Resources for Stakeholders in the Upper Delaware Watershed Region

The Marcellus Shale:

Shale Development Best Management Practices Natural Resources Information and Assessments Natural Gas Exploration and Development Regulations

Authors: Aaron M. Lien and William J. Manner Project Director: Aaron M. Lien December 15, 2010 This work was supported by the William Penn Foundation, The Heinz Endowments, and Nestle Water North America

Cover and interior scenic photographs courtesy of David B. Soete

Table of Contents
Section I: Management Practices for Marcellus Shale Development

....................................................................1

Issue: Well Pad Site Selection ........................................................................................... 3 Management Practice: Comprehensive Planning for Site Selection ...................................5 Management Practice: Co-location of Infrastructure ........................................................ 6 Management Practice: Constraints Mapping ..................................................................... 6 Issue: Water Resources .......................................................................................................9 Management Practice: Location Planning for Water Withdrawals ................................... 10 Management Practice: Timing of Water Withdrawals ...................................................... 11 Management Practice: Intake Structures ......................................................................... 12 Management Practice: Centralization of Infrastructure ................................................... 13 Management Practice: Water Storage .............................................................................. 14 Management Practice: Air Drilling .................................................................................. 14 Management Practice: Water Metering............................................................................ 14 Management Practice: Obstruction Permits ..................................................................... 15 Management Practice: Dry Hydrants ............................................................................... 15 Issue: Well Site Construction...........................................................................................16 Management Practice: Road Construction ....................................................................... 16 Management Practice: Noise Control .............................................................................. 18 Management Practice: Erosion and Sediment Controls ................................................... 18 Management Practice: Erosion and Sediment Plan Monitoring ....................................... 19 Management Practice: Zero Discharge Well Pads ............................................................ 19 Management Practice: Site Scale Plastic Liners and Composite ...................................... 21 Management Practice: Closed Tanks with Double Containment ...................................... 21 Management Practice: Waste Reduction .......................................................................... 22 Management Practice: Cleanliness .................................................................................. 23 Management Practice: Noxious Weed and Invasive Species Control................................ 23

Issue: Water Quality ..........................................................................................................24 Management Practice: Wastewater Disposal.................................................................... 25 Management Practice: Water Testing............................................................................... 25 Management Practice: Hydraulic Fracturing Fluid and Wastewater Storage ......................................................................................................... 26 Management Practice: Well Casings ................................................................................ 27 Issue: Air Quality ................................................................................................................28 Appendix A: Sources .............................................................................................................. 30

Section II:
Natural Resources Information and Assessments for the Upper Delaware River Watershed ..................................................................... 32
Resource Assessments: .................................................................................................... 33 General Information and Maps:....................................................................................... 44

Section III:
Natural Gas Exploration and Development Regulations, NY and PA..........................................................................................................................50
Current Status of Regulatory Revisions: Pennsylvania ..................................................... 51 Current State of Regulatory Revisions: New York ............................................................ 51 Current State of Regulatory Revisions: Delaware River Basin Commission .................................................................................. 52 Regulations: Well Pads..................................................................................................... 52 Regulations: Surface Water Withdrawal .......................................................................... 55 Regulations: Ground Water Withdrawal .......................................................................... 56 Regulations: Waste Water Disposal .................................................................................. 57 Regulatory Summary Chart and Citations for Specific Regulations: ....................................... 58 Public Dialogue Participants.......................................................................................... 70

ii

Section I: Management Practices for Marcellus Shale Development

Beginning in March 2010, the Common Waters Partnership, in conjunction with the Upper Delaware River Roundtable and with participation of a broad range of stakeholders from throughout the Marcellus shale region of the Upper Delaware River Basin, hosted a dialogue about the impacts of Marcellus shale gas development on the region. The focus of this dialogue was first and foremost education and communication. An eort has been made to include stakeholders representing all viewpoints. For a list of the participants see pages 70-73. The Marcellus Shale Dialogue set out with four specific goals: 1. Identify stakeholders commonly held concerns, areas of uncertainty, and questions and provide an ongoing forum for discussion and communication about Marcellus shale issues for a diverse group of stakeholders. Present research-based information on best management practices that address concerns raised by stakeholders and may help to mitigate the potential impacts of gas drilling. Provide an objective review of the current status of regulations aecting gas drilling in the region as a common resource for all stakeholders. Report on resources identified as important to stakeholders and worthy of extra consideration when siting gas drilling and pipeline infrastructure because of potential impacts on environmental, economic, or social resources.

Photograph by David B. Soete

2. 3. 4.

This report in its entirety addresses the second, third, and forth goals. This section addresses the second: an objective review of best management practices that address concerns raised by stakeholders. In part, the current regulations, to the extent they relate to recommended management practices, are also addressed. Section II provides resources to inform interested stakeholders about the natural resources of the region. Section III provides a comprehensive review of current state regulations in New York and Pennsylvania as of November, 2010.
1

In the context of this report, the term best management practices is not intended to refer to regulatory requirements, but rather the management practices that best address an identified resource concern, based on the research conducted to inform this report. At stakeholder meetings held throughout the spring and summer of 2010, and through an interview process conducted in winter of 2010 by the Upper Delaware River Roundtable, questions and concerns about management practices associated with the development of Marcellus shale well sites were identified. This information was utilized to conduct an initial literature review of management practices. The results of this literature review were then presented to a small workgroup of stakeholders.1 The workgroup provided additional feedback on the information reported, corrections on regulations, and recommendations of additional management practices to consider. This report does not take a position on whether gas drilling should occur in the Delaware River Basin. Rather, it provides resources for citizens and stakeholders in the Upper Delaware River region so they can learn about what best practices may help to avoid adverse impacts. Stakeholders can draw on these resources when considering gas development in their community or on their land. The practices included are focused on environmental issues associated with natural gas exploration and development and based on issues and concerns identified by stakeholders; therefore, the list of practices is not entirely comprehensive. There are best management practices associated with other issues such as public and human health and worker safety that are not considered in this report. Implementation of these best management practices is equally important, but beyond the scope of this report. Some of the best management practices included in this report are already being implemented by companies engaged in gas drilling operations. Some are not. Many of these practices are required by existing laws in some states, while others are recommended by state drilling guidance documents. In some cases, included practices not required by law in the Upper Delaware River Basin are required by the requirements of some leases. It is the purpose of this document to identify practices based on a literature review and provide information about when and how they can be used. It should be noted that past gas well development has taken place in areas that do not have the number of high quality or exceptional value waters as are located in the Upper Delaware River Watershed, and therefore current regulations may not be as protective of these resources as would be desirable. The gas drilling industry is constantly changing and these practices can change as technology advances. Many practices commonly used by the industry today were not common two years ago. One example is the recycling of hydraulic fracturing wastewater. This best management practice was not commonly used two years ago, but is now common practice by drillers in Pennsylvania. The regulatory requirements in both states are currently being revised; however, the regulatory development process takes time and may not reflect the most current technological advancements or management practices. The best management practices included in this report are current as of November 2010. This section of the report is organized by issue: well site selection, soil and erosion control, etc. Underneath each of these primary headings is a brief introduction to the issue and a list of recommended best management practices and related regulations associated with the issue. Each best management practice is accompanied by a short description of its purpose and the impacts it addresses, applicability, and sources for additional information. Resources for detailed information on best practices are also provided at the end of this report. All told, this report provides information on the potential impacts of drilling and approaches through the application of best management practices that may help mitigate these impacts. This work is supported by The Heinz Endowments, The William Penn Foundation, and Nestle Waters North America.

Participants in the workgroup included Marian Schweighofer, Craig Todd, Ellen Salak, Bruce Ferguson, Mike Uretsky, and Brian Grove. The workgroup was facilitated by Bill Manner and Aaron Lien.

Well Pad, Bradford County, PA, May 2010

Issue: Well Pad Site Selection

Before the drilling of a Marcellus shale natural gas well even begins, important decisions are made about where to place the well pad the area where the process of drilling the well will take place. These decisions are based on a number of factors including geology, proximity to pipelines and compressor stations, proximity to water bodies like lakes, streams, wetlands, environmental concerns (e.g. endangered species), and surface conditions such as whether there are open fields or flat areas available. The decisions made by gas companies about where to place well pads can have a significant impact on a number of resource values. Certain well site considerations are required by regulations, such as setbacks from rivers, lakes, and homes. Other siting considerations, such as placement of well pads across the landscape, how vistas are aected by drilling rigs and well pads, and forest fragmentation are not addressed by regulations. In addition, there is currently no regulatory requirement in the Delaware River Basin to site well pads based on the results of a comprehensive well site planning process. However, a comprehensive well site planning process could address many of the concerns about well site issues raised by stakeholders. These concerns include the density of well pads across the landscape, forest loss and fragmentation, proximity of well pads to water and other resources, gas developments interaction with local comprehensive urban and open space planning, and impacts of natural gas infrastructure (pipelines, compressor stations, etc.) on resources. This section provides an overview of several site selection management practices intended to reduce impacts on sensitive natural resources. Traditional urban planning and zoning at the county and municipal levels do not address or anticipate many of the issues of concern related to natural gas exploration and development. Local zoning has been established for many of the municipalities in the Upper Delaware Region, but gas drilling in was not anticipated when these ordinances were enacted. Land use in Pennsylvania is regulated by the local municipal governments through zoning regulations, however these local zoning ordinances may not infringe on the state regulation of well drilling. A recent (July 22, 2010) Pennsylvania Commonwealth Court decision allows municipalities to zone for all uses including gas drilling, but municipalities cannot zone out gas extraction completely or regulate industry operations that are otherwise regulated by State laws. This court decision stated zoning ordinances are not an attempt to regulate the oil and gas industry. Instead they define land use in

municipalities and what land uses are permitted in dierent areas of the municipalities to protect public health and safety. Implementation of site selection management practices by gas companies could help to address concerns about resources not considered by local zoning. Currently, the gas industry typically uses a multi-step, iterative approach to determine where a well can be drilled. The process starts with evaluation by company geologists to determine preliminary coordinates from geologic and seismic test data. After the preliminary coordinates are determined, a construction foreman checks the location for suitability of the site for drilling. The consultants employed by the drilling company then check the site for environmental factors, such as the sensitive species or habitats, wetland buers, water bodies, and set backs from buildings. The well pad location may be adjusted as a result of these site specific factors. When a well site is finalized, preparation of the permit application begins. The permit application includes a plat plan for the well pad and any roads or other facilities needed. Water and soil samples are also collected and analyzed in the area proposed for drilling. At the same time, surface land owners and water source owners are notified of the proposed activity. A construction foreman for each well site is responsible for contacting the local and/or state highway departments to address any road use permit issues. Preparedness, Prevention, and Contingency Plans are also prepared for the site. When all preliminary work is completed, the permit application is finalized and the drilling companys management submits the permit application to the respective state regulators.

Well Pad, Bradford County, PA, November 2010 (This is the same site as pictured on page 3) - Note well in middle of pad and production water storage tanks on right edge of pad

Management Practice: Comprehensive Planning for Site Selection

A comprehensive planning process should be utilized before choosing locations for a well pad, access road(s), and compressor station facilities. The process should consider a core set of environmental factors, listed below, to help reduce the environmental impacts of well pad development. The planning process should also include a review of the applicable zoning regulations imposed by local governments to ensure consistency with local planning objectives. The purpose of comprehensive planning for site selection is to identify how gas well development can take place at a landscape scale so well pads can be located as efficiently as possible across the region. Considering a large area in a single planning process increases the likelihood of protecting sensitive natural resources and avoiding conflicts with community facilities, while also allowing for reasonable access to natural gas resources. In areas where individual companies or partnerships hold large blocks of leases, comprehensive planning for well site locations also makes economic sense. Planning will allow companies to maximize efficiency of well spacing, while also minimizing infrastructure costs and avoiding adverse impacts to natural and community resources. Where large blocks of leases are not present, comprehensive planning is still possible, with the same benefits, through cooperation between gas companies. A great deal of information is currently available to help gas companies, government agencies, and local residents eectively carry out comprehensive planning in the Upper Delaware River Basin. Local planning agencies in each of the basin counties with Marcellus shale resources (predominately Pike, Monroe, and Wayne County, Pennsylvania and Delaware and Sullivan County, New York; small parts of several other counties are also within both the Delaware River Basin and the Marcellus shale region) have county planning offices. Gas companies should work with these offices to receive feedback about county comprehensive planning, open space planning, zoning, and other land use related issues. County planning agencies can also help coordinate issues across local governments. Many municipalities have their own planning offices; gas companies should engage with them as well. Beyond local planning agencies, there are also other governmental and non-governmental bodies that can provide information to gas companies. These include county conservation districts and local conservation organizations. Comprehensive planning for well pad site selection will require time, eort, and significant engagement and information collection from the community. However, once planning is complete, gas companies, governmental agencies, and the public will have a comprehensive resource for understanding how gas development will proceed in the region. The process of developing comprehensive plans for site selection may also strengthen relationships between stakeholders. Because of the current regulatory situation, with a moratorium on drilling in the Delaware River Basin, companies have an opportunity to pursue planning now to demonstrate their good faith to the community and prepare for future gas development. One example of a comprehensive planning initiative is available from the state of Colorado. In early 2009, Colorado made changes to its oil and gas regulations and implemented a new well permitting process that allows comprehensive planning for well development. This voluntary program allows one or more operators to submit a Comprehensive Drilling Plan for wells to be drilled in a specific region, allowing for comprehensive planning for multiple wells and facilities. This promotes eective well siting based on regional considerations rather than individual sites. The process also allows for input from the regulatory and environmental agencies and impacted landowners. The purpose of the comprehensive planning regulations is to promote better environmental protection; protection of wildlife, public health and safety; and allow operators efficiency in their operations. The Colorado regulations can serve as a guide for the Upper Delaware River Region.

