## Meeting Summary

T opic : Meeting with Purestream Technology a bout Treatment Technologies

Relevant to the U nconventional O il a nd G as Industry

Meeting D ate : 08 November 201 3

Participants : Lisa Biddle, Jesse Pritts , Karen Milam ( EPA/EAD ) Meghan Camp, Sarah Hays (ERG) Amy Hansen, Todd Ennenga ( IPAA )

On 08 November 201 3

, the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA ) held a meeting

with Purestream Technology 1 to discuss treatment technologies relevant to the u nconventional oil and g as extraction industry. Todd Ennenga and Amy Hansen , represented Purestream Technology

. Discussion topics included:

**•** Water management options for the unconventional oil and gas (UOG) industry ;

**•** Comparison of treatment and reuse ; and

**•** Purestream Technology treatment options.

Attachment 1 lists the meeting participants

.

Purestream Technology Background

Purestream Technology (Purestream) was founded in 2009 and operated wastewater disposal ponds in UT and WY. Purestream partnered with approximately 400 researchers at Utah State University, who are experts in thermal management, and created the AVARA mobile treatment unit, which is a vapor recompression technology. Purestream licensed AVARA technolog y and to

- date, the largest commercial installation of the AVARA treatment system is in the Fayetteville shale formation (AR).

Total Water Management Scenario

Purestream presented the following three water management options used by unconventional oil and gas (UOG) operators:

**•** Once

- through use and subsequent disposal

– Operators have the option to dispose

of UOG wastewater at underground injection disposal well s or cent ralized waste

treatment facilities (CWT s )

.

**•** Treatment and re use in fracturing fluid

- Operators have the option to reuse UOG wastewater in subsequent fracture jobs , which sometimes requires mixing with

1 More information on Purestream Technology is available online at: http://purestreamtechnology.com/Meeting Summary Page 2 of 7

freshwater to obtain the correct water quality characteristics. Purestream noted

that o perators usually only need to remove solids and oil & grease to meet reuse water quality requirements

.

**•** Treatment and discharg e

– Operators have the option to treat UOG wastewater to meet effluent discharge limits set by the state or EPA and then discharge directly

to surface water 2

UOG Wastewater Treatment Considerations .

Purestream recognizes that transferring UOG wastewater is typically the highest cost component associated with managing and/or disposing of UOG wastewater. However, Purestream focuses on the treatment component of m anaging and/or disposing of UOG wastewater. Purestream noted that treating UOG wastewater has the following benefits:

**•** Reduces the demands for fresh water;

**•** Reduces the amount of UOG wastewater requiring disposal 3

**•** Reduces transportation associated with transferring UOG wastewater to disposal

locations ; and

4

.

However, Purestream noted that industry has the following concerns with treating UOG

wastewater :

**•** There are many treatment technologies and hundreds of water treatment vendors to choose from, so evaluating the options can be challenging for UOG operators.

**•** There is not one technology that fits every treatment need

. Each basin has different characteristics (e.g., economics, wastewater pollutants) and there are

even different characteristics within s ome basins (e.g., Bakken).

**•** The cost of treatment must compete with the cost of underground injection disposal , which is typically the cheapest disposal option (except in Pennsylvania)

.

**•** Although l ong term contracts are attractive to water treatment provide rs, they are

not attractive to UOG operators.

The following describes some of the major drivers for operators when deciding whether or not to reuse UOG wastewater in subsequent fracture jobs:

**•** Quality of influent water

- Purestream noted that the most comm on problem with the quality of influent water is the elevated concentration of TDS , which requires brine handling and disposal. Other pollutants of concern include hydrogen sulfide (H 2 S), bacteria, and oil & grease.

2 Treatment and discharge is the disposal method implemented at the Southwestern facility in the Fayetteville shale formation (AR).

3 For example, western Texas, central Arkansas, and portions of the Marcellus shale formation have specific

restraints on the quality and quantity of UOG wastewater that can be disposed of at underground injection disposal

wells.

4 For example, an operator would need approximately 300 truck trips to transfer half of the volume of flowback from a 125,000 bbl fracture job to a dis posal location.Meeting Summary Page 3 of 7

o TDS

- The AVARA treatment unit’s maximu m influent TDS concentration is 280 mg/L, which is the threshold for keeping solids saturated so that brine handling and disposal is not necessary (i.e., disposal via UIC is still appropriate). An alternative to brine disposal is to use the

brine in other UOG process es (e.g., as a kill fluid) 5

o Hydrogen sulfide (H 2 S), bacteria, and oil & grease

- These constituents may require a pretreatment step (e.g., oil/water separator, UV disinfection) upstream of the AVARA treatment unit to remove these constituents .

