Appendix I: EFD East Regional Center I.2 Assessing ...efdsystems.org/pdf/I.2_Assessing_Environmental_Impacts.pdf · Assessing Environmental Impacts of Horizontal Gas Well Development

Assessing Environmental Impacts of Horizontal Gas Well Development Operations (on Nearby Water

Resources)

Final Report April 1, 2014 – May 31, 2016

Submitted to: Houston Advanced Research Center

Environmentally Friendly Drilling (EFD) Technology Integration Program (TIP) 4800 Research Forest Drive The Woodlands, TX 77381

Submitted by: West Virginia University Research Corporation

West Virginia Water Research Institute 385 Evansdale Drive

PO Box 6064 Morgantown, WV 26506-6064

Submission Date: May 31, 2016

Appendix I: EFD East Regional Center I.2 Assessing Environmental Impacts (Task 5.4.1)

Table of Contents List of Figures ................................................................................................................................................ 1

List of Tables ................................................................................................................................................. 2

Executive Summary ....................................................................................................................................... 4

Background and Research Objectives ........................................................................................................... 5

Methodology ................................................................................................................................................. 6

Principal Findings .......................................................................................................................................... 6

Appendix A .................................................................................................................................................. 47

Appendix B .................................................................................................................................................. 49

Appendix C .................................................................................................................................................. 50

Appendix D .................................................................................................................................................. 51

List of Figures Figure 1. MSEEL site, Morgantown, WV, site of unconventional gas well water and waste stream characterization activities ............................................................................................................................. 7 Figure 2. Drill cuttings and muds at MSEEL site being sampled by energy company representatives ........ 8 Figure 3. Results of 3H radionuclides testing ............................................................................................... 9 Figure 4.Results of 5H radionuclides testing .............................................................................................. 10 Figure 5. Results of diesel range organics for 3H........................................................................................ 10 Figure 6. Results of diesel range organics for 5H........................................................................................ 11 Figure 7. Results of inorganics (total metals) for 3H .................................................................................. 11 Figure 8. Results of inorganics (total metals) for 5H .................................................................................. 12 Figure 9. Makeup and HF fluids radionuclides ........................................................................................... 13 Figure 10. Makeup and HF fluids select organics ....................................................................................... 14 Figure 11. Makeup and HF fluids select metals .......................................................................................... 14 Figure 12. Makeup and HF fluids select inorganics .................................................................................... 15 Figure 13. Makeup and HF fluids total dissolved solids (TDS) .................................................................... 15 Figure 14. TDS values for gas wells 3H and 5H FPW ................................................................................... 16 Figure 15. Inorganics for gas wells 3H and 5H FPW.................................................................................... 17 Figure 16. BTEX values for gas wells 3H and 5H FPW ................................................................................. 18 Figure 17. Radionuclides for gas wells 3H and 5H FPW .............................................................................. 19 Figure 18. FPW discharges for gas wells 3H and 5H ................................................................................... 20 Figure 19. FPW cumulative production for gas wells 3H and 5H ............................................................... 20 Figure 20. MSEEL surface water sampling locations .................................................................................. 25 Figure 21. Surface water bromide concentrations ..................................................................................... 26 Figure 22. Surface water TDS concentrations ............................................................................................ 26 Figure 23. Surface water alkalinity and major inorganic ions upstream (MR-1) of gas wells 3H & 5H ...... 27 Figure 24. Surface water alkalinity and major inorganic ions downstream (MR-2) of gas wells 3H & 5H . 27

1 | P a g e

Figure 25. Surface water alkalinity and major inorganic ions downstream (MR-3) of gas wells 3H & 5H . 27 Figure 26. Radionuclides in surface water upstream (MR-1) of gas wells 3H & 5H. .................................. 28 Figure 27. Radionuclides in surface water downstream (MR-1 & MR-2) of gas wells 3H & 5H. ................ 28 Figure 28. Montrose, PA and Cranesville, WV sites (black circles), shale gas wells (yellow) ..................... 30 Figure 29. Sampling locations in Susquehanna County, PA ........................................................................ 31 Figure 30. Groundwater (drinking water well) was sampled mostly from pressure tanks in residences. . 32 Figure 31. Spring sampling sites SP-A (left) and SP-B (right). ..................................................................... 32 Figure 32. Surface water sampling point 7A upstream of permitted gas well. .......................................... 33 Figure 33. Sampling location 6C downstream of gas well site. .................................................................. 33 Figure 34. Surface water bromide readings along Hop Bottom during gas well development and western unnamed tributary (UNT). .......................................................................................................................... 35 Figure 35. Surface water TDS readings along Hop Bottom during gas well development and western unnamed tributary (UNT). .......................................................................................................................... 35 Figure 36. Surface water arsenic readings along Hop Bottom and western unnamed tributary (UNT). ... 36 Figure 37. Surface water barium readings along Hop Bottom and western tributary. .............................. 36 Figure 38. Surface water lead readings along Hop Bottom and western tributary and western unnamed tributary (UNT). ........................................................................................................................................... 37 Figure 39. Radionuclides along Hop Bottom upstream (7A) of well pad site. ............................................ 37 Figure 40. Radionuclides along Hop Bottom immediately downstream 6C (left) and 5A (right) of well pad site. .............................................................................................................................................................. 38 Figure 41. Control group site sampling locations (blue circles), Preston County, WV and Garrett County, MD. .............................................................................................................................................................. 40 Figure 42. Residential drinking water wells sampled in Cranesville. CW01 is the closest sampling point to permitted gas well. ..................................................................................................................................... 41 Figure 43. Select inorganic cations from Montrose, PA (active site) drinking water wells. ....................... 42 Figure 44. Select inorganic cations from Cranesville, WV (non-active site) drinking water wells. ............ 42 Figure 45. TDS and anions from select Montrose, PA (active site) drinking water wells. .......................... 43 Figure 46. TDS and anions from select Cranesville, WV (non-active) drinking water wells. ...................... 43 Figure 47. Comparison of Gross alpha results for Montrose, PA (active) and Cranesville, WV (non-active) sites’ drinking water wells........................................................................................................................... 44 Figure 48. Comparison of Gross beta results for Montrose, PA (active) and Cranesville, WV (non-active) sites' drinking water wells. .......................................................................................................................... 45

List of Tables Table 1. Solids chemistry for cuttings and muds .......................................................................................... 8 Table 2. Radiochemistry of cuttings ............................................................................................................. 9 Table 3. Aqueous chemistry parameters - HF fluids and FPW ................................................................... 13 Table 4. FPW characterization of gas wells 4H and 6H............................................................................... 21 Table 5. FPW characteristics of unconventional wells in the Marcellus .................................................... 21 Table 6. Comparison of HF and FPW of gas wells 3H and 5H ..................................................................... 22 Table 7. Characterization of water and waste streams from the development of unconventional Marcellus shale gas wells ............................................................................................................................ 23 Table 8. Surface water quality parameters ................................................................................................ 24

2 | P a g e

Table 9. National primary (1°) and secondary (2°) drinking water standards and surface water results at MSEEL site. .................................................................................................................................................. 29 Table 10. Contaminants, analytical reporting limits and methods. ........................................................... 34 Table 11. National primary (1°) and secondary (2°) drinking water standards and surface water results at the Montrose site. ...................................................................................................................................... 39 Table 12. National primary (1°) and secondary (2°) drinking water standards and surface water results at the Montrose, PA (active) site and Cranesville, WV (non-active) site. ....................................................... 45

3 | P a g e

Executive Summary Increased use of horizontal drilling and hydraulic fracturing methods to produce natural gas from deep shale beds has raised environmental impact concerns from the general public. Although hydraulic fracturing is not a new technique to release deep deposits of natural gas, the rate of which it has been used recently within the Marcellus Shale Formation has greatly escalated. Horizontal wells, unconventional gas wells, in the Marcellus differ from vertical wells due to the large amount of water used and thus wastewater produced; therefore, these shale gas extraction activities may pose an increased potential to impact nearby water resources. Of most concern to the general public are potential contamination threats during shale gas development activities to nearby water resources, especially groundwater that supply private drinking water wells or springs. Most horizontal shale gas well development occurs outside populated areas in rural areas of the countryside. Many homeowners living in these areas depend upon individual (private) groundwater wells or springs as their source of drinking water and for agriculture purposes (e.g., farming).

When drinking water wells are drilled, flow rates are measured to determine adequate yield and water quality sampling is conducted to determine if treatment prior to use is necessary. In most cases, homeowners may never have their well water tested again unless they notice a change in color, smell, taste, or if industrial development begins to sprout up around them. Various recommendations exist for water quality testing of private drinking water wells. For general use and maintenance, these recommendations are fairly similar. However, when you insert new industrial development into the surrounding area, such as the recent Marcellus Shale gas development, water quality testing becomes very complex and costly to the average homeowner (well owner). The well owner wants to ensure their drinking water has not been compromised; but, they often end up with more questions than answers. What parameters should be monitored, how often should sampling occur, when should sampling start, how long should samples be taken, and how much is this going to cost, are just a few of the questions asked repeatedly.

Few studies have been published on the health effects of gas exploration and extraction activities on nearby communities. A lack of evidence does not negate the fact these operations use and produce contaminants that may adversely affect the health of the surrounding environment and nearby populations. Further research through field-based environmental monitoring programs is needed to measure impacts on air and water resources (surface water and groundwater). Results would identify potential health effects and remediation actions or assure communities located near unconventional gas well operations the level of safety provided by industry’s control technologies adequately protects environmental health.

This field-based research effort examined the effects of shale gas development (horizontal drilling and hydraulic fracturing) on surrounding air and water resources. Active site (area of shale gas development by unconventional gas wells) and non-active (no shale gas development) sites were included in the study. This report focuses only on the results of monitoring nearby water resources. A separate report will focus on the air monitoring efforts.

Water and waste streams produced from unconventional gas well development were characterized. A list of parameters of concern was then created and used to monitor nearby

4 | P a g e

surface and near-surface water resources at both active and non-active sites. Results of water sampling activities during the various stages of gas well development from active sites were compared to baseline (pre-gas well development) data and to non-active site results to identify any impacts on water resources.

Background and Research Objectives Development of shale gas resources promises to be an important opportunity for the United States; thus, drilling activities have escalated over the past few years due to the use of horizontal drilling and hydraulic fracturing techniques. Although these methods have been in practice for decades in other areas of the country, they are considered new to the Marcellus Shale region. The accelerated rate at which these methods have been applied and the volumes of water necessary for their use, have elevated concerns of potential environmental impacts. Drilling fluids and muds may consist of water, mineral oil or a synthetic-based oil compound, weighing agents such as barite or bentonite clay, biocides, lubricants, and corrosion inhibitors. The drilling process, through the use of the drilling fluids and cuttings created, increases the threat to groundwater contamination because they also have the potential to include radioactive materials. FPW contains salts, metals, and organic compounds along with the compounds introduced into the fracturing supply water such as friction reducers, surfactants, gelling agents, scale inhibitors, acids, corrosion inhibitors, antibacterial agents, and clay stabilizers.

Efficient management of water and waste streams associated with the development of a shale gas well requires knowing the characteristics of those streams. This study first focused on sampling and analyzing drilling fluids, muds and cuttings, along with hydraulic fracturing fluids and flowback/produced water (FPW) of shale gas wells in northern West Virginia and determining which compounds, if they were to reach groundwater resources, are of concern for potential contamination. Results of these activities provided the initial framework to develop a monitoring plan to sample nearby groundwater (near-surface) and surface waters. Other sampling protocols in existence from various sources such as state agencies, private analytical service providers, and industry (energy companies) were taken into account. The monitoring plan was also compared to research studies having sampled drinking water wells located in close proximity to planned and active shale gas wells. The next step was to “field-test” the plan to determine if it would adequately monitor water quality of nearby water resources and detect contaminant intrusion specifically from gas well development activities.

