Marcellus Shale Coalition Guiding Principles Document
Pittsburgh, PA – The Marcellus Shale Coalition (MSC) published Recommended Practices (RP) for Water Pipelines, the sixth in a series of guidance documents aimed at further enhancing the safe development of natural gas across the Appalachian basin. This RP for constructing water pipelines is in line with the MSC’s Guiding Principles to “implement state-of-the-art environmental protection across our operations” and supports ongoing industry efforts to reduce its operational overall footprint.
“By continually implementing cutting-edge recycling technologies, water pipelines and other innovative water management practices, our industry is able to further reduce the volume of truck traffic and capitalize on environmental benefits inherent to safe development and use of natural gas,” said MSC chief executive officer Kathryn Klaber. “As Marcellus Shale development advances, and more operators build water pipeline networks to support their well operations, this guidance document will aid in the siting and construction process. Additionally, this RP builds upon a series of content-rich, member-driven guidance documents designed to raise the bar and advance our industry’s commitment to operational excellence and compliance.”
This Recommended Practice for Water Pipelines was drafted by industry professionals and provides guidance to the industry in the following areas:
Optimal Route Selection: Identify sensitive resources and minimize environmental impact.
Pipe Materials: Determine correct materials and utilize proper resources to construct pipelines.
Valves: Install appropriate valves to isolate segments of the line; allow for maintenance; and permit drainage.
Pipeline Restraints: Use restraints to prevent unwanted line movement.
Operational Considerations: Test pipelines to avoid leaks, consider any environmental consequences, monitor all lines and air venting during operations, and consider using locks, handles, protective covering, or drainage when necessary.
Deactivation: Upon completion the pipeline should be deactivated or removed in its entirety after all remaining water is removed.
Continued Klaber, “With water and water management serving a critical role in the well completion process, ensuring that water pipelines, both temporary and permanent, are constructed to the highest degree of integrity is critical for the development process, the environment and public safety.”
To view other Recommended Practices click HERE
MSC Guidance on Stray Gas
****
The above is not my work – but provided as a link to information.
More on
Well Water Quality In Pennsylvania
Barium, Arsenic, Lithium, Methane
Common Well Water Problems – Helpguide
Case Studies
New Educational Tool on Drinking Water Quality
Website Provided for Educational Purpose.
Carbon County Groundwater Guardians is a 501(c)(3) IRS approved nonprofit, volunteer organization and your donation is tax deductible to the extent allowed by law.
Fact Sheet: Methane Gas Migration and Mitigation
Methane gas has been a “hidden” problem in Northeastern Pennsylvania. The gas is typically associated with wetlands, bogs, landfills, coal-producing formations, natural saline seeps, some glacial deposits, and gas storage areas. Because of the development of the Marcellus Shale, the presence of methane gas and the potential for methane gas migration is a growing concern. Methane is a colorless, odorless gas that is lighter than air. Natural gas is mostly methane (70 – 90 % CH4), carbon dioxide (0 to 8 % CO2), plus other gases. The other gases may include ethane (C2H6), propane (C3H8), butane (C4H10), and hydrogen sulfide (H2S) as well as small amounts of helium.
Methane gas is highly flammable between a lower explosion limit (LEL) of 5.53 percent by volume in air and an upper explosion limit (UEL) of 15 percent. These percentages are equivalent to a methane concentration of 50,000 and 150,000 parts per million (ppm) in air. The minimum concentration level at which the gas has the potential to explode is called the lower explosive limit (LEL); below the LEL level there is not enough gas to cause an explosion. Above the UEL, there is inadequate oxygen to fuel combustion, but if the space is vented and the gas concentration drops below the UEL, the gas can become diluted enough to explode (it would require an ignition source). Methane is not considered toxic, but it is an asphyxiant at a concentration of over 50 percent in air (it displaces oxygen). Therefore, the primary risks for methane would be asphyxiation in a confined or poorly vented area or a potential explosion hazard. As a safety measure, the natural gas industry adds mercaptans to the produced methane gas that enters the pipeline and your home. The mercaptans produce a very pungent odor so that gas leaks will be noticed, but unprocessed methane gas tends to have NO ODOR. It is critical to note that some unprocessed methane gas may contain long chain hydrocarbon molecules that can create an odor.
