Site Visit Report

Anadarko Petroleum Corporation

Marcellus Shale Gas Operations

January 20, 2015
i

TABLE OF CONTENTS

Page

1.0 INTRODUCTION ........................................................................................................ 1

2.0 BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES .............................................................................. 1

3.0 OVERVIEW OF SHALE GAS PRODUCTION ................................................................. 1

3.1 Company Background ................................................................................ 1

3.2 Shale Gas Well Development ..................................................................... 3

3.2.1 Well Pad Construction .................................................................... 3

3.2.2 Drilling............................................................................................ 4

3.2.3 Hydraulic Fracturing....................................................................... 5

3.3 Production Phase......................................................................................... 7

3.4 Waste Management..................................................................................... 9

3.4.1 Wastewater...................................................................................... 9

3.4.2 Solid Waste ..................................................................................... 9

4.0 ANADARKO SITES VISITED .................................................................................... 10

4.1 Larry’s Creek freshwater impoundment ................................................... 10

4.2 Active Drilling Site—Larry’s Creek Pad C.............................................. 11

4.3 Fracturing Site—Larry’s Creek Pad H ..................................................... 14

4.4 Production Site—Larry’s Creek Pad B..................................................... 16

APPENDIX A LIST OF PARTICIPANTS ON THE ANADARKO SITE VISIT........................................ 20

APPENDIX B MAP OF SITES VISITED ........................................................................................... 22

APPENDIX C SUMMARY OF COSTS PROVIDED BY ANADARKO ................................................... 24
ii

LIST OF FIGURES

Page

Figure 3-1. Anadarko’s 2012 Active Shale Wells in North Central Pennsylvania..........................3

Figure 4-1. Larry’s Creek Freshwater Impoundment ....................................................................11

Figure 4-2. Example Source Water Withdrawal Site Flow Diagram ............................................11

Figure 4-3. Drilling Rig .................................................................................................................12

Figure 4-4. Water Storage (Left) and Drilling Rig (Right)............................................................12

Figure 4-5. Steel Casing.................................................................................................................12

Figure 4-6. Drilling Mud Shaker and Solids Collection Container (Removes Cuttings From 

Drilling Mud)............................................................................................................13

Figure 4-7. Drill Cuttings Dewatering Equipment ........................................................................13

Figure 4-8. Drill Cuttings Disposal Containers (to Be Sent to Landfill); Barite (Used to Add 

Weight to Drilling Mud) in the Gray Tank...............................................................13

Figure 4-9. Fracturing Site.............................................................................................................14

Figure 4-10. Wireline Blowout Preventor (“Producing Tree”) .....................................................14

Figure 4-11. Water Storage Tanks.................................................................................................15

Figure 4-12. Proppant and Chemical Addition Equipment ...........................................................15

Figure 4-13. Perforating Guns Before Perforation (Right) and After Perforation (Left) ..............15

Figure 4-14. Well Plug (Which Is Later Drilled Out to Allow the Flow of Water and Gas to the 

Surface).....................................................................................................................16

Figure 4-15. Production Site: Four Water Tanks (Left Side of Left Photo), Six Well Heads 

(Foreground of Right Photo), Water/Gas Separation Equipment (Background of 

Right Photo)..............................................................................................................17

Figure 4-16. Production Well Assembly (Foreground) and Solar-Powered Monitoring 

(Background) ............................................................................................................17

Figure 4-17. Dehydrator Exterior (Left) and Interior (Right)........................................................18

Figure 4-18. Water/Gas Separator .................................................................................................18

Figure 4-19. Production Site Flow Diagram..................................................................................19
iii

Figure A-1. Overview of Sites Visited in ArcGIS.........................................................................23

LIST OF TABLES

Page

Table 3-1. Anadarko’s Active U.S. Formation Production .............................................................2

Table 3-2. Anadarko Illustration of Responsible Surface Use (Grugan Area)................................4

Table 3-3. Anadarko’s 2011 and 2012 Average Cost for Fracturing per Stage ..............................5

Table 3-4. Anadarko’s 2010 and 2012 Average Cost for Fracturing per Foot................................6

Table 3-6. Andarko’s Solid Waste Management Practices in Pennsylvania .................................10

Table A-1. List of Attendees..........................................................................................................21

Table A-2. Summary of Costs Provided by Anadarko ..................................................................25
1

1.0 INTRODUCTION

On June 26, 2012, the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) participated in a site 

tour with Anadarko Petroleum Corporation (Anadarko). They visited four places, all in the 

Marcellus shale play in north central Pennsylvania:

 Larry’s Creek freshwater impoundment

 Larry’s Creek Pad C, an active drilling site

 Larry’s Creek Pad H, a hydraulic fracturing and completion site

 Larry’s Creek Pad B, a production site

Over 30 people participated in the site tour; including Anadarko employees, members of 

the National Petroleum Council, and various federal government and congressional staff. 