This project was a field-based research effort to examine the effects of large-scale shale gas development (horizontal drilling and hydraulic fracturing) on surrounding water resources. Project objectives included:

Objective 1: Document the physical and chemical characteristics of FPW and solid waste streams associated with the development of unconventional shale gas wells.

Objective 2: Monitor nearby water resources and compare water quality results to applicable, current environmental standards.

Objective 3: Evaluate the impacts of shale gas well development activities on nearby water resources.

5 | P a g e

Methodology This study enhances the understanding of shale gas activities through the characterization of water and waste streams created during unconventional (horizontal drilling and hydraulic fracturing) gas well development and the potential impacts to nearby water resources that may be experienced during each stage of gas well development. Project tasks accomplished to fulfill project objectives included:

1. Characterization of drilling muds and cuttings, hydraulic fracturing fluids, and FPW from unconventional gas wells in the Marcellus region;

2. Identification of water quality parameters of greatest concern existing in unconventional gas well waste streams that may impact nearby water resources;

3. Identification of active and non-active sites to monitor impacts of shale gas development on natural water resources; and

4. Comparison of water quality monitoring results from active sites to non-active sites and applicable environmental standards.

Principal Findings Objective 1: Document physical and chemical characteristics of FPW and solid waste streams associated with the development of an unconventional shale gas well.

The Marcellus Shale Energy and Environment Laboratory (MSEEL) site, located just outside the city limits of Morgantown, West Virginia, was selected as the site for collecting samples of the various waste streams created during the development of two unconventional gas wells, 3H and 5H. Two additional producing unconventional wells (4H and 6H) are also located on the same well pad. These wells were completed in 2011. Figure 1 is a map of the MSEEL site showing the two wells, 3H (6101707) and 5H (6101699), along with other wells in the area permitted through the West Virginia Department of Environmental Protection (WVDEP), and surface water sampling locations referenced as MR-1, MR-2, and MR-3, along the Monongahela River. All sampling activities followed grab sampling standard procedures for characterizing water and waste stream activities and samples were transferred within allowed hold times to a certified laboratory with chain-of-custody documentation for analysis.

6 | P a g e

Figure 1. MSEEL site, Morgantown, WV, site of unconventional gas well water and waste stream characterization activities

Characterization of Cuttings and Muds Samples of the cuttings and muds, hydraulic fracturing fluids and makeup water (HF), and the flowback/produced water (FPW) from the two wells, 3H and 5H, at the MSEEL site were sampled. Drilling muds return to the surface with cuttings during the drilling process. After separated from the cuttings, the liquid portion (muds) are recycled for future use on site and disposed of once all on site wells are completed. Drill cuttings are rock fragments that range in size from clay to fine gravel. Once they are separated from the muds, they are disposed of off-site. Depending on the characteristics of the muds and cuttings, final disposal typically occurs at a licensed solid waste landfill. Characteristics analyzed for cuttings and muds are provided in Table 1. Samples of drill cuttings were collected from the shaker tables by representatives of the energy company for safety reasons, Figure 2. Analytical results for radionuclides are listed in Table 2 and a complete compilation of results for drill cuttings and muds is provided in Appendix A. The unit of measurement for radionuclides is pico-curie per gram (pCi/g). Graphical representation of select radionuclides, organics, and inorganics are exhibited in Figures 3 through 8. Both 3H and 5H are considered green completion wells.

7 | P a g e

Table 1. Solids chemistry for cuttings and muds

*total and dissolved, ** performed on leachate

Figure 2. Drill cuttings and muds at MSEEL site being sampled by energy company representatives

8 | P a g e

Table 2. Radiochemistry of cuttings

Figure 3. Results of 3H radionuclides testing

9 | P a g e

Figure 4.Results of 5H radionuclides testing

Figure 5. Results of diesel range organics for 3H

10 | P a g e

Figure 6. Results of diesel range organics for 5H

Figure 7. Results of inorganics (total metals) for 3H

11 | P a g e

Figure 8. Results of inorganics (total metals) for 5H

Hydraulic Fracturing (HF) fluids Makeup water was pumped from the Monongahela River and mixed with the hydraulic fracturing (HF) fluids. Samples of the makeup water (MW) were obtained from the freshwater impoundment on site containing mainly water pumped directly from the Monongahela River and produced water from existing gas producing wells (4H and 6H). The existing gas wells have been in production for approximately five years and thus produce a small daily quantity of FPW. HF fluids samples were collected prior to mixing with the makeup water. Representatives of the energy company collected all samples due to safety reasons with researchers present to observe sampling procedures. Characteristics analyzed for HF are listed in Table 3. A complete compilation of MW and HF fluids sample results is provided in Appendix B. Graphical representation of select radionuclides, organics, and inorganics are exhibited in Figures 9 through 13.

12 | P a g e

Table 3. Aqueous chemistry parameters - HF fluids and FPW

*total and dissolved ***flowback/produced water = FPW

Figure 9. Makeup and HF fluids radionuclides

13 | P a g e

Figure 10. Makeup and HF fluids select organics

Figure 11. Makeup and HF fluids select metals

14 | P a g e

Figure 12. Makeup and HF fluids select inorganics

Figure 13. Makeup and HF fluids total dissolved solids (TDS)

Flowback/Produced Water (FPW) Characterization Flowback/Produced water (FPW) are the fluids returned from the well after hydraulic fracturing has occurred. FPW is often recycled or reused on site (depending if the energy company treats the water prior to another use) to frac another well, may be transported to another site, or sent for final disposal via deep well injection. FPW samples were collected at the upstream end of each

15 | P a g e

well’s separator. Characteristics analyzed for FPW are listed in Table 3. FPW is strongly saline, with typical total dissolved solids (TDS) values running from 10,000 to 250,000 mg/liter (mg/L), dependent upon production length of time. The longer the HF fluids stay in contact with the formation prior to flowing back up hole, the higher the TDS values. Figure 14 illustrates TDS values for the first four months of production for both 3H and 5H wells.

Figure 14. TDS values for gas wells 3H and 5H FPW

Inorganic constituents for 3H and 5H FPW consist mainly of sodium, magnesium, calcium, strontium, barium, chloride, and bromide, and are of major concern when considering potential environmental impacts, Figure 15. Benzene, toluene, ethylene, and xylene (BTEX) are the organics of concern in FPW, Figure 16, along with naturally occurring radioactive material (NORM) levels for gross alpha, gross beta, and radium-226 and -228 (Ra-226 and Ra-228, respectively), Figure 17. Because the quality of the FPW samples are not typical aqueous samples, non-radiochemical parameters are subject to detection limit dilution. For this reason, we follow the USEPA standard convention of reporting below detection limits as one-half the actual detection limit.

16 | P a g e

Figure 15. Inorganics for gas wells 3H and 5H FPW

17 | P a g e

Figure 16. BTEX values for gas wells 3H and 5H FPW

18 | P a g e

Figure 17. Radionuclides for gas wells 3H and 5H FPW

During the flowback/production stage of the gas well, FPW discharges drop off rapidly within the first few weeks with ion concentrations increasing over time. FPW volumes are graphically shown in Figures 18 and 19, daily production and cumulative, respectively. The further out in production (i.e., time), the quantity of FPW greatly decreases and the quality greatly concentrates as observed from analytical results of various inorganic contaminants.

19 | P a g e

bbl/day = barrels per day, FB = flowback

Figure 18. FPW discharges for gas wells 3H and 5H

Figure 19. FPW cumulative production for gas wells 3H and 5H

20 | P a g e

Cation-to-chloride ion pairs dominate in FPW. A review of the analytical results from the previous two wells drilled on the MIP pad, 4H and 6H, show chloride, sodium, and calcium dominate the makeup of the FPW, nearly five years out in production, Table 4. A review of FPW characteristics from the four wells at the MSEEL site – 3H, 4H, 5H, 6H, and gas wells studied previously in West Virginia, Ohio, and Pennsylvania showed similar results, Table 5. Most of the contaminants of concern come from the formation, not from the HF fluids put downhole, Table 6.

Table 4. FPW characterization of gas wells 4H and 6H

Parameter (mg/L) 4H 6H Chloride (Cl) 59300 37400 Sodium (Na) 23700 15000 Calcium (Ca) 9480 5550 Barium (Ba) 4970 3040 Strontium (Sr) 1970 1310 Magnesium (Mg) 809 571 Bromide (Br) 643 416 Potassium (K) 146 93 Lithium (Li) 93 53 Iron (Fe) 93 155 Sulfate (SO4) 63 63 Manganese (Mn) 3 4 Aluminum (Al) 1 0 Electrical Conductivity (EC) (µS/cm) 143000 99300 Alkalinity 124 180 Total Dissolved Solids (TDS) 104000 65100 Total Suspended Solids (TSS) 75 99

Table 5. FPW characteristics of unconventional wells in the Marcellus

Parameter (mg/L) 3H 5H 4H 6H FPW5 FPW4 FPW3 FPW2 FPW1TDS 110000 90000 10400 65100 104000 189000 38700 12610 8800Cl 76000 66000 59300 37400 65000 107000 17100 7172 6575Na 30000 26000 23700 15000 33700 48100 8560 2863 3550Ca 11000 8100 9480 5500 12800 22200 1640 1749 319Mg 1100 870 809 571 1470 2000 193 122 31Sr 2300 2000 1970 1310 1440 2970 301 nd ndK 180 170 146 93 444 668 243 57

SO4 14 14 63 63 414 49 28 71 99Ba 4300 3700 4970 3040 176 1300 175 nd 27Fe 340 340 93 155 30 48 37 27 37pH 5.9 6.1 6.3 5.7 7.4 6.1 7.6TSS 1200 900 75 99 570 519 99 220 44

21 | P a g e

Table 6. Comparison of HF and FPW of gas wells 3H and 5H

*FPW at 42 days

Analytical results for cuttings and muds, HF fluids, and FPW from the current MSEEL site were compared to results obtained from West Virginia Water Research Institute’s (WVWRI’s) previous study titled, “Assessing Environmental Impacts of Horizontal Gas Well Drilling Operations,” along with a comparison of other scientific studies with the same objective to characterize FPW and solid waste streams created from the development of unconventional shale gas wells. Table 7 looks at the characterization of the various water and waste streams involved with, or created by, the development of an unconventional Marcellus shale gas well. Parameters analyzed and compared to prior research studies are highlighted in red. Because sources of makeup water, drilling methods, and hydraulic fracturing fluids differ across energy companies and from well to well, ranges for each characteristic are presented. Analytical results from this study were comparable to the results of the previous study and literature reviewed.