Management Practice: Co-location of Infrastructure

When conducting comprehensive planning for site selection and even if comprehensive planning is not undertaken, well pad sites and infrastructure should be co-located with or located near existing infrastructure. Doing so minimizes the impacts from well development by placing well sites and infrastructure in or near already disturbed areas. Wherever possible, sites should be developed with regard to current or planned infrastructure to reduce the amount of earth disturbance and impacts from development. Examples of existing and planned infrastructure to target for co-location include: Roads Existing roads, state, municipal, or landowner owned should be utilized wherever possible to reduce impacts from additional road construction. Pipelines should be colocated in road right of ways to minimize the impacts of additional earth disturbance. Pipelines Companies should consider sharing of pipelines to avoid duplication of pipelines, thus decreasing impacts and oering economies of scale for pipeline projects. Water sources When considering the location of water withdrawal points, use existing access points or construct access points with regard to future use. Planning should carefully consider traffic impacts and site stability.

As with comprehensive planning for well site locations, co-location of infrastructure makes sense from an environmental and from an economic perspective. Co-location limits impacts, but also results in lower costs associated with planning and development of new infrastructure. Co-location also focuses development to areas that are already developed while reserving undeveloped areas such as large forest blocks that are important for maintenance of wildlife habitat and water quality. The economy of Upper Basin communities is driven in large part by agriculture, natural resources, and tourism industriesnatural resources protection is important to protect this foundation of the local economy.

Management Practice: Constraints Mapping

Constraints mapping is closely related to comprehensive planning for site selection. Constraints mapping should be developed locally with cooperation of gas companies so adverse impacts from development can be avoided rather than mitigated and/or remediated. Constraints mapping is a proactive step to recognize where important natural and community resources are located before consideration of well site and infrastructure locations even begins. It provides a landscape context and is a foundational component of comprehensive planning for site selection. Typically, constraints on well site and infrastructure development are determined at the sight level, often after an initial site location has already been selected. Development of constraints maps for areas where drilling may take place, however, would allow consideration of constraints before initial site selection, increasing efficiency and reducing the likelihood a chosen site will be unsuitable. For example, a Pennsylvania Natural Diversity Index or PNDI review is required for all permits and Water Management Plans in Pennsylvania with resolution of hits before permits or plan approvals are granted. A Pennsylvania Natural Diversity Index hit is an indication that a species of concern may be located in the area proposed for disturbance. Once a hit has been identified the applicant must then contact the appropriate resource agency and conduct field studies if required to determine if the species of concern is at the site or may be aected by the proposed activity. If a species of concern is identified, mitigation measures or re-location of the proposed activity may be required. If constraints maps were developed, this process could be avoided because the potential locations of species of concern would already be know before selection of a site. The Pennsylvania Natural Diversity Index process does not necessarily capture local information that has not been added to the Index, nor does it incorporate information on wetlands, historical sites, and many other community and natural resource values. The county conservation districts and other local organizations have a great deal of local knowledge and can provide valuable
6

information in an advisory capacity. To a certain extent, a good deal of constraints mapping has already been conducted by local, stakeholder driven open space planning eorts. Many of the available data sources for constraints mapping are summarized in Section II of this report. However, there are others that are not included. Any constraints mapping eort carried out by gas companies should be done in close consultation with local stakeholders. It should be recognized that due to the use of horizontal drilling techniques, strategic placement of the well pad location allows the gas companies to access Marcellus shale gas while also avoiding development on land surface areas that require special protection. Landowners should be actively engaged in the discussion of well pad siting with the lease holder and recommend development of a surface development plan for their property prior to the construction of well pads, access roads, or compressor stations. Both comprehensive planning for site selection and constraints mapping can contribute to this discussion. Environmental constraints for consideration in comprehensive planning and constraints mapping The following features should be considered when selecting the location of well pads. In some cases, consideration is already required by regulatory requirements, as noted. 1. Distance from waterways (lakes, ponds, or streams) In order to protect waterways from the aects of drilling operations, state regulations require specific distances between the well and the waterway. These distances should be considered minimums and greater distances should be utilized to protect sensitive headwaters, Class A trout streams, or streams with a naturally reproducing trout population. Current New York regulations require a 50 buer from water bodies; Pennsylvania requires a 100 buer. In Pike and Wayne Counties, Pennsylvania, all streams are designated by Pennsylvania Regulations, Title 25 PA Code Chapter 93, Water Quality Standards, as High Quality or Exceptional Value streams, which may necessitate greater protections. This is also true in many of the streams in New York, although New York uses a dierent stream classification system. Floodways and floodplains Regulations vary by local municipal ordinances and enforcement is up to the municipalities. Floodways are regulated by the Pennsylvania Department of Environmental Protection and permits are required for facilities with proposed locations in floodways. The presence of facilities in a floodway can directly aect water flow during a flood event and cause increased water levels and damage in areas above or below the structure. Due to the likely threat to water resources and properties in the event of a flood, all types of well pad development should avoid floodways and the 100-year floodplains. Increased enforcement or expansion of floodplain regulations may be needed at the state or local level to ensure protection. Local municipalities generally have a floodplain ordinance developed from a model ordinance and then modified to meet the specific needs of the municipality. While there are common elements in the model ordinances, local modifications or lax enforcement of the regulations results in a great diversity in regulatory actions by municipalities. As a result, any disturbances in floodways and floodplains (100 year) should be avoided. Wetlands Wetlands and vernal pools should be avoided. Both Pennsylvania and New York establish minimum buers of 100 for protection of wetlands. This is especially crucial as many of these wetlands and vernal pools are directly related to groundwater recharge. Diminution of these areas can aect the quantity of groundwater available for drinking water and/or stream base flow. The state defined buers should be considered minimum distances. Forested areas Generally forested areas should be avoided in favor of open lands to reduce forest fragmentation, changes in the rate and water quality of storm water runo, protection of stream buers, and preservation of existing water quality in the streams. Steep slopes Construction of well pads pipelines or roads on steep slopes should be avoided to reduce earth disturbance from cuts and fills and soil erosion. In addition selecting level areas reduces the overall impact on the site and can reduce construction and restoration costs. For the context of this document, steep slopes are those over 15%.
7

2.

3.

4.

5.

6.

Occupied dwellings Well pads should be located away from occupied dwellings for the safety of the occupants and to reduce noise, light, and other impacts during the drilling operation. Pennsylvania and New York have minimum requirements for buers from dwellings. Currently, in New York the buer is 100 and in Pennsylvania the buer is 200. Though state laws allow for variances to reduce buer widths, this should be avoided. The regulatory buer widths should be considered minimum guidelines. Public Buildings The well pads should be located away from occupied public buildings for the safety of the occupants and to reduce noise, light, and other impacts during the drilling operation. These distances are especially important for schools, camps, hospitals, nursing homes or other facilities where at-risk populations are located. In addition, for well pads located near these types of facilities, the timing of drilling operations should be adjusted to correspond with times when they are not in use, e.g. during a schools summer recess or at camps during the o season. Current New York regulations require a 150 buer and Pennsylvania requires a 200 buer. The existing regulations should be considered minimum guidelines. Private Drinking Water Wells Isolation distances from private drinking water wells is important to avoid impacts or contamination of existing wells. In Pennsylvania, there are no standards for the construction of private water wells. They are especially prone to contamination from surface water runo and are not often constructed with full casing or grouting. Pennsylvania regulations require at least 200 feet separation between private water wells and a gas well unless a variance is granted. New York has variable distance requirements for this isolation distance. Public Drinking Water Supplies Under the federal Safe Drinking Water Act, a public water system (PWS) is a system for the provision to the public of water for human consumption through pipes or other constructed conveyances, if such system has at least fifteen service connections or regularly serves at least twenty-five individuals. In the Upper Delaware region, most public water systems utilize groundwater as the source of water supplied to their customers. Public Drinking Water Supplies should have greater isolation distances than private wells from gas well drilling activity due to the larger zone of influence for these larger water withdrawals. Many water suppliers have performed source water protection studies. Gas companies should contact and work directly with local public water suppliers prior to choosing the well pad site location and should reference Source Water Protection Plans if they are available.

7.

8.

9.

10. Other Critical Areas Critical areas include areas with known endangered species, unique habitat, significant migration or breeding areas for birds, mammals, or aquatic organisms, and significant unfragmented forests or riparian areas. These can be identified with the assistance of local governments or organizations and may not be included in the Pennsylvania Natural Diversity Index. Section II of this report provides an overview of several sources of data for identification of important natural resource areas. 11. Soil Conditions Soil conditions at a proposed pad location should be evaluated and highly erodible or prime agricultural soils avoided. This analysis can reduce erosion and loss of productive agricultural soils. 12. Viewscapes In order to preserve scenic natural views, ridgeline facilities should be restricted where possible to minimize impacts to views. Depending on local site conditions, however, it may be desirable to locate pads on ridgelines to reduce forest fragmentation, avoid steep slopes, or prime agricultural soils. The use of natural or artificial features to screen (topography, vegetation, or artificial berm) production facilities is recommended. Also painting the well head and tanks a color that blends to background vegetation can reduce the visual impact. Viewshed analysis should be a part of any constraints mapping and comprehensive planning for site selection process.

13. Pipeline Construction To minimize the Impacts from pipeline construction, pipelines should be co-located along the access roads to minimize earth disturbance, erosion, and sedimentation. Where co-location is not possible, pipelines should be located according to a comprehensive planning and constraints mapping process and take into account the same considerations as well pad siting.
Sources: Well Pad Site Selection See the Source list in Appendix A of this section. The sources for this section are: 2, 6, 8, 9, 10, 19, 20, 21, 25, 27 and 28.

Issue: Water Resources

There is a great deal of concern about the impacts of gas drilling on the water resources of the Delaware River Basin. These concerns are multifaceted. There are concerns about the impacts of gas development on drinking water supplies, both quantity of water, and quality of water. Will gas drilling eect the amount of water available for drinking from both surface and subsurface resources? Will the quality of subsurface and surface water resources be impacted? What management practices can be implemented to reduce the risk of reduction in quantity and/or contamination of drinking water sources? Issues of both water quantity and quality are addressed in this report. This section focuses on water quantity, while the sections on well construction and wastewater address water quality issues. There is a great deal of controversy about the impacts of unconventional gas drilling (the type of drilling that will take place in the Delaware River Basin) on water resources. There is no doubt that unconventional gas drilling uses a lot of water millions of gallons of water is used in the hydraulic fracturing process for each well. Currently, there is a Delaware River Basin Commission (DRBC) permitting process in place in the Basin that evaluates any withdrawal of surface or groundwater greater than 100,000 gallons per day during any 30 consecutive day period for any use (not just gas drilling). Detailed stream flow information is used to evaluate stream withdrawals. Drawdown pump testing is required for groundwater withdrawals. The withdrawal information is evaluated to ensure there are no adverse impacts from a proposed water withdrawal. A part of this evaluation also considers low flow impacts. Pass by flow restrictions requirements that a minimum stream flow must be maintained are incorporated into the withdrawal request. Pass by flow restrictions are used to limit or stop water withdrawals during low flow or drought conditions. The cumulative impact of water withdrawals from gas drilling at the basin-wide scale is currently unknown. However, cumulative impacts of water withdrawals are evaluated and considered by DRBC sta during their permitting process. At the localized stream level, however, there can be measurable impacts to water quantity as a result of gas drilling related withdrawals, even from a single well site. This section will suggest best management practices to avoid adverse impacts to stream health and loss of water for other uses as a result of water withdrawals for gas drilling leading to low stream flow rates. The DRBC is tasked with regulating the flow, water quality, and withdrawals from the Delaware River. DRBC is currently working to complete regulations specifically applicable to gas drilling. Ultimately, all natural gas extraction activities in the Delaware River Basin will require a DRBC permit, regardless of the level of water withdrawal. Water withdrawals for drilling of gas wells or use for hydraulic fracturing of the wells needs careful consideration and study. It is anticipated that each Marcellus well will require 3 to 5 million gallons to develop, with current technology. Implementation of best management practices and evolution of technologies may reduce the amount of water required per well. For comparison, according to the DRBC State of the Basin Report 2008, the daily water withdrawals, exports, and consumptive uses in the basin equal 8,736 million gallons per day (mgd), and are broken down as follows: thermoelectric power generation 5,682 mgd; public water supply 875 mgd; diversion (New York City & New Jersey) 736 mgd; hydropower 617 mgd; industrial Uses 501 mgd;

remaining uses, including agriculture, mining, domestic water wells, non-agricultural irrigation (e.g. golf courses), and all other uses 325 mgd. The timing and location of withdrawals is a critical factor in determining the impacts of withdrawals, given the diversity of surface water users in the watershed. In Pennsylvania, a comprehensive Water Management Plan for both fresh water and wastewater is required prior to issuance of the drilling permit. In addition, approval by DRBC is required.

