DEP Office of Oil and Gas Management

Similar documents
Review of April 2016 Lawrence County Seismic Events

Colorado s Underground Injection Control Program: Prevention and Mitigation of Induced Seismicity

Potential Injection-Induced Seismicity Associated With Oil & Gas Development

Seismicity and the SWD-C4A well: An ongoing UIC case study in the Denver Basin, Colorado

OHIO S NEW CLASS II REGULATIONS AND ITS PROACTIVE APPROACH TO SEISMIC MONITORING AND INDUCED SEISMICITY

COGCC Underground Injection Program & Induced Seismicity

Table One: Induced seismicity since 2011 in five previously aseismic Ohio counties. Locality County Year Induced Recorded Reference

Seismicity in Texas in Relation to Active Class I Underground Injection Control Wells: Preliminary Observations

Risk Treatment. Todd Shipman PhD, Alberta Geological Survey/Alberta Energy Regulator November 17 th,2017 Induced Seismicity Workshop, Yellowknife NWT

Seismicity in Pennsylvania and the Pennsylvania State Seismic Network (PASEIS)

Risk Evaluation. Todd Shipman PhD, Alberta Geological Survey/Alberta Energy Regulator November 17 th,2017 Induced Seismicity Workshop, Yellowknife NWT

MESOZOIC BASINS. North Carolina Geological Survey

Needs Assessment: Permitting, i Data Management, Operations

Regulatory Considerations for Evaluating the Potential for Induced Seismicity of a Class I Non-Hazardous Disposal Well

INDUCED SEISMICITY AND THE O&G INDUSTRY

Addressing the risks of induced seismicity in sub-surface energy operations

Minimizing and Managing Potential Impacts of Injection-Induced Seismicity from Class II Disposal Wells: Practical Approaches

Marcellus Shale Gas Play Tetra Tech Capabilities

Hydraulic Fracturing Lifeline to Domestic Energy. Hydraulic Fracturing Lifeline to Domestic Energy. Hydraulic Fracturing Lifeline to Domestic Energy

Julie Shemeta, MEQ Geo Inc., WCEE Webinar 1/13/2016 1/14/2016

North Dakota Department of Mineral Resources

Estimating energy balance for hydraulic fracture stimulations: Lessons Learned from Basel

Challenges and Strategies for Monitoring Induced Seismic Activity

Monitoring and Verification of CO 2 Storage in Geological Formations Sally M. Benson Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory Berkeley, CA 94720

Human-Induced Earthquakes from Deep-Well Injection: A Brief Overview

Leveraging Cross-Disciplinary Science for Induced Seismicity Risk Management

KEY CONTROLLING FACTORS OF SHALEGAS INDUCED SEISMICITY

Preventing New Groundwater Pollution Problems from Old Oilfield Areas. Oklahoma Corporation Commission

West Coast Research. WESTCARB Technical Director California Energy Commission

What s Shaking in the Barnett Shale? STEP Dallas, August 11, 2015

CHAPTER GEOLOGICALLY HAZARDOUS AREAS Applicability Regulations.

Geologic CO 2 Storage Options for California

Research in Induced Seismicity

Ivan Wong Seismic Hazards Group AECOM Oakland, CA. IEAGHG Monitoring Network Meeting. 10 June 2015

GSWA Lower Lesueur 2D Seismic Survey. A summary on the impact of the new seismic survey on the South West Hub Carbon Capture and Storage Project

From an earthquake perspective, 2011 was. Managing the Seismic Risk Posed by Wastewater Disposal. 38 EARTH April

TexNet and CISR: An Update on Monitoring and Understanding Seismicity in Texas

MINIMIZING AND MANAGING POTENTIAL IMPACTS OF INJECTION INDUCED SEISMICITY FROM CLASS II DISPOSAL WELLS: PRACTICAL APPROACHES

Seismic Reflection Imaging across the Johnson Ranch, Valley County, Idaho

An Open Air Museum. Success breeds Success. Depth Imaging; Microseismics; Dip analysis. The King of Giant Fields WESTERN NEWFOUNDLAND:

Kent F. Perry. Gas Technology Institute Des Plaines, Illinois. Paper Presented October 6, th World Gas Conference Buenos Aires, Argentina

Shale Development and Hydraulic Fracturing or Frac ing (Fracking) What is it?