HF fluids FPW* HF fluids FPW*Al 0.42 0.00055 0.02 0.0055As 0 0.35 0 0.35Ba 0.04 2500 0.048 1100Ca 35.5 6800 34 2900Cr 0.003305 0.05 0.00005 0.05Fe 1.996 140 0.005 120Pb 0 0.005 0 0.005Mg 9.70 710 8.00 330Mn 0.11 11 0 1.8Ni 0.01 0.2 0 0.2K 3.40 130 2.50 120Se 0 0.5 0 0.5Ag 0 0.05 0 0.05Na 46.50 21000 30.00 13000Sr 0.34 1400 0.27 630Zn 0.07 1.2 0.04 1.2Alkalinity 70.00 140 64.00 240Br 0.17 0.95Cl 31.50 61000 34.50 37000SO4 125.00 7 140.00 7TDS 340.00 88000 565.00 55000Benzene (µg/L) 0.13 10 0.13 27Toluene (µg/L) 0.43 13 0.01 53Ethylbenzene (µg/L) 0.11 1.1 0.11 4Total Xylene (µg/L) 0.32 3.2 0.32 23MBAS 0 0.38 0 0.26

3H 5HParameter (mg/L)

22 | P a g e

Table 7. Characterization of water and waste streams from the development of unconventional Marcellus shale gas wells Parameter Units Makeup Water HF Fluids Drilling Muds Drill Cuttings FPW Waste Storage

Aluminum mg/l ND – 0.0236 ND – 0.80 0.969 – 4550 4740 – 12100 ND – 13.3 ND – 2.78 Arsenic mg/l ND ND – 0.0022 ND – 37 2.35 – 19.2 ND- 0.62 ND Barium mg/l 0.032 – 0.0565 0.03 – 12.4 2.13 – 5900 23.9 – 5920 23.1 – 2580 10.2 – 572 Bromide mg/l ND – 0.11 0.235 – 126 1.60 – 37.5 ND – 10.8 370 – 970 52.5 – 675 Calcium mg/l 20.8 – 44.4 35 – 1260 1090 – 52000 781 – 152000 2200 – 19900 1010 – 8670 Chloride mg/l 12.8- 26.5 48 – 9500 ND – 131000 876 – 20000 27500 – 79000 4700 – 56000 Chromium mg/l ND ND – 0.0065 0.268 – 19.0 6.367 – 32.8 ND – 0.16 ND – 0.144 Iron mg/l ND – 0.0244 0.174 – 30.9 1.09 – 30000 6670 – 30400 14.7 – 340 19.3 – 57 Lead mg/l ND ND ND – 84.9 3.5 – 31.5 ND – 0.102 ND Magnesium mg/l 4.04 – 8.24 6.85 – 171 2.84 – 2700 1920 – 7090 310 – 2260 107 – 944 Manganese mg/l 0.0025 – 0.022 0.147 – 1.76 0.064 – 435 91.9 – 714 1.715 – 14 1.38 – 7.56 Mercury mg/l ND ND ND – 0.196 ND – 0.173 ND ND Nickel mg/l ND ND ND – 140 10.3 – 41.4 ND – 0.79 ND Phosphorus mg/l ND – 0.04 0.09 – 11.2 0.6 – 235 100 – 349 ND – 2.36 0.75 – 90 Potassium mg/l 1.61 – 2.92 2.32 – 63.6 465 – 24900 1930 – 12000 118 - 1100 44.2 – 315 Selenium mg/l ND ND – 0.0005 ND – 16 ND – 3.14 ND – 0.5 ND Silver mg/l ND ND – 0.00005 ND – 0.54 ND – 0.397 ND – 0.05 ND Sodium mg/l 8.46 – 27.1 62 – 3990 364 – 44900 543 – 12400 12000 – 119000 2440 – 20800 Strontium mg/l 0.122 – 0.239 0.32 – 136 10.6 – 1600 4.22 – 508 530 – 4660 117 – 1460 Sulfides mg/l 4.19 – 30.3 4.47 – 33 ND – 9450 1410 – 12800 ND – 303 ND – 38.7 Zinc mg/l ND – 0.0075 ND – 1.74 ND – 480 2.22 – 89.7 ND – 0.58 0.06 – 0.352 Conductivity µmhos/cm 315 – 483 1030 – 33100 9100 – 222000 1150 – 77000 48000 – 230000 16800 – 132000 pH 8.09 – 8.75 6.63 – 7.96 7.35 – 12.71 NM 6.49 – 7.07 6.16 – 7.82 Hardness (total) mg/l 68.4 – 142 150 – 3840 2740 – 6550 NM 196 – 59000 2950 – 25500 Alkalinity (total) mg/l 48.2 – 188 49.3 – 188 220 – 11100 209 – 54700 139 – 330 118 – 234 TDS mg/l 170 – 277 420 – 20400 6600 – 119000 NM 45400 – 154000 8840 – 93700 TSS mg/l ND – 6 14 – 260 18300 – 162000 NM ND – 1200 143 – 420 Methane µg/l ND ND – 265 ND NM 1.81 – 8310 187 – 10500 Ethane µg/l ND ND ND NM ND – 2730 ND – 1760 Propane µg/l ND ND ND ND ND – 1130 ND TOC mg/l 0.72 – 5.4 4.55 – 217 1050 – 60000 26700 – 82100 3.36 – 588 25.8 – 309 COD mg/l 12 – 19 31 – 1110 3290 – 11200 526 – 5290 743 – 2660 568 – 2280 Oil & Grease mg/l ND ND – 20.4 ND – 196 ND – 5.13 ND – 39.1 4.6 – 594 Benzene µg/l ND ND – 29.4 ND – 300 ND – 294 ND – 716 ND – 372 Toluene µg/l ND ND – 76.9 ND – 2160 ND – 1640 ND – 2470 ND – 2070 Ethylbenzene µg/l ND ND – 8.7 ND – 513 ND – 404 ND – 220 ND – 235 Xylene (o.m,p) µg/l ND ND – 165.5 ND – 8400 ND – 3164 ND – 4053 ND – 3097 Styrene µg/l ND ND ND – 9.5 ND ND ND – 141 Tetrachloroethylene µg/l ND ND ND ND – 63.3 ND ND MBAS mg/l ND – 0.177 ND – 0.0025 ND – 262 NM ND – 0.74 ND – 0.473 TPH (diesel) mg/l ND ND – 119 23.1 - 237000 115 - 55900 0.57 – 114 1.9 – 285 Gross Alpha pCi/l NM 1.2 – 9.43 3.78 – 173 8.93 – 28.3 18.9 – 20920 8.69 – 5304 Gross Beta pCi/l 1.48 – 2.25 5.14 – 83 14.9 – 23770 17.3 – 30.1 168 – 4664 34 – 1349 Radium-226 pCi/l 0 - .725 1.44 6.45 – 9.715 0.95 – 3.114 178 - 10299 15.4 – 1194 Radium-228 pCi/l 0.189 – 0.354 1.23 0.486 – 4.95 0.715 – 1.929 49.1 – 461 53.5 - 216

23 | P a g e

Objective 2: Monitor nearby water resources and compare water quality results to applicable, current environmental standards.

Three monitoring sites were selected, two sites considered active (near gas well development) and one non-active (no gas well development in existence). The MSEEL site involved monitoring of nearby surface water only. No private water wells or springs were within close proximity to the site; however, there were several older shallow groundwater monitoring wells installed as part of the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency’s (USEPA’s) Superfund program. Access to these wells was not provided. The second active site located in Montrose, Pennsylvania, involved monitoring of surface and near-surface water resources. The third site, a non-active site located on the border of West Virginia and Maryland, involved monitoring of near-surface water (groundwater).

Working with the list of parameters used to characterize the water and waste streams from developing an unconventional shale gas well, collaboration with public health officials and industry representatives yielded a concise list of contaminants with the greatest potential to be found in nearby natural water resources, Table 8. Surface and near-surface (groundwater) water resources sampled at all sites followed this list for analysis.

Table 8. Surface water quality parameters

*total and dissolved

MSEEL Site – Surface Water Sampling Surface water sampling began in June 2015. Two sets of baseline samples were collected one month prior to gas well development activity beginning at the MSEEL site. Baseline sampling is the establishment of a benchmark to use as a foundation to compare future sampling results. Surface water samples were collected during and after each phase of gas well development at the three points selected along the Monongahela River. Figure 20 shows the locations of sampling points MR-1, MR-2, and MR-3 in red with the Northeast Energy site indicated in purple.

24 | P a g e

Figure 20. MSEEL surface water sampling locations

In addition to the water contaminants listed in Table 8, field measurements for temperature, electric conductivity, total dissolved solids, dissolved oxygen and pH were recorded at each sampling point during each sampling event using an YSI-550 multi-probe instrument. For the water contaminants of interest, grab samples were conducted via standard operating procedures and submitted with chain-of-custody documentation to a certified analytical laboratory for analysis within specified hold times. A trip blank was also submitted for analysis. Figures 21 through 27 graphically represent contaminants of interest along the Monongahela River at each of the three surface water sampling points upstream (MR-1) and downstream (MR-2 and MR-3) of the MIP well pad site (gas wells 3H, 4H, 5H, and 6H) over the course of monitoring activities.

25 | P a g e

Figure 21. Surface water bromide concentrations

Figure 22. Surface water TDS concentrations

26 | P a g e

Figure 23. Surface water alkalinity and major inorganic ions upstream (MR-1) of gas wells 3H & 5H

Figure 24. Surface water alkalinity and major inorganic ions downstream (MR-2) of gas wells 3H & 5H

Figure 25. Surface water alkalinity and major inorganic ions downstream (MR-3) of gas wells 3H & 5H

27 | P a g e

Figure 26. Radionuclides in surface water upstream (MR-1) of gas wells 3H & 5H.

Figure 27. Radionuclides in surface water downstream (MR-1 & MR-2) of gas wells 3H & 5H.

The United States Environmental Protection Agency (USEPA) has established mandatory (primary) and non-mandatory (secondary) drinking water standards. Primary drinking water standards are enforceable and are called maximum contaminant levels (MCLs) established to protect the public against consumption of drinking water contaminants that present a risk to human health. An MCL is the maximum allowable amount of a parameter (contaminant) to be present in drinking water. Secondary drinking water standards are non-mandatory water quality standards but exist for aesthetic considerations such as color, task, and odor. Table 9 provides the list of contaminants monitored during this study and corresponding primary (MCLs) or

28 | P a g e

secondary drinking water standards. A complete compilation of surface water data is included in Appendix C.

Table 9. National primary (1°) and secondary (2°) drinking water standards and surface water results at MSEEL site.

NM = not measured

Secondary drinking water standards for aluminum and iron were exceeded on a regular basis at all three sampling points along the Monongahela River. Exceedances were measured upstream and downstream of the gas well pad; therefore, it cannot be shown the activities occurring on the well pad impacted the quality of the nearby surface water when looking at primary and secondary drinking water standards. The Monongahela River is used as the source of several town’s and city’s primary drinking water source, including the city of Morgantown. However each community has a drinking water treatment system to treat the water prior to distribution for use. Based on the water quality parameters measured, the quality of the Monongahela River has shown no negative impact from the activities surrounding the MSEEL unconventional gas well development site. WVWRI will continue to monitor the river as part of other ongoing research projects. The general public can view many of the results from these efforts at www.3riversquest.org.

ContaminantPrimary (1) or Secondary (2)

Drinking Water

Standard Upstream (MR-1)Downstream

(MR-2)Downstream

(MR-3)Aluminum (Al) 2 0.05-0.2 mg/L 0.013-0.94 0.013-1.6 0.057-1.7Arsenic (As) 1 0.01 mg/L 0.00035-0.0097 0.00035-0.00086 0.00085-.0012Barium (Ba) 1 2 mg/L 0.034-0.06 0.033-0.06 0.032-0.87Chromium (Cr) 1 0.1 mg/L 0.00005-0.0011 0.00005-0.0016 0.00005-0.002Iron (Fe) 2 0.3 mg/L 0.023-1.7 0.019-2 0.02-2.9Lead (Pb) 1 0.15 mg/L 0.00005-0.0017 0.00005-0.0022 0.00005-0.0025Manganese (Mn) 2 0.5 mg/L 0.013-0.27 0.0064-0.18 0.0086-0.18Selenium (Se) 1 0.05 mg/L below detection below detection below detectionZinc (Zn) 2 0.5 mg/L 0.0029-0.31 0.0026-0.047 0.0047-0.035Mercury (Hg) 1 0.002 mg/L NM NM NMBenzene 1 0.005 mgL below detection below detection below detectionToluene 1 1 mg/L below detection below detection below detectionEthylbenzene 1 0.07 mg/L below detection below detection below detectionXylene 1 10 mg/L below detection below detection below detectionTDS 2 500 mg/L 94-1850 86-360 88-400Chlroide (Cl) 2 250 mg/L 4.6-17 4.9-17 4.8-17Sulfate (SO4) 2 250 mg/L 39-220 38-210 37-220Gross Alpha (α ) 1 15 pCi/L (-0.828-4.24) (-.366-1.86) (-.171-2.475)Gross Beta (β ) 1 4 mg/yr 0.733-6.9 0.097-3.01 (0-.455-2.6)Radium 226 + 228 1 5 pCi/L (-0.233-1.252) (-0.1096-0.812) (-0.0554-1.598)

29 | P a g e

http://www.3riversquest.org/

Montrose, Pennsylvania (active group site) – Surface Water Sampling Development of the Marcellus Shale through horizontal drilling techniques has been intense in Pennsylvania with over 9,000 wells unconventional wells drilled since 2005. In particular, over 1,100 unconventional wells have been drilled in the 2,155 km2 of Susquehanna County since 2006. As seen in Figure 28, shale gas development is most intense in the northeastern and southwestern portions of Pennsylvania. Two general locations have been identified to monitor drinking water wells near horizontal gas well development: an “active group” in an area of intense shale gas development, and a “control group” in an area of no shale gas development. The “active group” for this study is located near Montrose in Susquehanna County, Pennsylvania. The “control” group is located near Cranesville in Preston County, West Virginia.