Water Withdrawal Site, Bowmans Creek, Wyoming County, PA, November 2010

Management Practice: Location Planning for Water Withdrawals

The location where water is withdrawn from surface and/or groundwater sources to supply gas drilling operations should be carefully planned to take into account local conditions, constraints, and existing uses of streams. Ideally, location planning for water withdrawals will take place as a component of a comprehensive planning process for drilling infrastructure (see page 5). When selecting a location for water withdrawals, gas companies should take the following factors into consideration: Locate withdrawal points downstream from headwater areas. Headwaters are more susceptible to dewatering than areas further downstream with higher average base flow. If using groundwater, consult with existing groundwater users in the area, especially public water suppliers, to ensure there will be no impact on the productivity of existing water wells. Consult with county conservation districts, local and county governments, DRBC, and existing water users to determine the best location for water withdrawals. Develop a comprehensive Pollution Prevention and Contingency Plan that covers the well pad site as well as the water withdrawal location. Local, state, and federal permitting requirements as applicable.
10

Any water withdrawal of either surface or groundwater greater than 100,000 gallons per day during any consecutive 30 day period requires a permit from DRBC. An application must be prepared by an engineer, geologist, or hydrologist and submitted to the Commission for review. The information required includes: present water use, projected water use for next 10 years; consumptive use; location of withdrawal; details on groundwater withdrawals and well construction; Q7-10 for surface water withdrawals (the Q7-10 is the drought flow which occurs for a period of seven consecutive days one time in 10 years); the nearest USGS gauging station; drainage area, pump capacities, and storage capacity of reservoir or impoundment; amount of water being imported or exported from the basin; maps; floodways and floodplains(100 yr); wetlands; and applicable state permits. Once this information is received, the proposal is reviewed by DRBC technical sta for accuracy and compliance with the regulatory requirements and the cumulative impacts of the water withdrawals. The Commission sta evaluates the impacts of the withdrawal to ensure that no adverse impacts to the stream or groundwater aquifer will result from the withdrawal. Impacts on downstream water users are also considered. If the withdrawal will have impacts, then the water withdrawal volume may be reduced or the permit denied. In addition, the impacts of the withdrawal during drought or low flow conditions are evaluated and pass-by flow requirements may be incorporated into the permit so that downstream impacts are reduced or eliminated. The pass-by flow restrictions are normally required to protect aquatic life, as well as mitigate any downstream user impacts. While these permitting requirements protect streams from long-term, high volume withdrawals, they do not address situations where the volume or duration of withdrawals does not meet the required thresholds. Despite this, to protect streams and aquatic ecosystems, a thorough review similar to what is required to receive a DRBC permit should be conducted for all withdrawals, especially for small and headwater streams.

Management Practice: Timing of Water Withdrawals

The timing of water withdrawals from both surface and groundwater can have a significant eect on the impact of the withdrawals. During dry periods, the quantity of water required for gas drilling could easily deplete stream flow from a small, low-base flow stream to a trickle. This would have adverse impacts on downstream water users, aquatic life, wildlife, and fish habitat. Timing of water withdrawals is of greatest concern for small streams with significant seasonal fluctuations. However, the cumulative impacts of gas drilling at scale on the basin as a whole are unknown. Generally, water withdrawals from streams should be managed to avoid the need for large scale withdrawals during the driest parts of the year and preference the times of year with highest average stream flows or periods of flooding. Because water demands for drilling operations likely do not follow the same seasonal fluctuations as stream flow in the Delaware River Basin, this practice is best implemented in conjunction with other management practices, specifically centralization of infrastructure and fresh water storage. Impacts of depleted stream flows include reduction of habitat for aquatic organisms, changes to stream water quality, loss of aquatic species, increases in water temperature, diminution of flow to allow for proper dilution of effluent from wastewater plant discharges, and reductions of flow to water supply or other user intakes. An example of the impacts of depleted stream flow is the reduced ability of a stream to dilute wastewater treatment plant discharges from municipal or private wastewater treatment plants. Depleted stream flow can result in an effluent dominated stream where aquatic organisms are harmed or killed and dierent, effluent-tolerant species replace native species. Other impacts may include declines in stream flow to the extent that existing downstream water users are no longer able to withdraw water. During the summer of 2010, low stream flows in the Susquehanna River Basin due to lack of rainfall resulted in restrictions on gas industry water withdrawals from some approved withdrawal sites. The cessation of withdrawals was triggered by the stream flows and the withdrawal permit limits designed to protect aquatic life and downstream water users. Currently gas companies are exploring the use of water from sources other than streams or other water bodies. Some companies are exploring the use of mine drainage water and/or treated wastewater from sewage treatment plants. The use of water from these sources could have positive environmental impacts as a result of the removal of these waters from receiving streams.

11

Water Withdrawal Site, Bradford County, PA, November 2010

Management Practice: Intake Structures

Water withdrawals directly from streams and lakes can be harmful to aquatic life. Gas companies should take care to design intake structures so that they protect aquatic life when proposing to withdraw water from a natural water body. Failure to properly design and construct intake structures may trap fish and other aquatic organisms in the structure or drawn them into the pump. Improper construction may also aect the current or cross section of a stream resulting in damage or alteration of stream banks, change stream flow dynamics so that flood flows are altered, or be a hazard to navigation in a stream or river. The Pennsylvania Department of Environmental Protection, Bureau of Watershed Management, General Permit, BDWM-GP-4, for Intake and Outfall Structures (PA DEP3930-PM-WM0504) requires, intake structures must be designed so that there is no interference with any navigation of the stream, migration of fish or passage of flood flows. Intake structures shall be properly sized and located so that the intake structure does not violate the riparian rights of downstream users and does not substantially aect the course, current or cross section of the stream located downstream from the intake structure. Intake structures shall be screened or otherwise properly designed to prevent impingement and entrainment of fish The General Permit, BDWM-GP-4 is not available in High Quality or Exceptional Value watersheds. An individual permit, which has additional requirements, is required in these watersheds. Joint permits with the Army Corps of Engineers may also be required for these structures. Withdrawal sites must be stabilized to accommodate truck traffic. With the volume of truck traffic expected at these sites, a stable surface of gravel or macadam needs to be installed or the trucks will cause erosion on the site, resulting in sedimentation of the stream. A gravel surface may be more desirable than macadam, as gravel allows for better storm water management at the withdrawal site. One beneficial use that can be obtained from water withdrawal sites is the installation of dry hydrants. A dry hydrant is simply a pipe structure with screened intake. Dry hydrants allow withdrawal of water and can subsequently be used by local fire companies in cases of emergency to supply water for firefighting. An additional benefit to all property owners in proximity to the dry hydrants is a reduction in the fire insurance rates for those properties.

12

Except for water purchased from public water suppliers, groundwater withdrawals for hydraulic fracturing and drilling have not been used to date. The impacts of groundwater withdrawal can be significant and could result in reduction of groundwater supplies for drinking water wells, springs, wetlands, or stream base flow. These impacts could result in drinking water wells or springs drying up, reduced flows to wetlands, and reduced stream flow if base flow is reduced, especially during drought periods. Evaluations of proposed groundwater withdrawals are also regulated by the river basin commissions and their permitting programs require a specified pump testing procedure to ensure that withdrawals will not impact drinking water wells, springs, wetlands, or stream base flow.

Management Practice: Centralization of Infrastructure

As discussed above in reference to well pad site selection management practices, a major concern expressed by the community is the overall impact of gas drilling infrastructure across the landscape. In addition to well pads and associated access roads, water infrastructure to supply fracturing operations can have a significant impact across the landscape. At the same time, there is equal concern about the impacts of trucking water to individual well sites. Trucking water requires a large number of truck trips and results in impacts on roads due to the weight of the tanker trucks and localized air pollution from diesel engines. Pumping water directly to on-site storage ponds rather than trucking water can significantly reduce truck traffic and resultant air pollution. When planning the location and timing of water withdrawals, gas companies should also plan for centralization of as much infrastructure as possible. Similar to comprehensive planning for well site locations, companies should also carefully plan the location of water storage either in tanks or in constructed or existing ponds. Doing so has a number of advantages. First, centralization of water infrastructure allows a single water storage area to be used by multiple well pads, reducing the impact of having an individual storage pond on each site. Second, it provides flexibility with timing of water withdrawals. Because water is being stored, it can be pumped from streams during times of peak flows. Low flow periods can be avoided in favor of stored water. Third, a comprehensive approach to selecting sites for water storage allows for placement in areas that are the least disruptive to the environment, located logically relative to planned well pad sites, and take advantage of existing rights-of-way. Existing cleared areas should be utilized whenever possible when locating water storage and conveyance facilities. Centralization of water storage will require piping of water to individual well pads. These pipes should utilize existing rights-of-way, following access roads, pipelines, and other infrastructure. Pipes for pumping water to well sites should be well constructed to prevent large amounts of water being lost due to leaks. Avoiding leaks decreases the amount of water drawn from streams. At this time, there are no standards for the construction or material requirements for above ground pipelines in either state. Some drilling companies also utilize centralized impoundments for the storage of wastewater and leaks have occurred from these pipelines. Standards need to be established and enforced by the states for all pipelines. This management practice is recommended only for fresh water prior to its delivery to and use at individual well pads. Water used in drilling, hydraulic fracturing, and produced water during the production phase of a well should be stored on the well site using best management practices for wastewater storage, see below. In addition to water storage, other facilities can be centralized such as compressor stations, liquids gathering systems, and gathering lines. Centralizing these facilities can reduce the overall impact of the drilling activity by reducing land disturbance, resulting in reduced air pollution by decreasing truck traffic.

13

Management Practice: Water Storage

Construction of water storage structures (ponds) for water storage of clean water used in the drilling and hydraulic fracturing operations must meet regulatory standards. These structures may be sized or located to service one or multiple wells pads in a given area. If serving multiple well pads, pipelines should be utilized to transfer water between the pad sites, which reduces truck traffic and resultant air pollution (see centralization of infrastructure management practice, page 13). Other considerations that apply to water storage structures: 1. There may be a need for permit under existing dam safety regulations if the size of the storage structure meets regulatory minimums set by both New York or Pennsylvania regulations. If an embankment is used it must meet dam safety requirements in the respective state. A pit lining is required if the pit is used for the storage of fluid other than fresh water under the Waste Management Regulations in both states. Both states have standards that apply to the type and thickness of the lining. However, this management practice as presented here is intended for fresh water only. Wastewater, produced water, etc. should be stored in closed tanks (see wastewater storage management practice, page 26). Maintain at least two feet freeboard (two feet from the top of a pond or storage structure and the highest water level) in the storage facility to prevent overflow of water from the impoundment. Use fencing around water storage ponds as a safety measure to prevent access by people and animals. Water storage and pumping facilities should not be located in the floodway and floodplains to prevent damage to facilities or waterways during flood events.

2.

3.

4. 5.

The use of fresh water storage ponds can greatly reduce the volume of truck traffic, especially if water is piped directly from the withdrawal point to the storage pond and then to the well site. The reduction in truck traffic reduces the stress on local roads and reduces the amount of air pollution generated by the trucks. An additional benefit of fresh water storage is that storage structures allow gas companies to withdraw water during high flow periods (spring) and then utilize the water when needed. This allows well development to continue during periods of low stream flows or drought periods, even if withdrawals from streams are suspended to protect aquatic habitats, downstream users, etc.

Management Practice: Air Drilling

Use air drilling to reduce water use during the drilling operation. This also reduces wastewater generation and subsequent treatment. Air drilling is a process that utilizes high pressure air rather than water to remove the rock fragments and cool the drill bit when drilling through rock. This process has been used extensively for gas grilling and for drilling water wells. The major environmental benefit is that less water is utilized during the drilling process and dry rock fragments are returned to the surface rather than a slurry of water, drilling mud, and rock fragments. Several of the gas drilling companies plan to use this process in the Upper Delaware River Basin.

Management Practice: Water Metering

A metering system to monitor the volume of water withdrawn from streams is required by Pennsylvania Department of Environmental Protection and DRBC. Metering allows proper monitoring of withdrawals to limit the chances of negative impacts on the water body as a

14

result of over drafting the stream. In addition, monitoring of USGS stream gauges is required to ensure that sufficient water is available for withdrawal. If sufficient USGS stream gauges are not available in a specific waterway, additional gauges may need to be installed and monitored. Metering and reporting of the water use is also required in order to ensure water withdrawals do not exceed permitted limits, resulting in potential adverse impacts on aquatic life and downstream water users. Metering is required for water withdrawals in the Delaware River Basin and standards are set by Section 2.50.2 of DRBC Resolution 2001-8. Generally, water metering regulations apply to any cumulative withdrawals that exceed 100,000 gallons of water per day for a 30-day period. If this threshold is met, water meters must be installed and water withdrawals tracked and reported to Pennsylvania Department of Environmental Protection for withdrawals from Pennsylvania water bodies and to DRBC for withdrawals from New York water bodies. The Water Management Plan requirement of Pennsylvania Department of Environmental Protection for Marcellus gas wells and Chapter 110 of Pennsylvania Department of Environmental Protections regulations require the permittee to follow the same requirements for monitoring and accuracy as is required by DRBC. New York does not specify a monitoring frequency or accuracy requirement in its own current regulations, but does default to DRBCs requirements. While water metering and monitoring of stream gauges is only required by regulations when certain thresholds are met, metering is also a general best practice for water withdrawals, even when regulatory thresholds are not met. Active monitoring of withdrawals at the stream bank makes it easier for gas companies to time water withdrawals during periods of high flows and recognize when withdrawals could have adverse impacts on stream ecology due to a combination of surface water withdrawals and low stream flows. Monitoring in combination with some flexibility of when water withdrawals take place will help to mitigate the impacts of withdrawals on streams for downstream users and fish and wildlife.

Management Practice: Obstruction Permits

In New York and Pennsylvania, a permit is required to assure proper planning, design, construction, maintenance, and monitoring of water obstructions and encroachments in order to prevent unreasonable interference with water flow and to protect navigation. Obstruction/ Encroachment permits are needed for structures such as road or pipeline crossings over or under streams, wetlands, or other water bodies to ensure these structures will not have negative impacts up or downstream from the proposed structure. Improper construction may aect the current or cross section of the stream resulting in damage or alteration of the stream bank, change stream flow dynamics so that flood flows are altered, or be a hazard to navigation in the stream or river. Encroachment permits are also required if there are impacts to wetlands from drill pads, roads, or pipelines.

Management Practice: Dry Hydrants

A dry hydrant is simply a pipe structure with screened intake. Dry hydrants allow withdrawal of water and can subsequently be used by local fire companies in cases of emergency to supply water for firefighting. An additional benefit to all property owners in proximity to the dry hydrants is a reduction in the fire insurance rates for those properties. Dry hydrants are very cost eective structures due to their simplistic design and they can easily be used by the gas or fire companies for water withdrawal.
Sources: Water Resources See the Source list in Appendix A of this section. The sources for this section are: 6, 9, 10, 12, 13, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 29 and 30.

