L8-A1

Running Head: Health Effects of Hydraulic Fracturing 1
Health Effects of Hydraulic Fracturing and the Industry’s Leaders Actions Taken to Ensure
Better Safety for Employees, Surrounding Communities, and their Environment
Kaitlyn A. Potter
INTS 3300-001
Dr. Gail Bentley
Texas Tech University

Health Effects of Hydraulic Fracturing 2
Abstract
The process of hydraulic fracturing results in both positive and negative effects on oil and
gas industry employees, their families, as well as surrounding communities and the environment
in the regions where this type of natural oil and gas extraction is being used. This is an
interdisciplinary research project that aims to answer the following question: how has hydraulic
fracturing affected the health and safety of employees involved and what steps are being taken
by the industry’s leaders to help keep their employees as well as the surrounding communities
and their environment safe? This question is considered through the insights of two disciplines:
human resource development and organizational leadership. Throughout research of literature
concerning this complex problem, it is concluded that there exists harmful amounts of crystalline
silica being emitted into the atmosphere as a result of hydraulic fracturing. Also, the industry has
little regulation on what types of chemicals, as well as the amounts, that should be monitored
during this process. This research concludes that there are harmful effects on employees, their
surrounding communities, and the environment as a consequence of crystalline silica inhalation
that results in many health problems, most notably a lung disease known as silicosis, and what
little protection is in place for employees, communities, and the environment. Further research is
suggested into what the industry’s leaders can do to keep those involved, both directly and
indirectly, in hydraulic fracturing safer.

There exists both positive and negative effects of hydraulic fracturing on oil and gas
industry employees, their families, as well as surrounding communities and the environment in
the regions where this type of natural oil and gas extraction is being used. This is an
interdisciplinary research project that utilizes Allen F. Repko’s 10 step process. Repko (2012)
interdisciplinary research process requires more than two disciplines be evaluated to address a
complex or ‘wicked’ problem. The areas of human resource development coupled with
organizational leadership will assist in answering the following question: how has hydraulic
fracturing affected the health and safety of employees involved and what steps are being taken
by the industry’s leaders to help keep their employees as well as the surrounding communities
and their environment safe?
STEP 1: State the Focus of Your Paper
Although hydraulic fracturing aids the oil and natural gas industry in reaching depths of
the Earth’s surfaces that cannot be accessed otherwise, and increases the supply of oil and natural
gas, it is also the topic of heated debates. Because this is a complex problem that can possibly
have long-term negative effects on human, animal, and plant life, many different areas of
research and analysis must be taken into consideration when evaluating the effects of hydraulic
fracturing. The areas of human resource development coupled with organizational leadership will
assist in answering the following question: how has hydraulic fracturing affected the health and
safety of employees involved and what steps are being taken by the industry’s leaders to help
keep their employees as well as the surrounding communities and their environment safe?
STEP 2: Justify Using an Interdisciplinary Approach
The complications that are linked to hydraulic fracturing and the impact it has had on
families and communities, as well as the future risk of the health of human, animal, and plant life

can be looked at from many different perspectives. In order to justify using an interdisciplinary
approach to this issue, Repko (2012) provides four criteria to establish justification of an
interdisciplinary approach. The problem has to be classified as complex, theories or insights that
are relevant to the problem in question can be obtained from two or more disciplines, the
problem has not been adequately addressed or solved by a single discipline, and, lastly, the
problem is unanswered and is a need or issue of society (p. 84). To conduct this study, two
disciplines will be examined, human resource development and organizational leadership.
STEP 3: Identify Relevant Disciplines
Repko (2012) describes disciplines as “academic communities that exhibit a disciplinary
perspective (which involves preferences regarding phenomena to study and theories and methods
to use, shared terminology called concepts, and epistemological and ethical and ideological
outlooks” (p. 94) and refers to the term academic disciplines as scholarly “developed fields of
knowledge” (p. 93). There are various fields of knowledge relevant for this study including, but
not limited to, engineering, environmental science, epidemiology, human resource development,
occupational safety and health, toxicology, and agricultural research. These disciplines cover
many pertinent aspects for answering the complex problem such as research into the effects of
air pollution from hydraulic fracturing air emissions and the specific levels of toxicity in the
water that is used on site then transported and stored or destroyed.
The disciplines essential for this study are human resource development and
organizational leadership. Human resource development will address the question regarding:
what ways does hydraulic fracturing directly affect the health and safety of employees on site?
Organizational leadership will address complex problem from a different perspective, asking:
what are the industry’s leaders, who utilize the hydraulic fracturing process to increase the

