), https://www.irwaonline.org/eweb/upload/0604d.pdf.
  2. Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, “An Interstate Natural Gas Pipeline on My Property? What Do I Need to Know?” updated August 2013, http://www.ferc.gov/for-citizens/citizen-guides/citz-guide-gas.pdf.
  3. Pennsylvania State University Extension Agency, “Negotiating Pipeline Rights-of-Way in Pennsylvania,” accessed December 6, 2014, http://extension.psu.edu/natural-resources/natural-gas/publications/negotiating-pipeline-rights-of-way-in-pennsylvania.

Appendix E: Pipelines—Transporting Shale Gas to Markets

What can be done to address health concerns? What have others done?

Safety

Most excavation incidents occur when an entity other than the operator is digging near pipelines, and these incidents lead to the largest number of personal injuries and fatalities. Excavation risks therefore need to be managed by multiple stakeholders — including operators, regulators, municipal planners, property owners, and private excavators.

Pipeline operators:  Damage to pipelines due to excavation has been decreasing in recent years, thanks to one-call centers, or “call before you dig” phone banks. Pipeline markers are also important in preventing excavation damage, but they are not exact indicators of pipeline locations, so contacting a one-call center is still necessary before excavation begins.

Pipeline companies are using improved technology and detection techniques, such as handheld infrared scanners, to address potential problems due to corrosion or pipeline defects. 1 Some experts have recommended more frequent replacement of aging pipelines to prevent potential problems and that all pipelines, including rural gathering lines, be regulated by OPS.

OPS requires operators to conduct public awareness programs regarding pipeline safety. Activities include disseminating materials on the use of one-call centers; communicating with stakeholders on pipeline locations and the detection of any leaks; and trainings for first responders. 2

Local governments:  While local governments traditionally have jurisdiction over land use, they have infrequently addressed pipeline issues, or have done so in the absence of risk- or site-based data. 3 Following several major pipeline incidents in 2004, the Transportation Research Board (TRB) recommended that the federal government provide risk-based guidance on land use near pipelines. 4, 5 As a result, the Pipelines and Informed Planning Alliance (PIPA) was created under OPS to provide guidance to local communities, pipeline operators, property developers/owners, and real estate commissions. These guidelines include siting considerations; width of pipeline corridors and easements; appropriate land use, human activities, and structures in the vicinity of the easement; setbacks to protect people and property; and model ordinances. The guidelines were developed for transmission pipelines only and are not mandatory. 6

Therefore, in terms of considerations for improving pipeline safety, local planning commissions could make risk-based determinations on the above considerations according to the needs of their communities. They could also include pipeline locations on local plats and planning documents. Local governments could require real estate transactions to disclose pipelines within 600 feet of the property line. 7

Property owners and private excavators:  Prior to conducting excavation activities, it is important to check for pipeline markers and make use of one-call centers to determine the exact location of any pipelines on or near the property.

Notes:

  1. Pennsylvania State University Extension Agency, http://extension.psu.edu/natural-resources/natural-gas/publications/negotiating-pipeline-rights-of-way-in-pennsylvania.
  2. INGAA, “How Are Natural Gas Transmission Pipelines Regulated?” (2014), http://www.ingaa.org/cms/4923.aspx.
  3. The Transportation Research Board, “Transmission Pipelines and Land Use: A Risk-Informed Approach” (Special Report 281, Washington, DC, 2004), viii, http://onlinepubs.trb.org/onlinepubs/sr/sr281.pdf.
  4. Office of Pipeline Safety, “Building Safe Communities:  Pipeline Risk and Its Application to Local Development Decisions” (October, 2010), http://pstrust.org/docs/PIPA-PipelineRiskReport-Final-20101021.pdf.
  5. The Transportation Research Board, “Transmission Pipelines and Land Use: A Risk-Informed Approach” (Special Report 281, Washington, DC, 2004), http://onlinepubs.trb.org/onlinepubs/sr/sr281.pdf.
  6. Pipelines and Informed Planning Alliance, “Partnering to Further Enhance Pipeline Safety in Communities through Risk-Informed Land-Plan Use:  Final Report of Recommended Practices” (November 2010), http://www.ingaa.org/File.aspx?id=11683.
  7. Municipal Research and Services Center, last updated November 3, 2014, http://www.mrsc.org/subjects/pubsafe/pipesafety.aspx.

Appendix E: Pipelines—Transporting Shale Gas to Markets

What can be done to address health concerns? What have others done?

QUALITY OF LIFE

Property owners:  If your property might be impacted by the construction of an interstate pipeline – and thereby be subject to eminent domain – you will receive information on the process from FERC and from the pipeline operator, and will have the opportunity to participate in informational meetings to learn more about the proposed pipeline. Residents and municipalities can inform themselves about their options during the permitting process, and landowners can learn about negotiating an easement with the company (see the resources section below).

When eminent domain does not apply to the proposed pipeline, as with gathering lines in many states, property owners can accept or deny easement rights, with a certain amount of leverage in negotiating terms. Given the concerns about state capacity to regulate most gathering lines, property owners should carefully attend to matters of construction, inspection, and safety.  

Appendix E: Pipelines—Transporting Shale Gas to Markets

What resources can provide further information?

SAFETY

Appendix E: Pipelines—Transporting Shale Gas to Markets

What resources can provide further information?

QUALITY OF LIFE

Gathering pipeline construction, PA. Photo by Bob Donnan, 2014.

 

Construction of oilgas pipeline in ND. Photo by the National Parks Conservation Association, 2014.