Welcome to DU!
The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards.
Join the community:
Create a free account
Support DU (and get rid of ads!):
Become a Star Member
Latest Breaking News
General Discussion
The DU Lounge
All Forums
Issue Forums
Culture Forums
Alliance Forums
Region Forums
Support Forums
Help & Search
General Discussion
Related: Editorials & Other Articles, Issue Forums, Alliance Forums, Region ForumsFracking Chemicals' Secrecy Questioned
Wyoming high court reverses judges decision on disclosure
Friday, March 14, 2014
CHEYENNE -- The question of the publics right to know what is in fracking fluids now awaits a district court decision. The Wyoming Supreme Court decided on Wednesday to reverse a district court judges decision that let the chemicals be secret and send the case back to him.
Several groups had challenged the Wyoming Oil and Gas Commissions withholding of certain fracking chemical information from public disclosure and review. In its opinion, the high court ruled that the withholding of information must fall within the defined label of trade secrets.
The justices also said the Oil and Gas Commission must be able to prove it has a justified reason for withholding the data. The court decided that when information is being pursued under the Wyoming Public Records Act, the definition of trade secrets is the same as it is under the federal Freedom of Information Act.
According to the Freedom of Information Act Guide from May 2004, a trade secret protection is recognized for:
MORE
Friday, March 14, 2014
CHEYENNE -- The question of the publics right to know what is in fracking fluids now awaits a district court decision. The Wyoming Supreme Court decided on Wednesday to reverse a district court judges decision that let the chemicals be secret and send the case back to him.
Several groups had challenged the Wyoming Oil and Gas Commissions withholding of certain fracking chemical information from public disclosure and review. In its opinion, the high court ruled that the withholding of information must fall within the defined label of trade secrets.
The justices also said the Oil and Gas Commission must be able to prove it has a justified reason for withholding the data. The court decided that when information is being pursued under the Wyoming Public Records Act, the definition of trade secrets is the same as it is under the federal Freedom of Information Act.
According to the Freedom of Information Act Guide from May 2004, a trade secret protection is recognized for:
(P)roduct manufacturing and design information but has been denied for general information concerning a products physical or performance characteristics or a product formula when release would not reveal the actual formula itself.
MORE
InfoView thread info, including edit history
TrashPut this thread in your Trash Can (My DU » Trash Can)
BookmarkAdd this thread to your Bookmarks (My DU » Bookmarks)
3 replies, 590 views
ShareGet links to this post and/or share on social media
AlertAlert this post for a rule violation
PowersThere are no powers you can use on this post
EditCannot edit other people's posts
ReplyReply to this post
EditCannot edit other people's posts
Rec (6)
ReplyReply to this post
3 replies
= new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight:
NoneDon't highlight anything
5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies
Fracking Chemicals' Secrecy Questioned (Original Post)
DeSwiss
Mar 2014
OP
LiberalEsto
(22,845 posts)1. The public and the government have a RIGHT to know what chemicals
are going into the public air, the public soil, and the public aquifers and other drinking water sources.
RC
(25,592 posts)3. Why don't we have the right to know what we are being poisoned with?
Trade secrets my ass. Does anyone really think the drilling companies don't know whats in everyone else's franking brew.
It is more sinister that that. If the general public knew what those franking compounds consisted of, there would be a whole lot less fraken.