efficiency of producing oil and natural gas, doing to make certain there are no adverse effects of
this process harming human, animal, and plant life?
STEP 4: Conduct a Literature Search
Establishing why insights from these disciplines are important to this research process is
crucial. Sharon Armstrong and Barbara Mitchell explain in The Essential HR Handbook: A
Quick and Handy Resource for any Manager or HR Professional (2008) that studying human
resource development is key to understanding the processes of securing, appraising, training, and
paying employees while managing their concerns about labor relations, fairness, and most
importantly, health and safety (p. 13). The College of University Studies at Texas Tech
University defines organizational leadership as an interdisciplinary concentration that “formally
guides and encourages the exploration of organizations and their influence in the global
economy” (“Organizational Leadership,” 2015). A deeper understanding of this complex
problem is achieved by evaluating the health and safety concerns regarding hydraulic fracturing
employees and understanding the influence of the industry’s leaders on safety measures being
taken to protect employees, their families and surrounding communities.
The literature search revealed a challenge regarding the abundance of ground that has to
be covered when having to research a complex problem. The need to research aspects of human
resource development and hydraulic fracturing as well as organizational leadership and hydraulic
fracturing result in extensive literature on the subject that also leads into scientific and
environmental disciplines that are too broad for the research question being approached. By re-
phrasing search terms and eliminating literature that did not specifically address the complex
problem being researched, a more concise collection of relevant literature.

STEP 5: Develop Adequacy in Each Relevant Discipline
According to Repko (2012) developing adequacy in each relevant discipline requires a
basic understanding of how the discipline approaches, clarifies, and describes the problem (p.
193). There are three foundational theories used in human resource development including
motivational theory, contingency theory, and systems theory. Motivational theory involves the
idea that production is the result of an employee’s motivation combined with their abilities.
Contingency theory states that there organizations require different methods of management
depending on internal and external situations. Lastly, systems theory encompasses the intricate
and vast interactions between process, group, organizations, environments and individual
variables functioning over time and at any point in time.
Methods of research used in human resource development, specifically with businesses
such as hydraulic fracturing companies, include exploratory or formal options collected through
monitoring or a communication study which can be either experimental or ex post facto. The
purpose of the study can be one of three options: reporting, descriptive, and causal where causal
can be either explanatory or predictive. Time dimensions can be either cross-sectional or
longitudinal and the topical scope of the study (breadth and depth) can either be case or statistical
study. The research environment can be chosen from a field setting, laboratory research, or
simulation and the participants’ perceptions of the research activity can be actual routine or
modified routine (Cooper & Schindler, 2014, p. 126). By analyzing this problem from a human
resource development point of view it will shine light on what procedures/policies would best
benefit the employees in the fracturing industry.
Theories that are used in organizational leadership include trait theory, transformational
theory, and contingency leadership theory. Trait theory has to do with the specific traits, such as

psychological and intellectual traits, and how they relate to effectiveness as a leader.
Transformational theory of a leader encompasses the idea that leaders and their team mates will
rise and transform parallel to each other, ultimately resulting in desirable leadership and a close
knit team. Contingency leadership theory perpetuates the idea that there is no one style of
leadership that is most effective and that one leadership style may be appropriate for a setting
that is not appropriate in another.
Methods that are used within organizational leadership include descriptive or
observational research design, time span research including cross-sectional and longitudinal,
most involving quantitative research. By evaluating this complex problem through an
organizational leadership lens, it will help aid in deciding what leadership positions and traits
will best address these issues and what types of research will help illuminate solutions to the
adverse health effects of hydraulic fracturing on employees, their communities, and their
environment.
STEP 6: Analyze the Problem and Evaluate Each Insight or Theory
The two disciplines chosen for research in order to address this complex question include
human resource development and organizational leadership. Human resource development is
beneficial in addressing this complex problem because this area of study focuses on managing an
organization’s employees and more specifically on the training and development programs in
place for the protection of the organization’s most valuable asset, their employees. By focusing
on this discipline it will help aid in a better understanding of how hydraulic fracturing companies
are attempting to keep their employees safe in route to a well site as well as on the location of a
well site and how they can better educate their employees on proper safety and hazard protocol.
By researching organizational leadership analysis of the leadership involved in protecting