15

Well Pad, Bradford County, PA, May 2010

Issue: Well Site Construction

Well site construction management practices are of critical importance for protection of environmental resources and human health. The way a well pad is constructed can have a significant impact on nearby homeowners, waterways, and natural resources. Well sites or well pads are where drilling, hydraulic fracturing, and gas production actually take place. A well site goes through several phases during its life development of the well pad including, clearing, leveling, and implementing erosion and sedimentation control management practices and site containment management practices; gas well drilling and fracturing - the time period when a given well site is most active and when implementation of erosion and sedimentation control management practices and management practices to prevent and contain spills must continue; and production - when the well site can be partially reclaimed back to its original state and its operations are largely passive. This section focuses on management practices implemented during the development phases of the well site. These management practices can reduce, though not completely prevent, the chance of harming natural resources in the area surrounding a well pad. Potential sources of environmental harm include chemical and fuel spills and erosion and sedimentation of local waterways during the active drilling and hydraulic fracturing portion of operation. Implementation of best management practices help to prevent spills and erosion from taking place and make it easier to spot when there is a problem so the problem can be reported and addressed quickly. The practices listed below are oriented to all aspects of well site construction and operation, except for the conduct of drilling itself (some drilling practices, such as well casings are addressed in the Water Quality issue area of this report, page 24). Most of the practices seek to prevent surface impacts, such as erosion, sedimentation of waterways, chemical spills, unintential discharge of chemicals into the environment, and related subsurface impacts. In addition, noise impacts are addressed. The management practices do not address subsurface impacts that result from well drilling and hydraulic fracturing.

Management Practice: Road Construction

Road construction practices relate to the construction of access roads for the well pad. In addition, all well pad site location criteria described above should also be applied to new roads, including constrains mapping and comprehensive planning for site selection. Poor road construction can lead to erosion and sedimentation issues in local water bodies and wetlands, deterioration of the

16

roads so as to preclude their use during inclement weather conditions, and lack of access during emergency situations. For a detailed description of effects of erosion and sedimentation see the Erosion and Sedimentation Controls section. In addition to site selection and constraints issues, the following specific items need to be considered: 1. Utilize the Pennsylvania Dirt and Gravel Road guidelines for construction of permanent non-paved roads, and ensure that erosion and sediment plans are implemented during construction. After construction, an appropriate Post Construction Stormwater Plan should be implemented. More details about the Dirt and Gravel Road Program can be found at www. dirtandgravel.psu.edu/. This program is implemented by county conservation districts and has been eective in reducing erosion and sedimentation from dirt and gravel roads throughout Pennsylvania. In New York, a similar program is available to local governments through Cornell Universitys Local Roads Program. The Cornell program information may be accessed at: http://www.clrp.cornell.edu/index.htm. While the New York Program is not administered by the county soil conservation districts, assistance is available for local governments to properly construct and maintain roads. Provide proper road drainage and erosion control for all roads. Proper road drainage promotes stability of the road surface and allows for road use during storm events and changing weather conditions. The stability of the road and proper drainage will also decrease the amount of runo and erosion of soil in drainage channels, reducing sedimentation of local streams and wetlands. Avoid wetland crossings. If crossings cannot be avoided, then follow the Army Corps of Engineers and state permitting requirements and construction standards to minimize impacts to wetlands. State and Army Corps permits are required for wetland impacts. If proper construction practices are not followed, damage to the ecological values of wetlands is likely. In fact, a wetland habitat can be destroyed completely by changing its hydrology or altering the plant life. Follow existing contours to reduce impact of excessive cuts or fills during road construction. Cuts and fills require more earth disturbance and increase the likelihood of erosion and sedimentation problems. Use existing roads wherever possible. Upgrade existing roads when needed to meet the capacity requirements of traffic to and from well pads. If road upgrades are needed, permits may be required. Use of existing roads limits the amount of earth disturbance required for the project and therefore can reduce the amount of soil erosion and sedimentation associated with the development of a well pad. When constructing new roads, engineer them to meet the capacity requirements for all traffic to and from the well pad, including heavy trucks. If new roads are constructed and not needed in the future, they should be removed and the area restored to pre-construction conditions to minimize earth disturbance. When activities at a well pad are complete, restore roads back to original site conditions.

2.

3.

4.

5.

6.

Detailed information related to proper road construction can be found in the US Department of the Interior and US Department of Agriculture, Surface Operating Standards and Guidelines for Oil and Gas Exploration and Development The Gold Book.

17

Management Practice: Noise Control

Noise control related to the drilling operations, hydraulic fracturing, and operation of compressor stations can be substantial and have quality of life impacts for a lessor, as well as neighbors. The drilling and hydraulic fracturing operations can last for several weeks and are temporary in nature. However, compressor stations are essentially permanent structures and will operate continuously for many years until gas wells are depleted. The level of noise associated with drilling, hydraulic fracturing, and compressor stations is influenced by several factors, including: distance from the activity and equipment, topography, vegetation, meteorological conditions, and time of day. Some states have addressed the noise issue by specifying a noise level limit in decibels for day and night operations and have established setbacks or require the use of noise abatement practices to attenuate noise. At the time of publication, Pennsylvania does not have noise abatement requirements, but leaves this regulation to local governments. New York has a policy to assess and mitigate noise impacts (DEP-00-1) and can require mitigation. The highest noise levels are from the drilling and flaring operations and may be as high as 115 decibels at the drill rig location. As one moves further from the rig, noise levels decrease. The amount of time required to drill and hydraulically fracture a well varies. The drilling phase generally lasts at least two weeks and may extend for longer periods. The hydraulic fracturing operation typically lasts for an additional five days after the well itself is drilled. During the drilling phase, the rig operates continuously 24 hours a day, seven days a week. Site selection is critical to reducing the noise impact associated with a drilling operation. The following practices can be utilized to reduce the impacts: 1. 2. Use eective mufflers on drill rig engines to reduce engine noise; use of electric motors rather than diesel or gas engines also will reduce engine noise. Use engineered sound barriers and sound insulated buildings when in close proximity to residential or other buildings. There are a variety of devices or structures available for use to reduce noise ranging from simply planting trees to elaborate engineered sound absorbing walls and buildings which can significantly reduce the noise associated with the drilling, fracturing, and production phases. Locate facilities to take advantage of natural topography and increase distances from habitable structures. These are among the least costly sound reduction methods and are quite eective. Utilize automated monitoring well-monitoring systems after well completion. This can reduce vehicle traffic for ongoing monitoring in the production phase of the operation. This practice also helps to reduce air quality impacts of drilling by reducing vehicle use and associated emissions. Consider impacts to future land development adjacent to well pads or compressor facilities, as these facilities can significantly impact land values and quality of life issues.

3.

4.

5.

Consideration of the use of noise controls should be based on potential, not present, development. Additional noise controls may be needed if adjacent land is subsequently proposed for development.

Management Practice: Erosion and Sediment Controls

According to the Pennsylvania Department of Environmental Protection, Storm water discharges generated during construction have a potential for serious water quality impacts. Construction of well sites for natural gas drilling is no exception. The impacts of poor storm water, erosion, and sedimentation controls on a construction site are numerous. Eroding soils from all sources are one of the primary ways contaminants that attach to soil particles, such as phosphorus, heavy metals, and organic compounds are transported into surface waters. Nutrients carried by sediments increase phosphorus and nitrogen in waterways, decreasing oxygen levels and leading to eutrophication. Erosion also can result in sedimentation accumulation of sediment in stream
18

channels and other water bodies. Sedimentation can impair fish habitat and reduce stream depth, resulting in higher stream temperatures and lower flood capacity. Sediments also increase the turbidity (cloudiness) of water, harming habitat and aesthetics. Beyond impacts on the physical environment and fish and wildlife, increased sediments in waterways make the water harder to filter and more expensive to treat to drinking water quality as more nutrients, sediment, and other toxins need to be removed. Sediment is the largest stream polluter in the state of Pennsylvania.2 Because of these impacts, strong erosion and sedimentation planning is needed at drilling sites to prevent impacts on environmental and human health. In addition, because well sites are not paved, erosion and sediment control is an ongoing concern at all well sites throughout their life cycle. A detailed erosion and sedimentation site plan is required to meet regulations in both New York and Pennsylvania. Plans must be reviewed and approved by the applicable agency. In Pennsylvania, if a project will cause more than five acres of surface disturbance, including the well pad and the access road for the well pad, then a separate NPDES Permit for storm water discharges associated with construction activities is required. These permits are reviewed by Pennsylvania Department of Environmental Protection and are generally more rigorous than a standard erosion and sedimentation site plan. Many well pads are likely to fall under the five acre threshold for the more rigorous plan. In New York State, well sites over one acre must obtain a Construction Stormwater General Permit. More information on the regulatory process is available at http://www.dec.ny.gov/25.html To avoid erosion problems from well sites, it is strongly recommended that the design of storm water control structures and practices be based on 10yr/24hr storm (a storm that has a 10% chance of occurring in a given year), not 2yr/24hr storm(a storm that has a 50% chance of occurring in a given year). Utilizing the larger, less frequent storm event as a design basis will provide better protection from the aects of larger storms on erosion, sedimentation, and stream stability. In addition, the other erosion control related management practices found in this issue area should be implemented. In Pennsylvania, the county conservation districts are not currently empowered to participate in the review of storm water or erosion and sedimentation permits for gas drilling operations. It is recommended that the county conservation district review power be restored. The county conservation districts knowledge of local conditions and their local presence on-the-ground are likely to lead to better, more consistent outcomes.

Management Practice: Erosion and Sediment Plan Monitoring

Each pad/access road should have an independent person on site during construction to ensure that the erosion and sedimentation and storm water plans are properly implemented to prevent erosion and sedimentation. Currently, the regulatory agencies are not sufficiently staed by trained inspectors to inspect the sites daily during the construction process. Having a person properly trained in erosion and sedimentation control construction practices on site during construction to ensure the controls are properly constructed following the approved plans should be considered a best practice for preventing erosion and sediment pollution. Again, empowering local conservation district personnel to engage in the overall erosion and sedimentation permitting and monitoring will benefit the process. In addition, all erosion and sediment control plans, permits, and related documentation should be kept on-site at all times.

Management Practice: Zero Discharge Well Pads

Construct zero discharge pads collect and treat all water on the pad site and reuse this water during the drilling operation. This practice requires grading a well pad so that all water or other liquids flow by gravity to a single location on the pad where they can be collected. The area under the drill rig, other mechanized equipment, and chemical or fuel storage areas must be lined with
2

PA DEP Erosion and Sediment Control, Best Management Practice (BMP) Manual, Technical Guidance Number 363-2134-008 19

a heavy plastic liner material similar to what is used for landfill or pond liners. The area under heavy equipment should also be covered with composite mat so that the liner is not punctured by the heavy equipment. Water can then be collected and re-used after treatment in the drilling operation. If there is a leak of chemicals on the site, the spill can be captured, collected, and removed for proper disposal without having the opportunity to negatively impact the soil or waters on or adjacent to the pad site.

Well Pad, Bradford County, PA, May 2010 Note berm on left edge, plastic liner, composite decking for equipment, and secondary containment around tanks

Well Pad, Bradford County, PA, May 2010 Note composite decking and plastic liner

Construction of a berm around the drill pad will prevent any runo from leaving the pad site and allow its diversion to the collection area of the drill pad for re-use. The entrance road to the well pad should also be elevated so there is a slight downhill slope into the well pad to prevent runo from leaving the site via the access road. These practices can significantly reduce the chances of contamination of the environment at the drill site and greatly reduce the impacts from accidental chemical spills. In addition, the collection and reuse of water from the site will reduce the amount of water needed for the drilling and fracing operations, thereby reducing truck traffic and water withdrawals.

20

Management Practice: Site Scale Plastic Liners and Composite

Line the site to collect all runo from under the drill rig and chemical storage areas to prevent and contain any spills or leaks of chemicals or drilling/hydraulic fracturing fluids. The use of composite decking under the drill rig allows for a stable base for the rig and reduces the chance of the rig or other equipment puncturing the plastic well pad liner. Lining well sites allows for reduction or elimination of soil, groundwater, and surface water contamination from surface spills of chemicals, diesel fuel, etc. during drilling operations.

Management Practice: Closed Tanks with Double Containment

Utilize double containment, e.g. closed tanks with secondary containment to capture accidental spills from tanks, for all fuel and chemical storage facilities on the pad site. This allows for the collection of any leaking of spilled fuel or chemicals to prevent site contamination. Double containment is designed to collect any leaked or spilled fuel or chemicals that have the potential to cause soil, groundwater, or surface water contamination. Use of a closed loop system that allows for the separation of fluids and drill cuttings and treatment and reuse of drilling fluids can eliminate the need for on-site ponds for drilling mud. Dry drill cuttings are easier to dispose of then drilling mud. Ponds, even those with liners have the potential to leak due to breaches in the liner or over-topping if not monitored closely, resulting in soil, groundwater, and/or surface water contamination. Closed loop systems in sealed tanks collect all fluids and significantly reduce the possibility of leaks or spills. Closed loop systems also facilitate re-use and recycling of the fluids thereby reducing water consumption and air pollution by reducing truck traffic at the site. Drill cuttings may be buried on site if regulatory requirements are met, but de-watering and mixing of the cuttings with wood chips or lime results in a more stable waste that can be disposed of at lined landfills, and is preferred. The water removed from the cuttings can be recycled for use in drilling or hydraulic fracturing processes. At this time, some companies are exploring the use of drill cuttings as the proppant in place of or in combination with the sand currently being used. This practice has the potential to reduce the quantity of solid waste that must be removed and transported to landfills or buried on site, reducing truck traffic.

