hf-report20121214

Study of the Potential Impacts of Hydraulic Fracturing
on Drinking Water Resources: Progress Report December 2012
List of Figures
Figure 1. Illustration of the five stages of the hydraulic fracturing water cycle ............................................. 8
Figure 2. Potential drinking water issues associated with each stage of the hydraulic fracturing water
cycle .............................................................................................................................................................. 9
Figure 3. Illustration of the structure of the EPA’s Study of the Potential Impacts of Hydraulic Fracturing
on Drinking Water Resources ..................................................................................................................... 12
Figure 4. Fundamental research questions posed for each stage of the hydraulic fracturing water
cycle ............................................................................................................................................................ 13
Figure 5. Water acquisition......................................................................................................................... 14
Figure 6. Chemical mixing .......................................................................................................................... 15
Figure 7. Well injection ............................................................................................................................... 17
Figure 8. Flowback and produced water .................................................................................................... 18
Figure 9. Wastewater treatment and waste disposal ................................................................................. 20
Figure 10. Locations of oil and gas production wells hydraulically fractured between September 2009
and October 2010 ....................................................................................................................................... 44
Figure 11. Locations of oil and gas production wells hydraulically fractured from September 2009
through October 2010 ................................................................................................................................. 49
Figure 12. Locations of 333 wells selected for the well file review............................................................. 52
Figure 13. Example of data disclosed through FracFocus ......................................................................... 57
Figure 14. Scenario A of the subsurface migration modeling project ........................................................ 64
Figure 15. Scenario B1 of the subsurface migration modeling project ...................................................... 65
Figure 16. Scenario B2 of the subsurface migration modeling project ...................................................... 66
Figure 17. Scenario C of the subsurface migration modeling project ........................................................ 67
Figure 18. Scenario D1 of the subsurface migration modeling project ...................................................... 68
Figure 19. Scenario D2 of the subsurface migration modeling project ...................................................... 69
Figure 20. The Susquehanna River Basin, overlying a portion of the Marcellus Shale, is one of two study
areas chosen for water availability modeling .............................................................................................. 81
Figure 21. The Upper Colorado River Basin, overlying a portion of the Piceance Basin, is one of two river
basins chosen for water availability modeling ............................................................................................. 82
Figure 22. Public water systems in the Susquehanna River Basin............................................................ 84
Figure 23. Public water systems in the Upper Colorado River Basin ........................................................ 87
Figure 24. Hydraulic fracturing wastewater flow in unconventional oil and gas extraction ...................... 102
Figure 25. Generalized flow diagram for conventional publicly owned works treatment processes ........ 103
Figure 26. Flow diagram of the EPA’s process leading to the development of modified or new analytical
methods..................................................................................................................................................... 116
Figure 27. Locations of the five retrospective case studies chosen for inclusion in the EPA’s Study of the
Potential Impacts of Hydraulic Fracturing on Drinking Water Resources ................................................. 128
Figure 28. Extent of the Raton Basin in southeastern Colorado and northeastern New Mexico ............. 132
Figure 29. Locations of sampling sites in Las Animas and Huerfano Counties, Colorado ...................... 135
Figure 30. Extent of the Bakken Shale in North Dakota and Montana .................................................... 137
viii