employees and their families as well as surrounding communities and the environment from any
adverse effects that natural resource extraction may create will hopefully result in a possible
solution to this complex problem.
The disciplinary affiliations of the literature collected for this research for both
disciplines include: industrial hygiene, occupational safety and health, toxicology, disease
control and prevention, health science, epidemiology, chemistry, environmental chemistry,
immunology and microbiology, medicine, social psychology, environmental science and
community engineering, environmental health development, energy policy, rural sociology,
sociology of natural resources and the environment, environmental and occupational health,
public health, community and behavioral health, social psychology, political science, United
States environmental politics, and public policy.
Insights of Human Resource Development
Eric J. Esswein, Michael Breitenstein, John Snawder, Max Kiefer, and W. Karl Sieber, all
of whom authored the article Occupational Exposures to Respirable Crystalline Silica During
Hydraulic Fracturing in 2013, focus on research pertaining to employee’s exposure to
chemicals, specifically crystalline silica, that is used during the fracturing process to enhance to
ability of the process to reach deeper depths of the Earth the health risks involved. R, Mash, J.
Minnaar, and B. Mash state in their article, Health and Fracking: Should the Medical Profession
be Concerned? written in 2014, that “[Crystalline silica] is used to keep open the network of tiny
spaces in the shale created by [fracturing], which allow the gas to be released” (p. 332). Mash
(2014) also explains that a requirement of up to 2,000 tons of crystalline silica sand is needed for
this process” (p. 332). Esswein, Breitenstein, Snawder, Kiefer, and Sieber (2013) conducted a
qualitative study by using an on-site survey of employee exposure to crystalline silica on eleven

well sites in five different states (Colorado, Texas, North Dakota, Arkansas, and Pennsylvania)
to determine the industry job positions that were the most exposed to the crystalline silica during
the fracturing process. With such a broad sample of research from eleven well sites, the
researchers were able to consider many different environmental, meteorological, and
geographical factors that influence the presence of crystalline silica during fracturing (Essewein
et al., 2013).
Esswein et al. (2013) discover that fracking employees who work full-shifts are exposed
to separable crystalline silica which has been proven to be hazardous to the health of the workers
involved. Diseases that can be caused by the inhalation of the crystalline silica include lung
cancer, silicosis, kidney disease, autoimmune disorders, and an elevated risk of tuberculosis.
The findings of this research conclude that the job positions that are most directly affected by the
inhalation of crystalline silica include the Sand Mover and Transfer Belt Operators. Even though
workers usually wear masks and respirators, those who wore half masks at the well-site were not
efficient enough to protect the worker due to the concentration of the crystalline silica.
The researchers conclude that the employee’s positions that are more directly exposed to
crystalline silica are at far more risk for diseases and highlights a need for additional safety
procedures in place to better protect employees when the use of these chemicals are most
prevalent (Esswein et al., 2013).
In another article titled Human Health Risk Assessment of Air Emissions from
Development of Unconventional Natural Gas Resources written by Lisa M. McKenzie, Roxana
Z. Witter, Lee S. Newman, and John L. Adgate in 2012, the research focuses primarily on the
most accurate tools that can be utilized when conducting research on the adverse health effects
from air emissions resulting from hydraulic fracturing. Specifically, this study questions whether

