Houston (Platts)--7Oct2009/717 pm EDT/2317 GMT

Until recently, the oil and natural gas exploration-and-production industry has presented a united front on the need to keep secret the chemical composition of its hydraulic fracturing fluids, but that wall of silence is now beginning to see some cracks.

But in late September, the CEOs of two major gas shale players--Fort Worth-based Range Resources and Oklahoma City-based Chesapeake Energy--called for well service providers to publically disclose the ingredients in their fracking fluids to state regulators and the public.

Chesapeake's Aubrey McClendon and Range's John Pinkerton made identical proposals in response to questions after presentations at the 18th IHS Herold Pacesetter's Energy Conference in Greenwich, Connecticut.

The transparency issue has come to the forefront as state regulators wrestle with the question of how best to regulate the well-completion technique commonly know as fracking, particularly in states such as New York and Pennsylvania where producers are increasingly seeking to use the technique to unlock the potential of the gas-rich Marcellus shale.

In addition, gas industry officials might be hoping that by moderating their position on fracking chemical disclosure, they can head off federal regulation.

A bill currently pending in Congress, the Fracking Responsibility and Awareness of Chemicals Act, or FRAC Act, would mandate public disclosure of the chemicals used in fracking fluid.

Chesapeake spokesman Jim Gipson on Wednesday sought to downplay the controversy over whether or not the constituent chemicals of fracking fluid should be disclosed. "We believe the discussion about the types of additives used in minimal amounts during hydraulic fracturing is misguided since each additive that is brought onto a location is accompanied by a Materials Safety Data Sheet, which not only identifies the materials but outlines proper ways in which to utilize them," he said.

The US Occupational Safety and Health Adminstation requires that such MSDSs be posted at worksites where the chemicals are used. He added that the information in the MSDSs "is readily available at each well site for review by regulatory and other public agencies."

Well-servicing companies, such as Halliburton, have long contended that they need to protect the forumlas of their fracturing fluids as proprietary trade secrets.

"We continue to proactively work closely with local, state and federal agencies regarding necessary disclosures of our products as we balance a right to know with our right to protect our stimulation equipment and fluid formulations, which are proprietary to our business," Halliburton spokeswoman Diana Gabriel said.

As an example of such cooperation with state regulators, she cited the case of Colorado, which in 2008 passed new regulations for the oil and gas industry, including a requirement to divulge fracking formulas to healthcare and emergency response personnel in the event of an incident at a well site.

Lee Fuller, vice president of government relations for the Independent Petroleum Association of America, said the idea that a schism has erupted in the industry consensus on the issue of transparency in regard to fracking might be based more on perception than reality.

"Because it's drawn so much attention from the groups trying to stop the development of these shale gases, it's drawn a lot more attention to the management," of gas producers, he said.

"It creates a misperception within the industry about what's really going on out there and you get reactions of wanting to be more transparent. But a lot of transparency is already in place," Fuller said.

--Jim Magill, jim_magill@platts.com