Production Well Site, Bradford County, PA, May 2010 Containment for production water storage tank

21

Well Pad, Bradford County, PA, May 2010 In foreground: drill mud treatment tank, drill mud thickened and prepared for hauling to licensed landfill

Management Practice: Waste Reduction

Waste reduction can significantly reduce environmental impacts, as well as provide cost saving opportunities for the drilling operators. Drill site wastes have the potential to cause significant adverse impacts on the environment in the areas around drilling sites. These impacts can result from leaks or spills of toxic substances used in the drilling process and can cause contamination of the soil, air, groundwater, or surface waters. Some cases have already been documented where drilling fluid or returned hydraulic fracturing water has leaked from the drill sites and contaminated soil or surface water. Some of these spills can easily be remediated by removing the contaminated soil and/or eliminating or containing the leaks. However, large volume leaks of some substances like diesel fuel can result in long-term, expensive clean-ups. It is easier, less expensive, and more environmentally friendly to reduce waste and implement best practices to prevent spills, such as those listed in this section, then it is to remediate or clean up spills. Some western states have seen contamination from unlined hydraulic fracturing water return ponds and have experienced air pollution issues related to the evaporation of hydraulic fracturing fluids in these ponds. In New York and Pennsylvania, the use of unlined ponds is prohibited by state regulations, and evaporation is less likely to occur due to the local climate. In order to reduce waste at the well sites the following practices should be utilized: 1. Provide secondary containment for chemicals stored at the site, as well as during transfer of the chemicals from trucks to storage facilities. This practice allows better identification of leaks or spills and allows for easier clean-up of any spilled chemical without causing site contamination and resultant clean-up costs. Replace conventional toxic products with less toxic or non-toxic chemicals, utilize new technologies (ultraviolet or ultrasound) that eliminate need for biocides in hydraulic fracturing fluid, and reduce use of scale inhibitors in the hydraulic fracturing fluid. Reduce volume of drill cuttings or mud by re-use and recycling of the drilling cuttings or mud.

2.

3.

22

4. 5. 6. 7. 8.

Make use of closed loop drilling, reducing water use and truck traffic. Recycle drill fluid to the next well site or well bore, reducing the need for fresh water and reducing waste disposal and trucking costs. Implement preventative maintenance of equipment at the drilling operation to reduce the chances for accidents that can cause spills. Use bioremediation for spills of certain chemicals where applicable; bioremediation is more desirable than other types of clean-up. Keep accurate records of all chemicals used in the well drilling and hydraulic fracturing operation. These records should be kept on-site so they are available in case of a spill or other emergency.

Management Practice: Cleanliness

Maintain the site in clean condition to allow for ready observation and remediation of leaks or spills. Detecting and cleaning up spills quickly can reduce the costs of cleanup or remediation and reduce impacts to soils, air, groundwater, or surface waters. A clean site also provides a safer work environment for the workers and site visitors.

Management Practice: Noxious Weed and Invasive Species Control

Control noxious and invasive weeds using an integrated management approach to reduce the likelihood that drilling and site development activities will become vectors for the spread of invasive species. Invasive weeds can have significant negative impacts on the local environment by decreasing diversity and out-competing native species. Native fauna, including insects, birds, mammals, reptiles, fish and other animals, is dependent on native plants for food and shelter. While some animals have a varied diet and can feed on a wide number of plant species, others are highly specialized and may be restricted to feeding on a few or a single plant species. The following impacts result from introduction of noxious weeds and invasive species: Reduction of biodiversity Loss of and/or encroachment upon endangered and threatened species and their habitat Loss of habitat for native insects, birds, and other wildlife Loss of food sources for wildlife Changes to natural ecological processes such as plant community succession Alterations to the frequency and intensity of natural fires Disruption of native plant-animal associations such as pollination, seed dispersal and host-plant relationships

Noxious weeds and invasive species can be controlled by the use of weed-free seed and mulch for stabilization and restoration of the drill site and by air spraying or washing construction equipment when moving from site to site. An integrated approach should be used during construction, production, and reclamation that incorporate cultural, chemical, biological, and physical controls. A written plan for invasive species control should be kept on-site at all times.
Sources: Well Site Construction See the Source list in Appendix A of this section. The sources for this section are: 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 8, 9. 10, 11, 12, 13, 20, 21, 25, 26 and 31. 23

Issue: Water Quality

One of the most significant challenges in the gas well development process is the disposal of wastewater generated by the drilling and hydraulic fracturing operations. The drilling fluid, mud, and hydraulic fracturing fluid contains chemicals and minerals in the rock fragments and fluids returned to the surface. The volume of drilling fluid produced at a well site is not large when compared to the water returned from the hydraulic fracturing process. The volume of water used for hydraulic fracturing ranges from two to five million gallons, while drilling fluid and mud used drilling the well itself is typically less than 100,000 gallons. The water returned from the hydraulic fracturing operation, approximately 20-30% of the total volume used for the hydraulic fracturing operation, contains chemicals used in the hydraulic fracturing process, as well as very high concentrations of total dissolved solids, mainly salts. These waters are contained on the well site and hauled to a treatment facility before disposal. During the production phase of a gas well, water often returns to the surface with the gas. This water is separated from the gas and stored on the site in tanks. This produced water is then collected from the tanks and hauled to a treatment facility for disposal. Wastewater from gas drilling can have significant negative environmental impacts on water bodies, groundwater, and soils if discharged without proper treatment. Neither the Environmental Protection Agency nor the states under the National Pollution Discharge Elimination System Program allow discharge of hydraulic fracturing fluids to water bodies without treatment. A permitting program is in place to regulate the quality of water discharged to water bodies. Due to the concentration of total dissolved solids (TDS) in hydraulic fracturing water, most existing wastewater treatment facilities cannot provide adequate treatment to meet the effluent limits (water quality standards) in their current permits. There are several options which may be used for the treatment of hydraulic fracturing fluids, including reverse osmosis filtration, distillation, evaporation, deep well injection, and re-use. The industry is also pursuing research to develop treatment processes to more eectively handle wastewater from hydraulic fracturing operations. Some of the more promising involve treatment of the wastewater to a standard that allows the re-use of the water in subsequent hydraulic fracturing operations.

Photograph by David B. Soete

24

Currently, there are treatment facilities capable of treating hydraulic fracturing fluids and produced water, but they are located in western Pennsylvania. Several treatment facilities and modifications to existing treatment facilities are proposed in northeast Pennsylvania, but at this time none have been permitted or constructed, and none are located in the Delaware River Basin. Deep well injection of wastewater is commonly used in Texas, but is neither prevalent nor proposed in Pennsylvania due to diering geology. Deep well injection is regulated by EPA.

Management Practice: Wastewater Disposal

The disposal of wastewater generated by the drilling/production activities, including hydraulic fracturing wastewater and production flow back water, requires specialized treatment. Neither New York nor Pennsylvania allow direct stream discharges of drilling fluids and treatment facilities require permits and/or prior governmental agency approvals before accepting wastewater for treatment. So far, the natural gas in production in northeast Pennsylvania is currently classified as a dry gas, which means there is less brine produced during the production phase of the well operation. As a result, there is less produced wastewater requiring treatment. Hydraulic fracturing operations typically return approximately 30% of the total amount of fluid pumped into the well during the hydraulic fracturing operation, with additional produced water returned throughout the productive lifetime of a gas well. In Pennsylvania, most gas drilling operations are currently shifting to the reuse of the hydraulic fracturing water that returns to the surface. The returned hydraulic fracturing water may receive treatment on-site and then is mixed with fresh water for use in fracturing the next well. The reuse of wastewater is highly desirable and strongly encouraged; water re-use reduces overall water consumption and truck trips to and from the well site. Some gas companies are also collecting the water used in the drilling operation, separating it from the solids in the drilling mud, and re-using the water in the hydraulic fracturing operation. If wastewater is not re-used, then it must be processed at a regulated, permitted wastewater treatment plant. As there are currently no authorized treatment facilities in the Upper Delaware River watershed, wastewater must be hauled to an authorized plant by trucks. Throughout the hydraulic fracturing process accurate records of all chemicals used at the well site should be kept on-site for reference during a spill or other emergency. Record should track what chemicals have been used, for what purpose, and where chemicals are stored on-site. When chemicals are transported to and from well sites, trucks should carry accurate manifests of their cargo. All permits related to well site development and drilling and transportation of chemicals and materials should be kept on-site.

Management Practice: Water Testing

A sampling program by a certified laboratory for all private wells should be conducted within a mile radius prior to well site development to establish background water quality. A baseline of existing water quality is needed by property owners so that if there are changes in groundwater quality in the future, the changes related to drilling activity can be established. Most homeowner drinking water wells are not routinely tested and it is possible that existing water quality, before gas drilling takes place, may not meet all EPA maximum contaminant levels (MCLs; water quality standards for dierent types of contaminants that may be found in drinking water). It is fairly common to find coliform bacteria, low pH, iron, and manganese at levels that exceed the MCLs in homeowners wells in the Upper Delaware region. Coliform bacteria levels are usually related to poor domestic water well construction and surface influences, while the other contaminant levels are due to existing natural groundwater conditions.

25

A laboratory certified to analyze drinking water must conduct the analysis of all water samples to establish baseline water quality. A technician trained in the collection of water samples must collect all samples in proper containers. A chain of custody between the laboratory and the technician collecting water samples must be maintained. The technician and the laboratory should also be independent from the gas drilling company and the landowner. Ideally, an employee of the certified laboratory providing the water testing services will also collect water samples. The landowner should provide as much information about the drinking water supply as possible, including: the location of the well; depth of the well; depth of the casing used for the well; age of the drinking water well; and type of treatment, if any, used on water drawn from the well.

If at any time during the well site development, gas well drilling, or gas production phase, the landowner notices changes in the quality or quantity of the drinking water, then the landowner should immediately notify the appropriate government agency, the owner of the well site, and request additional water tests to document what changes have taken place and determine if they are the result of gas drilling operations. While most landowners do not routinely sample their wells (ideally, yearly tests for bacteria should be conducted to ensure water is safe for consumption), during the gas well drilling and development phases, landowners should have their water well tested on a regular basis. Testing water wells every six months allows for early detection of any changes in water quality. Tests should include the following parameters as a minimum: total coliform, E. coli, chlorides, barium, total dissolved solids, methane, and pH. Water tests may also include other parameters, including inorganic and organic chemicals.

Management Practice: Hydraulic Fracturing Fluid and Wastewater Storage

The minimum standard for the storage of hydraulic fracturing and drilling fluids is a wastewater pond with a double liner and a leak monitoring system. However, the best management practice is utilization of closed containment systems (tanks) with adequate capacity to prevent overflow and structurally sound construction to prevent leaks. Storage tanks for hydraulic fracturing and drilling fluids should also have secondary containment a separate plastic liner and berm surrounding the tank to isolate leaks and make leaks easy to identify. In the past, open pits were constructed on the well pad for collection of drilling fluids and separate pits for collection of returned hydraulic fracturing water. Pit liners are required in New York and Pennsylvania. Currently, many drilling companies in Pennsylvania are utilizing storage tanks for containment of the returned fluids rather than the open pits. When accompanied with lined well pads, closed tanks achieve a higher degree of protection to the environment, as leaks or spills are contained. The use of the storage tanks also promotes the recycling of the fluids, resulting in less wastewater requiring treatment. Below grade tanks require secondary containment and leak detection if used for the storage of wastewater or chemicals. Below grade tanks are not recommended.

26

Management Practice: Well Casings

Well casings are installed to preserve the integrity of the well bore and prevent contamination of groundwater. The casings are steel and are sealed to the well bore with cement grout. A properly constructed well casing is essential for the protection of groundwater and drinking water supplies. A typical natural gas well targeting the Marcellus shale formation includes several dierent well casings and layers of grouting. The typical depth and number of well casings varies by gas company and individual well site. The first well casing is the conductor pipe. The conductor pipe is also the largest diameter pipe used; it is set to a depth to provide stability for the well. Once completed to the desired depth, the conductor pipe is grouted by pumping cement down the well bore and allowing the cement to come back to the surface along the outside of the casing. After the grout has hardened, well drilling continues and a second casing called the surface casing is set to a depth below existing drinking water aquifers. Information on area aquifers is included in Section II of this report. This surface casing is then grouted using the same procedure as the conductor casing. After the grout has set, the drilling continues along with setting and grouting a third casing called the production casing. One gas company in the area has indicated they are now using a fourth casing in their drilling operations for additional protection of the groundwater. Throughout the drilling process, centralizers must be installed to ensure that the casing is centered in the well bore. Centering the casing is essential to ensuring proper grouting can occur. Pressure testing of the well casing is required under the New York regulations and under the proposed Pennsylvania Department of Environmental Protection regulatory revisions currently in review. Casing and cementing standards are in place in both states, with Pennsylvania currently revising and strengthening its regulations. Standards for well casings and cementing have also been developed by the American Petroleum Institute (API). The API standards are the minimum standard for this procedure; state regulations must be followed if they exceed the API standards. Gas well operators should pressure test all gas wells. The test pressure should exceed the expected pressure levels resulting from the hydraulic fracturing of the well to ensure the well casings and grouting are strong enough for hydraulic fracturing to occur, regardless of current regulatory requirements. Failed grouting and/or well casings can result in groundwater contamination.
Sources: Water Quality See the Source list in Appendix A of this section. The sources for this section are: 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 12, 14, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 32, 33, 34, 35, 36 and 37.

27

Rail depot transferring sand from rail cars to trucks for use in fracing in Bradford County, PA, November 2010

Issue: Air Quality

The major sources of air emissions from gas drilling/production include internal combustion engines used for the drilling/hydraulic fracturing operations, compressor stations, flaring the well, condensate tank vents, and trucks used to deliver and remove materials from the well pad. There are three main types of emissions from the gas well/production operation: combustion emissions, fugitive emissions, and vented emissions. Combustion emissions are from vehicle tailpipe exhaust emissions, dehydrators, mobile and stationary engines, and from flaring. Fugitive emissions add to air pollution as a result of equipment leaks, evaporation ponds and pits, condensate tanks, storage tanks, and windblown dust. Vented emissions are common from dehydrator vents on dehydration units. Below is a list of some management practices that can be used to reduce the negative eects from air pollution at well sites and in the surrounding area. Flareless Well Completions This practice reduces methane green house gas emissions by recapturing the methane that would have otherwise been released or burned o by flaring and returning the gas to the collection system. The equipment needed for this procedure is portable and can be moved from well site to well site. Payback of capital costs of one year has been reported in the literature. Natural Gas Powered Engines Utilize methane motors/engines on drill rigs rather than diesel engines, as methane burns cleaner than diesel and reduces emissions. Control Valves on Separator Units Utilize better control valves for separator units and compressors. For example, replacing wet seals with dry seals in centrifugal compressors result in lower methane discharges and have lower power requirements. Electric Motors or Air or Nitrogen Driven Pumps Use of electric motors, air, or nitrogen driven pumps reduces air pollution due to less emissions than diesel or gasoline engines.