Figure 28. Montrose, PA and Cranesville, WV sites (black circles), shale gas wells (yellow)

While intense activity is present in Susquehanna County, the research team identified homeowners that were near a permitted, but not yet drilled well (API #115-21822). Figure 29 identifies surface water monitoring sites (7A, 6C, 5A, P-01, P-02, SP-A, SP-B, SP-C, UNT 44288) and groundwater monitoring (drinking water well) sites (W-01, W-02, W-03, W-04) selected for the study. Unconventional gas well development (active site) began in the latter part

30 | P a g e

of October 2014. Development was temporarily halted after drilling was completed for most of the 2015 calendar year with completions occurring in late 2015.

Figure 29. Sampling locations in Susquehanna County, PA

Groundwater samples were taken from residential drinking water wells. Samples were drawn from the pressure tank prior to any treatment (e.g. water softening) as noted in Figure 30. Water valves were opened to allow water to run for at least three to five minutes prior to water sample collection. Samples were collected from natural springs providing water for agricultural purposes and supplementing residential use at homes in the active group site. Surface water samples were taken at various points from the Hop Bottom stream, and an unnamed tributary west of the gas well site.

31 | P a g e

Figure 30. Groundwater (drinking water well) was sampled mostly from pressure tanks in residences. Figure 31 shows two of the spring locations that were also sampled. Spring SP-A was accessible to the public along Hop Bottom Road and many residents depend upon this spring for cooking and drinking purposes using their private drinking water well for other water usage. Estimated flow for Spring SP-A ranged from a high of 16 gallons per minute (gpm) to a low of 4 gpm.

Figure 31. Spring sampling sites SP-A (left) and SP-B (right).

32 | P a g e

Surface water sampling points along Hop Bottom included upstream and downstream points where potential runoff from the development of the nearby permitted gas well site may impact the stream. Figure 32 depicts site 7A along Hop Bottom, upstream of the soon-to-be developed unconventional gas well. Figure 33 is the first sampling location, 6C, immediately downstream where potential runoff may impact Hop Bottom.

Figure 32. Surface water sampling point 7A upstream of permitted gas well.

Figure 33. Sampling location 6C downstream of gas well site.

33 | P a g e

During each surface water sampling event, field measurements of pH, specific conductivity, total dissolved solids, and dissolved oxygen were recorded with an YSI 550 multi-probe instrument for each location. Additionally, grab samples were collected via standard operating procedures and submitted with chain-of-custody documentation to a certified analytical laboratory for analysis within specified hold times. A trip blank was also submitted for analysis. Table 10 lists contaminants tested along with laboratory methods and reporting limits. This list is the same list of contaminants monitored in the surface water at the MSEEL site. This is also the list of contaminants monitored for the near-surface water (drinking water wells) at both the Montrose site and the Cranesville, WV site.

Table 10. Contaminants, analytical reporting limits and methods.

34 | P a g e

Figures 34 through 40 graphically represent contaminants of interest along Hop Bottom at each of the three surface water sampling points upstream (7A) and downstream (6C and 5A) of the Montrose area well pad site over the course of monitoring activities. Site 7A is upstream of well pad, 6C is immediately downstream of well pad, and 5C is approximately 1.5 miles downstream of well pad. The unnamed tributary (UNT) is located on the western side of the ridge where the gas well is located. A complete

Figure 34. Surface water bromide readings along Hop Bottom during gas well development and western unnamed tributary (UNT).

Figure 35. Surface water TDS readings along Hop Bottom during gas well development and western unnamed tributary (UNT).

35 | P a g e

Figure 36. Surface water arsenic readings along Hop Bottom and western unnamed tributary (UNT).

Figure 37. Surface water barium readings along Hop Bottom and western tributary.

36 | P a g e

Figure 38. Surface water lead readings along Hop Bottom and western tributary and western unnamed tributary (UNT).

Figure 39. Radionuclides along Hop Bottom upstream (7A) of well pad site.

37 | P a g e

Figure 40. Radionuclides along Hop Bottom immediately downstream 6C (left) and 5A (right) of well pad site.

As stated earlier, the USEPA has established mandatory (primary) and non-mandatory (Secondary) drinking water standards. Primary drinking water standards are enforceable and are called maximum contaminant levels (MCLs) established to protect the public against consumption of drinking water contaminants that present a risk to human health. An MCL is the maximum allowable amount of a parameter to be present in drinking water. Secondary drinking water standards are non-mandatory water quality standards but exist for aesthetic considerations such as color, task, and odor. Several drinking water wells were monitored at the Montrose site. Table 11 summarizes the surface water quality results of contaminants monitored along Hop Bottom at the Montrose site and compares the results to the corresponding primary (MCLs) or secondary drinking water standards. A complete compilation of surface water data is included in Appendix D.

38 | P a g e

Table 11. National primary (1°) and secondary (2°) drinking water standards and surface water results at the Montrose site.

Secondary drinking water standards for iron was exceeded on a regular basis at all three sampling points along Hop Bottom. Exceedances were measured upstream and downstream of the gas well pad; therefore, it cannot be shown the activities occurring on the well pad impacted the quality of the nearby surface water when looking at primary and secondary drinking water standards. If Hop Bottom was a source of a small town’s primary drinking water source, treatment prior to distribution would be recommended. Based on the water quality parameters measured, the quality of Hop Bottom has shown no negative impact from the activities surrounding the Montrose unconventional gas well development site.

Montrose, Pennsylvania (active group site) and Cranesville, West Virginia (control group site) – Groundwater Sampling Near-surface, or shallow groundwater was monitored via drinking water wells at the Montrose site and Cranesville site. Four residencies at the Montrose site (previously identified as W-01, W-02, W-03, and W04) served as the active group site for monitoring near-surface water in an


Drinking Water

Standard Upstream (7A)Downstream

(6C)Downstream

(5A)Aluminum (Al) 2 0.05-0.2 mg/L 0.03-0.4 0.03-0.34 0.07-0.43Arsenic (As) 1 0.01 mg/L 0.0025 0.0025 0.0025Barium (Ba) 1 2 mg/L 0.04-0.06 0.04-0.06 0.03-0.06Chromium (Cr) 1 0.1 mg/L 0.0025 0.0025 0.0025Iron (Fe) 2 0.3 mg/L 0.239-0.543 0.286-0.684 0.035-1.340Lead (Pb) 1 0.15 mg/L 0.0025 0.0025 0.0025Manganese (Mn) 2 0.5 mg/L 0.052-0.146 0.052-0.223 0.051-0.310Selenium (Se) 1 0.05 mg/L 0.004 0.004 0.004Zinc (Zn) 2 0.5 mg/L 0.005-0.029 0.005 0.005Mercury (Hg) 1 0.002 mg/L 0.0001 0.0001 0.0001Benzene 1 0.005 mgL 0.0005 0.0005 0.0005Toluene 1 1 mg/L 0.0005 0.0005 0.0005Ethylbenzene 1 0.07 mg/L 0.0005 0.0005 0.0005Xylene 1 10 mg/L 0.00015 0.0005 0.00015TDS 2 500 mg/L 64-91 69-81 67-121Chlroide (Cl) 2 250 mg/L 12-17 13-17 12-16Sulfate (SO4) 2 250 mg/L 5-11 5-11 5-10Gross Alpha (α ) 1 15 pCi/L 0.742-1.08 (-0.06-3.16) (-0.07)-(-0.47)Gross Beta (β ) 1 4 mg/yr 0.38-1.32 0.21-5.21 0.19-1.93Radium 226 + 228 1 5 pCi/L 0.61-1.38 0.53-1.21 0.28-1.09

39 | P a g e

active shale gas development area, refer back to Figure 29. Six residencies near the Cranesville Swamp Preserve, located along the border of West Virginia and Pennsylvania (Preston County, WV and Garrett County, MD), served as the control group site for monitoring near-surface water (groundwater – drinking water wells) in a non-active shale gas development area. One nearby unconventional gas well: API# 4707700580 is approximately 2,000 meters (just over 6,500 feet) from the closest sampling site (CW01) and shows a status of “permitted.” To date, no activity has taken place at this site. Nearby surface mining is at the Cranesville Limestone rock quarry as noted on the map by data provided by the WVDEP. No evidence of current or legacy coal mining has been found in the area. The Nature Conservancy’s Cranesville Swamp Preserve is highlighted as yellow in Figure 41. Figure 342 is a closer look at the locations of the six drinking water wells sampled. Depths of the wells ranged from 20 feet to just under 200 feet.

Figure 41. Control group site sampling locations (blue circles), Preston County, WV and Garrett County, MD.

40 | P a g e

Figure 42. Residential drinking water wells sampled in Cranesville. CW01 is the closest sampling point to permitted gas well.

The national primary and secondary drinking water standards are applicable to water systems and serve as a water quality guide to private, individual well owners when considering the quality of their drinking water well and determining if treatment may be necessary prior to consumption. At each residency, water valves were opened to allow water to run for at least three to five minutes prior to water sample collection. For the water contaminants of interest, grab samples were conducted via standard operating procedures and submitted with chain-of-custody documentation to a certified analytical laboratory for analysis within specified hold times. A trip blank was also submitted for analysis. Figures 43 through 46 chart various contaminants of concern for drinking water wells monitored at both the active and non-active sites.

41 | P a g e

Figure 43. Select inorganic cations from Montrose, PA (active site) drinking water wells.

Figure 44. Select inorganic cations from Cranesville, WV (non-active site) drinking water wells.

42 | P a g e

Figure 45. TDS and anions from select Montrose, PA (active site) drinking water wells.

Figure 46. TDS and anions from select Cranesville, WV (non-active) drinking water wells.

43 | P a g e

Looking at the same parameters for the control site drinking water wells, measurements of most parameters were overall lower than those observed for the active site drinking water wells. However, this does not necessarily indicate active site drinking water wells were impacted by nearby unconventional gas well development. One would have to have record of water quality prior to any nearby gas well development activity showing measurements lower than this project’s baseline data. Requests were made to the well owners to provide this data but was not made available. Also, geology plays a big role when attempting to compare sites.

A comparison of radiological parameters gross alpha and beta for active and control site drinking water wells are provided in Figures 47 and 48. Although readings were overall higher for active site drinking water wells, this again does not indicate impact from unconventional gas well development. Pre-existing data prior to any nearby gas well development for the active drinking water wells would need to be available to make a valid comparison.

Figure 47. Comparison of Gross alpha results for Montrose, PA (active) and Cranesville, WV (non-active) sites’ drinking water wells.

44 | P a g e

Figure 48. Comparison of Gross beta results for Montrose, PA (active) and Cranesville, WV (non-active) sites' drinking water wells.

Table 12 summarizes the surface water quality results of contaminants monitored along Hop Bottom at the Montrose site and compares the results to the corresponding primary (MCLs) or secondary drinking water standards.

Table 12. National primary (1°) and secondary (2°) drinking water standards and surface water results at the Montrose, PA (active) site and Cranesville, WV (non-active) site.

