FracFocus Trade Secrets in Montana

Summary: Trade secrets in FracFocus, an instrument of transparency, explicitly conceal the identity of chemicals. This masking has long been controversial. Open-FF found 3,230 trade secrets in Montana records. These records spanned all years and 64.2% of published disclosures. About 5,610,000 pounds of trade secret chemicals have been reported. In this post, we summarize the broad patterns of trade secret use in Montana between 2014 and early 2025. We also illustrate the types of trade secrets patterns in the state with local examples. This post is part of a series reporting on “holes” in FracFocus.¹

FracFocus is a public online database that provides information about the chemicals used in hydraulic fracturing (fracking) across the United States. While intended to promote transparency, a significant portion of the disclosed chemical information is often withheld as “trade secrets.” This practice has been the subject of debate of how to balance industry’s need to protect proprietary formulas with the public’s right to know about substances injected underground.

Broad Patterns in Montana

Quantity of chemicals masked as trade secrets:

5,610,000 pounds

Frequency of Claims: How common are trade secret claims in Montana?

Across all valid Montana chemical records, 15.6% are marked as trade secrets. Trade secret claims appear in 64.2 % of all disclosures.

And the breakdown of the frequency of trade secrets within Montana disclosures is: 

Compared to Other States: How does the trade secret use in Montana compare to other fracking states?

Montana ranks second lowest in terms of proportion of disclosures that include trade secrets — that’s only more than California which essentially shut down the use of trade secrets in 2015.

---

Examples of Trade Secret Use in Montana

We summarize specific examples to highlight the various ways the trade secret designation is applied. Here are some typical scenarios we observed:

Large Percentage of Records as Trade Secrets

In some disclosures, a substantial proportion, sometimes even the majority, of the listed ingredients are marked as trade secrets. This leaves the public with very little information about the chemical composition of the fracturing fluid used in that specific well.

Example: Consider the well operated by Kraken Operating LLC in Richland County. (Click on images to open map and disclosure.)

In this disclosure, 54% of ingredients are listed as trade secrets. For some of these chemicals, the name given seems to be a legitimate chemical name. However, FracFocus instructs us to give primacy to the CASNumber. Even if the name is correct and specific, the “Proprietary” label makes the identity unclear – the opposite of transparency. The list of trade secrets for that fracking job are:

IngredientName	CASNumber	mass (pounds)
polymer	Proprietary	39,400
distillates (petroleum), hydrotreated light	Proprietary	23,400
paraffinic oils	Proprietary	9,500
polyoxyethylene monooleate	Proprietary	2,970
bhmt phposphonate	Proprietary	2,950
ammonium chloride	Proprietary	1,730
propietary ingredient	Proprietary	1,410
bhmt phosphonate	Proprietary	1,410
sorbitan oleate	Proprietary	1,240
12-hydroxystearic acid-polyethylene glycol copolymer	Proprietary	863
poly(oxy-1, 2-ethanediyl), .alpha.-hydro-.omega.-hydroxy-,ether with d-glucitol (2:1), tetra-(9z)-9-octadecenoate	Proprietary	863
sodium hydrogensulphite	Proprietary	738
alkyl aryl sulfonic acid salt	Proprietary	675
alchols, c12-14-secondary, ethoxylated	Proprietary	612
alkyl sulfonic acid	Proprietary	455
isopropanol	Proprietary	251
ammonium acrylate	Proprietary	126
acrylamide	Proprietary	126
diethylene triaminepentaacetic acid, pentasodiumsalt	Proprietary	78
potassium acetate	Proprietary	31
polyethyleneglycol	Proprietary	1
ethylene oxide	Proprietary	1
dioxane	Proprietary	1

Individual Trade Secret Records That Are High Mass

Occasionally, a single ingredient marked as a trade secret represents a significant mass or percentage of the total fluid volume reported in a disclosure. This means a large component of the fracturing fluid’s composition is entirely unknown.

Example: Consider the well operated by Alta Vista Oil Corporation in Big Horn County.

In this well, a single trade secret entry is reported with a mass of 87,900 pounds, representing a significant portion of the total fluid volume. The chemical identity of this large-mass material is withheld.

Montana has 0 trade secret records with masses over 100,000 pounds, unlike most other states.

Systems Approach Disclosures with Trade Secret Records

FracFocus disclosures are often published in the “systems approach” format that decouples product names from chemical identity. FracFocus claims that this practice “decreases the use of trade secrets in disclosures, thereby improving public transparency.” Analyses by Trickey et al. and Underhill et al. disprove that claim across the FracFocus data. Instead, we often find system approach disclosures with multiple trade secret claims – because there is nothing to compel companies to include the chemical identity.

Example: Consider the well operated by Kraken Operating LLC in Richland County.

The disclosure for that well utilizes a systems approach format but still conceals the identity of 12 chemicals, which means 33% of ingredients are listed as trade secrets. The table below lists those records with their quantity.

IngredientName	CASNumber	mass (pounds)
sodium phosponates	Proprietary	11,300
goethite	Proprietary	3,990
alkyl sulfonic acid	Proprietary	728
proprietary ethoxylated alcohol	Proprietary	728
proprietary surfactant	Proprietary	728
alkyl aryl sulfonic acid salt	Proprietary	728
petroleum distillates	Proprietary	unknown
urea derivative	Proprietary	unknown
proprietary amide	Proprietary	unknown
organic acid salt	Proprietary	unknown
glycol	Proprietary	unknown
proprietary surfactant	Proprietary	unknown

Trade Secret Records Without Any Hints About Material Type

While it is sometimes claimed that operators must supply coarse categories for trade secrets, the data tell a different story. Some trade secret entries provide no descriptive information, such as a functional category (such as “friction reducer,” “surfactant”) or chemical group (“ethoxylated alcohol”), about the material. This makes it impossible to even guess the potential role or nature of the withheld substance.

Examples: The following table lists some of the reported IngredientNames for Montana’s trade secrets that are also reported without informative values for “Purpose”.

IngredientName	count
proprietary ingredient	98
proprietary	34
proprietary component	29
trade secret ingredient	2
proprietary blend	1
trade secret	1

Implications for Montana

The patterns and examples of trade secret usage in Montana’s FracFocus data highlight the limitations of the database in providing
chemical transparency. While trade secret protection is a legal right when formalized, its extensive use in fracking disclosures raises questions for regulators, researchers, and the public regarding potential environmental and health impacts. Understanding how and where trade secrets are used is a crucial step in evaluating the effectiveness of public disclosure requirements in the state.

Colorado’s recent law requiring enhanced disclosure in a way that still protects intellectual property may serve as a model to improve overall transparency.

References

Trickey, Kevin, Nicholas Hadjimichael, and Prachi Sanghavi. “Public Reporting of Hydraulic Fracturing Chemicals in the USA, 2011–18: A before and after Comparison of Reporting Formats.” The Lancet Planetary Health 4, no. 5 (May 1, 2020): e178–85. https://doi.org/10.1016/S2542-5196(20)30076-0.

Underhill, Vivian, Gary Allison, Holden Huntzinger, Cole Mason, Abigail Noreck, Emi Suyama, Lourdes Vera, and Sara Wylie. “Increases in Trade Secret Designations in Hydraulic Fracturing Fluids and Their Potential Implications for Environmental Health and Water Quality.” Journal of Environmental Management 351 (February 1, 2024): 119611. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jenvman.2023.119611.

---

Title image credit: Becky Mansfield (modified by author)

---

1. Map images ©OpenStreetMap; Disclosure tables screenshot from FracFocus PDFs. ↩︎