Meeting Summary 

Topic: Conference Call with ConocoPhillips about shale gas operations 

Meeting Date: 5 November 2012

Participants: Lisa Biddle, Brian D’Amico, Erik Helm (EPA/EAD) 

Meghan Camp, Brent Ruminski (ERG) 

Warren Emerson, Neal Goates, Steve Jester, Alena Jonas (ConocoPhillips) 

 

On 5 November 2012, the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) held a 

conference call with ConocoPhillips to discuss their shale gas operations. Discussion topics 

included: 

 Current shale gas activity; 

 Well development; 

 Freshwater acquisition; 

 Wastewater volumes; and 

 Wastewater management 

Attachment 1 lists the meeting participants.

Current Shale Gas Activity 

ConocoPhllips operates approximately 20,000 net oil and gas wells across the country 

and is active in the Bakken, Eagle Ford, Permian, Barnett, Niobrara, and Mancos shales. 

According to their website, ConocoPhllips is expanding activity in liquid-rich shale areas of the 

Eagle Ford, Bakken, and Permian basin (West Texas). ConocoPhllips is also exploring 

production in the Niobrara and Mancos formations. According to Conoco, they are currently 

drilling their third well in the Niobrara and their first well in the Mancos. ConocoPhllips plans to 

fracture the Mancos well using slickwater. 

Table 1 provides the number of ConocoPhllips wells in shale formations from 

DrillingInfo, Inc’s HPDI database as of December 2010.1

 Table 1 shows all of ConocoPhllips’ 

shale wells in the country as of December 2010 using EPA’s Geoplatform mapping tool and 

coordinates from DrillingInfo, Inc’s HPDI database and PA DEP’s database.2

 The map in Table 

1 shows both shale gas and oil wells from Table 1. Information in Table 1 and Figure 1 was 

gathered outside of the conference call. 

 

1

 HPDI database last updated in December 2011 and includes wells through the end of 2010. 2

 HPDI database last updated in December 2011. 
 Meeting Summary 

Page 2 of 5 

Table 1. ConocoPhllips’2010 Shale Well Count by Formation 

Formation States 

Number of 

2010 Gas 

Wellsa 

Number of 

2010 Oil 

Wellsa 

Number of Active 

Drilling Rigsb

Barnett TX 578 15 0 

Eagle Ford TX 34 10 16 

Permian TX, NM 15 23 NRc 

Bakken ND 125 184 10 

Niobrara CO 0 0 NR 

Mancosd CO, NM 1 3 NR 

a—DrillingInfo, Inc’s HPDI database. Last updated January 2012. 

b—Spring, 2012. Lower 48 and Latin America. Available online at: 

http://www.conocophillips.com/EN/about/worldwide_ops/l48-la/Pages/Lower48.aspx. 

c—ConocoPhllips drilled 103 wells in the Permian during 2011. 

d —The four wells listed in DrillingInfo, Inc’s HPDI database were classified as well type = unknown. 

These could be vertical exploration wells. 

NR—Not Reported. 

Source: DrillingInfo, Inc’s HPDI database. Last updated January 2012.

Figure 1. ConocoPhllips’2010 Active Shale Wells 

Well Development 

ConocoPhllips provided an overview of the shale gas well development process. Well 

pad construction typically lasts several weeks. The time to construct the pad depends heavily on 

the well and area where the well is being drilled. Drilling one well requires approximately 60 to 

Bakken 

309 active wells

10 drilling rigs active in 2011

Permian Basin

38 active wells in 2010

Drilled 103 wells in 2011

Mancos

4 active wells (possibly 

vertical)

Currently examining 

formation potential

Barnett

593 active wells

Not actively drilling

Eagle Ford

44 active wells

16 drilling rigs active in 2011

Niobrara

0 active wells

Currently examining formation potential
 Meeting Summary 

Page 3 of 5 

90 days. For example a well in the Eagle Ford can take 6 – 8 months. When developing multiwell well pads, ConocoPhllips will initially only drill and complete one or two wells in order to 

evaluate production before investing in all potential wells. A drill rig is brought back onsite to 

drill the remaining wells when logistics are favorable. 