From the available data in the Citizen Groundwater/Surfacewater Database, it would appear that the natural background level of methane in private wells in Northeastern Pennsylvania ranges from not detectable or trace levels to over 28 mg/L. You may suspect the presence of methane gas in your water if you hear a “gurgling noise”, sputtering at the tap, the water has a lot of gas bubbles, is effervescent or fizzy.
Note: If the pumping level of water in your well starts to fall below your pump intake, ordinary air may mix with the water and produce similar symptoms. When in doubt, contact a professional to determine the nature of the observed gas.
For more on this topic – Methane Gas Migration
Citizen Groundwater and Surfacewater Database
The Baseline Water Testing Process It is NOT Just About Getting a Sample
The Baseline Water Testing Process It is NOT Just About Getting a Sample
By Brian Oram, Professional Geologist
Carbon County Groundwater Guardians
Published in March ONG Marketplace
We have had the opportunity to witness a wide range of practices that have been called baseline testing. We have seen a team of 4 professionals working for the EPA in Dimock, Pennsylvania, take 4 to 5 hours to collect one water sample and we’ve seen a single sampler with virtually no training take 15 minutes to purge and sample a private well with no field measurements or even gloves. The potentially negative impacts of this wide variation in sampling techniques and experience is compounded by the lack of field documentation and a quest for that “single” list of parameters. This approach will make for great future lawsuits and media stories, but does little to generate the reliable data required by professionals, scientists, regulatory agencies, and the public.
The key elements to effective baseline testing should include:
a. A selection of parameters and indicators that meets the regional environmental conditions and addresses the historic and proposed activities and practices in the region and not just a simple list provided or recommended by a regulatory agency;
b. chain-of-custody practices with internal and external quality control (QC) and quality assurance (QA) that start and end with the certified laboratory working with a trained third-party professional;
c. field documentation, including notes, field measurements, and photos, that includes a summary of the existing condition of the private water distribution system;
d. field sampling done by third-party samplers that are either licensed professionals or specifically trained in the standard operating procedures of the certified testing laboratory, plus these individuals must have a working understanding of common water treatment systems; and
e. prior to releasing the data, the certified laboratory must validate and review the data, plus work with the third-party professional to confirm or check the reliability and validity of the results.
As part of our outreach efforts, we have been able to review baseline testing conducted by multiple entities. Here is just one example for your consideration.
The sample was collected by a non-professional, third party sampler, tested by a certified testing laboratory, and then given by a natural gas company to a private well owner. The sample was collected only a few weeks before drilling started. The well owner was given a report with the raw data, spike and recovery analysis, surrogate testing results, field data sheet, and a full listing of the methods and the laboratory certifications. When the homeowner, a royalty owner, asked if there was any problems, we provided them a list.
1. The field conductivity was reported at 250 uS/cm, but the certified laboratory data had reported a total dissolved solids of 1500 mg/L;
2. The cation and anion mass balance was out of balance by over 25 %;
3. Total metal values less than dissolved metal values; and
4. The well had arsenic at over 10 times the primary drinking water standard, but this was never flagged as a problem for the private well owner.
This data is not scientifically valid and does not make sense. It may be certified, but it is wrong and there is no time to collect another pre-drill sample.
As professionals, we have the obligation to attempt to get it right and to properly inform citizens when a problem is identified. It is critical that we implement a process to screen the water quality data before it is distributed to the community. To build trust, the data must be provided to the private well owner in a format they can understand.
Baseline testing can be a valuable tool for the environmental professional, gas drilling industry, and community. With proper planning, baseline testing can used to determine where additional documentation or monitoring is needed and to determine the location of systems or wells vulnerable to influence.
In our opinion, baseline testing is not just part of an environmental audit, but in many ways, it is an opportunity for the company and consultant to build trust in the community. At the same time, the company is attempting to mitigate risk by documenting pre-existing conditions, the data collected during this baseline assessment should be used to make critical decisions related to the use of best management practices and build trust in the community through education and outreach.
Baseline testing is a community issue. We ALL live downstream and we need to solve problems as a community. This is a great opportunity to make a positive difference in your host community. Options for informational well water testing.
Support Groundwater Education in Pennsylvania and Consider Scheduling an Education Workshop for Your Community – just email bfenviro@ptd.net
Carbon County Groundwater Guardians is a 501(c)(3) IRS approved nonprofit, volunteer organization and your donation is tax deductible to the extent allowed by law.