28

Catalytic Converters Using the proper catalytic converters on exhaust pipes from pumps and other engines on-site can reduce emissions significantly. Emission Controls on Dehydrators Use of emission controls on glycol dehydrators results in cost savings, in addition to reductions of air pollution. Also, use of vapor recovery systems on tanks can capture up to 95% of hydrocarbon vapors. Recovered vapors can have significant value and multiple uses, making this a process an economically viable option. Reduced Truck Utilization Reduce trucking and service traffic to reduce combustion and fugitive emissions from truck engines and dust. Use of centralized production and liquids gathering systems allow for reduced emissions from vehicle trips. Larger facilities also make it more efficient to control emissions from tanks and compressor facilities. Use of telemetry and well automation to remotely control and monitor production reduces vehicle traffic and reduces dust and vehicle emissions. The use of train transportation for materials such as the sand and drill pipe can reduce truck traffic as trains can transport larger quantities of materials with less fuel, thereby reducing air pollution. All trucks should carry accurate manifests detailing chemicals, wastewater, and other drilling supplies during transport. Dust Control Use dust suppression and prevention techniques to reduce fugitive dust from well pads and roads. Dust can aect air quality and creates a health and visibility hazard for drivers. Spraying roads with water is the simplest dust suppression method, but can add to vehicle emission issues because of the need to transport the water. Wetting roads also provides only a short-term solution. Dust suppressants such as magnesium chloride, calcium chloride, lignin, sulfonate, or an asphalt emulsion oer moderate costs, last about 1 year, but need to be applied carefully to prevent excess runo to streams or wetlands. The Dirt and Gravel Road Program has information on environmentally sensitive dust suppressants. If a company plans to use a road for a number of years with high average daily traffic, chip seal or asphalt roads are a good option. State regulations generally require utilization of best available technology to prevent air pollution.
Sources: Air Quality See the Source list in Appendix A of this section. The sources for this section are: 2, 3, 6, 8, 15, 20, 21, and 26

Compressor Station, Bradford County, PA, May 2010

29

Appendix A: Sources
1. Best Management Practices for Oil & Gas Well Site Construction Ohio Department of Natural Resources Mineral Resource Management April 2005

2. Handbook on Best Management Practices and Mitigation Strategies for Coal Bed Methane on the Montana Portion of the Powder River Basin; prepared by ALL Consulting for the U S Department of Energy, National Petroleum Technology Office, National Energy Technology Laboratory April 2002 3. Underused Drilling Practices Could Avoid Pollution PRO PUBLICA article, December 14, 2009 4. The American Oil & Gas Reporter Special Report Collaborative Team Researches Best Management Practices for Drilling Wastes, August 2007 5. Analysis of Best Hydraulic Fracturing Practices in the Golden Trend Fields of Oklahoma- Society of Petroleum Engineers, 2005 SPE Annual Technical Conference, October 2005 6. Department of the Interior, Bureau of Land Management, Best Management Practices for Fluid Minerals, November 2006 7. Earthworks Action Organization- downloads from website Oil & Gas Accountability Project, Drill Right Doing It Right, Best Oil & Gas Development Practices for New Mexico 8. Best Practices for Community and Environmental Protection workshop proceedings, Intermountain Oil and Gas BMP Project, Natural Resources Law Center, University of Colorado Law School, October 2009 9. Surface Operating Standards and Guidelines for Oil and Gas Exploration and Development, The Gold Book, 4th edition Revised 2007,US Dept of Interior, Bureau of Land Management & US Dept of Agriculture, Forest Service 10. PA Department of Environmental Protection (DEP), Bureau of Oil and Gas Management, Oil and Gas Operators Manual, Doc#550-0300-0001; Chapter 4 DEP recommended Oil and Gas Management Practices 11. PA DEP Erosion and Sediment Control, Best Management Practice (BMP) Manual, Technical Guidance Number 363-2134-008 12. PA DEP Rules and Regulations, Chapter 105; Act 220 and Chapter 110; Chapter 78; Water Management Plan 13. Personal conversation and site visit to Chesapeake Energy drill sites in Bradford County, Pa. with Brian Grove, Chesapeake Energy, Director of Corporate Development, May 13, 2010 14. Drill-Right Texas, Texas Oil & Gas Earthworks Accountability Project 15. US EPA, Natural Gas STAR Program, www.epa.gov/gasstar, Lessons Learned; Green Completions PRO Fact Sheet No. 703 16. Delaware River Basin Commission Resolution 2001-8 17. Delaware River Basin Commission, Administrative Manual, Rules of Practice and Procedure, May 31, 2002 18. Delaware River Basin Commission, Instructions and Application for a Ground and/or Surface Water Withdrawal in the Delaware River Basin, Revised 11/2007. 19. New York Department of Environmental Conservation, Environmental Conservation Law, Article 15, Title 33; Casing and Cementing Standards, Designing and Drilling Your Well, Fresh Water Aquifer Supplementary Permit Conditions; Regulations Chapter V Part 673 , 20. Draft Supplemental Generic Environmental Impact Statement on the Oil, Gas and Solution Mining Regulatory Program, Well Permit Issuance for Horizontal Drilling and High-Volume Fracturing to Develop the Marcellus Shale and other Low-Permeability Gas Reservoirs, Bureau of Oil & Gas Resources, New York Dept. of Environmental Conservation, Division of Mineral Resources, September 2009.

30

21. Technical Consulting Reports Prepared in Support of the Draft Supplemental Generic Environmental Impact Statement for Natural Gas Production in New York State, New York State Energy Research and Development Authority, Alpha Environmental Consultants, Inc., September 2009 22. American Petroleum Institute, Hydraulic Fracturing Operations Well Construction and Integrity Guidelines, API Guidance Document HF1, October 2009 23. American Petroleum Institute, Water Management Associated with Hydraulic Fracturing, API Guidance Document HF2, June 2010 24. American Petroleum Institute, Isolating Potential Flow Zones During Well Construction, API Recommended Practice 65- Part 2, May 2010 25. Canadian Association of Petroleum Producers, Best Management Practices, Natural Gas in Coal (NGC)/ Coalbed Methane (CBM), May 2006 26. Penn State University, Center for Dirt and Gravel Road Studies, The Dirt and Gravel Road Maintenance Program 27. Commonwealth Court Decision, July 22, 2010, Penneco Oil Company Inc., Range Resources-Appalachia, LLC, and the Independent Oil & Gas Association of Pennsylvania versus The County of Fayette, Pennsylvania, Zoning and Community Development of Fayette County, Pennsylvania; No. 18 C.D. 2010 28. Developing the Marcellus Shale, Environmental Policy and Planning Recommendations for the Development of the Marcellus Shale Play in Pennsylvania, A Report of Findings and Recommendations, The Pennsylvania Marcellus Shale Policy Conference in Pittsburg, Pa. The Pennsylvania Environmental Council, July 2010. 29. Delaware River Basin Commission, Delaware River, State of the Basin Report, 2008 30. Susquehanna River Basin Commission, Federal Register/ Vol. 74, No. 187, September 29, 2009; 18CFR Parts 806 and 808; effective November 1, 2009. 31. Plant Conservation Alliance, Alien Plant Working Group (APWG) http://www.nps.gov/plants/alien/ factmain.htm/ last updated: 07-Jul-2009 32. A Guide to Practical Management of Produced Water from Onshore Oil and Gas Operations in the United States, Prepared for the US Dept. of Energy, National Petroleum Technology Office by the Interstate Oil & Gas Compact Commission and ALL Consulting, October 2006. 33. US Environmental Protection Agency, Evaluation of Impacts to Underground Sources of Drinking Water by Hydraulic Fracturing of Coalbed Methane Reservoirs, June 2004, Chapter 4, Hydraulic Fracturing Fluids, EPA 816-R-04-003. 34. Final Impact Assessment Report, Impact Assessment of Natural Gas Production in the New York City Water Supply Watershed, prepared by Hazen & Sawyer and the New York City Department of Environmental Protection, December 2009. 35. Toxic Chemicals on Tap, How Natural Gas Drilling Threatens Drinking Water, Environment America, Michael Berkowitz, Environment America Research and Policy Center, November 2009. 36. Modern Shale Gas, Development in the United States, A Primer, for US Dept. of Energy, Office of Fossil Energy and National Energy Technology Laboratory, prepared by the Ground Water Protection Council and ALL Consulting, April 2009 37. Pennsylvanias Approach to Marcellus Shale Development, A Primer, prepared by the Pennsylvania Environmental Council, April 2009.

31

Section II: Natural Resources Information and Assessments for the Upper Delaware River Watershed
This report provides an inventory of primary sources for natural resources information and assessments for the Upper Delaware River Watershed. An extraordinary amount of data characterizing the regions natural resources and conservation values is available from a number of sources, including federal, state, and local governments and non-profit organizations working in the region. Together, this data provides information about the water resources, forests, county open space priorities, habitat values, and geology of the region. This information is organized in this report into two broad categories: Resource Assessments and General Information and Maps. The Resource Assessments section includes information about county open space planning eorts and natural resource assessments developed by non-profit organizations. The General Information and Maps section includes maps of the region that focus on particular resource types, but do not include any further analysis, and information about resources such as county comprehensive plans. Included with each data source is information about what it is, how it was developed, and where to obtain the data or additional information. This inventory does not amount to a comprehensive representation of the natural resource values of the Upper Delaware River Basin. Its primary purpose is to provide information on natural resource and planning studies in response to issues and concerns noted by stakeholders through the joint Common Waters Partnership Upper Delaware River Roundtable Marcellus shale dialogue process (See participant list, page 70). There may be additional natural resource values that are not addressed by the information sources provided in this inventory. This inventory also does not prioritize natural resource values in any way. It is an educational guide for learning about and locating information about the Upper Delaware River Basin that has been completed by a number of organizations. Where data sources included in this inventory designate priority natural resources or conservation areas, these priorities are the opinion of the originator of the data. Inclusion here does not imply endorsement.
32

Photograph by David B. Soete

Resource Assessments:
Open Space Plans: Pike County, PA
Summary Pike County, Pennsylvania adopted a county open space plan in 2008. The open space plan has been incorporated into the 2006 Pike County Comprehensive Plan (see County Comprehensive Plans section below for more information). The plan has a number of goals, including identification of priorities for open space conservation in order to maintain the countys rural character, tourism economy, and natural resources. The plan includes a wealth of information on the natural resources and open space conservation priorities of Pike County. The end result of the plan is an open space network that includes Conservation Opportunity Areas, a greenway network connecting opportunity areas, and a recreation plan. Information contributing to these outcomes includes a conservation suitability analysis of the entire county and an inventory of existing open space, greenways, and recreation opportunities in the county. Maps of Conservation Opportunity Areas and the county conservation suitability analysis are available from the Pike County Office of Community Planning. Scope The Pike County Open Space Plan covers all of Pike County, PA. Data The plan contains maps of natural resource values including existing open space, geology, steep slopes, hydric soils, water quality designations, wetlands, natural areas, important bird and mammal areas, forest cover density, properties enrolled in the Pennsylvania Clean and Green Program, and agricultural lands. Additional maps and information on historic sites, cultural resources, conceptual growth areas, and hunting clubs and summer camps are also included in the plan. Much of this data, along with other, more detailed datasets were used to develop conservation suitability maps for the entire county. These maps show the areas of the county most suitable for conservation and contributed to the development of the countys Conservation Opportunity Areas and greenways. About the Resource The responsibilities of the Pike County Office of Community Planning include development, management, and implementation of county planning initiatives and coordination and implementation of the Pike County Comprehensive Plan. Other core responsibilities of the Office of Community Planning are to provide professional technical planning assistance to municipal governments in areas such as municipal comprehensive planning, zoning, subdivision and land development, and to support and help facilitate local municipal and multi-municipal planning initiatives. Availability The Pike County Open Space Plan is available from the Pike County Office of Community Plannings website: http://www.pikepa.org/Planning/PikeOSP_Full_FINAL.pdf Additional information about the plan and the data used to develop the plan is available directly from the Pike County Office of Community Planning.

Monroe County, PA
Summary The Monroe County Open Space plan was completed in 2001. The plan identifies countywide open space resources and designates conservation priorities. The conservation priorities designated
33

by the plan include the most important and threatened open spaces in the county. The priorities were developed through a technical process using the Natural Lands Trusts SmartConservation approach. The plan identifies important natural and cultural resources, existing open space and parks, and greenways and provides recommendations for protecting or expanding on these resources. It also provides an action plan for implementing the Open Space Plan priorities. Scope The Monroe County Open Space Plan covers all of Monroe County, PA. Data The Monroe County Open Space Plan provides detailed maps of the Natural Assessment Inventory priority sites, Natural Treasure Registry sites, important natural areas, agricultural lands, scenic geological features, scenic drives, historic sites, water resources, protected lands, parks, and proposed greenways. About the Source The Monroe County Planning Commission serves Monroe County, Pennsylvania through its Municipal Partnership Program, Financial Assistance Program, Open Space Program, geographic information systems services, annual water study, Agricultural Land Preservation Program, traffic counts, and by providing professional planning assistance. The stated mission of the Monroe County Planning Commission is, The citizens of Monroe County will continue working together to sustain and improve our quality of life by ensuring that the countys environmental, economic, and cultural assets are within reach of all its people. Availability The Monroe County Open Space Plan is available from the Monroe County Planning Commission: http://www.co.monroe.pa.us/planning_records/cwp/view.asp?a=1551&q=605209&planning_rec ordsNav=|34304|34307|. Additional information about the plan and the data used to develop the plan is available directly from the Monroe County Planning Commission.