Participants from Anadarko and the EPA Engineering and Analysis Division (EAD) are listed in 

Appendix A. 

2.0 BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES

In coordination with the National Petroleum Council, Anadarko arranged a tour of its 

Marcellus shale gas operations. EPA EAD participated in the tour to collect background 

information on the shale gas industry and observe wastewater management practices.

Clay Bretches of Anadarko facilitated the discussion of the company’s Marcellus 

operations and the site tour. Other Anadarko staff provided technical information during the 

discussion and site tour (Appendix A lists all the participants). The remainder of this report 

summarizes the site visit, including a general discussion held with Anadarko before going into 

the field (Section 3.0) and information provided by Anadarko during the tour (Section 4.0).

3.0 OVERVIEW OF SHALE GAS PRODUCTION

Before a tour of operations near Williamsport, Pennsylvania, Anadarko provided 

information about their shale gas operations. Topics discussed included the company’s

background, shale gas well development (well pad construction, drilling, and fracturing), and 

waste management.

3.1 Company Background

Anadarko is one of the world’s largest independent oil and natural gas exploration and 

production companies, with 2.54 billion barrel-of-oil equivalents (BOE) of proved reserves at 

year-end 2011. Table 3-1 provides some of Anadarko’s active formations, along with estimated 

oil, natural gas liquids, and gas production for second quarter 2012, according to its 2012 second

quarter operation report.

1 Anadarko is also investing in exploration activities in the Geneseo 

Shale2layer, which the company believes may be favorable for future drilling.

 

1 Available online at: 

http://www.anadarko.com/SiteCollectionDocuments/PDF/Operations%20Reports/2Q12%20Operations%20Report.p

df

2 The Geneseo shale layer is present in the Appalachian Basin and is shallower than the Marcellus.
2

Table 3-1. Anadarko’s Active U.S. Formation Production

Formation 

Name

Formation 

Type

First Quarter 2012 Net 

Production

Notes on Formation Activity 

and Projections

Oil 

(mbbl/d)

NGLs 

(mbbl /d)

Gas 

(mmcf/d)

Marcellus Shale gas 0 0 314 Estimates 8 BCF estimated 

ultimate recovery per well.

Utica Shale oil and 

gas

NR NR NR

Only drilled 7 wells through the 

second quarter of 2012. Has 

390,000 gross acres of lease.

Eagle Ford Shale oil 12 8 61 4,000 total potential drill sites. 

Haynesville Shale gas

1 8 158

350 potential drill sites in the 

Haynesville and 100 potential 

drill sites in the Cotton Valley. Cotton Valley Tight gas

Avalon and 

Bone Springs Shale oil 8 2 46 1,300 total potential drill sites.

Austin Chalk Tight gas 7 5 34

Bossier Shale gas 0 0 96

Source: “Operations Report Second Quarter 2012,” Anadarko Petroleum Corporation. July 30, 2012. And

“Operations Report First Quarter 2012,” Anadarko Petroleum Corporation. April 30, 2012.

NR—Not Reported.

NGLs—Natural gas liquids.

Mbbl/d—Million barrels per day.

Mmcf/d—Million cubic feet per day.

Anadarko is active in the north central Pennsylvania portion of the Marcellus, where it 

has areas of mutual interest (AMI) with Chesapeake Energy and has leases that total 760,000 

gross acres and 260,000 net acres. Figure 3-1 shows Anadarko’s active Marcellus wells in 

Pennsylvania as of June 30, 2011, using EPA’s GeoPlatform mapping tool and coordinates from 

the Pennsylvania Department of Environmental Protection’s (PA DEP’s) database. According to 

PA DEP, Anadarko has drilled 348 wells in Clinton, Centre, and Lycoming counties at the end of 

June 2012. At the time of the site visit, Anadarko had a shared interest in 575 wells with 

Chesapeake Energy in this region, 222 of which were producing over 1.1 billion cubic feet per 

day. The other wells may not have been producing due to unfavorable logistics, lack of pipeline, 

or poor production.

