American Oil and Gas Reporter - March 2016 - 103

* Current practices for managing
treatment residuals.
As part of the study, EPA plans to visit CWT facilities accepting conventional
and unconventional oil and gas wastewater,
and to sample wastewater and treatment
residuals at such facilities to "evaluate the
pollutants present, their concentrations, and
the performance of treatment technologies." EPA has expressed concern that today's effluent regulations do not include
limitations for dissolved solids, barium,
bromide, radium, and strontium.
In its response to public comments on
its preliminary 2014 effluent guidelines,
EPA stated that it would evaluate all Part
437 facilities that accepted oil and gas
wastes. The agency also intends to evaluate treatment facilities not subject to 40
CFR Part 437, such as no-discharge facilities that accept oil and gas wastewater for
treatment.
Significantly, EPA anticipates the study
may also include various types of wastewater management facilities, including
both on- and off-site facilities, and facilities owned by oil and gas extraction
companies in order to "explore whether existing definitions for CWTs at 40 CFR Part
437 are clear enough to address facilities
across the oil and gas extraction industry
that are accepting wastes for discharge."
Industry Response
The American Petroleum Institute
challenged the agency's plan to potentially evaluate wastewater facilities owned by
oil and gas extraction companies. API argued that the definition of centralized
wastewater treatment in the regulations did
not include facilities that were owned or
operated by companies within the petroleum industry.
API also commented that EPA's study
might not include wastewater management
facilities that were not CWTs. EPA responded that wastewater treatment facilities owned by exploration and production
companies should be evaluated because:
* The agency expected many producers owned, operated, or leased wastewater
treatment systems that might discharge to
POTWs or to surface waters.
* Amendments to 40 CFR Part 437
might alter the cost of CWT services for
extraction companies.
It appears, therefore, that EPA may examine operator wastewater management
facilities, including facilities that do not directly or indirectly discharge to navigable
waters, as part of its larger study of the
CWT industry.
Hydraulic Fracturing Study
On June 4, 2015, EPA released its As-

sessment of the Potential Impacts of Hydraulic Fracturing for Oil and Gas on
Drinking Water Resources, a draft assessment that discussed the potential effect of
hydraulic fracturing activities on drinking
water resources. The draft assessment
discusses both POTW and CWT treatment
of oil and natural gas wastewater.
With respect to POTWs, the assessment
states that such facilities are not designed
to effectively reduce the concentration of
total dissolved solids present in highly
saline oil and gas wastewater, even though
the facilities may effectively remove some
constituents.
With respect to CWTs, the draft assessment summarizes the concerns of some researchers that ineffective treatment of oil
and gas wastewater has led to elevated radium concentrations in the effluent of certain CWT facilities. The studies cited by
the draft assessment note that radium
can accumulate in sediments and soils affected by the outfalls of some treatment
plants that have handled oil and natural gas
wastewater.
On Jan. 7, the EPA's Science Advisory Board released its SAB Review of
EPA's Draft Assessment of the Potential
Impacts of Hydraulic Fracturing for Oil
and Gas on Drinking Water Resources.
The review recommends that EPA revise
its draft assessment to:
* More clearly summarize the statutory and regulatory framework for CWT
oversight;
* Improve the description of the
processes used to treat wastewater at
CWT facilities; and
* More adequately describe the composition and disposal methods of treatment
residuals.
The SAB also challenged EPA to forecast the future treatment volumes of CWT
facilities, paying special attention to cost
and wastewater reuse patterns.
The SAB report was particularly critical of the Draft Assessment's conclusion
that POTWs receiving wastewater from
CWT facilities did not show higher radionuclide concentrations in the effluent
than POTWs not receiving such waste
streams. SAB believes EPA should have
stated that the reported waste streams were
all elevated beyond the maximum contaminant levels and several orders of magnitude above background river levels.
Anticipated Developments
Several developments in the area of federal oil and gas wastewater management
are expected this year. First, EPA projects
that its proposed Part 435 rule prohibiting
POTWs from treating or disposing unconventional wastewater will be finalized in

August.
Second, operators and CWT facilities
alike should follow closely EPA's ongoing study concerning the scope of Part 437,
because it may spark additional regulatory actions that directly affect the management and treatment of conventional and
unconventional wastewater.
Third, the SAB's review of EPA's assessment of hydraulic fracturing's impact
on drinking water resources suggests the
agency may re-examine its draft conclusions concerning potential radioactivity of
POTW and CWT effluent. These latter two
developments may eventually result in additional regulation of oil and natural gas
wastewater management.
State Regulations
Two states, Pennsylvania and Texas,
have adopted regulations to control the permitting of CWT facilities. The Pennsylvania DEP permits CWT facilities through
its WMGR123 general permit, which allows facilities to treat wastewater and send
it back into the field for reuse in development operations. The DEP also has adopted its own technology-based treatment regulations for industrial wastes, which include wastewater generated by oil and gas
activities. These regulations are codified
at 25 Pa. Code §95.10.
Under §95.10, new and expanding
discharges of wastewater resulting from
fracturing, production, field exploration,
drilling or completion of natural gas wells
may be authorized only from CWTs, as defined by EPA's regulations in Part 437. Oil
and gas operators must maintain and update annually a wastewater source reduction strategy that identifies the methods and
procedures the operator will use to maximize recycling and reuse of flowback and
production fluids.
This source reduction strategy must include:
* A complete characterization of the
operator's waste stream, including chemical analyses, TDS concentrations, and
monthly generation rates of flowback
and production fluids at each natural gas
well;
* A description and evaluation of
potential wastewater source reduction
options through recycling, reuse, and other permitted beneficial uses;
* The rationale for selecting the
source reduction methods employed by the
operator; and
* Quantification on a per well basis of
the flowback and production fluid recycled
or reused to fracture other natural gas
wells, or for other approved beneficial uses.
Pennsylvania CWT facilities discharging to surface waters or POTWs must meet
MARCH 2016 103
American Oil and Gas Reporter - March 2016

Table of Contents for the Digital Edition of American Oil and Gas Reporter - March 2016
