David Blackmon writes at Forbes:
For example, the BLM rule contains a whole suite of provisions designed to regulate how wells are completed, including new requirements related to casing and cementing. Can the BLM point to a rash of casing or cement job failures on federal lands, or significant failures in state oversight of well completions as a justification for the provisions? If it can, it doesn’t do so in the preamble to its proposed rule, nor has any representative of the Administration done so in any public statements. The reason for that, of course, is that no such justifications exist.
The proposed rule also would implement a requirement that oil and gas operators disclose the chemical and other contents in the fluids they use to conduct hydraulic fracturing operations on federal lands. Again, pretty much every state with any significant federal lands in their borders already have their own laws and/or regulations containing similar requirements for all wells drilled within their borders – including those on federal lands – requirements that are already working quite well. So what is the driving need for the federal government to now come in and increase everyone’s costs and add time delays with a duplicate set of reporting requirements?