6

**•** Required quality of effluent water .

**•** Volume of influent water

**•** Chemical costs

**•** Energy source

**•** Disposal, sourcing, transportation costs

Purestream also identified the following variable drivers that may or may not play into the UOG operator’s decision about whether or not to reuse UOG wastewater :

**•** Location of F ield

– Operators may have the option of managing and/or disposing

of UOG wastewater via exi sting infrastructure in the field.

**•** Existing R egulation s

– Operators may need to consider the regulations that apply to surface discharge, above ground storage pits, in

- ground storage pits, etc.

**•** Reuse Options

– Operators in different locations may have different infrastructure and options in place to aid in reusing UOG wastewater. For example, in the Eagleford

, Fayetteville, and western Texas shale formations

, o perators are pursuing the hub and spoke concept (i.e., centralized waste tr eatment with piping

and/or trucking of treated water back out into the field for reuse).

When planning for reuse, operators consider space restrictions and whether they will use centralized or mobile treatment to treat the UOG wastewater to a quality that is sufficient for reuse. Depending on the quality of the wastewater and the type of treatment implemented, if any, operators may consider blending wastewater with freshwater prior to reuse in a subsequent fracture job. Operators also consider which storage and transportatio n methods they will use to during reuse. Operators may store wastewater in above

- or in

- ground storage tanks, which can be highly regulated in some states (e.g., leak detection system and/or lining requirements). Operators must also transfer wastewater to and from treatment as well as from the producing well to the next well to be fractured. Finally, operators must determine what disposal options they will need (e.g., solid waste, concentrated brine, sludge).

Purestream identified multi

- site water balance a s another important component of UOG

wastewater reuse. Operators must consider the following components when evaluating the water

5 Purestream described that an operator frac ture s a well and as they’re plugging each frac ture stage, they use a heavy

brine to act as a barrier and prevent water from flowing back up before they set the plug . Typically, operators

pur chase clean brine for this (KCl), but brine can be used as an alternative.

6 In the Fayetteville shale installation, aerated pits containing aerobic bacteria naturally remove ammonia in wastewater prior to treatment in the AVARA system.Meeting Summary Page 4 of 7

balance: on

- site fracturing fluid storage, fracturing fluid demand, on

- site flowback storage, transportation (e.g., percentage transported by truck versus by pipe), availability of off

- site storage (e.g., percentage stored in water tanks versus impoundments versus brine tanks), and fresh water supply options (e.g., groundwater, surface water). All of these components play into

an operator’s decision about whether they will recycle or dispose of UOG wastewater. Purestream acknowledged that it takes a lot of time and effort for operators to decide what reuse option works best for them. However, Purestream stated that it is becoming easier for operators to reuse because reuse now offers a low liability and low cost option for obtaining water.

Purestream stated that there is untapped potential in reusing water for beneficial reuse. For example, Arkansas could use treated UOG wastewater for agriculture, irrigation, or cattle water. EPA noted that they are aware of conventional oil and gas wastewater that is used for beneficial reuse, but not UOG wastewater. Purestream agreed that they are also not aware of any

UOG wastewater that is bene ficially reused. EPA asked Purestream if there are other industries where there are roadblocks to reuse. Purestream responded by saying that there are not roadblocks to reuse in other industries, the problem is that operators do not know all of their optio ns for reuse until they become more popular options.

T echnology History and Overview of Purestream Treatment Technologies

Purestream provided a brief overview of the history of UOG wastewater treatment technologies. Three years ago, technology focused on large desalination plants and reverse osmosis. These technologies are only effective with low influent TDS concentrations, so they are not feasible for UOG wastewater. Beginning approximately eighteen months ago, technology

shifted focus to the smaller sca le evaporators, selective ion removal technologies, and crystallization (see descriptions below).

**•** Smaller scale evaporators are capable of treating between 1,000 to 2,500 barrels per day and create distilled quality effluent water as well as a concentrated brine stream. The evaporators can be constructed as mobile or semi

- mobile units and therefore, reduce the amount of trucking associated with transferring water to

treatment locations.

**•** Selective ion removal technologies are used to target and remove specif ic ions from an influent stream. One example of this type of technology is electrocoagulation.

**•** Crystallization treatment is capable of treating less than 10,000 barrels per day of wastewater and requires a market for the byproduct (e.g., road salt), otherw ise it is not a cost effective treatment option. Purestream noted that crystallization is popular in the Marcellus shale formation.