The company is operating four drill rigs in the Marcellus region. Anadarko noted that 

operations in this region are nearing the point of not being economical given the current price of 

gas (approximately $3.50 per thousand cubic feet), especially considering the need to compete 

with the more profitable liquid plays. The company noted they would be making more capital 

investments in the Marcellus if the price of gas would increase to $4 to $5 per thousand cubic 

feet (mcf). However, the costs for the entire drilling and hydraulic fracturing process are coming 

down, which is helping Anadarko to stay economical and operate at its current level of activity in 

this time of low gas prices. Section 3.2.3 provides specific costs for fracturing in various 

formations for 2011 and 2012.
3

Source: EPA’s GeoPlatform mapping tool.

Figure 3-1. Anadarko’s 2012 Active Shale Wells in North Central Pennsylvania 

3.2 Shale Gas Well Development

The following subsections summarize general information Anadarko provided on shale 

gas well development. Anadarko typically installs six to 12 wells per pad; the company estimates

the total cost to obtain permits, construct a well pad, drill a horizontal well, and fracture is

approximately $7 to $9 million. Anadarko’s reserve engineers anticipate that the production 

lifetime of each Marcellus well will be between 40 and 60 years. Reserve engineers use existing 

production decline curves to make these estimates. Because Marcellus wells are relatively young, 

these estimates may change as more production data become available.

3.2.1 Well Pad Construction

Construction of a well pad costs between $400,000 and $1,000,000 depending on 

location and existing road infrastructure. If access roads already exist, well pad costs are closer 

to $400,000. If Anadarko is required to construct long access roads, the well pad costs are closer 

to $1,000,000. Construction costs include excavation, access roads, well pad containment, and 

permits. The wide range of well pad costs is attributed to the construction of access road. 

Anadarko typically designs each well pad to accommodate six to 12 horizontal wells on 

approximately 3.7 acres (400 feet by 400 feet). Wells are generally spaced 15 feet apart at the 

well head. 

Anadarko provided an example of a site that produced natural gas from an area of 15,309 

acres and only used 2 percent of that area (295 acres) for the pad and related support 

infrastructure. Table 3-2 provides this example.
4

Table 3-2. Anadarko Illustration of Responsible Surface Use 

(Grugan Area)

Surface Use Area (acres)

Pad locations and road access (15) 140

Water containment 21

Water lines 14

Midstream gas pipelines 110a

Compressor stations 10

Total use 295

Tract area produced 15,309

Percent of total area used <2%

a—Attempted to route pipelines in previously disturbed right of ways.

Source: “National Petroleum Council Site Tour,” presented by Anadarko 

Petroleum Corporation—Appalachian Basin, June 26, 2012. 

When planning to construct a new well pad, Anadarko develops road use agreements 

with the local townships as well as the Pennsylvania Department of Transportation. The latter

agreement commits Anadarko to repair roads after the work is done. Therefore, before beginning 

construction Anadarko takes video of the roads, to record the condition to the roads must meet 

after their onsite work is done. To date, Anadarko has paved 150 miles of roads in Pennsylvania. 

All of the roads Anadarko builds are designed to last 10 years. Recently, Anadarko rebuilt a 5-

mile road in order to improve access to its site. This effort involved doubling the width of the 

road (from approximately 0.75 lanes to 1.5 lanes) and cost approximately $6 million.

To prevent migration of materials from the well pad, Anadarko lines the entire area under 

fracturing equipment and fluid storage with a triple-pad liner. This liner consists of static-free, 

anti-slip, tear-resistant material in three layers: the first and third layers are 8-ounce geotextile 

felt and the center layer consists of 30-millimeter woven coated HDPE-reinforced plastic liner. 

This liner extends to solid barriers or conduits on the perimeter of the site, which are between 12

and 18 inches tall. Separate, individual containment units are used under all engines and pumps. 

Permanent tank batteries are located within lined steel containment. All non-fresh water is stored 

within containment as well. Secondary containment is left in place until all wells on the well pad 

are in the production phase and no future wells are planned.

Before secondary containment is removed, Anadarko removes any spills or precipitation

via vacuum trucks. This fluid is hauled to the same destinations as flowback and produced water 

(see Section 3.4 for more details). Anadarko routes all stormwater runoff that falls outside of the 

secondary containment away from the well pad and does not attempt to collect any for use. 

Before drilling, Anadarko requests access to perform pre-drilling test of neighboring

drinking water wells within 2,500 feet of operations.