Induced Seismicity Potential in Energy Technologies

Seismicity induced by Shale Gas Hydraulic Stimulation: Preese Hall, Blackpool, United Kingdom.

FAQs - Earthquakes Induced by Fluid Injection

Unraveling the Mysteries of Seismicity in Oklahoma. A Story Map

Comprehensive Hydraulic Fracturing Study Los Angeles, California Dan Tormey, Ph.D., P.G. Cardno ENTRIX Los Angeles, California

FRIO BRINE SEQUESTRATION PILOT IN THE TEXAS GULF COAST

Induced Seismicity Potential in Energy Technologies

USGS: USGS: NEIC NEIC

Unconventional Reservoir Development: The Role of Geoscience from a State Regulator s Perspective

Lynn Helms Director, Department of Mineral Resources North Dakota Industrial Commission UNITED STATES

SCEK Report on Phase I ( ) Induced Seismicity Monitoring Project (ISMP) Carlos Salas, VP Oil & Gas, Geoscience BC

COMMENT CARD RESPONSES (SEISMIC)

Surface Processes Focus on Mass Wasting (Chapter 10)

OIL AND GAS PLAYS OF THE MICHIGAN BASIN, SOUTHERN ONTARIO. Terry Carter, Consulting Geologist London, Ontario

Shale Gas:- What is it?, Where is it? How can we get it and when? Professor Peter Styles, Applied and Environmental Geophysics Research Group

Section 19.1: Forces Within Earth Section 19.2: Seismic Waves and Earth s Interior Section 19.3: Measuring and Locating.

The following procedures describe how application managers will review chemical additives during the permit application review phase.

1 of 5 12/10/2018, 2:38 PM

RAILROAD COMMISSION OF TEXAS OIL WELL POTENTIAL TEST, COMPLETION OR RECOMPLETION REPORT, AND LOG

Guidelines for Site-Specific Seismic Hazard Reports for Essential and Hazardous Facilities and Major and Special-Occupancy Structures in Oregon

BERG-HUGHES CENTER FOR PETROLEUM AND SEDIMENTARY SYSTEMS. Department of Geology and Geophysics College of Geosciences

Finding Large Capacity Groundwater Supplies for Irrigation

Update on the seismic evaluation of the plans for Shaft #4 in the Cayuga Salt Mine, New York State April 11, 2017

Kansas Underground Injection Control Program & Induced Seismicity. By: Benjamin Busboom Stinson Leonard Street

Tectonic Hazard Evaluations for Korean Nuclear Sites

For personal use only

Recommendations for Injection and Storage Monitoring

Mapping Faults With Lightning, Natural-Sourced Electromagnetics (NSEM) Louis J. Berent Dynamic Measurement, LLC

OVERVIEW OF THE ROGERSVILLE SHALE IN WEST VIRGINIA. Philip Dinterman West Virginia Geological & Economic Survey May 11, 2017

Deep Borehole Disposal Performance Assessment and Criteria for Site Selection

The Stability Of Fault Systems In The South Shore Of The. St. Lawrence Lowlands Of Québec Implications For Shale Gas Development

Microseismic data illuminate fractures in the Montney

Is It Safe to Frack Beneath Lake Lewisville?

SLOPE STABILITY EVALUATION AND ACCEPTANCE STANDARDS

Shale Gas; Wellbore Positioning Challenges

Exploration, Drilling & Production

Module 7: Plate Tectonics and Earth's Structure Topic 4 Content : Earthquakes Presentation Notes. Earthquakes

PRESENTATION TITLE. Drone Magnetic Site Surveys To Verify Wellhead Locations David M. Velozzi 9/27/18

Dr. Kenneth B. Taylor, P.G.