Contaminant

Primary (1) or

Secondary (2)

Drinking Water

Standard W-01 W-02 W-03 W-04 CW02 CW03 CW04 CW05Aluminum (Al) 2 0.05-0.2 mg/L 0.03 0.03 0.03 0.03 ND 0.05-0.08 ND 0.05-0.08Arsenic (As) 1 0.01 mg/L 0.0025-0.0053 0.0025 0.0025 0.0025 ND ND ND NDBarium (Ba) 1 2 mg/L 0.12 0.15-0.16 0.10-0.11 0.16 0.22 0.07-0.09 0.01 0.04-0.05Chromium (Cr) 1 0.1 mg/L 0.0025 0.0025 0.0025 0.0025 ND ND ND NDIron (Fe) 2 0.3 mg/L 0.035 0.035 0.035-0.085 0.035 3.17 0.16 0.27-0.28 NDLead (Pb) 1 0.15 mg/L 0.0025 0.0025-0.0117 0.0025-0.0528 0.0025 0.04 0.01 0.03 0.01-0.14Manganese (Mn) 2 0.5 mg/L 0.003 0.003 0.003 0.003 0.32 0.02-0.03 0.06 0.03-0.04Selenium (Se) 1 0.05 mg/L 0.004 0.004 0.004 0.004 ND ND ND NDZinc (Zn) 2 0.5 mg/L 0.005-0.064 0.042-0.055 0.015-0.24 0.005-.032 0.04-0.09 0.13-0.88 0.03-0.22 0.13-0.61Mercury (Hg) 1 0.002 mg/L 0.0001 0.0001 0.0001 0.0001-0.0010 ND ND ND NDBenzene 1 0.005 mgL 0.0005 0.0005 0.0005 0.0005-0.005 ND ND ND NDToluene 1 1 mg/L 0.0005 0.0005 0.0005 0.0005-0.005 ND ND ND NDEthylbenzene 1 0.07 mg/L 0.0005 0.0005 0.0005 0.0005-0.005 ND ND ND NDXylene 1 10 mg/L 0.00015 0.00015 0.00015 0.00015-0.0015 3.8 ND ND NDTDS 2 500 mg/L 102-685 91-134 83-155 105-173 103 63-77 37-40 36-72Chlroide (Cl) 2 250 mg/L 2 2 12-15 3-4 3.9-4.2 6.8-12.6 ND 8.6-18.4Sulfate (SO4) 2 250 mg/L 5-11 5 11-12 11-12 ND ND ND NDGross Alpha (α ) 1 15 pCi/L 2.03-3.18 0.48-2.53 0.41-1.41 1.87-2.96 0.45-1.03 0.76-1.71 (-0.10-1.27) 0.24-1.09Gross Beta (β ) 1 4 mg/yr (-0.39-1.72) 0.12-1.29 0.15-2.59 0.33-0.71 0.37-0.75 0.83-1.75 0.56-1.16 0.6-1.85Radium 226 + 228 1 5 pCi/L 0.47-1.16 0.08-1.2 0.25-1.13 0.19-1.35 (-0.21-0.56) 0.62-0.92 0.23-1.22 1.12-1.20

45 | P a g e

Secondary drinking water standards for iron and zinc were exceeded during at least one round of sampling of two non-active (Cranewville, WV) site drinking water wells (CW02 and CW05). Non-active site drinking water well CW05 also had one lead reading close to the primary drinking water standard of 0.15 mg/L. No exceedances of primary or secondary drinking water standards were measured for any of the active (Montrose, PA) drinking water wells. Based on the water quality parameters measured, drinking water quality of the water wells monitored in the active group site showed no negative impact from the activities surrounding the Montrose unconventional gas well development site.

Objective 3: Evaluate the impacts of shale gas well development activities on nearby water resources.

Water quality for surface and near-surface water (groundwater) resources in close proximity to two active unconventional gas well development sites were monitored throughout the various stages of gas well development. The contaminants of concerned included many inorganic and organic parameters listed as national primary and secondary drinking water standards. Baseline sampling was conducted for all sampling points within the three study sites – two active and one non-active. Some contaminants were present in baseline analysis and throughout the gas well development cycle and thus could not be tied to gas well development activities. Results of this study indicated no negative impact from gas well development on natural water resources monitored. Evaluations of surface water and groundwater results are incorporated into the specific sections under Objective 3 above.

46 | P a g e

Appendix A

ND = Non Detect

MIP 4400 3H

MIP 5026 3H

MIP 13480 3H

MIP 13480 3H DUP

MIP 13480 3H Mud

MIP 6798 5H

MIP 8555 5H

MIP 8555 5H DUP

MIP 9998 5H

MIP 11918 5H

MIP 11918 5H

MIP 14454 5H

Analysis Method Units Parameter TCLP Limit

EPA drinking

water MCL

Universal Treatment Standards

Sewage

7/13/2015 7/13/2015 9/21/2015 9/21/2015 9/21/2015 10/6/2015 9/11/2015 9/11/2015 10/6/2015 9/25/2015 10/6/2015 10/6/2015

2,4,5-TP (Silvex) 1 ND ND ND ND ND ND ND ND ND ND ND ND2,4D 10 ND ND ND ND ND ND ND ND ND ND ND ND

% Rec Surr: DCAA - 90.20 97.40 86.00 94.00 95.60 109.00 109.00 114.00 110.00 86.60 97.60 103Chlordane

technical0.03

ND ND ND ND ND ND ND ND ND ND ND NDEndrin 0.02 ND ND ND ND ND ND ND ND ND ND ND ND

gamma-BHC (Lindane)

-ND ND ND ND ND ND ND ND ND ND ND ND

Heptachlor - ND ND ND ND ND ND ND ND ND ND ND ND

Heptachlor epoxide0.008

ND ND ND ND ND ND ND ND ND ND ND NDMethoxychlor 10 ND ND ND ND ND ND ND ND ND ND ND ND

Toxaphene 0.5 ND ND ND ND ND ND ND ND ND ND ND NDSurr:

Decachlorobiphenyl

-90.00 91.00 72.00 62.00 65.00 71.00 98.00 98.00 78.00 85.00 78.00 60

Surr: Tetrachloro-m-xylene -

64.00 68.00 48.00 44.00 54.00 52.00 66.00 67.00 58.00 71.00 53.00 50TCLP

Mercury by CVAA

SW7470A mg/LHg

0.2 0.002 0.15ND ND ND ND ND ND ND ND ND ND ND ND

As 5 0.01 1.4 ND ND ND ND ND ND ND ND ND ND ND NDBa 100 2 1.2 0.82 0.99 2.20 2.30 2.00 0.84 2.50 2.50 2.80 2.70 2.70 2.7Cd 1 0.005 0.2 ND ND ND ND 0.00 0.00 ND ND 0.00 ND ND NDCr 5 0.1 0.37 0.00 0.00 0.01 0.01 0.01 ND 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0..25Pb 5 0.015 0.28 0.04 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.00 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.0088Se 1 0.05 0.82 ND ND ND ND ND ND ND ND ND 0.01 ND NDAg 5 - 0.29 ND ND ND ND ND ND ND ND ND ND ND ND

1,4- Dichlorobenzene

7.5ND ND ND ND ND ND ND ND ND ND ND ND

2,4,5- Trichlorophenol

400ND ND ND ND ND ND ND ND ND ND ND ND

2,4,6- Trichlorophenol

2ND ND ND ND ND ND ND ND ND ND ND ND

2,4- Dinitrotoluene *0.13 ND ND ND ND ND ND ND ND ND ND ND NDHexachloro-1,3-

butadiene0.5

ND ND ND ND ND ND ND ND ND ND ND NDHexachlorobenzen

e*0.13

ND ND ND ND ND ND ND ND ND ND ND NDHexachloroethane 3 ND ND ND ND ND ND ND ND ND ND ND ND

m-Cresol 200 ND ND ND ND ND ND ND ND ND ND ND NDNitrobenzene 2 ND ND ND ND ND ND ND ND ND ND ND ND

o-Cresol **200 ND ND ND ND ND ND ND ND ND ND ND NDp-Cresol **200 ND ND ND ND ND ND ND ND ND ND ND ND

Pentachlorophenol 100 ND ND ND ND ND ND ND ND ND ND ND NDPyridine *5 ND ND ND ND ND ND ND ND ND ND ND ND

Surr: 2,4,6- tribromophenol

-70.20 80.20 76.60 79.40 74.00 78.60 103.00 95.70 66.20 79.20 73.70 66.7

Surr: 2- Fluorobiphenyl

-57.40 52.10 68.30 70.80 66.40 58.30 75.80 74.00 59.40 65.10 56.00 86.9

Surr: 2- Fluorophenol

-40.50 38.10 44.30 47.60 39.50 43.20 52.70 46.90 37.50 42.40 42.80 39.4

Surr: 4- Terphenyl-d14

-64.70 51.50 83.30 86.20 85.90 82.70 114.00 95.40 80.30 79.90 80.30 90

Surr: Nitrobenzene-d5

-55.60 50.80 67.40 69.80 67.80 57.40 82.30 67.50 52.90 63.70 54.00 65.6

Surr: Phenol-d6 - 23.60 26.00 30.70 32.90 27.60 30.20 38.80 34.50 30.20 29.40 31.50 31.71,1-

Dichloroethene0.7

ND ND ND ND ND ND ND ND ND ND ND ND1,2-

Dichloroethane0.5

ND ND ND ND ND ND ND ND ND ND ND ND2- Butanone - ND ND ND ND ND ND ND ND ND ND ND ND

Benzene 0.5 ND ND ND ND ND ND ND ND ND ND ND NDCarbon

Tetrachloride0.5

ND ND ND ND ND ND ND ND ND ND ND NDChlorobenzene 100 ND ND ND ND ND ND ND ND ND ND ND ND

Chloroform 6 ND ND ND ND ND ND ND ND ND ND ND NDTetrachloroethene 0.7 ND ND ND ND ND ND ND ND ND ND ND ND

Trichloroethene 0.5 ND ND ND ND ND ND ND ND ND ND ND NDVinyl Chloride 0.2 ND ND ND ND ND ND ND ND ND ND ND ND

Surr: 1,2- Dichloroethane-d4

-96.20 98.40 102.00 102.00 103.00 99.90 99.00 102.00 93.40 95.50 95.10 94.8

Surr: 4-bromofluorobenze

ne-

94.60 98.00 100.00 98.00 102.00 98.60 96.70 99.00 94.60 96.20 98.40 96.2Surr:

Dibromofluoromethane

-98.30 98.00 102.00 101.00 99.60 95.70 96.00 103.00 101.00 106.00 103.00 99.4

Surr: Toluene-d8 - 96.40 97.80 98.80 99.10 99.60 98.60 98.00 99.60 95.30 96.80 102.00 98.4DRO (C10-C28) - 250.00 85.00 85000.00 87000.00 230000.00 66000.00 130000.00 130000.00 390000.00 310000.00 260000.00 350000ORO (C28-C40) - 65.00 34.00 1100.00 1100.00 19000.00 1800.00 1800.00 1500.00 25000.00 24000.00 20000.00 19000

% RecSurr: 4-terphenyl-

d14 -89.80 63.50 187.00 226.00 210.00 598.00 169.00 121.00 250.00 290.00 248.00 245

ug/Kg GRO C6-C10) - 60000.00 ND 240000.00 330000 450000.00 43000.00 880000.00 400000.00 390000.00 470000.00 34000.00 430000

% Rec Surr: Toluene-d8 - 96.30 95.20 106.00 102 103.00 102.00 105.00 104.00 103.00 102.00 104.00 101

TCLP Herbicides

SW8151ug/L

TCLP Pesticides

SW8081

ug/L

% Rec

TCLP Metals Analysis By

ICP-MSSW6020A mg/L

TCLP Semi-Volatile Organics

SW8270

ug/L

% Rec

TCLP Volatile Organics

SW8260B

ug/L

% Rec

Diesel Range

Organics by GC-FID

SW8015M

mg/Kg-dry

Gasoline Range

Organics by GC-FID

SW8015D

47 | P a g e

Ethylbenzene - 58.00 29.00 ND ND ND ND ND ND ND ND ND NDm,p- Xylene - 430.00 240.00 ND ND ND ND ND ND ND ND ND ND

o- Xylene - 130.00 60.00 ND ND ND ND ND ND ND ND ND NDStyrene - ND ND ND ND ND ND ND ND ND ND ND NDToluene - 370.00 200.00 ND ND ND ND ND ND ND ND ND ND