Sullivan County, NY
Summary The Sullivan County, NY Open Space Plan was adopted in 2008. The purpose of the plan is to target conservation eorts to high priority areas. Conservation priorities are identified through analysis of agricultural, biodiversity, recreational and cultural, and water resources. Detailed geographic information system analysis was conducted for each resource type to inform the final set of conservation priorities. Growth pressures were also evaluated in developing priorities. The plan includes maps of each of the resource types evaluated, overall conservation priorities, and goals and strategies for conserving priorities. The overall priorities and goals of the county open space plan are also consistent with those of the New York State Open Space Plan priorities in Sullivan County. The Sullivan County Open Space Plan was developed cooperatively by the county and nongovernmental organizations and with citizen input. Scope The Sullivan County Open Space Plan covers all of Sullivan County, NY. Data The Sullivan County Open Space Plan contains detailed maps of the countys agricultural, biodiversity, recreational and cultural, and water resources. A wide variety of data inputs were used to create these maps. The data was reviewed by technical teams knowledgeable of each resource type for completeness and applicability to the resource in question. A stakeholder meeting was also held to review the results of the resource mapping and develop strategies for the Open Space Plan. The final plan describes priority areas for conservation for each resource type.

34

About the Source The Sullivan County Division of Planning & Environmental Management is responsible for the creation of programs that foster orderly development and redevelopment of the Countys physical infrastructure in a manner that conserves natural resources while providing economic opportunity for area residents. The Division of Planning also oers technical assistance to local municipalities and assists with the development of land use policies. Availability The Sullivan County Open Space Plan is available from the Sullivan County Division of Planning & Environmental Management website: http://www.co.sullivan.ny.us/Departments/Planninga ndEnvironmentalManagement/tabid/3225/Default.aspx. Additional information about the plan and the data used to develop the plan is available directly from the Sullivan County Division of Planning and Environmental Management.

Wayne County, PA
Summary Wayne County does not have an Open Space Plan at this time, but has included some open space considerations in its recently completed Comprehensive Plan. In the context of the overall Comprehensive Plan, a natural resources analysis was conducted. The natural resources analysis provides general information on the resources present in Wayne County and maps of important farmland, steep slopes, and hydric soils. Scope This plan covers all of Wayne County, PA. Data General information is provided on natural resources present in Wayne County, including geology, topography, soils, hydrology, forests, wildlife, and scenery. Maps of important farmland, steep slopes, and hydric soils are provided. About the Source The Wayne County Planning Commission consists of a nine member board, which is appointed by the County Commissioners. Each board member represents a portion of Wayne County. Availability The Wayne County Comprehensive Plan is available on the Wayne County website at: http:// plan.co.wayne.pa.us/. Additional information about the plan and how it was developed may be obtained by contacting the Wayne County Planning Commission.

New York State Open Space Plan

Summary New York has developed an open space plan at a statewide level. By developing a plan at such a large scale, the state was able to look at its natural resources as a whole and develop a landscape scale plan. The focus of the plan is to identify areas important for sustaining biodiversity and ecological integrity, develop linkages between existing protected lands to create large blocks of conserved land, and to sustain intact ecosystems so that natural ecological and evolutionary processes are maintained. The plan identifies region conservation priorities consistent with these goals.

35

Scope The New York State Open Space Plan covers the entire state of New York. It is a useful reference for areas both within and outside the Delaware River Basin. Data The plan provides information on regional conservation projects, resource inventories, existing programs and partnerships, and regional advisory committee recommendations for conservation priorities. Conservation priorities identified by the Open Space Plan are mapped. The plan also contains supporting information explaining how the various maps and priorities contained in the plan were developed. Numerous additional resources are also provided in the plan, included web links, for those wanting additional information on selected topics. About the Resource The New York State Open Space Plan is updated by the New York State Department of Environmental Conservation every three years. It is prepared by the Department of Environmental Conservation (DEC), the Office of Parks, Recreation and Historic Preservation (OPRHP), the Department of Agriculture & Markets, the Department of Transportation, and the Department of State. In addition, Regional Advisory Committees provide local input into the plan development process. Availability The New York State Open Space Plan is available from the New York State Department of Environmental Conservation: http://www.dec.ny.gov/lands/47990.html

Other Assessments: Natural Lands Trust Drinking Water Source Model

Summary The purpose of the Natural Lands Trust Drinking Water Source Model is to identify areas in the Upper Delaware River watershed that are the most important sources for clean drinking water for downstream users. The model considers a range of resource values to determine which areas are most important for providing clean water to the main stem of the Delaware River, which then flows downstream to water users throughout the Delaware River Basin. The model was developed by Natural Lands Trust, a non-profit conservation organization based in Media, Pennsylvania. The Philadelphia Water Department provided input into the weighting of the dierent resource values considered in the model based on its expertise in water quality and drinking water. Scope The Natural Lands Trust Drinking Water Source Model is available for the entire Upper Delaware River Basin from the headwaters in the north to the Delaware Water Gap in the south. Data The Natural Lands Trust Drinking Water Source Model is a single composite dataset that provides a priority ranking of the importance of a given location for clean drinking water. The dataset is represented across the Upper Delaware Basin. The watershed is divided into 30 meter blocks. Each block has a dierent rank assigned based on ability to provide clean drinking water on a scale from 1 to 10, where 1 is the lowest and 10 is the highest ability to provide clean drinking water.

36

There are seven dierent individual resource types that are considered in determining the rank of a given block: Forested Lands Headwater Streams small tributary streams to the Delaware River and the areas around them Reservoir Watersheds areas that drain into reservoirs Exceptional Quality Streams streams designated by states as exceptional quality and the areas around them Trout Reproduction Waters streams that support trout populations, an indication of water quality, and the areas around them Groundwater Recharge Areas areas with soils that are important for the recharge of aquifers Drinking Water Wells areas surrounded public water supply wells

Source Water Protection Model Map

State Boundaries County Cortland Boundaries Source Water Protection 0 - Lower Value Chenango 2 4 6 8 10 - Higher Value

Otsego

Schoharie

Albany

Greene Delaware

Broome

Ulster Susquehanna

Sullivan Wayne Wyoming

Lackawanna Pike

Orange

Luzerne Sussex Passaic Monroe

Rockland

1. Aquatic Assessment Prioritization developed using SmartConservation methodology.

Bergen

Carbon Northampton

Warren

Morris

Schuylkill

Disclaimer: This map is not a survey. The information imparted with this map is meant to assist Natural Lands Trust, Inc., describe the placement of certain retained, reserved, or excluded rights and to calculate acreage figures. Property boundaries, while approximate, were established using the best available information, which may have included: surveys, tax maps, field mapping using G.P.S., and/or orthophotos. Natural Lands Trust, Inc., makes no representation as to the accuracy of said property lines (or any other lines), and no liability is assumed by reason of reliance thereon. Use of this map for other than its intended purpose requires the written consent of Natural Lands Trust, Inc.

Essex

Hudson n

Source Water Protection Model

COMMON WATERS
1031 Palmers Mill Road, Media, PA 19063 610-353-5587 ~ www.natlands.org g
0 7 Miles 14
Compiled By: MEB 06/28/10 p y

37

Each resource type is assigned a value, the data are layered on top of one another, and the values for each block are added together to determine the value of each block for drinking water. About the Source The Natural Lands Trust is a not-for-profit conservation organization based in Media, Pennsylvania. Its mission is to save natural areas for generations to come, steward landscapes to support a healthy environment, and to connect people to the natural world around them. The development of the Drinking Water Source Model was supported by the Common Waters Partnership. Availability The Natural Lands Trust Drinking Water Source Model data are available from the Pinchot Institute for Conservation, who distributes the data on behalf of the Common Waters Partnership: www.commonwaterspartnership.org

Natural Lands Trust SmartConservation Aquatic Assessment

Summary SmartConservation was developed by Natural Lands Trust to support proactive land conservation. SmartConservation is a science-based methodology for prioritizing the conservation value of sites across a large region. It was designed to fill the need for a standardized, replicable process that conservation organizations, municipalities, resource agencies, and others could use to help prioritize where to expend finite sta and financial resources. In the Upper Delaware River Basin region, the SmartConservation process has been applied to aquatic resources to develop an Aquatic Assessment. This eort uses some similar data to Natural Lands Trust Drinking Water Source Model, but has a dierent focus (general conservation rather than clean drinking water) and considers some habitat characteristics. The Aquatic Assessment can be used to help determine the relative conservation value of dierent areas in the Upper Delaware River Basin relative to conservation of aquatic resources only. The SmartConservation Aquatic Assessment is a science based assessment. To determine the how to best analyze the data included in the assessment, the Natural Lands Trust convened a group of scientific experts at a Conservation Science Forum. The purpose of the Conservation Science Forum was to determine the criteria for assessing natural features to assist in focusing conservation eorts. The conservation values and weights associated with the factors included in the Aquatic Assessment were determined by the participants in the Conservation Science Forum. Scope The SmartConservation Aquatic Assessment is available for the entire Upper Delaware River Watershed from the headwaters in the north to the Delaware Water Gap in the south. Data for the assessment were generally collected for the Central Appalachian Forest and High Allegheny Plateau ecoregions. Data The SmartConservation Aquatic Assessment is a single composite dataset that provides a priority ranking of the relative conservation value for aquatic resources of lands in the Upper Delaware Basin. The dataset is represented across the Upper Delaware Basin. The watershed is divided into 30 meter blocks. Each block has a dierent rank assigned based on its relative conservation value for aquatic resources on a scale from 1 to 10, where 1 is the lowest and 10 is the highest conservation value.

38

Aquatic Assessment Map

State Boundaries County Cortland Boundaries Aquatic Assessment 1 - Lower Value Chenango 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 Broome 10 - Higher Value

Otsego

Schoharie

Albany

Greene Delaware

Ulster Susquehanna

Sullivan Wayne Wyoming

Lackawanna Pike

Orange

Luzerne Sussex Passaic Monroe

Rockland

1. Aquatic Assessment Prioritization developed using SmartConservation methodology.

Bergen

Carbon Northampton

Warren

Morris

Schuylkill

Disclaimer: This map is not a survey. The information imparted with this map is meant to assist Natural Lands Trust, Inc., describe the placement of certain retained, reserved, or excluded rights and to calculate acreage figures. Property boundaries, while approximate, were established using the best available information, which may have included: surveys, tax maps, field mapping using G.P.S., and/or orthophotos. Natural Lands Trust, Inc., makes no representation as to the accuracy of said property lines (or any other lines), and no liability is assumed by reason of reliance thereon. Use of this map for other than its intended purpose requires the written consent of Natural Lands Trust, Inc.

Essex

Hudson n

SmartConservation R Aquatic Assessment

1031 Palmers Mill Road, Media, PA 19063 610-353-5587 ~ www.natlands.org

COMMON WATERS

Miles 14

Compiled By: MEB 06/28/10

39

The Aquatic Assessment combines the following resource values: Riparian Buer Quality land cover types assigned values based on habitat potential and averaged in the 100 ft buer (each side) of streams and weighted based on associated stream order. Water Quality (303d/305b) value assigned to attaining, unattaining and unassessed streams then averaged within small watersheds and weighted by stream length. Headwaters Protection flow accumulation based on the number of raster cells (30m x 30m) flowing into each cell then averaged within small watersheds. Impervious Cover (2001) impervious cover percent averaged within small watersheds Forested Water Quality percent of 1st and 2nd order streams and percent of forest cover calculated within small watersheds. The overall value is the average of the two component values. Hydric Soils Floodplains 100 year floodplains National Wetlands Inventory - wetlands assigned value based on NWI class (i.e. Forested, Emergent, Open Water) Slopes conservation value assigned by percent of slope

Each resource type is assigned a value, the data are layered on top of one another, and the values for each resource type are added together to determine overall conservation value of each block. About the Source The Natural Lands Trust is a not-for-profit conservation organization based in Media, Pennsylvania. Its mission is to save natural areas for generations to come, steward landscapes to support a healthy environment, and to connect people to the natural world around them. The development of the SmartConservation Aquatic Assessment was supported in part by the Common Waters Partnership. Availability The Natural Lands Trust SmartConservation Aquatic Assessment data are available from the Pinchot Institute for Conservation, who distributes the data on behalf of the Common Waters Partnership: www.commonwaterspartnership.org

The Nature Conservancy Priority Forest Areas

Summary The Nature Conservancy chapters in Pennsylvania and New York have conducted analyses of forest resources in each state and identified forests patches that are ecologically important and the highest priority for conservation by The Nature Conservancy chapters in each of the states. In Pennsylvania, data for forest patches the highest priority, ecologically important forests and landscape forest blocks are available. In New York, only landscape forest blocks are available. Forest blocks are large, relatively contiguous areas of forest that support intact ecological systems. Forest patches are a further refinement of the forest blocks. The Nature Conservancy data are not a comprehensive source for data on all important natural resource areas in Pennsylvania and New York. Rather, they are only an accounting of forest areas important to The Nature Conservancys chapters in either state. There are other important forest areas that are not included. For more information on the development of these data sets and the selection of priorities, contact The Nature Conservancy chapter offices in New York or Pennsylvania.