3.2.2 Drilling

Anadarko explained that in the north central Pennsylvania region of the Marcellus, the 

gas-rich “zone of interest” is at an approximate depth of 8,000 feet, and the shale is between 150

and 175 feet thick. When drilling, it takes approximately 1,000 feet to turn the bit from vertical 

to horizontal; therefore Anadarko begins turning the drill bit at approximately 7,000 feet. Most of 

Anadarko’s horizontal laterals are approximately 6,500 feet long, though the company has drilled 
5

some lengths closer to 7,500 feet. The cost to Anadarko to drill a single horizontal well is 

approximately $5 to $8 million (this is based on Anadarko’s estimate of $7 to $9 million overall 

well costs less Anadarko’s estimate of $1 to $2 million to perform hydraulic fracturing, as 

described below). Drilling a well in the Marcellus takes approximately 30 days including casing 

installation and rig mobilization. This process used to take much longer (between 40 to 50 days). 

Anadarko typically drills all initial wells on the pad before demobilizing the drilling rig and 

hydraulically fracturing any of them. There is typically a two week lag to removing drilling 

equipment and mobilizing hydraulic fracturing service providers.

Anadarko uses air, rather than mud, to drill through the drinking water aquifer (which is 

100 to 400 feet below the surface in this region). Also the wells are encased in two cement 

barriers at the elevations that pass through the aquifer. Synthetic-based drilling mud is used for 

the remainder of the drilling. This mud is reused through a closed-loop recirculating system (see 

Figure 4-6 for synthetic mud recycling images).

3.2.3 Hydraulic Fracturing

Anadarko contracts with service providers to perform the hydraulic fracturing portion of 

the well completion.3 Anadarko estimated they typically spend $1 to $2 million per well for 

hydraulic fracturing but noted that service company costs have decreased over time, which is 

helping Anadarko to stay economical and operate at their current level of activity in this time of 

low gas prices. Table 3-3 provides Anadarko’s 2011 and 2012 average cost for fracturing a 

single stage in various shale oil and shale gas formations, according to their 2012 first quarter 

operation report.4Table 3-3 also provides the range of stages per well for each formation, which 

Anadarko provided after the site visit and suggested they tend to use the lower end of the range 

presented. Table 3-4 provides Anadarko’s 2011 and 2012 average cost for fracturing on a per 

foot basis with the average lateral length for several shale oil and shale gas formations, according 

to their 2012 second quarter operation report.5

Table 3-3. Anadarko’s 2011 and 2012 Average Cost for 

Fracturing per Stage

Formation

Cost for Fracturing ($ per stage) Number of Stages 

per Wellb2011a2012a

Haynesville $256,000 $136,000

8 to 23

Avalon $212,000 $133,000

Bone Springs $142,000 $122,000

Marcellus 

(Vendor 1) $180,000 $137,000

Marcellus 

(Vendor 2) $142,000 $122,000

a—Source: “Operations Report First Quarter 2012,” Anadarko Petroleum 

Corporation. April 26, 2012.

b—Source: Provided by Anadarko.

 

3 Names of service providers companies are available online at: fracfocus.org 

4 Available online at: 

http://www.anadarko.com/SiteCollectionDocuments/PDF/Operations%20Reports/1Q12OpsReport%20final.pdf

5 Available online at: 

http://www.anadarko.com/SiteCollectionDocuments/PDF/Operations%20Reports/2Q12%20Operations%20Report.p

df
6

Table 3-4. Anadarko’s 2010 and 2012 Average Cost for Fracturing per Foot

Formation

4

th Quarter 2010 2nd Quarter 2012

Cost per Foot 

of Lateral 

($/foot)

Typical 

Lateral Length 

(feet)

Cost per Foot 

of Lateral 

($/foot)

Typical 

Lateral Length 

(feet)

Marcellus 1,000 to 1,250 5,000 500 to 750 6,000

Eagle Ford 750 4,500 750 5,000

Haynesville 1,500 4,000 500 to 750 6,000

Source: “Operations Report Second Quarter 2012,” Anadarko Petroleum Corporation. July

30, 2012.

Each horizontal lateral is fractured in stages, each stage is approximately 350 to 400 feet 

in length; typically Anadarko will fracture eight to 23 stages per well. Fracturing operations vary 

from 12 to 24 hours, based on the service provider. Typically, service provides can fracture three 

to four stages per day when operating for 12 hours and four to six if operating for 24 hours. 

Anadarko provides the water that is used in the hydraulic fracturing process. Approximately 

6,000 to 10,000 barrels of water are needed for each stage of fracturing, equating to a total of 

60,000 to 100,000 barrels for a ten-stage well. This water comes from one or more of the 

following sources: surface water (Susquehanna River), the municipal drinking water supply, or 

recycled shale gas extraction wastewater. Anadarko has also submitted an application for 

groundwater withdrawal wells, but has not received approval from the Susquehanna River Basin 

Commission (SRBC).