Xylenes total - 560.00 300.00 ND ND ND ND ND ND ND ND ND NDSurr: 1,2-

Dichloroethane-d4-

102.00 108.00 102.00 101 103.00 101.00 104.00 103.00 99.20 101.00 102.00 101Surr: 4-

Bromofluorobenzene

-97.40 93.20 100.00 92.8 92.20 94.40 96.40 93.90 94.30 95.20 95.50 96.8

Surr: Dibromofluoromet

hane-

103.00 108.00 102.00 93.4 96.80 99.10 98.40 102.00 92.80 99.20 98.00 100Surr: Tolouene-d8 - 94.00 92.90 98.80 100 99.60 100.00 96.10 100.00 102.00 99.40 102.00 100

- 28.32 24.28 17.66 18.486 12.892 27.36 25.90 24.63 16.70 21.80 19.69 20.0734.81 4.42 3.21 3.471 2.98 4.53 4.25 4.62 4.27 3.74 3.41 3.7990.99 1.41 1.20 1.371 1.083 0.87 1.08 1.53 2.73 1.13 1.08 1.055

- 1.22 1.35 9.22 9.715 5.563 1.76 4.71 4.56 9.15 4.01 4.17 5.7740.31 0.34 1.32 1.371 0.866 0.35 0.71 0.74 1.33 0.67 0.63 0.8910.28 0.18 0.24 0.335 0.153 0.20 0.22 0.27 0.29 0.25 0.25 0.249

- 1.82 1.90 0.81 1.131 0.486 1.44 1.34 1.12 0.48 0.72 0.76 1.3270.48 0.45 0.55 0.388 0.346 0.45 0.37 0.58 0.89 0.47 0.39 0.520.25 0.29 0.49 0.312 0.826 0.52 0.42 0.61 0.95 0.51 0.57 0.611

- 15.00 10.50 55.70 59.2 60 17.10 27.00 38.10 46.80 24.40 23.80 28.87.05 5.75 14.70 14.9 15.9 7.65 9.62 11.10 11.00 9.18 6.75 7.889.76 9.15 11.50 9.31 10.5 11.20 10.20 9.05 4.69 10.30 5.24 6.53

- 24.50 19.40 35.40 35 42.5 27.80 36.90 29.80 42.90 23.00 28.70 37.56.26 4.79 8.21 7.75 9.6 6.65 8.56 6.84 8.98 6.21 6.34 7.955.64 4.13 5.83 4.55 6.14 5.38 6.62 4.94 5.89 6.17 5.07 5.41

Br - 2.80 7.30 4.50 1.60 11.00 2.70 5.20 4.60 3.90 4.80 4.30 7Cl - 260.00 750.00 1100.00 440.00 2800.00 1100.00 1700.00 1700.00 1300.00 1600.00 1100.00 1800

SO4 - 36.00 46.00 26.00 17.00 39.00 21.00 36.00 35.00 16.00 17.00 13.00 16SW9034 sulfide - ND ND ND ND ND ND ND ND ND ND 270.00 140E353.2 nitrate - 0.10 1.40 10.00 5.10 7.90 0.70 0.16 0.54 0.69 1.00 0.06 0.84E354.1 nitrite - 0.04 0.01 0.01 ND 0.04 0.03 0.03 0.03 0.04 ND 0.26 0.041

A2510Mµmhos/c

m conductance-

1200.00 1900.00 9800.00 9100 60000.00 20000.00 3900.00 6500.00 24000.00 8900.00 21000.00 21000SW9045D units pH - 8.80 9.20 9.90 9.9 9.80 9.61 10.00 10.00 10.06 11.00 9.80 9.98

alkalnity, bicarbonate

-150.00 140.00 ND ND ND 84.00 ND ND 200.00 ND ND ND

alkalinity, carbonate

-130.00 270.00 440.00 300.00 600.00 56.00 280.00 280.00 710.00 820.00 500.00 470

alkalinity, total - 280.00 410.00 1300.00 610.00 940.00 140.00 730.00 650.00 910.00 1000.00 510.00 550 E365.1

R2.0 TP-

220.00 240.00 170.00 200 190 330.00 160.00 130.00 57.00 59.00 450.00 62Ag - 0.03 0.03 0.49 0.54 0.48 ND 0.44 0.37 1.30 0.53 ND NDAl - 7500.00 11000.00 2500.00 2700.00 3100.00 17000.00 6600.00 6600.00 3000.00 3300.00 3000.00 2900As - 12.00 13.00 32.00 35.00 20.00 15.00 25.00 22.00 55.00 29.00 34.00 37Ba - 40.00 42.00 590.00 540.00 2000.00 7600.00 1600.00 1500.00 5500.00 2600.00 4900.00 5900Ca - 9400.00 9700.00 31000.00 29000.00 52000.00 19000.00 22000.00 25000.00 63000.00 58000.00 63000.00 40000Cr - 11.00 22.00 8.10 7.60 19.00 28.00 11.00 11.00 14.00 8.20 9.80 12Fe - 23000.00 40000.00 29000.00 30000.00 19000.00 38000.00 27000.00 25000.00 34000.00 18000.00 22000.00 27000K - 710.00 1200.00 2600.00 2500.00 2700.00 3300.00 2600.00 2600.00 2400.00 2400.00 2500.00 2500

Mg - 4100.00 5400.00 2600.00 2700.00 2000.00 9300.00 2800.00 3100.00 2400.00 3300.00 3600.00 1900Mn - 570.00 660.00 200.00 210.00 420.00 670.00 190.00 230.00 280.00 200.00 270.00 240Na - 420.00 850.00 2200.00 6000.00 6000.00 1000.00 1100.00 1100.00 1200.00 970.00 1100.00 780Ni - 20.00 24.00 140.00 140.00 140.00 55.00 92.00 74.00 200.00 87.00 110.00 130Pb - 11.00 7.80 27.00 27.00 28.00 13.00 25.00 25.00 38.00 20.00 24.00 29Se - 0.45 0.35 15.00 16.00 7.30 ND 4.80 4.60 15.00 6.50 12.00 11Sr - 13.00 24.00 570.00 530.00 1600.00 610.00 460.00 580.00 1000.00 640.00 810.00 790Zn - 36.00 43.00 380.00 480.00 230.00 95.00 130.00 730.00 340.00 160.00 220.00 120

Moisture E160.3M % Moisture - 15.00 14.00 14.00 14.00 36.00 10.00 14.00 14.00 16.00 15.00 14.00 16Chemical Oxygen Demand

E4104 R2.0

mg/Kg-dry

COD -- - 970.00 890.00 2600.00 3000.00 4000.00 4600.00 5300.00 3600.00 3800.00 3700

Organic Carbon - Walkley-

Black

TITRAMETRIC

% by wt-dry

OC-WB

-

ND ND 10.00 1.5 2.26 4.00 5.60 5.80 6.50 6.50 7.70 11Oil &

GreaseSW9071B -

OGmg/Kg-

dry O&G-

370.00 150.00 20000.00 34000 130000 64000.00 59000.00 83000.00 130000.00 110000.00 110000.00 130000

Volatile Organic

CompoundsSW8260B

ug/Kg-dry

% Rec

5

Radium-228

9310

Gross Alpha 15

Gross Beta

Inorganics

SW9056Amg/Kg-

dry

A4500-CO2 D

mg/Kg-dry

SW6020A

Radio-nuclides

EPA 901.1

pCi/g

Potassium-40

Radium-226

48 | P a g e

Appendix B

Date

Sample IDMIP HF

5HMIP MW

5HMIP HF

3HMIP MW

3H0.0011 Al - 0.021 0.80 0.0370.0007 As - 0.00035 0.0022 0.000920.0002 Ba - 0.048 0.03 0.054

0.4 Ca - 34 35 360.0001 Cr - 0.00005 0.0065 0.00011

0.01 Fe - 0.005 3.900 0.0920.0001 Pb - 0.00005 0.008 0.000050.019 Mg - 8 10 9.70.0002 Mn - 0.00097 0.170 0.0460.0004 Ni - 0.0022 0.0092 0.0015

0.03 K - 2.5 4.30 2.5000.001 Se - 0.0005 0.0005 0.00050.0001 Ag - 0.00005 0.00005 0.00005

0.1 Na - 30 62 310.0003 Sr - 0.27 0.32 0.35

0.02 Zn - 0.037 0.140 0.00670.25 Benzene 0.125 0.125 0.125 0.1250.22 Ethylbenze 0.11 0.11 0.11 0.110.4 m,p-Xylene 0.2 0.2 0.2 0.20.21 o-Xylene 0.105 0.105 0.105 0.1050.2 Toluene 0.01 0.01 0.84 0.010.62 Total-Xylene 0.32 0.32 0.32 0.32

75-120Surr: 1,2 - Dichlorethane

-d4 98.4 97.8 103 96.6

80-110Surr: 4-

Bromoflurobenzene 98.2 98.3 96.4 103

85-115Surr:

Dibromofluoromethane 99.8 100 99.9 94.685-110 Surr: Toluene -d8 97.2 97.4 96.4 98.4

A4500-CO2D 4.3 Alk 69 59 80 600.09 Br 0.950 0.950 0.235 0.1100.29 Cl 55 14 48 15

3 SO4 140 140 120 130

A5540C 0.005mg

MBAS/LAnionic Surfactants as

MBAS 0.0025 0.0025 0.0025 0.0025

A2510 B-97 2.4µmhos/cm @25°C Specific Conductance 550 420 500 380

A2540 C-97 7.6 Total Dissolved Solids 860 270 420 260A2540 D-97 1.8 Total Suspended Solids 140 2 150 9.5

A4500-H B-11 pH pH 6.6 7.8 6.74 6.81Act 1.61 -0.672 2.87 1.84Unc 1.54 0.692 1.80 1.42MDC 2.93 2.5 2.89 2.59Act 1.7 1.78 5.14 2.02Unc 0.861 0.999 1.64 1.01MDC 1.46 1.75 2.12 1.72Act 1.52 0 1.44 0.318Unc 1.02 0.291 1.91 0.292MDC 1.09 0.63 0.97 0.172Act 2.51 0.869 1.23 0.608Unc 1.49 0.433 1.48 0.367MDC 2.72 0.751 3.12 0.685Act 0 43.766 16.57 0Unc 42.366 49.865 77.18 21.878MDC 112.5 63.59 88.45 99.78

A4500-NO2 B-11 0.02 Nitrite 0.01 0.016 0.2 0.023A4500-NO3 B/E-11 0.012 Nitrate 0.68 0.34 0.006 0.16

E1664A 1.4 Oil & Grease 8.1 - 0.07 1.4E365.1 R2.0 0.04 Total Phosphorus 3.8 0.041 3.5 0.041

SW9030B 0.44 Sulfide 0.22 0.22 0.22 0.22

Units Details

Radium-228

901.1 Potassium-40

mg/L

mg/L

900.0

pCi/L

Gross Alpha

Gross Beta

903.1 Radium-226

904.0

SW8260

µg/L

%REC

mg/LAnions by Ion

ChromatographyE300.0

Below detection limit values shown as 1/2 MDL 11/6/2015 11/10/2015

SW6020A mg/LMetals by ICP

(Total)

MethodMinimum Detection

Limit

49 | P a g e

Appendix C

6/12/15 6/25/15 7/8/15 9/25/15 10/14/15 11/19/15 12/29/15 2/3/16 3/9/16 3/30/16

Contaminant

Primary (1) or

Secondary (2)

