# From Pilot Study to Daily Processing Warren, Ohio’s Documentary to Hydraulic Fracturing Water Treatment

By Tom Angelo Director City of Warren, Ohio Water Pollution Control DepartmentIn May of 2009, Warren and Patriot Water Treatment LLC began discussions with the OEPA to initiate the treatment of brine water from the Marcellus Shale.

Warren was asked to perform an eight (8) week pilot study to “clearly identify the amount of brine that Warren can receive without causing WWTP or water quality issues.”

This demonstrated that the facility could accept up to 664,000 gallons of brine water at 50,000 mg/l TDS before toxic conditions occurred. Charged with this task, Warren first had a whole effluent toxicity (WET) test accomplished on September 4, 2009 to determine the ceiling of brine water acceptance.An organizational meeting was held January 8, 2010 to set guidelines for the pilot study. The guidelines were set as follows:

1. P atriot Water Systems would supply ten 20,000 gallon frac tanks. 2. The tanks would be connected together to create one 100,000 gallon mixing system. 3. Brine water would be re

- circulated in the combined tanks to create a homogeneous mix. 4. The initial mix will be tested for the parameters as defined by OEPA. 5. The City will sample influent, effluent, upstream and downstream prior to the discharge of brine water to develop a baseline concentration of TDS. 6. The City would conduct a live, 8 week, phased in trial to monitor and record effects on treatment processes, accumulation loading and receiving stream TDS. 7. The maximum amount of TDS in the brine water will not exceed 50,000 mg/l.An organizational meeting was held January 8, 2010 to set guidelines for the pilot study. The guidelines were set as follows:

8. Brine water will be phased in as follows (all flows will be over an 8 hour period):

• Week 1 – 5 days at 20,000 gallons

• Week 2 – 5 days at 40,000 gallons

• Week 3 – 5 days at 60,000 gallons

• Week 4 – 5 days at 80,000 gallons

• Week 5 – 5 days at 100,000 gallons

• Week 6 – 5 days at 100,000 gallons

• Week 7 – 5 days at 100,000 gallons

• Week 8 – 5 days at 100,000 gallons 9. Testing will be accomplished as defined in Addenda 3Acute & Chronic Toxicity Volatile Organic Compounds Base Neutral Organic Compounds Acid Organic Compounds Pesticides & Total Phenols MBAS Aluminum Antimony Silver Barium Beryllium Boron Cadmium Chromium Copper Iron Nickel Lead Selenium Strontium Zinc Hexavalent Chromium Low Level Mercury pH HEM Oil & Grease Total Dissolved Solids Total Suspended Solids Total Phosphorus BOD5 COD TOC Total Nitrogen Ammonia Nitrogen Nitrate/Nitrite Nitrogen Total Uranium Total Thorium Total Alpha Total Beta Barium StrontiumBASELINE SAMPLING Initial baseline testing was accomplished on the river and plant flow to determine TDS levels prior to start

- up of the pilot study. The baseline levels are as follows:

Baseline Level TDS Chloride
Raw 584 143 Final 599 157 Up 336 70 Down 332 60 Liquid Sludge 296 Initial radioactivity sampling: Collect date 2/17/10

Parameter Results Units Gamma Scan All other nuclides <LLD pCi/L
K- 40 2.6E+02 +/ - 2.6E+01 pCi/L

# TDS is greatest pollutant of concern. Of that, Chlorides or salt, is the largest proponent.

Raw TDS average increased to 679 mg/l which is approximately 16% over the baseline of 584 mg/l. The average final effluent TDS increased by 47.8% above the baseline.TDS OVERVIEW

D aily Chloride Loading to the River This information provides a better model of loading in terms of pounds of chlorides to the river.



### BASELINE DAILY CHLORIDE LOADINGS

Upstream Downstream Plant Avg Avg Avg Avg Daily Daily Daily River Flow Load Load Load MGD lbs/day lbs/day lbs/day 867.27 506,314.39 484,615.20 20,439.42TDS OVERVIEW

**STUDY RESULTS - DAILY CHLORIDE LOADINGS**

Upstream Downstream Plant Effluent Avg Peak Avg Peak Avg Peak Avg Daily Daily Daily Daily Avg Daily Daily River Flow Load Load Load Load Plant Flow Load Load MGD lbs/day lbs/day lbs/day lbs/day MGD lbs/day lbs/day 867.27 852,488.76 1,612,972.97 873,134.10 1,446,612.53 15.61 46,867.46 118,995.12 % Over Baseline 168.37 318.57 180.17 298.51 229.30 582.18 Lbs. Over Baseline 346,174.38 1,106,658.59 388,518.90 961,997.33 26,428.04 98,555.70

This information demonstrates that the river was able to assimilate a peak daily load of chloride 318% greater than the baseline loading without any toxicology issues. In total pounds applied this means that an additional 1,106,658 pounds of chlorides over baseline was assimilated without adverse affects to the river biology. Warren’s highest peak daily loading of chloride was only 118,995 pounds.EPA Questions

What caused the high effluent results on 4/13, 4/14, and 4/15?Toxicology

Overall the results of the study indicated that if Patriot Water Treatment discharges a consistent amount of brine water over an extended period of time then there will be no adverse changes in the water quality of Warren WWTP or in the Mahoning River downstream of outfall 001.Pilot Study Conclusion 

# The 8 week Pilot Study demonstrated that a controlled discharge of brine water into Warren’s WWTP did not have adverse water quality impacts to the treatment facility or receiving
stream.Concerns



# • Allow high levels of heavy metals to enter the receiving stream.

• Potential for radiation.

