### Marcellus & Utica Shale Plays:

Water Issues in the Ohio River Basin

# The Ohio River Basin

 5% of US mainland (205,000 square miles)  25 million population

 All or part of 15 states

 Highly diverse land uses

– Forest

– Agriculture

– Industrial Corridor

– Urban areas

– Energy Development

 Coal

 Oil and Gas

# Ohio River Facts

 981 miles from Pittsburgh to Cairo

 Drinking water source for 5 million people (33 intakes)

 120+ species of fish; rich in mussels

 230 million tons of cargo transported annually; 20 locks and dams

 Recreational water resource  49 power generating plants; 5% nations electric.

 Low flows=5,880 cfs

=3.8 bgpd

# Ohio River Valley Water

Sanitation Commission

 Established in 1948 by Compact.

 Ratified by Congressional action.

 Eight signatory states (IL, IN, NY, KY, OH, PA, VA, WV)

 “Pledge cooperation” to abate interstate water pollution in Ohio River valley compact district.

 Created ORSANCO to coordinate and implement  Historical focus on Ohio River water quality.

 Currently investigating a role in water quantity.

# Commission

 3/state (gubernatorial appointments); 3 federal (Presidential appointments)

 State EPA director ex

- officio

 One federal is EPA Regional Administrator

 Budget: $2.5 million

 Staff

– 23

# Commission Structure

 Commissioners are board of directors.

– OH, Scott Nally , Director OEPA

– PA, Michael Krancer , Secretary PADEP

– WV, Randy Huffman, Secretary WVDEP

 Pollution Control Standards Committee

– Set Water Quality Standards for Ohio River.

 Technical Committee

– States’ Water Directors

 Water Resources Committee

# Program Areas

 Regulatory

– establish Ohio River Pollution Control Standards

 Water quality & biological monitoring & assessment.

 Spill Detection/Response (monitoring, communications)

 Clean Water Act/Safe Drinking Water Act implementation coordination (TMDLs, NPDES, Source Water Protection, etc...)

 Applied Research (pharmaceuticals, mercury)

 Public Involvement Programs (volunteer monitoring, River Sweep, mobile aquarium)

 Not authorized to address water quantity issues.

– Currently investigating ORSANCO’s potential role.

# Background

 2008

– Monongahela TDS Concentrations problematic for drinking water treatment facilities.

– Occurred during summer low flows.

– Partially attributed to shale gas hydrofracing operations in PA.

– At the time frac flowback waters were sent to WWTPs with little effective removal capabilities.

 2009

– Bromide identified as cause for increased DBPs/TTHMs at drinking water treatment plants.

– This also partially attributed to hydrofracing

.

# Background (cont.)

 

### Around the same time, PADEP was reporting on Susquehanna River Basin Commission’s active role in permitting water withdrawals for hydrofracing

.

 

### Issue raised whether ORSANCO should take that same water resources role in Ohio Basin.

 

### Recognition that ORSANCO has no legal authority to operate in water resources arena.State Yr Marcellus Yr Utica

OH Permits issued since 2006 16 2009 273

Permits issued in 2012 2 2012 177

WV Permits issued since 2005 2622

Permits issued in 2012 264

PA Permits issued since 2005 11,155

Permits issued in 2012 1,407 

# Status of Marcellus & Utica Activities

# Status of Disposal of Flowback Water

 WV

– 81% of Frac Water is reused, 18% sent to Underground Injection Well, 1% other

 PA

– 99% reused, Underground Injection Well, industrial Water Treatment Plant

 OH

– Sent to Underground Injection Wells or Reused  Surface water quality concerns relating to disposal of flowback water are controlled at this time!!!!

### Water Quality Issues for Ohio Basin

 

### Water quality issues relating to disposal of flowback water are diminished.

 

### ORSANCO recently established a TDS standard of 500 mg/L for Ohio River.

 

### One year TDS/Bromide monitoring survey underway.

 

### TDS is secondary drinking water standard for asthetics

.  

