The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) has discovered numerous pollutants in well water near gas drilling sites, including chemicals that are used in a controversial technique called hydraulic fracturing, or fracking. The investigation in central Wyoming is the first water testing by EPA examining the impacts of gas drilling on drinking water. However, EPA is hobbled in its duty to protect the public because gas drillers are allowed to keep secret the chemicals they pump into the ground – toxic chemicals that may be entering ground water supplies.

Responding to years of complaints of water contamination and illnesses from citizens in rural Wyoming, the EPA investigated the water quality of 39 wells surrounding a small community besieged by gas drilling. The agency found a range of contaminants, including arsenic, copper, vanadium, and methane gas in the water. Many of the substances are found in various fluids used at drilling sites. EPA scientists are acknowledging the growing body of evidence linking hydraulic fracturing to numerous cases of contamination and health problems.

The drilling industry claims no federal regulation of fracking is needed, citing the lack of conclusive proof linking fracking chemicals to contamination of a particular water source. Unfortunately for EPA and citizens like those in Wyoming who depend on wells, EPA has little authority to do the scientific analysis needed to effectively protect water supplies. A 2005 energy bill exempted gas drilling operations from the requirements of the Safe Drinking Water Act. EPA eventually was able to exercise its authority under the Superfund law to begin its investigation in Wyoming.

The news organization ProPublica describes the burdensome and slow process EPA is forced to use to protect public health:

EPA investigators explained that because they had no idea what to test for, they were relegated to an exhaustive process of scanning water samples for spikes in unidentified compounds and then running those compounds like fingerprints through a criminal database for matches against a vast library of unregulated and understudied substances. That is how they found the adamantanes and 2-BE [compounds associated with gas drilling].

All this effort was to test just 39 water wells surrounding one small town. There are thousands of gas-drilling sites around the country that are using secret fracking fluids. Gas drilling expanded greatly during the previous administration. Drilling sites are active or in development in more than 30 states, including in the watershed that supplies drinking water to New York City.

Legislation that is now in Congress would close the regulatory loophole granted to the oil and gas industry and require drillers to disclose what chemicals are in their fracking fluids. Without knowing what chemicals to test for and without the authority of the Safe Drinking Water Act, the EPA's investigations will be slower and costlier and identifying the source of contaminants extremely difficult. Under these restrictions, which are designed to protect industry, the government cannot protect the drinking water and health of Americans.

The Department of Labor (DOL) today officially announced that it will not go forward with a controversial proposal that would have made it more difficult for the government to write new worker protection rules.

In a notice in today’s issue of the Federal Register, DOL said it was withdrawing a proposed rule published Aug. 29, 2008. The notice called the requirements outlined in the proposed rule, “unnecessary.”

The proposed rule was essentially an attempt to regulate regulations. It would have added to the workload of regulators at the Occupational Safety and Health Administration (OSHA) and the Mine Safety and Health Administration (MSHA) by requiring those agencies to publish an Advanced Notice of Proposed Rulemaking before publishing a Notice of Proposed Rulemaking.

As DOL notes in today’s withdrawal notice, an advanced notice is published “only if the agency believes it will be beneficial to the rulemaking,” adding, “This decision is made on a case-by-case basis.” The proposed rule would have added a mandatory step to an already complicated rulemaking process. In many cases, the advanced notice phase would have been a complete waste of time for OSHA, MSHA, and any commenters.

The proposal also would have changed the way OSHA and MSHA study workplace risks. Scientists and regulators would have had to collect industry-specific data on occupational hazards, use central estimates for risk assessments, and quantify the level of uncertainty in the scientific studies upon which worker safety and health regulations are based. (For more on the proposed requirements, click here.)

Many critics of the proposed rule, including OMB Watch, accused the Bush administration of pushing the regulation as a means to delay the development of standards designed to protect workers from occupational hazards.

But President Bush’s Labor Secretary, Elaine Chao, did not finish the rule before leaving office, giving President Obama’s Labor Secretary, Hilda Solis, an opportunity to review the rulemaking. Thankfully, with today’s announcement, Solis put an end to this saga once and for all.

In May, President Obama announced that his administration would set new, nationwide standards for vehicle fuel efficiency in order to reduce tailpipes’ contribution to global warming. The administration said it would use a plan developed by the state of California as a model.

The announcement appeased environmentalists and the California government, both of whom wanted the stricter standards. The auto industry also jumped on board, because it wanted one standard applied to all 50 states.

But since then, we’ve heard nary a whisper from the administration about when these new standards would be formally proposed, finalized, or made effective.

That changed Tuesday, when EPA sent a proposed rule titled, “Control of Greenhouse Gas Emissions from Light-duty Vehicles” to the White House Office of Information and Regulatory Affairs (OIRA). OIRA will review the draft proposal, share it with other federal agencies, and suggest edits. Since the president himself promised to enact emissions controls, OIRA is almost sure to sign-off on the proposed rule.

As Frank O’Donnell at the Blog for Clean Air points out, the movement on the vehicle emissions rule signals that EPA may be nearing completion on its final rule declaring greenhouse gases a threat to society. The two rules are related because, under the Clean Air Act, once EPA says that a pollutant is a danger, it is obligated to regulate it.

O’Donnell also says that these regulatory developments may prod the Senate to work on cap-and-trade legislation when it returns from summer recess:

The review suggests that EPA is nearing a final “endangerment” finding that global warming emissions threaten health and the environment. That decision – the right response to the big Supreme Court decision on global warming – may be interpreted by some as a polite reminder to the Senate that it cannot ignore the climate issue. The EPA finding could be the starting point for additional administrative action on climate if the Senate fizzles.

Over the next few months, as the October 10 recipient reporting deadline approaches, expect to see many more articles such as this one out of New York City. Apparently, the city is having some problems with estimating how many jobs are being created through teh Recovery Act. With the Office of Management and Budget leaving it up to recipients to estimate/guess how many jobs are being created, such articles are going to be inevitable. The question is whether or not OMB decides to do anything about it, and rework the guidlines for Recovery Act job estimation. A good place to start? Introducing a more effective full-time equivalent standard, or the number of hours that constitute a full-time job. Right now, states can decide on their own what constitutes a full-time job, which makes it difficult to compare projects across state lines. Standardizing the full-time equivalent across the country would be a great first step towards taking the guesswork out of job estimation.

Image by Flickr user sensesmaybenumbed used under a Creative Commons license.