Purestream introduced three levels of their treatment technologies: high end, middle of the spectrum, and low end. Purestre am’s AVARA treatment unit is at the high end of the treatment spectrum. The AVARA treatment is capable of reducing the concentrations of TDS and heavy metals while producing a distilled quality effluent. Purestream’s IGF and IGF+ are at

the low end of the spectrum. These technologies are capable of reducing the concentrations of TSS, oil and grease, and iron while producing an effluent water quality that is typicallyMeeting Summary Page 5 of 7

acceptable for reuse. Purestream noted that they don’t focus on treatment technologies that lie in the middle of the spectrum (e.g., electrocoagulation, reverse osmosis, filtration). More details about the Purestream treatment technologies are described below.

**•** IGF Treatment Process

– This treatment process uses air flotation and polymer

addition. As the air bubbles float to the top of the vessel, particles attach to them and are skimmed off of the top of the column. Approximately 1% of the total

volume is removed by the skimmer . Clean water exits the IGF for reuse or further treatment in the AVARA. The IGF is a completely automated system.

**•** AVARA Treatment Process

– The AVARA treatment process is a low pressure, light weight, low energy (3 phase 480 B

- 300 kW power source) (AVARA 1000)

v apor recompression unit. The AVARA unit ultimately boils water to concentrate salts, but keeps the solids saturated in the liquid phase by running just below the 260,000 to280,000 mg/L solids precipitation point. Operators have the option of blending treat ed water to achieve higher TDS if that is a requirement of reuse water (for subsequent fractures). The AVARA treatment is remote controlled. There is also a mobile app available.

Purestream also noted that they were awarded a DOD grant to use this treatme nt for military
applications to treat groundwater to potable water quality. The treatment system created for this
purpose is very small (10’ x 8’ x 6’).

AVARA Treatment Application in the UOG Industry and Other Operations

Purestream field tested the AVARA treatment unit at multiple locations in Texas (i.e., Sonora, TX; Tilden, TX; Wheeler County, TX) and each test system was converted into a commercial operation. Purestream also installed an AVARA treatment unit for Southwestern Energy in the Fayetteville s hale formation in Arkansas. Southwestern is treating a portion of their wastewater using the AVARA treatment unit rather than reusing all of it because they are not drilling enough wells to reuse 100% of their wastewater. Purestream noted that the AVARA

tr eatment facility is less expensive for Southwestern to operate than trucking wastewater to injection wells because there are few underground injection wells located nearby. Purestream also noted that the Southwestern AVARA facility is one of the only treat ment systems that is discharging directly to surface water instead of discharging to POTW.

Purestream noted the following active treatment units at UOG operations:

**•** Arkansas : AVARA treatment system is currently operating

.

**•** Pennsylvania : One treatment system is currently operating and another system is being shipped because the operator needs the capability to treat a larger volume of

water

.

**•** Texas : A treatment system will be shipped soon

.

**•** Oklahoma : A treatment system should begin operating next week

.

**•** Wyoming : A treatment system is being finalized for use in this location

.Meeting Summary Page 6 of 7

**•** Canada

– Purestream has pilot technologies set up for a couple of oil and gas

operators.

Approximately 2 years ago, Purestream deployed an AVARA treatment unit to North

Dakota for use in the Bakken shale formation. However, the high TDS concentrations in the Bakken wastewater (around 200,000 mg/L) proved difficult for the AVARA unit

. The treatment system produced very small volumes of clean water compared to the large volume of brine requiring disposal. Purestream noted that Bakken operators are beginning to focus more heavily on the feasibility of reuse , and want to be reusing 70% of their high TDS UOG wastewater. Purestream is hopeful that they may be able to pr ovide a technology that is capable of removing certain pollutants (e.g., hydrocarbons, TSS, oil and grease) to provide reuse quality water, rather than trying to achieve distilled water effluent quality.

Purestream noted that they are also working with e thanol plants, hog farms, poultry producers, distilleries, and the nuclear industry to see if their treatment technologies are a good

fit for these industries.

Potential Additional Data Sources

Purestream shared PowerPoint slides with EPA after the call vi a email (on 11/8/13). Ms. Amy Hansen , from Purestream, also mentioned that EPA may want to contact John Ventura regarding water data that he has collected across the U.S. Ms

. Hansen also noted that Purestream is willing to share water quality data with EPA

.Attachment 1

Table A

- 1. List of Meeting Participants

Name Affiliation Phone Email Amy Hansen Purestream Technology
Todd Ennenga Purestream Technology

Lisa Biddle US EPA 202

- 566

- 0350 Biddle.Lisa@epamail.epa.gov

Jesse Pritts US EPA 202

- 566

- 1038 Pritts

. Jesse @epa.gov

Karen Milam US EPA 202

- 564

- 9752 Milam. Karen @epa.gov Meghan Camp ERG 703

- 633

- 1684 Meghan.Camp@erg .com Sarah Hays ERG 703

- 633

- 1661 Sarah.Hays @erg.com