3.2.3.1 Fresh Water Supply

Anadarko has four approved withdrawal points on the Susquehanna River. These 

withdrawals are approved by the SRBC for 12,000 to 36,000 barrels per day. Anadarko sends the 

SRBC a permit application fee, annual compliance and monitoring fee, and a consumptive use 

fee for each surface water withdrawal. SRBC’s fee schedules are available online and are based 

on the daily withdrawal limit.

6 Anadarko mentioned that it can take between six months and two 

years to obtain withdrawal approval from the SRBC.

Water withdrawn from the river is transported to the fracturing sites by trucks or pipeline.

Due to the cost of trucking and subsequent road repairs, Anadarko prefers to pipe the water when 

possible. The company has one pipeline in place in north central Pennsylvania and plans to 

construct a second. Anadarko estimates that the use of the one pipeline reduced the number of 

truck trips by 40,000 to 50,000. It costs approximately $50 to $60 per foot to construct the 

pipeline. Anadarko estimates that the return on investment for the new pipeline will be 10 

percent; factoring in the cost of road repairs, though, it is more economical to construct the new 

pipeline.

Trucks transport 100 barrels per load, so approximately 1,000 truckloads are needed to 

fracture one well. Anadarko contracts trucking to third parties who charge approximately $100 

per hour. Trucking costs range from $4 to $5 per barrel but varies significantly with the distance 

between the source and well.

 

6

SRBC’s water withdrawal fee schedule is available online at: 

http://www.srbc.net/programs/docs/Regulatory_Program_Fee_Schedule_FY-2013_FINAL_20120607.pdf 
7

Anadarko stores the fresh water in permanent or temporary impoundments. 

Impoundments are never used by Anadarko to store any fluids other than fresh water. One 

permanent impoundment has a 400,000-barrel capacity and costs between $600,000 and 

$1,200,000 to construct. The impoundment that EPA visited served approximately 14 wells; 

however, Anadarko noted that the number of wells serviced per impoundment is highly variable

from one impoundment to the next. Anadarko currently has ten to 12 permanent impoundments 

in place in Pennsylvania at this time. A temporary above ground impoundment that can be 

moved between locations has an approximate 75,000-barrel capacity and costs between $400,000 

and $500,000 to purchase. Anadarko had two temporary impoundments in the field in 

Pennsylvania at the time of the site visit.

3.2.3.2 Recycled Shale Gas Extraction Wastewater

The third water source Anadarko uses for hydraulic fracturing is recycled wastewater 

from the flowback or production stages of shale gas extraction. Anadarko estimates that it

recovers 10 to 20 percent of the water injected during the hydraulic fracturing process and, after 

treatment, can reuse 100 percent of the recovered water. On most fracturing jobs, recycled water 

makes up approximately 25 percent of the total fracturing fluid volume. Anadarko’s fracturing 

fluid sometimes contains 40 percent recycled water—and the company once used approximately 

70 percent—but the ability to do this varies based on location and formation geology. The reuse 

water is stored onsite in 500 barrel tanks. These tanks rent for $30 to $50 per day per tank. See 

Section 3.4 for further discussion of wastewater treatment prior to reuse.

3.2.3.3 Chemical Additives

The fracturing service provider determines the mixture and concentrations of fracturing 

fluid chemicals and supplies the required chemicals. The chemical mix is dictated by formation

chemistry and geology. In the Marcellus, this mixture usually includes biocides, friction 

reducers, and scale inhibitors. Anadarko pointed out that the Fracfocus website provides public 

information on fracturing fluid volumes and chemicals.7

3.2.3.4 Flowback

After all of the stages have been fractured, the fracturing plugs are drilled out to allow

water and gas to flow to the surface. Initially fracturing fluid is returned to the surface (often 

referred to as “flowback”) at a high rate of approximately 1,000 barrels per day. The water 

usually flows at this rate for 30 to 90 days, after which the rate decreases significantly. During 

the initial flowback period, Anadarko stores the water onsite in 500 barrel tanks (as mentioned 

above, these tanks are rented for $30 to $50 per day and kept on site for the life of the flowback 

process), and then trucks the water from the well pad to treatment prior to reuse on the next 

fracturing job.

3.3 Production Phase

Early in the well life, the well will flow out sand and plug parts, as well as water and gas. 

The flow first passes through a sand trap which collects the solids. Following the sand trap, the 

flow is directed through a two-part gas production unit. In a wet play, unlike the north central

 

7 Available online at: http://fracfocus.org/.
8

Marcellus, a third part would be used to collect the hydrocarbon liquids (which are not present in 

the dry northeastern Marcellus). The gas that Anadarko collects in the northeastern Marcellus is 

97 percent methane with no liquid hydrocarbon liquids or hydrogen sulfide, so only a two-phase 

separator is needed.

