G t USA Gastem USA

Designing Designing esigning a Wate Quality a Water Quality QualityProgram
Desig g nin a Water Q 

uali

Program

3⁄4 Goal3⁄4 Design3⁄4 Challenges3⁄4 Limitations3⁄4 Future

Lake Otsego, Cooperstown, NY
Water Quality Quality Program Program Overv

Overv

Baseline Water Frac fluid Water Q

Testing

Water QMonitor

Baseline Water

Testing

Establish chemical

composition of

potential

Establish theeffectiveness 

Management 

Establish ambient

water quality p

contaminantsEstablish Tracer

Monitor ambfor potential 

Establish introducedwater quality

Parameter(s)
Goal

3⁄4 Best Management Practices 3⁄4 Environmental Ste

Ross Well Site, Maryland, NY Mats used to diminish environmental impact

Mii on toring for potenti l a impacts to surface and g

water
St du y D i es gn

Establish Area of Establish list of analytes 

Interest to be sampled –Wate

Quality Parameters

• Dissolved • Calcium

methane, propaneand ethane

• Volatile Organic

Compounds

• Glycols

• Magnesiu• Sodium• Potassium• Iron

• Glycols • Mangane• pH• Conductivity• Chloride• Alkalinity

• Mangane• Arsenic• Barium• Chromiu• Lead

• Sulfate• Total Dissolved

Solids

• Total Suspended

Solids

• Lithium• Strontium

Solids
D t ocument... d 

ocume

Write out plan

3⁄4 Establish DQO, QA/QC3⁄4 Resample residential wells

after hydraulic fracture ofthe Utica Shale for water

quality parameters

3⁄4 RESULTS: Compare

monitoring results tobaseline database database to see if

goals are met
Ch ll a enges

Site-specific variability 

3⁄4a ii e dd tives

Develop an understanding on the specific 

formulations used for the specific target

formations (M ll arce us, Uti ) ca

3⁄4baseline water quality

Characterize regional regional water quality qualitySelect chemical tracer/fingerprint
Variability Variability Baseline Baseline Water Quality Quality Quality

Wells

Characterize region‐wide groundwater qual

Wells

Sand and

gravel 

aquifer 

Saturatedzone

Low yield fractured

Low permeability t

Low‐yield fractured

bedrock aquifer

Different water source in aquifer = variable water 

quality
S l e ect Ch il em ca Fi 

ngerp

3⁄4 Chemical tracers

3⁄4 Introduced tracers(Utica Shale Stimulation)Flowback =

Combination additives

+ prod d uce water3⁄4 Nt l a ura Tracers(Brine, mercury, lead, arsenic, organic acids, hydrocarbons, poly

aromatic hydrocarbons volatile, and semi‐volatile organic

compounds)
I dd ntro uced Ch i l em ca Tra

Ad t van ages

3⁄4 Powerful fingerprint3⁄4 Easily explained3⁄4 Already present in fl

Di a a age sadvantages

3⁄4 Site specific

Look for trends in av

results

3⁄4 Tedious looking for d

flow back componen

 Fi d ti t

Find time proven trace
Types of Potential Potential Tracers Tracers in S

flowback

• Organic • Inorganic

o Higher Concentrato Potassium & Chlorid

g

o Modest concentrations o Most less than 1 ppm

RESIDENTIAL FLOWBACK

ANALYTES

WATER

WELLS

(before)

WATER WELLS

(after)

ADDITIVES IN

FLUID

Non X‐VOC Non detect Non detect Ethylene glycol 35 mg/L

SVOC Non detect Non detect

Acetone

13 μg/L

X‐VOCs Non detect Non detect

Chloromethane

8.0 μg/L

Potassium 0.27‐0.97mg/L 0.23‐0.98mg/L 61.6 mg/L

Chlorides 0‐69 mg/l 1.1‐84 mg/l 5070 mg/l
Selecting Tracers

K+ C

Ease of d t ti e ec on in fi ld e

X

Ease of detection in

lb t X X laboratory

Non‐reactive with water X X

Low Sorption X X

Availability in Frac Fluid X XBackground interference Road 

ChlorideFate and Transport extensively studied: Conservative tracer retardation reactions, only advection and dispersion), most m

present in high concentrations.
Wh t a N t? ex

3⁄4 Introduced water analysis3⁄4 Point of injection mixture analysis3⁄4 Chemical transformations, fate and transport of 

compounds in frac fluid