Reforming Natural Gas Fracking Regulations in 2017–2018: How Should States Enforce Regulations?

Abstract

ABSTRACTWhile much scholarly work has been published on hydraulic fracturing regulatory frameworks, there is little discussion on the enforcement mechanisms of these regulations and statutes. This article explores state hydraulic fracturing regulations and the expansion of a criminal framework to enforce compliance. More specifically, this article takes a comparative look at fracking enforcement regimes in California and several states with the most hydraulic fracturing activities. First, the article discusses fracking's economic benefits and environmental issues. The article then analyzes federal regulations, (which essentially leaves the bulk of regulation and enforcement to state and local governments) and state enforcement systems in California and the four states with the most fracking wells (Texas, Wyoming, Pennsylvania, and Colorado). California, a state that is pushing for more renewable resources, has robust regulations under Senate Bill 4. In the end, states that rely heavily on fracking should reform the enforcement mechanisms to disincentive noncompliance. Regulatory regimes in the other states appear to have deficiencies that could be remedied by adopting stricter enforcement mechanisms—such as criminal sanctions—that would disincentivize noncompliance, which could lead to large-scale environmental disasters. This article postulates that a model system incorporating a variety of methods including increased criminal enforcement could provide for proper remedies, justice, and deterrence. An ideal enforcement framework for effective deterrence should focus on transparency, flexibility, trusted delegation, and proportionality.