an environmental risk assessment can be used as a tool during a health impact assessment (HIA)
to determine the adverse health effects from air emissions resulting from fracturing. The study
concentrates on petroleum hydrocarbons in and around fracturing sites and specifically the
emissions present less than half a mile as well as more than a half a mile from the site and what
types of health hazards are associated with the risk of air contamination during well development
and production. This research also focuses on which stages of fracturing produce more air
pollutants (McKenzie et al., (2012).
McKenzie et al. (2012) establish that a risk assessment can be used in HIA to help
pinpoint the areas that will be most negatively impacted by air emissions from hydraulic
fracturing so that preventative recommendations can be made in order to decrease possible health
risks. The findings showed that there is a higher risk for adverse health effects on residents who
live less than half a mile from the well site than those residents living at a half mile or more away
from the well site. Complications from air emissions of various petroleum hydrocarbons such as
benzene, ethylbenzene, toluene, and xylene, can be directed linked to health hazards including
types of leukemia, immune deficiencies, anemia, inflamed sinuses, decreased lung function, and
even neurological tube defects in pregnant women. These results open the door for researchers
to develop ways to decrease the hazardous effects of hydraulic fracturing air emissions on the
workers involved as well as the residents that live in the vicinity of the well site (McKenzie et
al., 2012).
In 2011, supporting the previous findings, Theo Colborn, Carol Kwiatkowski, Kim
Schultz, and Mary Bachran, who wrote the journal article titled Natural Gas Operations from a
Public Health Perspective, explain how ground-level ozone can be created when “toxic volatile
compounds” mix with nitrogen oxides from the exhausts of equipment and trucks (p. 1042).

“One highly reactive molecule of ground-level ozone can burn the deep alveolar tissue in the
lungs, causing it to age prematurely” (Colborn et al., p. 1042, 2011). Exposure at this level, over
time, can lead to health problems such as chronic obstructive pulmonary disease and asthma,
which is most notably dangerous to age groups including children, young adults that are active
outdoors, and geriatrics (Colborn et al., p. 1042, 2011).
A great point referring to human resource development is made by Jamie Heinecke in
2014 in her journal article, The Role of Human Factors Considerations and Safety Culture in the
Safety of Hydraulic Fracturing (Fracking). In this article, Heinecke (2014) makes the claim that
“Human factors consideration should be the foundations of [hydraulic fracturing’s] rapidly
growing technology to ensure that it is implemented correctly in order to minimize the
drawbacks of the [fracturing] process” (p. 132). There not only exists exposures of chemical
hazards to employees, but physical hazards as well. The safety of the process of hydraulic
fracturing, as well as a deeper understanding of these needs must be re-evaluated by the
industry’s leaders to ensure that all is being done to protect their most precious asset, their
employees, as well as the environment and surrounding communities.
One important fact to consider when discussing the release of crystalline silica into the
environment caused by hydraulic fracturing is the measured amount of silica being distributed.
In 2005, James F, Collins, Andrew G. Salmon, Joseph P. Brown, Melanie A. Marty, and George
V. Alexeeff state in their journal article, titled Development of a Chronic Inhalation Reference
Level for Respirable Crystalline Silica, that “A recent inventory estimated that the annual
statewide industrial emissions from facilities [in California] reporting under the Air Toxics Hot
Spots Act were 2.5 million pounds of crystalline silica” (p. 292). This astonishing amount of
chemical air emissions puts into perspective the scope of this dangerous issue and prompts the

