Talk:Exemptions for fracking under United States federal law

	United States portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject United States, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of topics relating to the United States of America on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the ongoing discussions. Template Usage Articles Requested! Become a Member Project Talk Alerts United StatesWikipedia:WikiProject United StatesTemplate:WikiProject United StatesUnited States articles
???	This article has not yet received a rating on the project's importance scale.

Law Low‑importance

	Law portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Law, an attempt at providing a comprehensive, standardised, pan-jurisdictional and up-to-date resource for the legal field and the subjects encompassed by it.LawWikipedia:WikiProject LawTemplate:WikiProject Lawlaw articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Geology C‑class Low‑importance

	Geology portal Talk:Exemptions for fracking under United States federal law is part of WikiProject Geology, an attempt at creating a standardized, informative, comprehensive and easy-to-use geology resource. If you would like to participate, you can choose to edit this article, or visit the project page for more information.GeologyWikipedia:WikiProject GeologyTemplate:WikiProject GeologyGeology articles
C	This article has been given a rating which conflicts with the project-independent quality rating in the banner shell. Please resolve this conflict if possible.
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

This article was the subject of an educational assignment in 2014 Q1. Further details were available on the "Education Program:University of California, Berkeley/Environmental Justice: Race, Class, Equity, and the Environment (Spring 2014)" page, which is now unavailable on the wiki.

Untitled

Thank you everyone who has taken a look at this page, and is providing edits/comments.

Cjpepino (talk) 05:21, 29 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Edits to your Wiki page

Hi Chrissy and Paul, Nice work on your article. You covered a lot of information on different acts and allowed opportunities for readers to easily go deeper if they wanted. Also, nice unbiased presentation of material. I have emailed you a word document with specific tracked changes on sentence structure and punctuation (old school, I know).

Would be helpful to include a graphic for the different fracking methods.

This may be a stretch (or beyond the role of a Wikipedia article), but have you considered adding a section on "actions to reverse exemptions" or " criticisms of /reactions to exemptions" to bring the reader up to speed about the controversy that surrounds this?

Happy to connect to provide more specific feedback if you have any questions. Jtreetree (talk) 04:50, 30 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Peer Review

The article looks great so far! I've been making edits to page as described here. I clarified that an EIS is required only when determined by the EA in the NEPA section. In your article you mention that most sites are below the emissions threshold and so they do not have to obtain Title V permits, however, I would discuss what the emissions thresholds are and compare that to what the emissions from some sites might be if the information is available.

I added links to the Wikipedia pages for the following topics: criteria pollutants, NESHAPS, Energy Policy Act of 2005, and the Mineral Leasing Act. Make sure to specify the date for the Mineral Leasing Act discussed (i.e.: 1920 or 1947).

I made grammatical corrections throughout the article including changing “Comprehensive Environmental Response Compensation Liabilities Act” to Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation, and Liability Act in the introductory paragraph at the top of the page and I added the link to the Superfund page here since that is when it was first mentioned. I corrected “Hydrauling fracturing” to Hyrdaulic Fracturing in your section title, capitalized the words Congress and 11th Circuit, changed “Halliburton’s Loophole” to Halliburton Loophole, and some other edits that you can look at in the history of the page.

In the SDWA and RCRA sections you use their abbreviations, however, in the other sections such as the CAA and the CWA you do not end up using their abbreviations and instead you spell them out each time… so to maintain consistency I suggest that you chose one or the other and probably should use the abbreviations for all, including CAA and CWA, after spelling them out the first time. StacyPF (talk) 07:02, 30 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

From Prof

Hi guys. Nice job so far. I've gone through and added some citations and minor edits.

You might notice that your page has been tagged by a wikipedian. [[1]] left the student's general feedback on our course talk page. Since you might not have found it I'm pasting it here for your reference. If you believe you've remedied the "defects" he's mentioned, you might want to post a message for him on his talk page, and take down the tag. Aarf613 (talk) 23:39, 1 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Oh, and if you don't plan on filling in the EPCRA section, just remove the heading.Aarf613 (talk) 23:43, 1 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Some more feedback/suggestions

Hi all, I removed the cleanup tag because the links issue seems to be addressed now - if the tagging editor still has concerns please explain them here.

I was initially a bit concerned about this article, I feared it might become just a summary of other articles - but upon review it seems to address specifically how the laws applying to fracking. Nevertheless be careful to avoid going into too much detail with general summaries of the laws involved - no background should be supplied that isn't useful in understanding how they apply to fracking.

This article currently has no illustrations - it'd be great if one of you could perhaps work on a timeline that illustrates when these various laws were implemented and how they were spaced over time. Wikipedia has special support for timelines as described at Wikipedia:EasyTimeline - you can even link the laws in the timeline directly to the articles on the laws.

I'll leave more thoughts later! Dcoetzee 00:08, 2 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I've had a crack at one section, see this edit. I may have made errors, since I know nothing about the US, the law or the environment and don't speak US English. Stuartyeates (talk) 01:45, 2 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]

General comments by Stuartyeates

Please see general comments by User:Stuartyeates on articles generated by this class at Education Program talk:University of San Francisco/Environmental Law (Spring 2013)#Feedback_on_the_articles. Please respond there if you have any questions or comments. Dcoetzee 01:40, 2 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Pics

I agree with Derrick about images. I think that an image of hydraulic fracturing would be helpful. I know there is a page on fracking that has one but it is a process that is hard to imagine and nicely captured by one of the many images of the horizontal drilling and fracturing veins in shale. Derrick can help you with finding and posting images...thanks Derrick! -- Aaron Aarf613 (talk) 02:53, 3 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Suggestion

Hello everyone, May I suggest that you might include the federal statute citation that prohibit hydraulic fracturing in the United States. TucsonDavidU.S.A. 21:32, 9 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Made up?

I have deleted two complete sections because they are not 'Exemptions for hydraulic fracturing under United States federal law'. Is somebody just making this stuff up? Martin Hogbin (talk) 18:26, 26 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Misnamed article

This article really deals with federal exemptions and different treatment for the oil industry as a whole. As far as is pointed out in the article, there is only one federal exemption specifically for hydraulic fracturing: the exemption from obtaining injection permits under the SWDA. The title should be changed to reflect the broader scope of the article. Plazak (talk) 03:11, 9 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]

I do not think the article should exist at all; it is just anti-fracking, anti-oil propaganda. The content should be merged into the appropriate oil and fracking articles. Martin Hogbin (talk) 09:08, 9 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Sources

I see a LOT of exemptions, but not links, for the start of the article. I think each exemption should have a source, even if it later has a source (generally better to cite at the first mention of it). Zagadka314 (talk) 01:33, 25 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Exemptions for hydraulic fracturing under United States federal law. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20130414105027/http://www.epa.gov/oem/content/epcra/ to http://www.epa.gov/oem/content/epcra/

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 03:49, 28 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 2 external links on Exemptions for hydraulic fracturing under United States federal law. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 04:43, 26 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]

The program is financed by a federal 0.1-cent tax on petroleum products

Can the writer or anybody help elaborate the meaning of above? Is it 0.1-cent tax on every dollar of sale? Thanks. ThomasYehYeh (talk) 00:40, 29 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedia Ambassador Program course assignment

This article is the subject of an educational assignment at University of San Francisco supported by the Wikipedia Ambassador Program during the 2013 Spring term. Further details are available on the course page.

The above message was substituted from {{WAP assignment}} by PrimeBOT (talk) on 17:19, 2 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]