Powder River Basin Resource Council, Wyoming Outdoor Council, Earthworks, and Center for Effective Government (Formerly Omb Watch) v. Wyoming Oil and Gas Conservation Commission and Halliburton Energy Services, Inc.
2014 WY 37
Wyo.2014Background
- Appellants sought public records from the Wyoming Oil and Gas Conservation Commission identifying chemicals used in hydraulic fracturing.
- Wyoming amended rules in 2010 to require disclosure of additives, CAS numbers, and concentrations for well stimulation; information could be withheld as trade secrets.
- The Supervisor denied disclosure under WPRA trade secret exemption; the district court affirmed under APA review.
- Appellants appealed, arguing WPRA procedures apply and the information is not per se trade secret.
- The Wyoming Supreme Court adopted FOIA-style trade secret definitions for the WPRA and remanded for independent, case-by-case determinations of trade secret status.
- The court also held that district court must apply WPRA procedures (including potential show-cause proceedings) rather than review the decision as an APA administrative action.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether the district court erred by applying APA review instead of WPRA procedures. | Powder River contends WPRA governs disclosure and requires an independent finding. | WOGCC and Halliburton contend APA review suffices for judicial oversight. | Yes; WPRA procedures apply and require independent findings. |
| Whether the WPRA should adopt FOIA’s definition of trade secrets. | Appellants favor narrower or Restatement-based definitions. | Supervisor argues traditional WPRA standards apply. | Court adopts FOIA-like definition of trade secrets with direct relation to the productive process. |
| Whether the record supports treating individual hydraulic fracturing ingredients as trade secrets. | Identity of ingredients could be revealed without disclosing formulas. | Disclosing ingredients risks reverse engineering and competitively sensitive information. | Unable to determine on current record; remand for case-by-case factual findings. |
Key Cases Cited
- Allsop v. Cheyenne Newspapers, Inc., 39 P.3d 1092 (Wy. 2002) (WPRA open-records framework and de novo statutory interpretation guidance)
- Sheridan Newspapers, Inc. v. City of Sheridan, 660 P.2d 785 (Wyo. 1983) (open records philosophy; narrow construction of exemptions)
- Miley v. Miley, 942 P.2d 1101 (Wyo. 1997) (statutory interpretation guiding WPRA purposes)
- Anderson v. Dep’t of Health & Human Servs., 907 F.2d 936 (10th Cir. 1990) (FOIA trade secrets definition shaping WPRA approach)
- Public Citizen Health Research Group v. FDA, 704 F.2d 1280 (D.C. Cir. 1983) (FOIA trade secrets definition as a controlling standard)
- Freudenthal v. Cheyenne Newspapers, Inc., 233 P.3d 933 (Wyo. 2010) (WPRA procedures for challenging denial of access)