leaders of the hydraulic fracturing industry to approach this problem swiftly, possible in
conjunction with environmental specialists and research scientists, in order to come up with a
solution that will reduce this staggering amount of crystalline silica emission.
Insights of Organizational Leadership
B. J. Anderson and G. L. Theodori conducted a qualitative study in 2009 and published
their findings in the journal article titled Local Leaders’ Perceptions of Energy Developments in
the Barnett Shale. Anderson and Theodori (2009) suggest that there exists positive and negative
impacts at the local-level in communities surrounding hydraulic fracturing. These researchers
conducted semi-structured interviews with local leaders and everyday citizens within two
surrounding counties, Wise County and Johnson County, who all answered the same three
questions regarding the effects on public health and safety, resource use during hydraulic
fracturing, and the quality of life. The researchers assessed the increase in traffic, well
explosions, and gas leaks in reference to public health and safety, more specifically the safety of
the workers at the well site, and, in response to environmental concerns, they focused on the
massive amounts of water that is required for fracturing and the possibility of depleting water
sources completely. Finally, the researchers focused on the impact of the quality of life by
questioning respondents about topics such as noise level and struggles over mineral rights
(Anderson & Theodori, 2009).
Anderson and Theodori (2009) conclude that local communities do experience negative
consequences as well as positive impacts due to hydraulic fracturing. While the negative and
positive effects on these communities and their citizens are weighed differently between the two
counties, Wise County believing that the consequences out way the benefits and Johnson County
coming to an opposite conclusion, their areas of concern were parallel to each other. The authors

suggest further research be conducted on positive and negative energy-related impacts as well as
differences and similarities in the perceptions of the community’s leaders and their citizens
(Anderson & Theodori, 2009).
In 2014, Charles Davis authored Substate Federalism and Fracking Policies: Does State
Regulatory Authority Trump Local Use Autonomy? This journal article begs the question of
whether or not state regulations can be developed without repressing land use autonomy that is
practiced by local officials. This literature focuses on hydraulic fracturing policies of three of the
leading states in natural resource production including Colorado, Pennsylvania, and Texas.
Davis (2014) compares the different policies, including strengths and weaknesses of these
policies, which have been put into place from the beginning of natural resource exploration in
these states and explores the motivations behind each state’s preferences in regulations and why
each has more or less control over local fracturing policy decisions. This study also discusses
what actions are required by the organization’s leaders to follow these laws and regulations that
are being placed on hydraulic fracturing procedures (Davis, 2014).
Davis (2014) suggests that there exists great variation on how policy questions of state
control versus local land use autonomy are addressed in Colorado, Pennsylvania, and Texas.
Focusing on Texas, they prove to have more tolerance with local control over fracturing policies
due to their strong home rule policies that allow cities to enact regulations and restrictions on
drilling policy concerns to their own discretion. Davis also points out that state courts will most
likely become the mediators between the goals of state control and local land use autonomy for
the states that have strong state regulation roots and proposes more research be conducted about
the influence of state’s leaders’ preferences when referring to hydraulic fracturing regulations
(2014).

The journal article, Occupational Exposures in the Oil and Gas Extraction Industry: State
of the Science and Research Recommendations, written by Roxana Z. Witter, Liliana Tenney,
Suzanne Clark, and Lees S. Newman in 2014, explores occupational fatalities and injuries,
occupational illnesses, federal agency and industry interventions for the protection of employees,
as well as additional research requirements involving these issues in the oil and gas extraction
industry. This article focuses on the causes of workplace fatalities, injuries, and environmental
hazards in the workplace and recommends strategies that the industries can use to increase the
safety of their employees (Witter et al., 2014).
The findings in Witter’s (2014) article show that with the increase in available jobs due to
advancement in the oil and gas industry there is also a greater risk in fatalities, injuries, and
illness. The risks associated with work-related fatalities and injuries mostly involve vehicle
accidents related to texting and driving. Some of the injuries sustained on the job site include
machinery mishaps and tool malfunctions and can be addressed by increasing the effectiveness
of the company’s hazard communication plans when hiring on new employees. Witter also
addresses the ongoing debate on environmental impacts from the chemical emissions involved in
oil and gas extraction and describes ways that can help prevent employee exposure to these
substances. Overall, Witter (2014) states there is a need for cooperation between the oil and gas
industry, occupational health and safety experts, as well as federal agencies in order to make
these work sites safer for the industry’s employees.
Another article supporting this complex research question is titled Regulating Hydraulic
Fracturing in Shale Gas Plays: The Case of Texas, written by Dianne Rahm in 2011 who also
focuses on issues regarding employee and surrounding community exposure to air emissions
produced by the hydraulic fracturing process, but approaches the problem through a legislative