The mixture of produced water and gas exits the well and/or sand trap at 5,000 pounds 

per square inch (psi). The produced water and gas are then separated in a two-step unit two-step 

unit: 

1. Line heater: The mixture of produced water and gas of produced water and gas 

extracted from the well is passed through a series of coils that are surrounded by 

glycol and water kept at a temperature of 170 degrees Fahrenheit. Passing through 

the line heater increases the liquid temperature to 70 degrees Fahrenheit, prevents 

hydrate formation during the pressure drop in step 2. 8

2. Gas/Water separator: The heated mixture of produced water and gas is passed 

through a gas/water separator unit. The separator expands the gas/water mixture 

through a wider pipe, causing the pressure to drop from approximately 5,000 psi

to 1,000 psi. The pressure drop causes a large portion of the water to settle to the 

bottom, where it is collected, and the gas to rise for further treatment in the 

dehydration unit.9 Anadarko suggested that hydrates form during the pressure 

drop to 1,000 psi if the temperature of the mixture of produced water drops below 

55 degrees Fahrenheit.

The water storage portion of the separator has a float valve; when it reaches the 

designated level the water is transferred to the produced water tanks. The produced water is 

stored onsite, typically in a set of 400 barrel tanks. After the “flowback period” of 30 to 90 days, 

water returns to the surface at a rate of 100 barrels per day per well (at which point it is typically 

referred to as “produced water”). After six months, the produced water flow rate is expected to 

decrease further, to approximately 10 to 20 barrels per day per well for the duration of the well 

life.

Anadarko tries to reduce the need for venting or flaring of gas when production starts by 

having the pipeline ready to receive gas when it is detected. In the past, if the pipeline had not 

been brought to the site yet, Anadarko would flare off for a short time (less than 10 days) until 

the pressure and rate were known for the well; then the well was shut in until it could be tied into 

a pipeline. Currently, Anadarko does not do any flaring, and the gas product is fed directly into 

the pipeline.

Once the well is producing, Anadarko uses remote monitoring using microwave 

technology to track parameters measured onsite, including produced water tank levels and gas 

well pressure and flow. Anadarko indicated that the gas flow decline rate on wells varies: some 

are flat for years and others decline after a month and then level out. In general, Anadarko 

expects shale gas wells to produce economically for 40 to 60 years. When flow from producing 

 

8 Hydrates are solid crystals composed of hydrocarbons and water that cause plugging in pipes. Hydrates form when 

the temperature and pressure of a water and hydrocarbon mixture decrease past a certain point. Hydrate formation is 

dependent on both temperature and pressure.

9 The remaining step in the dehydration process is absorption of remaining water vapor from the gas into the glycol 

in an absorber.
9

wells decreases, a smaller pipe is installed to increase the velocity. Anadarko stated that they 

have not refractured any Marcellus wells in order to enhance production. In addition, it is too 

early to predict whether their Marcellus wells will require refracturing in the future.

3.4 Waste Management

Anadarko provided information on wastewater and solid waste management for its 

Marcellus operations. 

3.4.1 Wastewater

As discussed earlier in this report, the majority of wastewater is generated in the first 30

to 90 days after a well is fractured. After that time, volumes decrease to 100 barrels per day for 

three to five months and then down to approximately 10 to 20 barrels per day for the remaining 

life of the well. Anadarko collects flowback in 500 barrel fracturing tanks on the well site and 

produced water in 400 barrel above ground storage tanks. The wastewater is either treated onsite 

with Anadarko’s mobile treatment unit or at third party treatment facilities.

Anadarko rents a mobile treatment unit that removes suspended solids through a filtration 

process. The company can move the unit to high-production areas. However, the state of 

Pennsylvania now requires a separate Pennsylvania WMGR-123 permit10 at each location where 

the unit is set up; because this permitting is cumbersome, Anadarko is using the mobile unit less 

often. Instead, Anadarko is using third party treatment facilities to treat its wastewater prior to 

reuse. After treatment, wastewater is transported by truck to the next fracturing site, where it is 

stored onsite in 500 barrel tanks.

PA DEP data indicates that, after 2011, Anadarko used Hydro Recovery LP for third 

party treatment. Hydro Recovery LP is a treatment for reuse facility located in Blossburg, 

Pennsylvania that uses chemical precipitation.11

3.4.2 Solid Waste

Cuttings generated during the drilling process are the main solid waste generated and 

managed on Anadarko sites. The cuttings are dewatered by a centrifuge, resulting in the 

following waste streams:

 Solid waste—the solids from drill cuttings are sent to a landfill. 