Drinking Water Standard

Aluminum (Al) 2 0.05-0.2 mg/L 0.41 0.36 0.41 0.11 0.013 0.11 1.2 0.94 0.41 0.23Arsenic (As) 1 0.01 mg/L 0.00074 0.00035 0.00097 0.00035 0.0035 0.0035 0.00072 0.0035 0.0035 0.0035Barium (Ba) 1 2 mg/L 0.06 0.035 0.04 0.051 0.044 0.056 0.04 0.047 0.034 0.041Chromium (Cr) 1 0.1 mg/L 0.00057 0.00035 0.00047 0.00016 0.00005 0.00005 0.0011 0.0011 0.00034 0.0002Iron (Fe) 2 0.3 mg/L 0.810 0.560 0.73 0.22 0.023 0.24 1.7 1.6 0.59 0.44Lead (Pb) 1 0.15 mg/L 0.00065 0.00066 0.00073 0.00031 0.00005 0.00023 0.0017 0.00005 0.00066 0.00037Manganese (Mn) 2 0.5 mg/L 0.170 0.120 0.11 0.072 0.013 0.14 0.16 0.27 0.15 0.15Selenium (Se) 1 0.05 mg/L 0.0005 0.0005 0.0005 0.0005 0.0005 0.0005 0.0005 0.0005 0.0005 0.0005Zinc (Zn) 2 0.5 mg/L 0.031 0.027 0.022 0.0066 0.0029 0.0054 0.018 0.022 0.011 0.0052Mercury (Hg) 1 0.002 mg/L NM NM NM NM NM NM NM NM NM NMBenzene 1 0.005 mgL 0.125 0.125 0.125 0.125 0.125 0.125 0.125 0.125 0.125 0.125Toluene 1 1 mg/L 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1Ethylbenzene 1 0.07 mg/L 0.11 0.11 0.11 0.11 0.11 0.11 0.11 0.11 0.11 0.11Xylene 1 10 mg/L 0.31 0.31 0.31 0.31 0.31 0.31 0.31 0.31 0.31 0.31TDS 2 500 mg/L 410 94 185 350 270 300 110 180 190 220Chlroide (Cl) 2 250 mg/L 12 4.6 6.9 14 14 17 7 11 13 9.9Sulfate (SO4) 2 250 mg/L 220 40 66 180 100 160 39 41 69 120Gross Alpha(α ) 1 15 pCi/L ND 1.67 -0.828 0.932 0.828 1.99 0.248 4.24 0.649 NRGross Beta(β) 1 4 mg/yr 5.20 1.7 1.6 0.733 1.81 2.35 1.11 6.9 1.68 NRRadium 226 + 228 1 5 pCi/L ND -0.226 0.1916 0.25 0.784 -0.056 1.252 0.706 0.478 NR

Contaminant

Primary (1) or

Secondary (2)


Aluminum (Al) 2 0.05-0.2 mg/L 0.14 0.78 0.67 0.062 0.013 0.057 1 1.6 0.37 0.17Arsenic (As) 1 0.01 mg/L 0.00035 0.00072 0.00035 0.00035 0.0035 0.0035 0.00086 0.0035 0.0035 0.0035Barium (Ba) 1 2 mg/L 0.06 0.036 0.039 0.051 0.044 0.054 0.039 0.042 0.033 0.037Chromium (Cr) 1 0.1 mg/L 0.00016 0.00087 0.00064 0.00013 0.00005 0.00011 0.0011 0.0016 0.00032 0.0002Iron (Fe) 2 0.3 mg/L 0.220 1.000 0.74 0.093 0.019 0.12 1.5 2 0.54 0.33Lead (Pb) 1 0.15 mg/L 0.00017 0.00084 0.00065 0.00017 0.00005 0.00033 0.0014 0.0022 0.00044 0.00033Manganese (Mn) 2 0.5 mg/L 0.069 0.100 0.076 0.044 0.0064 0.1 0.14 0.18 0.081 0.11Selenium (Se) 1 0.05 mg/L 0.0005 0.0005 0.0005 0.0005 0.0005 0.0005 0.0005 0.0005 0.0005 0.0005Zinc (Zn) 2 0.5 mg/L 0.016 0.021 0.019 0.047 0.0026 0.0033 0.014 0.029 0.0075 0.015Mercury (Hg) 1 0.002 mg/L NM NM NM NM NM NM NM NM NM NMBenzene 1 0.005 mgL 0.125 0.125 0.125 0.125 0.125 0.125 0.125 0.125 0.125 0.125Toluene 1 1 mg/L 0.48 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1Ethylbenzene 1 0.07 mg/L 0.11 0.11 0.11 0.11 0.11 0.11 0.11 0.11 0.11 0.11Xylene 1 10 mg/L 0.31 0.31 0.31 0.31 0.31 0.31 0.31 0.31 0.31 0.31TDS 2 500 mg/L 300 96 150 360 280 300 86 140 140 220Chlroide (Cl) 2 250 mg/L 12 4.9 6.6 14 14 17 7 12 11 9.9Sulfate (SO4) 2 250 mg/L 210 45 64 180 100 160 38 43 65 110Gross Alpha(α ) 1 15 pCi/L ND -0.366 -0.057 1.86 -0.217 0.529 0.743 1.33 0.996 NRGross Beta(β) 1 4 mg/yr 3.20 0.279 0.097 1.33 3.01 2.81 0.275 2.59 1.94 NRRadium 226 + 228 1 5 pCi/L 0.98 0.496 0.552 -0.4434 0.812 0.355 0.63 0.4058 0.608 NR

Contaminant

Primary (1) or

Secondary (2)


Aluminum (Al) 2 0.05-0.2 mg/L 0.09 0.38 0.85 0.057 0.13 0.064 1.4 1.7 0.31 0.13Arsenic (As) 1 0.01 mg/L 0.00035 0.00077 0.00035 0.00035 0.0035 0.0035 0.0035 0.0012 0.0012 0.0012Barium (Ba) 1 2 mg/L 0.05 0.035 0.041 0.051 0.045 0.055 0.041 0.044 0.032 0.37Chromium (Cr) 1 0.1 mg/L 0.00013 0.00040 0.00072 0.00013 0.00005 0.00012 0.0014 0.002 0.00021 0.00012Iron (Fe) 2 0.3 mg/L 0.140 0.560 0.8 0.093 0.02 0.14 1.9 2.9 0.41 0.29Lead (Pb) 1 0.15 mg/L 0.00250 0.00061 0.00072 0.00012 0.00005 0.00015 0.0019 0.0025 0.00039 0.00026Manganese (Mn) 2 0.5 mg/L 0.055 0.087 0.086 0.047 0.0086 0.11 0.18 0.22 0.08 0.13Selenium (Se) 1 0.05 mg/L 0.0005 0.0005 0.0005 0.0005 0.0005 0.0005 0.0005 0.0005 0.0005 0.0005Zinc (Zn) 2 0.5 mg/L 0.018 0.035 0.019 0.02 0.0067 0.0033 0.018 0.024 0.0077 0.0047Mercury (Hg) 1 0.002 mg/L NM NM NM NM NM NM NM NM NM NMBenzene 1 0.005 mgL 0.125 0.125 0.125 0.125 0.125 0.125 0.125 0.125 0.125 0.125Toluene 1 1 mg/L 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1Ethylbenzene 1 0.07 mg/L 0.11 0.11 0.11 0.11 0.11 0.11 0.11 0.11 0.11 0.11Xylene 1 10 mg/L 0.31 0.31 0.31 0.31 0.31 0.31 0.31 0.31 0.31 0.31TDS 2 500 mg/L 400 96 150 350 280 300 88 130 160 220Chlroide (Cl) 2 250 mg/L 13 4.8 6.8 14 15 17 6.9 12 11 10Sulfate (SO4) 2 250 mg/L 220 45 64 170 110 150 37 42 62 110Gross Alpha(α ) 1 15 pCi/L ND -0.32 -0.171 2.08 0.507 2.475 0.17 0.956 2.23 NRGross Beta(β) 1 4 mg/yr ND -0.455 0.924 2.6 2.23 2.19 0.536 2.58 0.512 NRRadium 226 + 228 1 5 pCi/L 0.15 -0.0554 1.387 0.904 1.104 1.596 0.466 0.295 0.653 NR

MR-1

MR-2

MR-3

50 | P a g e

Appendix D

10/10/2014 10/21/2014 11/4/2014 12/9/2014 4/22/2015 9/10/2015 11/5/2015



Aluminum (Al) 2 0.05-0.2 mg/L 0.08 0.08 0.03 0.09 0.4 0.18 0.03Arsenic (As) 1 0.01 mg/L 0.0025 0.0025 0.0025 0.0025 0.0025 0.0025 0.0025Barium (Ba) 1 2 mg/L 0.06 0.04 0.05 0.04 0.04 0.07 0.06Chromium (Cr) 1 0.1 mg/L 0.0025 0.0025 0.0025 0.0025 0.0025 0.0025 0.0025Iron (Fe) 2 0.3 mg/L 0.402 0.362 0.321 0.239 0.543 0.53 0.269Lead (Pb) 1 0.15 mg/L 0.0025 0.0025 0.0025 0.0025 0.0025 0.0025 0.0025Manganese (Mn) 2 0.5 mg/L 0.146 0.087 0.129 0.052 0.063 0.140 0.182Selenium (Se) 1 0.05 mg/L 0.004 0.004 0.004 0.004 0.004 0.004 0.004Zinc (Zn) 2 0.5 mg/L 0.029 0.005 0.005 0.005 0.005 0.005 0.005Mercury (Hg) 1 0.002 mg/L 0.0001 0.0001 0.0001 0.0001 0.0001 0.0001 0.0001Benzene 1 0.005 mgL 0.0005 0.0005 0.0005 0.0005 0.0005 0.0005 0.0005Toluene 1 1 mg/L 0.0005 0.0005 0.0005 0.0005 0.0005 0.0005 0.0005Ethylbenzene 1 0.07 mg/L 0.0005 0.0005 0.0005 0.0005 0.0005 0.0005 0.0005Xylene 1 10 mg/L 0.00015 0.00015 0.00015 0.00015 0.00015 0.00015 0.00015TDS 2 500 mg/L 91 76 70 81 64 67 134Chlroide (Cl) 2 250 mg/L 17 13 12 13 13 14 18Sulfate (SO4) 2 250 mg/L 5 10 11 10 5 10 13Gross Alpha(α ) 1 15 pCi/L 0.05 0.53 0.16 1.08 0.74 0.21 1.09Gross Beta(β) 1 4 mg/yr 7.85 0.55 0.44 0.38 1.32 1.31 1.23Radium 226 + 228 1 5 pCi/L 0.89 0.81 1.08 0.61 0.4 0.37 0.34



Aluminum (Al) 2 0.05-0.2 mg/L 0.25 0.09 0.03 0.15 0.34 0.18 0.03Arsenic (As) 1 0.01 mg/L 0.0025 0.0025 0.0025 0.0025 0.0025 0.0025 0.0025Barium (Ba) 1 2 mg/L 0.06 0.05 0.04 0.04 0.04 0.06 0.06Chromium (Cr) 1 0.1 mg/L 0.0025 0.0025 0.0025 0.0025 0.0025 0.0025 0.0025Iron (Fe) 2 0.3 mg/L 0.684 0.383 0.303 0.286 0.447 0.530 0.305Lead (Pb) 1 0.15 mg/L 0.0025 0.0025 0.0025 0.0025 0.0025 0.0025 0.0025Manganese (Mn) 2 0.5 mg/L 0.223 0.091 0.122 0.052 0.054 0.110 0.172Selenium (Se) 1 0.05 mg/L 0.004 0.004 0.004 0.004 0.004 0.004 0.004Zinc (Zn) 2 0.5 mg/L 0.005 0.005 0.005 0.005 0.005 0.005 0.005Mercury (Hg) 1 0.002 mg/L 0.0001 0.0001 0.0001 0.0001 0.0001 0.0001 0.0001Benzene 1 0.005 mgL 0.0005 0.0005 0.0005 0.0005 0.0005 0.0005 0.0005Toluene 1 1 mg/L 0.0005 0.0005 0.0005 0.0005 0.0005 0.0005 0.0005Ethylbenzene 1 0.07 mg/L 0.0005 0.0005 0.0005 0.0005 0.0005 0.0005 0.0005Xylene 1 10 mg/L 0.00015 0.00015 0.00015 0.00015 0.00015 0.00015TDS 2 500 mg/L 77 72 69 81 73 55 143Chlroide (Cl) 2 250 mg/L 17 13 13 14 14 14 18Sulfate (SO4) 2 250 mg/L 5 10 11 10 5 10 13Gross Alpha(α ) 1 15 pCi/L -0.06 0.50 -0.17 3.16 0.51 -0.36 0.30Gross Beta(β) 1 4 mg/yr 0.21 1.68 0.50 5.21 1.00 2.05 2.57Radium 226 + 228 1 5 pCi/L 0.97 1.21 0.96 0.53 2.75 0.18 -0.06