Freshwater Acquisition 

ConocoPhllips currently withdraws water for hydraulic fracturing from groundwater 

wells and surface waters. When using groundwater wells, ConocoPhllips often withdraws 

groundwater from depths below drinking waterwell screens. ConocoPhllips trucks freshwater 

from the source to the well pad or pipes it through temporary piping to the well pad. In the Eagle 

Ford, ConocoPhllips has had success in drilling wells close to the water source. As a result, 

ConocoPhllips was able to use temporary piping to transport the water. In the Bakken, 

transportation distances from the source to the well are longer, and therefore the majority of the 

freshwater is transported via truck. When freshwater arrives at the site, it is typically stored in a 

freshwater impoundment. ConocoPhllips uses both well pad-specific and centralized 

impoundments. Table 2 provides typical source water types used by Conoco. 

Table 2. ConocoPhllips’ Freshwater Sources 

Formation Freshwater Source 

Eagle Ford 100 percent groundwater 

Permian 100 percent groundwater 

Bakken 50 percent groundwater 

50 percent surface water 

Niobrara Not far enough along in development to know 

Mancos Anticipate this will be a mix of GW and SW sources 

Produced Water Volumes 

ConocoPhllips explained that fracturing volumes vary by formation and sometimes even 

within formations. In addition, the type of fracturing fluid (e.g., gel or slickwater) depends on the 

reservoir and the preferences of the company performing the completion. ConocoPhllips also 

noted that they and their service providers are constantly optimizing fracturing techniques (i.e., 

experimenting with volumes, number of stages, and stage lengths) through trial and error. For 

example, ConocoPhllips stated that they have reduced the volume of water required per 

completion in the Eagle Ford from 140,000 bbl to 80,000 bbl. This was achieved by working 

with the fluid chemistry and experimenting to see how much water was really needed to carry the 

proppant. 

Produced Water Management 

ConocoPhllips does not discharge any shale produced water to publicly owned treatment 

works (POTWs) or directly to surface waters. Nearly all of ConocoPhllips’ produced water is 
 Meeting Summary 

Page 4 of 5 

trucked to nearby underground injection wells for disposal. ConocoPhllips noted that they have 

an on-going recycling pilot project for produced water from a conventional formation. However, 

they are not sure whether the findings can be broadly applied to other formations. ConocoPhllips 

stated that formation-specific compatibility issues need to be considered because produced water 

from each formation is unique and the fracturing fluid used in each formation requires a unique 

chemistry. 

During the flowback process, flowback produced water is stored onsite in 500 barrel 

fracturing tanks. After the initial flowback, the water flow rate decreases significantly for the 

remaining life of the well. After wells enter the production phase, the wells generate lower 

volumes of produced water which ConocoPhllips stores in above ground storage tanks. 

ConocoPhllips does not store any produced water in open pits or impoundments. From the well 

pad, produced water is typically trucked to an underground injection well. A typical truck trip is 

approximately one hour long. However, a truck may have to wait at an injection well causing the 

total trip to last five to six hours. 

In the Eagle Ford, ConocoPhllips currently manages all of their produced water via 

underground injection. ConocoPhllips owns and operates some underground injection wells, but 

primarily uses third party wells. As development continues in the Eagle Ford, ConocoPhllips 

plans to pipe wastewater to a centralized site via temporary or permanent piping. 
 Meeting Summary 

Page 5 of 5 

Attachment 1 

Table A-1. List of Meeting Participants

Name Affiliation Phone Email 

Warren Emerson ConocoPhillips 832-486-2002 Warren.emerson@conocophillips.com

Neal Goates ConocoPhillips Not provided. Not provided. 

Steve Jester ConocoPhillips Not provided. Not provided. 

Alena Jonas ConocoPhillips Not provided. Not provided. 

Milind Bhatte ConocoPhillips Not provided. Not provided. 

Brian D’Amico US EPA 202-566-1069 Damico.Brian@epamail.epa.gov 

Lisa Biddle US EPA 202-566-0350 Biddle.Lisa@epamail.epa.gov 

Erik Helm US EPA 202-566-1049 Helm.Erik@epa.gov 

Meghan Camp ERG 703-633-1684 meghan.camp@erg.com 

Brent Ruminski ERG 703-633-1701 brent.ruminski@erg.com