 Dewatering liquid stream—the liquid stream from this process is collected and 

treated with Anadarko’s other liquid waste streams for recycling in the hydraulic 

fracturing process. However, this waste is never combined with flowback and 

produced waters.

 

10 PA DEP requires WMGR-123 permits for processing and beneficial use of oil and gas liquid waste.

11This is based on 2012 PA DEP data. Anadarko used other wastewater treatment facilities in the past. More 

information on Hydro Recovery is available online at: http://www.hydrorecoverylp.com/?section=what-wedo&id=process. 
10

During drilling operations, Anadarko also manages synthetic-based drilling muds. As discussed 

in Section 3.3.2, they are recycled in a closed loop system, so there are no solid or liquid waste 

streams associated with the synthetic-based drilling muds.

Table 3-5 lists the companies Anadarko uses for solid waste from drill cuttings disposal 

according to PA DEP’s oil and gas reporting data. Anadarko did not provide solid waste 

management costs for the disposal companies they currently use and requested that EPA collect 

this cost information directly from the disposal companies.

Table 3-5. Andarko’s Solid Waste Management Practices in 

Pennsylvania

Management Practice Percentage (%)

2010 through 2012

Cumulative Tons a

Veolia Greentree 37 102,200

Wayne Township 32 89,100

Appex Environmental, LLC 18 49,900

Tunnell Hill Reclamation 8 22,300

White Pine 5 13,000

Other <1 1,700

4.0 ANADARKO SITES VISITED

This section describes the four sites that the EPA visited during the June 26, 2012, tour. 

These sites (in order of the well development process involved) were:

 Larry’s Creek freshwater impoundment

 Larry’s Creek Pad C, an active drilling site

 Larry’s Creek Pad H, a fracturing site

 Larry’s Creek Pad B, a production site

4.1 Larry’s Creek freshwater impoundment

While driving between sites, Anadarko pointed out the freshwater impoundment shown 

in Figure 4-1. Surrounded by fencing and lined with a plastic liner, the impoundment holds

approximately 240,000 barrels of water trucked from the Susquehanna River. However, many of 

Anadarko’s impoundments utilize temporary piping to and from the impoundment to reduce 

trucking. Figure 4-2 illustrates Anadarko’s withdrawal and distribution for the freshwater supply.
11

Figure 4-1. Larry’s Creek Freshwater Impoundment

Figure 4-2. Example Source Water Withdrawal Site Flow Diagram

4.2 Active Drilling Site—Larry’s Creek Pad C

At the time of the site visit, Anadarko was installing steel casing in the vertical portion of 

a well on the Larry’s Creek Pad C site. Large berms of soil along the site boundary will be used 

for site reclamation after the wells have been completed. Within the well pad, all equipment and 

tanks are in secondary containment. The site is set up to prevent run-on and run-off. The only 

accumulations of water on the pad are direct rain and snow precipitation. 

Drilling operations on this site take place 24 hours per day, seven days per week. Fresh 

water is stored on site (white tanks in Figure 4-4) for washing drilling equipment. Wastewater 

collected from the drilling cuttings dewatering process is also stored on site (red tanks in Figure 

4-4). Steel casing is stockpiled near the drilling rig (Figure 4-5). Closed-cycle drilling mud reuse 

is managed through the equipment shown in Figure 4-6, which includes a shaker for solids 

separation and a hopper to collect the drilling muds that are separated out from the cuttings for 

reuse. Collected drill cuttings are then dewatered in the equipment shown in Figure 4-7, and the 

solids are stored in dumpsters (Figure 4-8) before disposal in a landfill.
12

Figure 4-3. Drilling Rig

Figure 4-4. Water Storage (Left) and Drilling Rig (Right)

Figure 4-5. Steel Casing
13

Figure 4-6. Drilling Mud Shaker and Solids Collection Container (Removes Cuttings From 

Drilling Mud)

Figure 4-7. Drill Cuttings Dewatering Equipment

Figure 4-8. Drill Cuttings Disposal Containers (to Be Sent to Landfill); Barite (Used to Add 

Weight to Drilling Mud) in the Gray Tank
14

4.3 Fracturing Site—Larry’s Creek Pad H

The Anadarko tour included a visit to a site where fracturing was taking place (though 

operations were temporarily suspended for the safety of the tour group). The site included large 

pumping equipment, sand and chemical storage and conveyance equipment, fracturing 

equipment (including perforation guns), and storage for source water as well as future flowback 

water. The entire site was lined with the same three layers described in Section 4.2 and included 

berming around the entire site to contain any spills to the well pad.