7A

6C

51 | P a g e



Aluminum (Al) 2 0.05-0.2 mg/L 0.43 0.12 0.07 0.21 0.37 0.07 0.07Arsenic (As) 1 0.01 mg/L 0.0025 0.0025 0.0025 0.0025 0.0025 0.0025 0.0025Barium (Ba) 1 2 mg/L 0.06 0.05 0.04 0.04 0.03 0.06 0.05Chromium (Cr) 1 0.1 mg/L 0.0025 0.0025 0.0025 0.0025 0.0025 0.0025 0.0025Iron (Fe) 2 0.3 mg/L 1.340 0.540 0.538 0.035 0.478 0.490 0.574Lead (Pb) 1 0.15 mg/L 0.0025 0.0025 0.0025 0.0025 0.0025 0.0025 0.0025Manganese (Mn) 2 0.5 mg/L 0.310 0.109 0.138 0.051 0.056 0.260 0.178Selenium (Se) 1 0.05 mg/L 0.004 0.004 0.004 0.004 0.004 0.004 0.004Zinc (Zn) 2 0.5 mg/L 0.005 0.005 0.005 0.005 0.005 0.005 0.005Mercury (Hg) 1 0.002 mg/L 0.0001 0.0001 0.0001 0.0001 0.0001 0.0001 0.0001Benzene 1 0.005 mgL 0.0005 0.0005 0.0005 0.0005 0.0005 0.0005 0.0005Toluene 1 1 mg/L 0.0005 0.0005 0.0005 0.0005 0.0005 0.0005 0.0005Ethylbenzene 1 0.07 mg/L 0.0005 0.0005 0.0005 0.0005 0.0005 0.0005 0.0005Xylene 1 10 mg/L 0.00015 0.00015 0.00015 0.00015 0.00015 0.00015 0.00015TDS 2 500 mg/L 70 76 77 121 67 72 134Chlroide (Cl) 2 250 mg/L 16 12 14 12 12 14 17Sulfate (SO4) 2 250 mg/L 5 5 10 5 5 5 13Gross Alpha(α ) 1 15 pCi/L - -0.14 -0.47 -0.04 -0.07 -0.47 -0.70Gross Beta(β) 1 4 mg/yr - 1.64 1.93 0.98 0.19 1.19 1.23Radium 226 + 228 1 5 pCi/L - 0.74 0.28 0.82 1.09 0.15 0.23



Aluminum (Al) 2 0.05-0.2 mg/L 0.03 0.03 0.03 0.03 0.05 0.03 0.03Arsenic (As) 1 0.01 mg/L 0.0025 0.0025 0.0025 0.0025 0.0025 0.0025 0.0025Barium (Ba) 1 2 mg/L 0.05 0.05 0.05 0.04 0.04 0 0.05Chromium (Cr) 1 0.1 mg/L 0.0025 0.0025 0.0025 0.0025 0.0025 0.0025 0.0025Iron (Fe) 2 0.3 mg/L 0.035 0.035 0.035 0.035 0.035 0.035 0.035Lead (Pb) 1 0.15 mg/L 0.0025 0.0025 0.0025 0.0025 0.0025 0.0025 0.0025Manganese (Mn) 2 0.5 mg/L 0.005 0.003 0.003 0.003 0.003 0.003 0.003Selenium (Se) 1 0.05 mg/L 0.004 0.004 0.004 0.004 0.004 0.004 0.004Zinc (Zn) 2 0.5 mg/L 0.005 0.005 0.005 0.005 0.005 0.005 0.005Mercury (Hg) 1 0.002 mg/L 0.0001 0.0001 0.0001 0.0001 0.0001 0.0001 0.0001Benzene 1 0.005 mgL 0.0005 0.0005 0.0005 0.0005 0.0005 0.0005 0.0005Toluene 1 1 mg/L 0.0005 0.0005 0.0005 0.0005 0.0005 0.0005 0.0005Ethylbenzene 1 0.07 mg/L 0.0005 0.0005 0.0005 0.0005 0.0005 0.0005 0.0005Xylene 1 10 mg/L 0.00015 0.00015 0.00015 0.00015 0.00015 0.00015 0.00015TDS 2 500 mg/L 58 60 57 61 47 38 105Chlroide (Cl) 2 250 mg/L 4 2 3 2 2 2 4Sulfate (SO4) 2 250 mg/L 5 5 11 5 5 10 12Gross Alpha(α ) 1 15 pCi/L 0.24 1.32 -0.31 -0.11 -0.30 0.16 0.36Gross Beta(β) 1 4 mg/yr 0.88 1.06 0.75 -0.14 0.14 0.83 1.81Radium 226 + 228 1 5 pCi/L 0.77 0.05 1.04 0.76 0.09 1.11 0.68

5A

SP-A

52 | P a g e



Aluminum (Al) 2 0.05-0.2 mg/L 0.03 0.03 0.03 0.03 0.03Arsenic (As) 1 0.01 mg/L 0.0025 0.0025 0.0025 0.0025 0.0025Barium (Ba) 1 2 mg/L 0.11 0.12 0.10 0.15 0.14Chromium (Cr) 1 0.1 mg/L 0.0025 0.0025 0.0025 0.0025 0.0025Iron (Fe) 2 0.3 mg/L 0.035 0.035 0.035 0.035 0.035Lead (Pb) 1 0.15 mg/L 0.0025 0.0025 0.0025 0.0025 0.0025Manganese (Mn) 2 0.5 mg/L 0.003 0.003 0.003 0.003 0.003Selenium (Se) 1 0.05 mg/L 0.004 0.004 0.004 0.004 0.004Zinc (Zn) 2 0.5 mg/L 0.018 0.023 0.010 0.046 0.026Mercury (Hg) 1 0.002 mg/L 0.0001 0.0001 0.0001 0.0001 0.0001Benzene 1 0.005 mgL 0.0005 0.0005 0.0005 0.0005 0.0005Toluene 1 1 mg/L 0.0005 0.0005 0.0005 0.0005 0.0005Ethylbenzene 1 0.07 mg/L 0.0005 0.0005 0.0005 0.0005 0.0005Xylene 1 10 mg/L 0.00015 0.00015 0.00015 0.00015 0.00015TDS 2 500 mg/L 100 81 120 99 161Chlroide (Cl) 2 250 mg/L 7 6 8 2 8Sulfate (SO4) 2 250 mg/L 12 11 12 5 11Gross Alpha(α ) 1 15 pCi/L 1.33 0.66 1.84 0.77 0.95Gross Beta(β) 1 4 mg/yr 0.75 1.11 0.82 1.73 1.81Radium 226 + 228 1 5 pCi/L 0.86 0.52 0.65 0.41 0.47



Aluminum (Al) 2 0.05-0.2 mg/L 0.03 0.03 0.03 0.03 0.03Arsenic (As) 1 0.01 mg/L 0.0025 0.0025 0.0025 0.0025 0.0025Barium (Ba) 1 2 mg/L 0.08 0.09 0.08 0.08 0.08Chromium (Cr) 1 0.1 mg/L 0.0025 0.0025 0.0025 0.0025 0.0025Iron (Fe) 2 0.3 mg/L 0.035 0.035 0.035 0.035 0.035Lead (Pb) 1 0.15 mg/L 0.0025 0.0025 0.0025 0.0025 0.0025Manganese (Mn) 2 0.5 mg/L 0.003 0.003 0.003 0.003 0.003Selenium (Se) 1 0.05 mg/L 0.004 0.004 0.004 0.004 0.004Zinc (Zn) 2 0.5 mg/L 0.005 0.005 0.005 0.005 0.005Mercury (Hg) 1 0.002 mg/L 0.0001 0.0001 0.0001 0.0001 0.0001Benzene 1 0.005 mgL 0.0005 0.0005 0.0005 0.0005 0.0005Toluene 1 1 mg/L 0.0005 0.0005 0.0005 0.0005 0.0005Ethylbenzene 1 0.07 mg/L 0.0005 0.0005 0.0005 0.0005 0.0005Xylene 1 10 mg/L 0.00015 0.00015 0.00015 0.00015 0.00015TDS 2 500 mg/L 230 246 237 253 262Chlroide (Cl) 2 250 mg/L 28 32 28 34 32Sulfate (SO4) 2 250 mg/L 28 32 29 29 23Gross Alpha(α ) 1 15 pCi/L 0.75 0.83 0.30 0.72 0.68Gross Beta(β) 1 4 mg/yr 2.36 1.66 1.01 1.08 1.17Radium 226 + 228 1 5 pCi/L 1.39 0.88 0.47 1.23 0.65

SP-C

SP-B

53 | P a g e



Aluminum (Al) 2 0.05-0.2 mg/L 0.60 0.06 0.13 0.09 0.15 0.10 0.46Arsenic (As) 1 0.01 mg/L 0.0025 0.0025 0.0025 0.0025 0.0025 0.0025 0.0025Barium (Ba) 1 2 mg/L 0.10 0.07 0.05 0.02 0.03 0.07 0.05Chromium (Cr) 1 0.1 mg/L 0.0025 0.0025 0.0025 0.0025 0.0025 0.0025 0.0025Iron (Fe) 2 0.3 mg/L 11.200 3.600 3.740 0.376 0.527 7.200 2.830Lead (Pb) 1 0.15 mg/L 0.0025 0.0025 0.0025 0.0025 0.0025 0.0025 0.0025Manganese (Mn) 2 0.5 mg/L 1.740 1.270 0.332 0.043 0.118 1.400 0.333Selenium (Se) 1 0.05 mg/L 0.004 0.004 0.004 0.004 0.004 0.004 0.004Zinc (Zn) 2 0.5 mg/L 0.005 0.005 0.024 0.005 0.005 0.011 0.005Mercury (Hg) 1 0.002 mg/L 0.0001 0.0001 0.0001 0.0001 0.0001 0.0001 0.0001Benzene 1 0.005 mgL 0.0005 0.0005 0.0005 0.0005 0.0005 0.0005 0.0005Toluene 1 1 mg/L 0.0005 0.0005 0.0005 0.0005 0.0005 0.0005 0.0005Ethylbenzene 1 0.07 mg/L 0.0005 0.0005 0.0005 0.0005 0.0005 0.0005 0.0005Xylene 1 10 mg/L 0.00015 0.00015 0.00015 0.00015 0.00015 0.00015 0.00015TDS 2 500 mg/L 93 70 52 59 73 101Chlroide (Cl) 2 250 mg/L 4 2 3 4 3 2 5Sulfate (SO4) 2 250 mg/L 5 5 5 5 5 5 11Gross Alpha(α ) 1 15 pCi/L -0.05 0.41 0.35 -0.32 0.52 0.52 0.43Gross Beta(β) 1 4 mg/yr 1.74 0.85 2.08 1.71 0.44 0.92 3.48Radium 226 + 228 1 5 pCi/L 0.69 0.72 0.29 1.07 0.85 0.91 0.21

UNT 44288

54 | P a g e

Documents

Appendix I: EFD East Regional Center I.2 Assessing ...efdsystems.org/pdf/I.2_Assessing_Environmental_Impacts.pdf · Assessing Environmental Impacts of Horizontal Gas Well Development