point of view and devotes a portion of her research on Texas’ influence in this industry. Rahm
(2011) explores environmental concerns and issues related to hydraulic fracturing along with
United States regulatory practices imposed on states and the unique ability by Texas to become
one of the nation’s top players in the development of natural resources. This literature addresses
the constant battle between pro-drilling and anti-drilling states as well as the controversy
between federal government regulations through the EPA and state governments (Rahm, 2011).
Furthermore, Rahm’s research verifies that there will be continued controversy over the
environmental impact of hydraulic fracturing and the air emissions associated with this process
because of the confusion about who should regulate the industries rules and policies or lack
thereof (2011). Rahm describes the advantages that the state of Texas has when it comes to
ownership of mineral and surface rights and why this has paved the way for Texas to become
such a key player in hydraulic fracturing (2011). There is no question that communities and the
surrounding environment will continue to be altered overtime as a result of hydraulic fracturing,
but as a result of anti-drilling activists who are asking for more regulations and limits for these
companies and their procedures there will likely be more laws and regulations put into place in
the future (Rahm, 2011). Colborn et al. (2011) states that “The responsibility for overseeing the
nation’s underground minerals lies with the U.S. Department of Interior, Bureau of Land
Management (BLM) with some oversight from the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
(USEPA)” (p. 1040). It is reasonable to consider that Texas should utilize some of these
government agency’s plans and regulations to create more strict laws and guidelines to protect
employees and surrounding communities alike.

STEP 7: Identify Conflict between Insights and Their Sources
There has been no specific conflict identified between the two relevant disciplines,
human resource development and organizational leadership, and their individual approaches to
this complex problem. Fortunately the basic assumptions of each discipline are similar and they
both fit together nicely when researching the issue in question.
On the other hand, numerous vocabulary discrepancies within disciplines and across the
literature have been discovered. Within the journal articles that focus on the aspect of human
resource development, numerous references to the air emissions created by the hydraulic
fracturing process vary between three terms. Esswein et al. (2013) refer to these emissions as
“crystalline silica” and “frac sand” while McKenzie et al. (2012) term these same emissions as
natural gas development sources (NGDS).
The second vocabulary inconsistency revealed is the variation of terms used referring to
“hydraulic fracturing” across the different pieces of literature regarding both disciplines.
Anderson and Theodori (2009) use the term “unconventional energy development,” while
Esswein et al. (2013) prefers to use the term “hydraulic fracturing,” and Witter et al. (2014)
chooses to refer to it as “natural resource exploration,” McKenzie et al. (2012) uses the term
“natural gas development,” and, lastly, Davis (2014) utilizes two separate vocabulary terms, in
his single article, including “natural resource exploration” as well as “fracking.”
STEP 8: Create Common Ground
According to Repko (2012) “The purpose of creating common ground is to develop
collaborative communication among disciplinary scholars and reconcile (to the extent possible)
their different insights and theories on a particular problem” (p. 323). The circumstance
requiring common ground be created is due to the variations of concepts or terms being used to

refer to the same thing (Repko, 2012). Repko (2012) lists techniques that can be utilized to
achieve common ground, specifically in this case, redefinition. “Redefinitions involves
modifying or redefining concepts in different texts and contexts to bring out a common
meaning… [also referred to as] ‘textual integration’” (Repko, 2012, p. 336).
For this research process new vocabulary needs to be established to facilitate effective
communication. To dissolve the vocabulary conflict over what term to use when referring to the
chemical air emissions resulting from the fracturing process, “crystalline silica” or “silica” will
be used for the purpose of this research study due to the fact that this study specifically focus’ on
this particular form of environmental emissions. To unify the inconsistencies of terms being
used when referring to the process of natural gas extraction it is necessary to utilize information
from a lecture titled Essential Elements: Hydraulic Fracturing in 2015 by Caleb Crow. Crow
(2015) illustrates how the term “fracking” has been “demonized” by politics from the “left side”
and stresses that professionals within the industry use the preferred term, “hydraulic fracturing.”
Therefore, this research study will only refer to this process as “hydraulic fracturing” simply
because this type of professional research requires that the highest form of professionalism be
maintained. For example, when quoting Davis (2014) who states that “This places most fracking
regulatory decisions within the context of substate federalism,” it will be reconstructed so that
the quote reads, “This places most [hydraulic fracturing] regulatory decisions within the context
of substate federalism” (p. 8397). By creating common ground between the inconsistencies of
these vocabulary terms it will aid in developing “collaborative communication” as well as
decrease the amount of confusion that may exist (Repko, 2012, p. 328).

