First Flowback| A REVIEW OF EPA’S EXTERNAL

REVIEW DRAFT REPORT ON THE IMPACT OF HYDRAULIC FRACTURING

ON DRINKING WATER RESOURCES

Edward Pfau | Hull & Associates, Inc

Shale Exchange 2015

GOALS OF THIS PRESENTATION | THE BIG PICTURE

• Provide information on the External Review Draft

• Summarize the key findings

• Provide comments on likely implications

From EPA ERD (2015). Image: USGS

Shale Exchange 2015

EXTERNAL REVIEW DRAFT

• Assessment of the Potential Impacts of Hydraulic Fracturing for Oil and Gas on Drinking Water Resources

• External review draft released June 4, 2015

• Study may be accessed at:• http://www2.epa.gov/hfstudy

• Designated as a Highly Influential Scientific Assessment (HISA)

• Review by Science Advisory Board (SAB)

• Stakeholder and Public Comments due August 28, 2015

• http://www.regulations.gov/#!searchResults;rpp=25;po=0;s=epa-HQ-OA-2015-0245;fp=true;ns=true

Shale Exchange 2015

SCOPE OF EPA’s ASSESSMENT

• Water Acquisition

• Chemical Mixing

• Well Injection

• Flowback and Produced Water

• Wastewater Treatment and Waste Disposal

• Impacts on Drinking Water Sources

• Groundwater or surface water that now serves or could serve as a drinking water source for public or private use, including both fresh and non-fresh bodies of water

From EPA ERD, 2015. Image © J Henry Fair /

Flights provided by LightHawk.

SCOPE OF EPA’s ASSESSMENT EXCLUDES:

• Sand mining and chemical production

• Site selection and infrastructure

• Site reclamation

• Well closure

• Evaluation of regulations, policies and practices

• Impacts on non-drinking water use

• Seismic, air quality, ecosystems

• Worker health and safety

• Disposal of wastes in UIC wells

• Formal risk assessmentFrom EPA ERD, 2015. Photo

credit: DOE/NETL.

Shale Exchange 2015

EPA’s ASSESSMENT APPROACH

• Scientific and engineering journals

• Federal and state government reports

• NGO Reports

• Industry publications

• Government databases

• Other databases

• Business information submitted to EPA (CBI and non-CBI)

From EPA ERD, 2015. Photo credit: Mark

Saltzer (EPA).. Shale Exchange 2015

EPA’s IDENTIFIED MECHANISMS BY WHICH HYDRAULIC FRACTURING MAY IMPACT DRINKING WATER

• Water withdrawals in areas of or time of low water availability

• Spills of fracturing fluids, flowbackwater and produced water

• Fracturing directly into underground drinking water sources

• Below-ground migration of liquids and gases (casing and cementing failures)

• Discharge of untreated wastewaters into drinking water sources From EPA ERD, 2015. Image © Henry Fair;

Flights provided by Lighthawk.

Shale Exchange 2015

EPA’s MAJOR FINDING

• “We did not find evidence that these mechanisms have led to widespread, systemic impacts on drinking water resources in the United States. Of the potential mechanisms identified in this report, we found specific instances where one or more mechanisms led to impacts on drinking water resources, including drinking water wells. The number of identified cases, however, was small compared to the number of hydraulically fractured wells.”

Shale Exchange 2015

WATER ACQUISITION

• Hydraulic fracturing activities use 44 billion gallons water per year

• ~ 4 million gallons per well

• Generally ≤ 1% of total use

• ≥ 50% in 10% FracFocus counties

• Majority of water is fresh

• Wastewater reuse• 79% in Marcellus Shale (18% inj.

water)

• 5% in Barnett Shale

• No single case where HF activities alone caused a drinking water source to go dry

From EPA ERD, 2015. Photo credit: Martha

Roberts (EPA). Shale Exchange 2015

CHEMICAL MIXING

• Spill frequency• 1 spill/well in Colorado

• 0.4 to 12 spills/well in Western PA

• 151 spills of HF fluids, additives• 5 gal to 19,000 gal

• Median spill: 420 gal

• 30% of spills from storage units

• 64% soils, 9% SW, 0% GW

• Additives

• 1,076 chemicals in HF fluids

• 4 – 28 chemicals per well

• Risk assessment should be local

From EPA ERD, 2015. Photo credit: Industry

source.Shale Exchange 2015

WELL INJECTION

• Two mechanisms • Deficient well casing and cementing• Movement thru subsurface

formations

• Casing and Cementing• Risks greatly diminished if surface

casing extends below DW zone• > 3% of HF wells do not have

cement across a portion of casing thru DW zone

• Cited in Killdeer ND, Bainbridge OH and Mann Creek CO events

• Subsurface Formations• Marcellus Shale, Haynesville Shale • Antrim Shale, New Albany Shale

From EPA ERD, 2015. Photo credit: U.S.

EPAShale Exchange 2015

FLOWBACK AND PRODUCED WATER

• Produced water • Generally 10-25% of injected

volume• Barnett Shale exception, PW ≥ inj.

vol.

• 252 spills of flowback/produced • Median spill: 990 gal• 74% caused by container failure• 8% impacted SW and/or GW

• Lycoming County, PA• Towanda Creek, Bradford Co., PA

• Composition• 134 chemicals identified • Detailed evaluation in App. E• Risk assessment should be local

From EPA ERD, 2015. Photo credit:

NYSDECShale Exchange 2015

WASTEWATER MANAGEMENT AND DISPOSAL

• Wastewater Management Options• UIC wells

• Evaporation ponds

• Reuse without treatment

• Land application/road spreading

• Treatment at CWT facility, subsequent

• Discharge to stream

• Discharge to POTW

• Reuse

• UIC wells: 98% in 2007 (exc. Marcellus)

• Discharge issues• B, Ba, Br-, Cl-, heavy metals

• Radionuclides From EPA ERD, 2015. Photo credit:

Caroline Ridley (U.S. EPA).Shale Exchange 2015

REPORT LIMITATIONS

• These findings could reflect:• Rarity of impacts upon drinking water

resources• Insufficient pre- and post-fracturing

data on quality of drinking water sources

• Lack of long-term systematic studies• “Presence of other sources of

contamination precluding a definitive link between hydraulic fracturing activities and an impact.”

• “…the inaccessibility of some information on hydraulic fracturing activities and potential impacts.”

Shale Exchange 2015

EPA’s OBJECTIVES FOR USE OF THE REPORT

• EPA’s Objectives:• Encourage pre- and post-hydraulic

fracturing monitoring studies by researchers

• Dissemination of data in forms accessible by wide range of users

• Advance the scientific basis for decision-making by governments, industry and the public

• Report Finalization• SAB Review

• Public and Stakeholder Comments due August 28, 2015

• Next Steps

Photo credit: USGS

Shale Exchange 2015

IMPLICATIONS OF THE REPORT

• EPA has not identified a mechanism by which hydraulic fracturing has substantially affected drinking water resources

• There is no reason to regulate or restrict hydraulic fracturing in a manner distinct from conventional oil and gas exploration and extraction

Photo credit: USGS

QUESTIONS AND COMMENTS

Photo credit: USGS