BILL ANALYSIS �
AB 591
Page 1
Date of Hearing: May 18, 2011
ASSEMBLY COMMITTEE ON APPROPRIATIONS
Felipe Fuentes, Chair
AB 591 (Wieckowski) - As Amended: May 10, 2011
Policy Committee: Natural
ResourcesVote:6-3
Urgency: No State Mandated Local Program:
No` Reimbursable: No
SUMMARY
This bill makes requirements of operators of an oil or gas well
that will use hydraulic fracturing (fracking). Specifically,
this bill:
1)Requires the operator of a well, before commencing drilling
work, to file with to the Division of Oil, Gas and Geothermal
Resources (DOGGR) an application to drill, which must be
approved by DOGGR.
2)Beginning January 1, 2012, requires an application to include
specified information, such as (a) the type of exploration and
production techniques to be used, (b) a list of the chemicals
the operator intends to bring onsite for use in fracking and
(c), the location of any known active seismic faults within
five miles of the well.
3)Requires, after drilling commences, the operator to submit to
DOGGR the following:
a) A list of the chemicals injected into the well,
including each chemical's purpose, the amount used and the
concentration at which the chemical was injected.
b) The amount and source of well water used in exploration
or production.
c) Any radiological materials injected into the well.
4)Requires a well operator, if any chemical used is listed,
pursuant to Proposition 65, as a chemical known to cause
cancer or other harm, to notify of the chemical's use every
property owner and occupant within one mile of the well.
AB 591
Page 2
5)Requires DOGGR to collect information and prepare maps
regarding oil and gas wells and the location and extent of
groundwater and surface water for irrigation, domestic,
industrial, or wildlife purposes that might be affected and to
post the maps on DOGGR's website.
FISCAL EFFECT
1)One-time special-fund costs of approximately $50,000 to
$100,000 to DOGGR to conduct rule-making to permit fracking.
2)One-time special-fund costs of approximately $300,000 to DOGGR
to modify databases to support mapping data of fracking
operations.
3)Ongoing special-fund costs of approximately $250,000 to DOGGR
manage documents associated with fracking operations and
applications and post information on DOGGR's website.
COMMENTS
1)Rationale. The author intends to increase public knowledge
about fracking operations in California and to prompt DOGGR to
exercise its existing authority to regulate the practice.
2)Hydraulic Fracturing. Fracking is a process by which
high-pressure fluids are pumped into a well, creating cracks
in the subterrain shale formations, which can lead to the
release or increased flow of oil and natural gas. Fracking has
been used for decades in California. Recently, interest in
and concern with fracking has grown in response to new
fracking techniques better able to access oil and gas trapped
in shale as well as reports of groundwater contamination and
earthquakes correlated with fracking operations.
3)Division of Oil, Gas and Geothermal Resources. DOGGR, which
operates within the Department of Conservation, regulates oil,
gas, and geothermal well operations throughout the state. The
division issues production permits and oversees the drilling,
operation, and maintenance, as well as the plugging and
abandonment of wells. DOGGR also provides detailed production
reports on oil and gas output in the state. DOGGR is
authorized to regulate fracking; however, the department has
issued no fracking-specific regulations and maintains little
AB 591
Page 3
data on the practice in California.
4)Fracking, Earthquakes and Groundwater Contamination.
Recently, concern has grown about the connection between
fracking, earthquakes and groundwater contamination.
Opponents of this bill contend that the claim that fracking
causes earthquakes has been debunked. However, there are
numerous peer-reviewed articles going back decades that
describe the creation of seismic events resulting from the
process. It is less evident whether fracking fluids
contaminate groundwater. A recently published peer-reviewed
study, however, shows groundwater contaminated with methane as
a result of shale gas extraction. (See
www.pnas.org/cgi/doi/10.1073/pnas.1100682108.)
5)Support . This bill is supported by several organizations that
advocate protection of the environment and access to clean
drinking water.
6)Opposition . This bill is opposed by the American Chemistry
Council and petroleum industry groups who contest specific
provisions of the bill and question the need for increased
regulation and disclosure of fracking activities, given the
lack of apparent harm caused in California by this decades-old
practice.
Analysis Prepared by : Jay Dickenson / APPR. / (916) 319-2081