STEP 9: Construct a More Comprehensive Understanding
By executing STEP 8, it is now possible to construct common ground. Common ground
is used to integrate the numerous conflicting insights through discussion in STEP 9. Repko
(2012) defines integration as “a process by which ideas, data and information, methods, tools,
concepts, and/or theories from two or more disciplines are synthesized, connected, or blended”
(p. 466). This step will allow for construction of a more comprehensive understanding of the
complex question.
There is a need to integrate insights resulting from our original question: How has
hydraulic fracturing affected the health and safety of employees involved and what steps are
being taken by the industry’s leaders to help keep their employees safe as well as the surrounding
communities and their environment? The question obviously cannot be assessed by a single
discipline; to create a thorough picture to aid in answering our complex problem, each insight
requires an understanding of the others. By grasping a better understanding of these insights we
are better able to construct a more comprehensive understanding which is defined by Repko
(2012) as “the integration of insights to produce a new and more nuanced whole. It is the
integration that forms a new whole; the insights or theories that contribute to it” (p. 469).
Concerning human resource development based insights, there is a serious concern for
the health of on-site employees who are being exposed to harmful chemical air emissions during
the hydraulic fracturing process. Esswein, et al. (2013) conducted extensive research at eleven
different well sites in order to establish which employees were being exposed and what factors
influenced the various level of exposures. They concluded that there are employees and
surrounding communities who are more directly affected by exposure to crystalline silica than
others and discussed the methods used to protect these employees and citizens, specifically the

utilization of masks and respirators and preventative measures to reduce air emissions such as
wetting the soil on site. McKenzie et al. (2012) further investigate the specific chemicals that
hydraulic fracturing employees are being exposed to as well as the diseases and health
complications that are directly related to these harmful chemicals, most notably the lung disease
known as silicosis.
By researching the insights of organizational leadership in hydraulic fracturing
organizations, it is concluded that there exists a large number of inconsistent laws and
regulations as well as the need for government and state level authorities to collaborate their
efforts in order to protect all affected by hydraulic fracturing (Davis, 2014). It is vital that the
industry’s leaders begin working on ways to protect their human resources (employees) as well
as their families in the surrounding communities and the environment (Heinecke, 2014).
Without pressure from lawmakers concerning these health and environmental issues, this
problem will continue to grow, possibly, past the point of containment.
Solely through developing a more comprehensive understanding of these two disciplinary
insights the primitive question can be reconstructed into one of policy: What has been done to
prevent negative health and safety repercussions of hydraulic fracturing employees and what
steps have been implemented by the industry’s leaders, such as top of the line respirators and
masks and onsite emission prevention methods, to ensure safety of their employees, their
surrounding communities, and their environment? Neither of these individual disciplines could
develop this understanding. By integrating, exclusively, the insights of human resource
development and organizational leadership and examining these discipline’s theories, concepts,
and assumptions a more solid understanding of the question can be accomplished.

STEP 10: Communicating the Results
Repko (2012) states that “A more comprehensive understanding is the integration of
insights to produce a new and more nuanced whole” (p. 382). Through an interdisciplinary
understanding of the disciplinary insights into hydraulic fracturing and the effects that this
process has on employees, their surrounding communities, and their environments, a
development in the comprehension of how to better protect these subjects from the harmful air
emissions produced by this process, as well as identification of the steps that the industry’s
leaders need to consider to better solve this complex problem, is achieved.
Deeper research into the specific companies that provide top quality respirators and
masks is required to better address this question. It would be beneficial for researchers to
evaluate the companies that provide protective wear for these types of employees and encourage
them to go from well site to well site advertising their products to the hydraulic fracturing leaders
and demonstrate the high level of protection they can offer to shield the workers from harmful air
emissions. On the other hand, researchers can also evaluate the best methods of educating the
industry’s leaders on the harmful exposures from air emissions that are affecting the health of
their employees and what steps they can take to prevent adverse side effects. Also, further
research into what processes are the most efficient in reducing the amount of air emissions that
are being produced, such as wetting the ground around the site to decrease amounts of crystalline
silica that are potentially affecting citizens in surrounding communities and their environment.
Overall, this research proves that there is a need for research concerning better regulations, not
only by legislation, but also by the industry’s leaders, on hydraulic fracturing in order to protect
all those involved.