• Contaminate source drinking water and ground
water.

• Increase TDS Levels in the receiving stream, specifically Chlorides or salt.Daily Processing



## Ohio’s whole model for the treatment of low TDS flow back brine wastewater was based on the observance of issues that was witnessed during 2009 through 2010 by treatment plants that was processing brine wastewater in Pennsylvania.Daily Processing

• Only Flow Back, muddy and brackish brine water will be allowed for treatment. No Produced water will be allowed.

• Direct discharge to a municipal wastewater treatment plant will not be allowed. Brine water must go to a centralized waste treatment facility (CWF) for pretreatment prior to discharging to a municipal wastewater treatment facility (POTW). The CWF will remove heavy metals, suspended solids and other pollutants to categorical and local limits and adjust pH prior to discharge.

• A limit will be set on the total volume of brine water that can be treated daily. This limit will be established based on the ability of the treatment facility to assimilate without toxic conditions or water quality conditions occurring.

• A limit of no greater than 50,000 mg/l of TDS in the flow will be allowed to be discharged from the CWF into the POTW.

• All brine water will be regularly tested for heavy metals, radiation and volatile compounds and will be summarized in a daily operational report.

• Quarterly toxicity testing will be accomplished by the POTW.Daily Processing



# • October of 2010, OEPA issued a PTI to Patriot Water Treatment

• December 1, 2010, OEPA issued a NPDES modification to Warren that would allow for the acceptance and treatment of low TDS flow back brine wastewater from a CWF.

• Total acceptance of 100,000 gallons of flow back brine per day at a maximum concentration of 50,000 mg/l TDS.Daily Processing



### • The overall success of this program depended on how TDS would impact river quality.

• Warren initiated a self

- imposed river sampling program that monitored TDS levels throughout the watershed.

• A total of 8 locations were finally part of the sampling regiment.

• Analyze for both Chlorides and Sulfides.

• Analyze for Bromide. 

# Increase TDS levels in receiving streamDaily Processing



## • December 2010, Warren filed an appeal with the Environmental Review Appeals Commission (ERAC).

• May of 2011, OEPA issued a letter to the Ohio Department of Natural Resources (ODNR) indicating that the permits issued to Warren and Patriot were in violation of ORC 1509.22 and would not renew the modification when Warren’s current permit expired on December 31, 2011.

• Legal Battle throughout 2011 & half of 2012.

• OEPA issues a new NPDES to Warren April 1, 2012.

• Section BB; permittee shall stop accepting brine wastewater from oil or gas drilling, exploration or production 

# State ShowdownDaily Processing



## • Warren ordered Patriot to cease discharging brine water to its Municipal Wastewater Plant effectively shutting down Patriot.

• ERAC hears Warren/Patriot’s appeal (april/may 2012)

• July 3, 2012 ERAC determined that Section II, BB of the 2012 Warren NPDES was both unlawful and unreasonable.

• ERAC unilaterally modified Warren’s NPDES to remove Section II, BB in its entirety.

• Patriot restarts operations in July of 2012 and Warren has continued to receive daily discharges since. 

# State ShowdownDaily Processing



## • September 2011,USEPA Region 5 conducted a compliance inspection to determine that the Warren WPCC was only accepting brine waste water generated from the oil and gas industry from one CWT facility (Patriot), and that the POTW had not experienced any of the following conditions since accepting the brine waste water:

1. Diminished or inhibited performance of the biological treatment processes, 2. Adverse impacts to the downstream water quality, 3. Adverse impacts to the quality of the facility’s biosolids. 

# USEPA Compliance InspectionDaily Processing



## • Both Warren and Patriot were inspected and numerous tests were conducted. Overall, approximately 950 pages of documents were generated from the report. A summary of the key constituents of concern is shown below: 

# USEPA Compliance InspectionDaily Processing



## • In addition to a complete metals analysis, radiological screening was accomplished.

• The report concluded that Warren’s POTW was in compliance with the NPDES permit limitations. 

# USEPA Compliance InspectionSummary



## The waste treatment model used in Warren has almost 2 1⁄2 years of operational data that demonstrates that it is a safe and viable alternative disposal that compliments other disposal options including deep well injection. The model requires both a CWT and a POTW. It requires extensive testing by both entities which are mandated and voluntary. It only allows for a small percentage of hydraulic fracturing wastewater to be accepted. The water that this model accepts; low TDS, pit, flowback, muddy and storm waters are also the waters that are most problematic for deep well injection.Benefits



## The waste treatment model used in Warren has almost 2 1⁄2 years of operational data that demonstrates that it is a safe and viable alternative disposal that compliments other disposal options including deep well injection. The model requires both a CWT and a POTW. It requires extensive testing by both entities which are mandated and voluntary. It only allows for a small percentage of hydraulic fracturing wastewater to be accepted. The water that this model accepts; low TDS, pit, flowback , muddy and storm waters are also the waters that are most problematic for deep well injection.