Pershing Gold Extends High-Grade Mineralization through Step-Out Drilling in Phase 1 and Initiates Phase 2 Drilling Program

NUCLEAR POWER PLANT SITE SELECTION

Minewater Management Annual Meeting Marion, Illinois. August 13, 2013

Passive seismic monitoring in unconventional oil and gas

DEPARTMENT OF GEOLOGY AND MINERAL INDUSTRIES WAYS & MEANS SUBCOMMITTEE ON NATURAL RESOURCES MARCH 2, 2017

What We Know (and don t know)

New USGS Maps Identify Potential Ground- Shaking Hazards in 2017

GPR AS A COST EFFECTIVE BEDROCK MAPPING TOOL FOR LARGE AREAS. Abstract

Making the Earth Shake:

GOAL 7 AREAS SUBJECT TO NATURAL DISASTERS AND HAZARDS. To protect life and property from natural disasters and hazards.

For personal use only

Hydrogeology of East-Central Union County, Northeastern New Mexico

Answers to questions raised by Gerhard Schmidt concerning the planning process for a Danish nuclear waste repository

IV. ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT ANALYSIS G. GEOLOGY AND SOILS

Recent Earthquakes in Oklahoma. and Potential for Induced Seismicity Austin Holland Oklahoma State Seismologist

Economic Geology Unconventional Energy Research

Call for Papers. Hydraulic Fracturing Special Issue

Microseismicity applications in hydraulic fracturing monitoring

Transcription:

DEP Office of Oil and Gas Management Bureau of Oil and Gas Planning and Program Management Well Plugging and Subsurface Activities Division Production Waste Trends and Management May 19, 2017 2017 Shale Network Workshop State College, PA

Presentation Outline Current Oil and Gas Waste Generation Trends - Unconventional Industry - Conventional Industry DEP Process for Permitting UIC Wells Review of Lawrence County Induced Seismic Event Regulatory Framework for Managing Induced Seismic Risks

Current Oil and Gas Waste Generation Trends Unconventional: 2016 Waste Streams

Current Oil and Gas Waste Generation Trends Unconventional: 2016 Waste Management Trends

Current Oil and Gas Waste Generation Trends Unconventional: 2016 Percentage and Bbls by County

Current Oil and Gas Waste Generation Trends Unconventional: 2016 Brine-to-BOE Ratio by County

Current Oil and Gas Waste Generation Trends Unconventional: 2016 Summary 35.4 MM Bbls of brine produced 75.2% of liquid waste is being recycled 4.7 MM Bbls of oil and condensate produced 5 Tcf (1 B BOE) of gas produced Limitation: our data system only captures the first stop for waste, e.g., if waste goes from well pre-treatment UIC well, we only have information for well and pre-treatment facility

Current Oil and Gas Waste Generation Trends Conventional: 2016 Waste Streams

Current Oil and Gas Waste Generation Trends Conventional: 2016 Waste Management Trends

Current Oil and Gas Waste Generation Trends Conventional: 2016 Percentage and Bbls by County

Current Oil and Gas Waste Generation Trends Conventional: 2016 Brine-to-BOE Ratio by County

Current Oil and Gas Waste Generation Trends Conventional: 2016 Treatment Facility Inventory

Current Oil and Gas Waste Generation Trends Conventional: 2016 Summary 4 MM Bbls of brine produced Only half of liquid waste is being recycled 1.5 MM Bbls of oil and condensate produced 120 Bcf (21 MM BOE) of gas produced DEP s database is not comprehensive - Only 65% of total wells are represented in 2016 report Conventional industry is facing significant challenges relating to brine management

DEP Process for Permitting UIC Wells Current UIC Disposal Well Inventory Comments Note that Stonehaven Energy Mgt Co LLC well is now online Only commercial facility is Bear Lake Prop LLC

DEP Process for Permitting UIC Wells UIC Permitting DEP s Oil and Gas Program completes an independent geological and well integrity assessment for every new UIC permit application: Area of Review (AOR) analysis for seismic risk that includes 3- and 6-mile radii around historic earthquake epicenters Rigorous analysis of geologic conditions at and adjacent to the well site A mechanical integrity evaluation of the proposed injection well Additional consideration for monitoring at offset wells In addition to these criteria, the Oil and Gas Program also considers several enhancements that are discussed in subsequent slides Surface permitting activities are also still conducted: Control and Disposal Plan and Erosion and Sedimentation Controls

DEP Process for Permitting UIC Wells UIC Permitting 1) Geologic analysis Geological review of the area around the well, including the structural geologic framework 2) Detailed review of stratigraphy associated with UIC well Review of geophysical logging suites available to understand fully how well brines will be contained Confirmation of lower confinement whenever possible this is particularly critical in situations where offset from basement rock is minimal