References
Anderson, B. J. & Theodori, G. L. (2009). Local leaders’ perceptions of energy development in
the Barnett shale. The Journal of Rural Social Sciences, 24 (1), 113-129.
Armstrong, S. & Mitchell, B. (2008). The essential hr handbook: A quick and handy resource for
any manager or hr professional (G. Talucci, Ed.). Pompton Plains, NJ: The Career Press,
Inc.
Bamberger, M. & Oswald, R. E. (2015). Long-term impacts of unconventional drilling
operations on human and animal health. Journal of Environmental Scinces and Health,
Part A: Toxic/Hazardous Substances and Environmental Engineering, 50 (5), 447-459.
Colborn, T., Kwiatkowski, C., Schultx, K., & Bachran, M. (2011). Natural gas operations from a
public health perspective. Human and Ecological Risk Assessment: An International
Journal, 17 (5), 1039-1056.
Collins, J. F., Salmon, A. G., Brown, J. P., Marty, M. A., & Alexeeff, G. V. (2005).
Development of a chronic inhalation reference level for respirable crystalline silica.
Regulatory Toxicology and Pharmacology, 43 (3), 292-300.
Cooper, D. R. & Schindler, P. S. (2014). Business research methods. New York, NY: McGraw-
Hill/Irwin.
Crow, C. (2015, February 3). Essential elements: Hydraulic fracturing. Lecture at Texas Tech
University, Lubbock, TX.
Davis, C. (2014). Substate federalism and fracking policies: Does state regulatory authority
trump local use autonomy? Environmental Science & Technology, 48 (15), 8397-8403.

Esswein, E. J., Breitenstein, M., Snawder, J., Kiefer, M., & Sieber, K. (2013). Occupational
exposures to respirable crystalline silica during hydraulic fracturing. Journal of
Occupational and Environmental Hygiene, 10 (7), 347-356.
Heinecke, J.,Jabbari, N., & Meshkati, N. (2014). The role of human factors considerations and
safety culture in the safety of hydraulic fracturing (fracking). Journal of Sustainable
Energy Engineering, 2 (2), 130-151.
Mash, R., Minnaar, J., & Mash, B. (2014). Health and fracking: should the medical profession be
concerned? South African Medical Journal, 104 (5), 332-335.
McKenzie, L. M., Witter, R. Z., Newman, L. S., & Adgate, J. L. (2012) Human health risk
assessment of air emissions from development of unconventional gas resources. Science
of the Total Environment, 424, 79-87.
Rahm, D. (2011). Regulating hydraulic fracturing in shale gas plays: The case of Texas. Energy
Policy, 39 (5), 2974-2981.
Repko, A. F. (2012). Interdisciplinary research: Process and theory (2nd ed.). Los Angeles, CA:
Sage.
Texas Tech University. (2015). University studies. In Prospective students: Organizational
leadership. Retrieved from
http://www.depts.ttu.edu/universitystudies/prospective_students/orgl.php
Witter, R. Z., Tenney, L., Clark, S., & Newman, L. S. (2014). Occupational exposures in the oil
and gas extraction industry: State of the science and research recommendations.
American Journal of Industrial Medicine, 57 (7), 847-856.

L8-A1

Recommended

Recommended

More Related Content

Similar to L8-A1

Similar to L8-A1 (20)

More from Kaitlyn Potter

More from Kaitlyn Potter (7)

L8-A1