### Evaluating need for Bromide criterion

– Pittsburgh Water was having issues.

# Surface Water Quality Monitoring Programs

 West Virginia

– Cooperative agreement with USGS to test GW quality by testing nearby wells and streams from 2011

- 2012

– West Virginia Water Research Institute (WVWRI) has an established monitoring network on the Monongahela River (19 Parameters including Br

- & TDS)
 Ohio

– No monitoring directly related to DrillingStudy Area of USGS & WVDEP Ground Water Study of Marcellus Shale Gas Play in North

Central WV Pennsylvania

– RAIN (River Alert Information Network)

– a surface water protection network monitoring Cond , pH, & Temp at 13 Locations (adding a 14 th in WV)

– Freshwater Biology Team has a monitoring network for Fish Creek, WV; Cross Creek & Tenmile Creek, PA

– Modifications to existing monitoring network to address Marcellus.

 Susquehanna

– Network of 51 in

- stream monitors

– 50% of well applications get a baseline biological assessment at a fee of $5700 

# Surface Water Quality 

# Monitoring

## Status of State Regulations

### Ohio DNR

Division of Mineral resources Mgnt

 Withdrawals

–

– Must register for capacities > 100,000 gal/d

– Obtain permit for capacities > 2,000,000 gal/d

– Registration does not impose any restrictions.

 Disposal

–

– Must be sent to Class II disposal wells or reused unless granted exemption.

– City of Warren had been accepting flowback water; OEPA disallowing in their permit.

 Water well sampling required within 1500ft of well.

 Out of Basin Diversions > 100,000 gal/mo. requires permit.

## PADEP Bureau Oil & Gas Mgnt

 Withdrawals

–

– Mandatory water management plans.

– No restrictions on withdrawals < 10% of stream low flow.

– Must establish pass

- by flows for withdrawals > 10% of stream low flow.

 Multiple methodologies available.

– SRBC & DRBC regulate withdrawals in PA.

 Disposal

– voluntary program

 Contracting with nature conservancy to establish ecosystem flows for Ohio Basin; already completed for SRBC .

# West Virginia DEP

Office of Oil & Gas

 

### Water Mgnt Plan required if using > 210,000 gpmo
.  

### Withdrawals & Disposal: Where, when, how much.

 

### Withdrawals

– Demonstration of sufficient instream flows to protect stream designated uses.

– ID methods used to minimize aquatic life impacts.

 

### Disposal

– No land disposal; WVDEP approval for WWTP disposal.

– Quanitity , disposal locations, name hauling company.

 

### Online Water Withdrawal Guidance tool.

# ORSANCO Initiatives

 

## Foundation funding to investigate ORSANCO’s role in Water resources

– Characterize Ohio river basin water resources.



### – Summarize state & federal authorities & management of Ohio River Basin water resources.

– Develop recommendations for ORSANCO role.

 

## $400k project to be completed in 2014.

# Govenors ’ MOU Initiative

 MOU recognizing ORSANCO’s Role in Water resources Management.

– Trying to get Governor’s signatures;

 IN, KY, OH, PA, & WV on board so far.

– Forum for Ohio Basin states to develop regional policies.

– Coordinate Ohio Basin planning activities.

– Representation of regional interests to Congress and federal agencies.

– Investigate/study water resources issues.

– Provide training in water resources issues.

# What’s Next?

 Get Governors’ MOU in place.

 Complete water resources projects in 2014.

 Commission consideration of formal role in Ohio Basin water resources.

– Legal authorities would require changes to Ohio River Valley Water Sanitation Compact.

 Continue to monitor water quality.

 Keep abreast of emerging issues.

– Land Use Impacts

– Resulting sediment loads to surface water

# Questions?

Jason Heath, P.E., BCEE Technical Programs Manager & Assistannt Chief Engineer jheath@orsanco.org www.orsanco.org