Figure 4-9. Fracturing Site

Figure 4-10. Wireline Blowout Preventor (“Producing Tree”)
15

Figure 4-11. Water Storage Tanks

Figure 4-12. Proppant and Chemical Addition Equipment

a, b—Proppant and chemical storage equipment.

c—Proppant and chemical mixing.

d—Fracturing chemical and sand delivery pipes.

Figure 4-13. Perforating Guns Before Perforation (Right) and After Perforation (Left)
16

Figure 4-14. Well Plug (Which Is Later Drilled Out to Allow the Flow of Water and Gas to 

the Surface)

4.4 Production Site—Larry’s Creek Pad B

The site tour included a production site (Figure 4-15 through Figure 4-18), where the last 

of six wells was recently put into production. Construction on this pad started two and a half 

years earlier. Anadarko estimated that the six wells are generating 20 million cubic feet of gas

per day. This site produces about 100 barrels of water per day (from all six wells).

There are six separate well heads, each with a designated water/gas separator. There is 

one line heater, shown at the right side of Figure 4-15. There are four 400-barrel water storage 

tanks onsite, shown at the left side of Figure 4-15. Figure 4-19 illustrates the flow from the well 

head to the delivery gas pipeline and water storage tanks.

Each well has a pressure monitor, powered by solar panels. (Rather than solar power, 

Anadarko plans to use thermal-electric generators at future wells.) These monitors are observed

remotely—for parameters like pressures, levels, and flows—through a cellular-based monitoring 

system. The water storage tank levels are also monitored remotely.
17

Figure 4-15. Production Site: Four Water Tanks (Left Side of Left Photo), Six Well Heads 

(Foreground of Right Photo), Water/Gas Separation Equipment (Background of Right 

Photo)

Figure 4-16. Production Well Assembly (Foreground) and Solar-Powered Monitoring 

(Background)
18

Figure 4-17. Dehydrator Exterior (Left) and Interior (Right)

Figure 4-18. Water/Gas Separator
19

Figure 4-19. Production Site Flow Diagram
20

APPENDIX A

LIST OF PARTICIPANTS ON THE ANADARKO SITE VISIT
21

Table A-1. List of Attendees

Last Name First Name Organization Phone Number Email

Biddle Lisa U.S. EPA, SGE Engineer (202) 566-0350 Biddle.Lisa@epa.gov

Bretches Clay Anadarko Petroleum Corporation Not provided. Not provided.

Conrad Mark Anadarko Petroleum Corporation Not provided. Not provided.

Doyle Chris Anadarko Petroleum Corporation Not provided. Not provided.

Hanley Mark Anadarko Petroleum Corporation Not provided. Not provided.

Pensabene Greg Anadarko Petroleum Corporation Not provided. Not provided.

Stone Justin Anadarko Petroleum Corporation Not provided. Not provided.

Gough Rob Anadarko Petroleum Corporation Not provided. Not provided.

Milliken Brad Anadarko Petroleum Corporation Not provided. Not provided.

Shotts Doug Anadarko Petroleum Corporation Not provided. Not provided.

Bennett Nathan Anadarko Petroleum Corporation Not provided. Not provided.

Note: This list only includes the U.S. EPA (Engineering and Analysis Division) and Anadarko participants on the 

site tour.
22

APPENDIX B

MAP OF SITES VISITED
23

Source: Generated by ArcGIS using base map information from Bing MapsTM.

Figure A-1. Overview of Sites Visited in ArcGIS
24

APPENDIX C

SUMMARY OF COSTS PROVIDED BY ANADARKO
25

Table A-2. Summary of Costs Provided by Anadarko

Process Cost Notes

Well Construction and Development

Well pad construction $400,000–$1,000,000 Includes excavation, access roads, 

well pad containment, and permits.

Drilling (one horizontal well) $5–$8 million Cost to drill a horizontal well ready 

for fracturing.

Hydraulic fracturing (one 

horizontal well) $1–$2 million Cost to hydraulically fracture a horizontal well.

Total cost (one horizontal 

well) $7–$9 million Total cost of excavation, drilling, and fracturing.

Other General Costs

Temporary piping $50 to $60 per foot Estimated capital cost for installing 

temporary piping

Permanent freshwater 

impoundment $600,000–$1,000,000

Cost for a single permanent 

impoundment with a capacity of 

400,000 barrels. Serves up to 14 

wells over its lifetime.

Temporary freshwater 

impoundment $400,000–$500,000

Cost for a temporary above ground

impoundment with a 75,000 barrel 

capacity.

Flowback storage tanks $30–$50 Cost to rent one 500 barrel tank per 

day.