DEP Process for Permitting UIC Wells UIC Permitting 3) Seismic event monitoring and shut-down protocol Operator development of a seismic monitoring and mitigation plan (SMMP) which includes active event monitoring One seismometer on site or a local seismic network tied to the state s monitoring network (PASeis) As part of SMMP, the operator shall discontinue injection operations if a measured induced seismic event great than 2 M L occurs within a 3-mile radius of the injection well operations may not recommence until it has been definitively demonstrated that the seismic event is not associated with injection activities or some other approved mitigation strategy has been implemented

DEP Process for Permitting UIC Wells UIC Permitting 4) Continuous pressure monitoring on outer strings and continuous casing pressure monitoring associated with long string (i.e., casing that houses the injection tubing) Recommend that additional gauges/valves be installed on outer casing strings to detect and address potential well integrity issues in real-time 5) Installation of pressure alarm and pump shut-down device Recommend installation of a pressure alarm and pump shut-down device outside the long string to safely keep any pressure leaks significantly below the pressure rating of the casing

DEP Process for Permitting UIC Wells UIC Permitting For more information: http://www.dep.pa.gov/business/energy/oilandgasprograms/oil andgasmgmt/pages/underground-injection-wells.aspx

Review of Lawrence County Event Timing: Several low-magnitude earthquakes occurred in Lawrence County during the morning hours of April 25, 2016 Locations: Mahoning, North Beaver, and Union Townships, just west of New Castle Magnitude: 1.8-2.3 on the Richter Scale since the seismic events were recorded and felt only by seismometers, they re considered microseismic DEP Analysis: These events correlated with operator activity

Review of Lawrence County Event Lateral Locations, Epicenters per Lamont Doherty Network, and Geology Orange dot is well pad location

Review of Lawrence County Event Well Site Area and Regional Geologic Structure The Rome Trough is associated with thickening sediments and greater offset to crystalline basement rock

Lawrence County Event Details Seismic Event Locations with Regional Geologic Structure Mapped extent of lineament Proposed extent of lineament

Review of Lawrence County Event

Review of Lawrence County Event Key Geologic Factors Tied to Seismicity and Forward Actions Structural geologic features in the area result in Precambrian crystalline basement rock being closer to the surface than in other areas of the basin: the depth in the area of the well pad is approximately 9,500 to 10,000 feet The Utica Shale is approximately 2,500 to 3,000 feet shallower than basement rock Literature proposes that the Blairsville-Broadtop Lineament extends through Lawrence County, but currently the mapped extent ends in Butler County DEP is currently assigning special permit conditions to future permits issued Mahoning, North Beaver, and Union Townships; Lawrence County over the longer term, an Area of Alternative Methods will be the primary mechanism for regulating this issue

Review of Lawrence County Event Lawrence County Induced Seismic Event For more information: http://www.dep.pa.gov/about/regional/northwestregion/com munity-information/pages/lawrence-county-earthquake.aspx

Regulatory Framework for Managing Induced Seismic Risks Area of Alternative Methods Stakeholder workgroup is being assembled Rulemaking will focus on Utica Shale development in areas where the formation is closer to crystalline basement rock and/or portions of the state where measurable seismic events have occurred historically During interim period, DEP will continue to rely on permit conditions for certain parts of Lawrence County and PASeis/internal SOPs for response in the remainder of the state

Regulatory Framework for Managing Induced Seismic Risks Summary Geologic and engineering reviews to develop permit conditions will be used as the primary mechanism for regulating induced seismicity associated with UIC operations An Area of Alternative Methods will be developed to regulate induced seismicity associated with hydraulic fracturing DEP will continue to actively discuss research findings relating to induced seismicity with all groups performing research to better understand potential triggering mechanisms

Thank You! Questions? Seth Pelepko, P.G. Program Manager, Well Plugging and Subsurface Activities Division Bureau of Oil & Gas Planning & Program Mgmt 717.772.2199 mipelepko@pa.gov Acknowledgments: Thanks to Stew Beattie, Lindsay Byron, and Harry Wise of BOGPPM for helping prepare the presentation materials.