40

The Nature Conservancy Map of Priority Forests

41

Scope The Nature Conservancys Priority Forest Areas are available for the entire Upper Delaware River Watershed and the entire state of Pennsylvania. Priority Forest Areas are also available for the New Jersey portion of the Delaware River Basin. Data Priority forest areas represent places that The Nature Conservancy has identified as ecologically important at the regional and individual state chapter levels. In 2003, The Nature Conservancys ecoregional planning process identified Matrix Forest Blocks that are large contiguous areas whose size and natural condition allow for the maintenance of ecological processes, viable occurrences of matrix forest communities, embedded large and small patch communities, and embedded species populations. Since 2003, each state chapter modified those forest priorities based on new information and new analysis methods. TNC-NJ developed Priority Conservation Areas that represent large, high-quality, forested blocks. TNC-NY did some slight refining of their Matrix Forest Block boundaries. TNC-PA built upon the Matrix Forest Block concept by conducting a Forest Conservation Analysis to refine its forest priorities. About the Source The Nature Conservancy is a leading national and international conservation organization. It pursues its goals through science-based, collaborative approaches. This data was developed by the Pennsylvania and New York Chapters of The Nature Conservancy. Availability Additional information about The Nature Conservancy Priority Forest Areas and maps of the data are available from the Pennsylvania and New York Chapters of The Nature Conservancy: http://www.nature.org/wherewework/northarmerica/states/newyork/ http://www.nature.org/wherewework/northamerica/states/pennsylvania/ Additional Data on Avian Habitats: Data and information on bird habitats in the Delaware River Basin can be obtained from a variety of sources. The Upper Delaware River region is an important wintering ground for bald eagles. The Eagle Institute in Lackawaxen, PA is dedicated to the protection of bald eagles and other birds of prey and collects data about eagles in the Upper Delaware area. The Eagle Institute may be able to provide information and assistance on areas important to eagles and birds of prey and how to avoid impacting their habitat. More information about the Eagle Institute is available at: http://www. eagleinstitute.org The Audubon Society has detailed information available for designated Important Bird Areas. Important Bird Areas are sites that provide habitat for one or more species of bird and meet certain specific criteria. Information on designated Important Bird Areas in the Delaware River Basin is available from the Pennsylvania and New York chapters of the Audubon Society. For each Important Bird Area, detailed information on location, species present, and habitat is available. More information about Important Bird areas is available at: New York: http://ny.audubon.org/BirdSci_IBAs.html Pennsylvania: http://pa/audubon.org/iba/

42

Natural Heritage Programs:

Natural heritage programs exist in both New York and Pennsylvania. The primary purpose of these programs is to inventory data on biological diversity in each of the states. Natural heritage programs also document known locations or rare, threatened, and endangered species, provide information on species and habitats, and work to keep the data they provide as up-to-date as possible. The natural heritage programs in both New York and Pennsylvania are excellent resources for information on biological diversity in the Upper Delaware River Basin region.

Pennsylvania Natural Heritage Program

http://www.naturalheritage.state.pa.us/HomePage.aspx The Pennsylvania Natural Heritage Program provides a number of resources for accessing information about species found in the state; rare, threatened, and endangered species; and important habitat locations. Species lists are available for plants, vertebrates, and invertebrates for the entire state and on a county and watershed basis. Similar lists for geologic features and natural community types are also available. Species listings also include rank codes for various measures of species rarity or conservation priority. Finally, County Natural Heritage Inventories are also available. These inventories provide information on plants, animals, and ecological communities in each county of the state and include maps of important natural areas within each county. The Pennsylvania Natural Heritage Program also administers the Pennsylvania Natural Diversity Index. This index is used in the site selection process for development projects to determine if rare, threatened, and/or endangered species may be present at a planned development sight. If a species is potentially present on a site, additional review may be required. Pennsylvania Natural Diversity Index reviews are a required component of the natural gas well site permitting process. The index is generally not available for general public use.

New York Natural Heritage Program

http://www.nynhp.org/ The New York Natural Heritage Program provides information about rare animals and plants and significant ecological communities throughout the state. Information is available about rare vertebrates, some rare invertebrates, important habitat areas, and rare plants. The New York Natural Heritage Program houses several resources to provide the public with information about species and ecological communities. The New York Nature Explorer is an online tool for finding information on species of plants and animals and ecological communities present throughout the state. The database is searchable by county, town, or watershed or by species or natural community type. Searches by place will provide information on rare species and ecological community types that may be present in that given area. Searches by species provide a listing of where those species may be located. The Environmental Resource Mapper is a similar online tool, but provides information through an interactive online mapping application. Finally, the New York Natural Heritage Program has produced New York Natural Heritage Conservation Guides, which provide comprehensive information about rare species and ecological communities.

43

General Information and Maps:

Conserved or Protected Lands in the Upper Delaware River Basin
Summary A variety of conserved and protected lands exist across the Upper Delaware River Basin region. These include conservation easements; agricultural easements; private preserves; federal lands; state game and forest lands; and state, county, and municipal parks and other lands. The land use restrictions present on these lands varies by use, ownership, etc. This data allows stakeholders to identify where existing conservation and protected lands exist. Scope A map of conserved and protected lands is available for the entire Upper Delaware River Watershed from the headwaters in the north to the Delaware Water Gap in the south. Data This map shows lands with some form of conservation restriction in the Upper Delaware River Basin. This includes agricultural easements, conservation easements, private preserves, and government owned lands (federal, state, or local). State and municipal lands are grouped, while other categories are represented in dierent colors. The map was created by the National Park Service, Delaware Water Gap National Recreation Area. About the Source This map was created by the National Park Service, Delaware Water Gap National Recreation Area as the regional overview map for the Common Waters Partnership Atlas of the Upper Delaware Region. The mission of the Common Waters Partnership is to conserve clean water, natural places and working lands through cooperation, scientific research, education, and technical assistance by and for the stakeholders of the region. Availability This map and the Common Waters Partnership Atlas of the Upper Delaware River Region are available from the Pinchot Institute for Conservation, who distributes the data on behalf of the Common Waters Partnership: www.commonwaterspartnership.org

Geology of the Upper Delaware River Region

Geologic maps are available from a number of sources. Maps vary in detail from generalized geology to detailed maps of surface geology. In some places, geologic cross sections are available, showing the geology of a place at depth. Information about map types and sources is provided below. A variety of geologic maps for the region are available from the USGS. There are a number of ways to access these maps. The National Geologic Map Database provides a searchable database for geologic maps covering the entire county, including the Upper Delaware region. Data are available in a number of formats. The second way to access geologic maps through USGS is the USGS Publications Warehouse. The Publications Warehouse is also a searchable database and provides access to both maps and publications. USGS National Geologic Map Database: http://ngmdb.usgs.gov/ngmdb/ngm_catalog.ora.html USGS Publications Warehouse: http://pubs.er.usgs.gov/#home:7:30 Geologic maps are also available from state agencies in both Pennsylvania and New York. In most cases, the maps available from the states will also be available through the USGS National Geologic Map Database. In Pennsylvania, the Pennsylvania Department of Conservation and Natural Resources, Bureau of Topographic and Geologic Survey provides access to geologic maps. In New York, the New York State Geological Survey provides access to geologic maps. Pennsylvania Bureau of Topographic and Geologic Survey: http://www.dcnr.state.pa.us/topogeo/gismaps/geomaps.aspx New York Geological Survey: http://www.nysm.nysed.gov/nysgs/index.html

44

Conserved or Protected Lands in the Upper Delaware River Basin Map

Approximate River Approximate River O tMilesoby CSection Miles bySectiony seg ount
Norwich
23

West Branch, Delaware River -90 miles West Branch, Delaware River 90 miles East Branch, Delaware River 75 miles East Branch, Delaware River -75 miles Upper Delaware Scenic Recreational River - 73.4 miles Upper Delaware Scenic && Recreational River 73.4 miles 88 Tri-State Bend (Port Jervis area) 8.3 miles Tri-State Bend (Port Jervis area) - 8.3 miles Middle Delaware Scenic Recreational River within Delaware Water Gap Middle Delaware Scenic && Recreational River within Delaware Water Gap National Recreation Area - 40.6 miles National Recreation Area 40.6 miles
Chenango County
Bainbridge

Oneonta

Schoharie County

Prattsville
r ive Riv

Delhi

s We

h anc t Br

De

law

a re

Greene County

Delaware County Broome County

17

Eas

h anc t Br

De

law

a re

er Riv

Cannonsville Reservoir

Windsor

N E W

Pepacton Reservoir

Ulster County
Hancock

Susquehanna County

Delaware River

U Up p

er

Delaw

ar

Neversink Reservoir

Y O R K
Callicoon
o llic on Cr ee k
17 44

e e

e Sce
nic
&

Ca

Ellenville
209

81

Sullivan County
Monticello
Mongaup River

ti n Recr e ational

Wa yne C ounty
Honesdale
6

97

v R i

r er

Lackawanna
Hawley Scranton

Lackawaxen River
ve r

Middletown

County Pike County

6 84

Port Jervis Goshen Milford

Ne

Wallenpaupack

ve r

P E N N S Y L V kA N I A L Lake

sin

Ri

Orange County
6

A
Montague

380

r Gap

206

ate

Sussex

Legend
Watershed Boundary Towns County Seat

Monroe County
De
80

d ead C ro h Brod reek

ar

aw

D
r ive

el

209

N E W
Sussex County
Newton

Town Reservoirs Basin Major Rivers

la

re wa

J E R S E Y
15 206

UPDE Boundary Catskill Park

STA

Delaware Water Gap

Carbon

P a sConservation Landsy saic Count

Public & Private
Agriculture Easement Preserve

Stroudsburg

Wa rren Count y
476 209 46

Stanhope

1 inch equals 8.00 miles

ST ST

County
33

Northampton County

Morris County
16
206

24 Miles

Federal Lands State & Municipal Land

10/05/2009 Graphic File: RegionOverview.pdf Created By: NPS, Delaware Water Gap NRA

Data Source: Base cartographic Geographic Information System (GIS) layers.

45
Common Waters layout.indd 6 10/16/2009 2:28:50 PM

Geologic Map of the Upper Delaware River Region

Geologic Units, Continued
Dhmo

Devonian Period
MDsk Spechty Kopf Formation Dck Catskill Formation Dcd Catskill Formation, Duncannon Member

Dsw

Dcpg Catskill Formation, Poplar Gap Member Dcpp Catskill Formation, Poplar Gap and Packerton Mbrs. Dcp Catskill Formation, Packerton Member Dclr Catskill Formation, Long Run Member Dclw Catskill Formation, Long Run and Walcksville Mbrs. Dcw Catskill Formation, Walcksville Member

Dwrg Dwrg g

Dcbr Catskill Formation, Beaverdam Run Formation

Dwn Dwnm Dwnm n

NY NY PA

Dct
h2o h2o 2 h2o D w Dww

Catskill Formation, Towamensing Member

Dwrg Gardeau Formation

Dwnm New Milford Formation

Dwh Honesdale Formation Dws Slide Mountain Formation Dww Upper Walton Formation
Dws Dwh Dck Pp Pp

Dsw Lower Walton Formation Dtr

Trimmers Rock Formation

NY NY
Dsw

Dhmo Moscow Formation Dh

Hamilton Group, undifferentiated

Dmh Mahantago Formation Dm

Marcellus Shale

PA

Dou Onondaga Limestone

DS DS

a a llaw De re re
Dhmo

Db

Buttermilk Falls Limestone

Dbe Buttermilk Falls Through Esopus Formations Ds

Schoharie Formation Esopus Formation Oriskany Group Ridgeley Formation through Coeymans Formation

r ve R Ri

MDskDcd sk k Dcpp Dtr Dclw

Srp rp Dh Srp Dou Dou o Dou Dh Dhg O hg Dhg Oag

De Do Drc

NY NY NJ Omh NJ Om Omh m

Dhg Helderberg Group Dp

Port Ewen Shale

Dct Dcpg Dmh h Dcp Dcp Dcp

Dm Dm mn Dmn DpDsDo DpDsDo DeSp DeSpDkc Db Sbv Db Sbv DSrd Sbv b Sb

Dmn Minisink Limestone and New Scotland Formation

Ss

Dkc Kalkberg Limestone and Manlius Limestone DS

Port Ewen Shale, Manlius Limestone, and Rondout Dolostone

DSrd Rondout and Decker Formations

Silurian Period
Dclr Omr OmbOCa mbOCa a Obu Ob Obu b j Oj Ow Ow

Srp

Rondout Formation

DcbrDcw brDcw r w Dm

Sdp Decker Formation through Poxono Island Formation Sbv Bossardville Limestone Sp
Poxono Island Formation Bloomsburg Red Beds Shawangunk Formation

D e Dbe Sdp Sd Sdp dp Dr Drc Drc rc Obl Obl bl Oe Oe

O gs Ori ri Om Omgs Ori

1 inch equals 10 miles 0 10 20 30 Miles

Sb Ss

Ordovician Period
Om
Martinsburg Formation

Karst dissolution features such as caves, sinkholes, and underground rivers can reduce ground water quality because of reduced rainwater interaction with soils and can spread any ground water contaminations faster than normal. These karst features usually happen in limestones such as the Onondaga / Buttermilk Falls Limestone, Schoharie Formation, Coeymans Formation and others. The Marcellus Shale natural gas drilling is occurring in areas northwest of the Marcellus Shale where it is covered by younger Devonian through Pennsylvanian Period rock units west of here.
10/05/2009 Graphic File: Geology.pdf Created By: NPS, Delaware Water Gap NRA

Rivers and Boundaries

State Boundaries Delaware River

Omgs Martinsburg Formation, graywacke and shale g Omr Martinsburg Formation, Ramseyburg Member Omb Martinsburg Formation, Bushkill Member Omh Martinsburg Formation, High Point Member Oag Austin Glen Formation Oj
Jacksonburg Limestone

Geologic Units
Descriptions of formations can be found at:
http://ngmdb.usgs.gov/Geolex/geolex_home.html

Obu Upper Part Beekman Group Obl Oe Ori Ow

Lower Part Beekman Group Epler Limestone Rickenbach Formation Wantange Sequence

Holocene
h2o Bodies of Water

Pennsylvanian Epoch
Pp
Pottsville Formation

OCa Allentown Formation

Data Source: Geologic map data from 2009 U.S. Geological Survey's geologic maps for New York and Pennsylvania and 2009 N.J. Geological Survey's geologic maps for New Jersey, all at a 1:250,000 scale. U.S. Geological Survey has a list of formation discriptions based on published material at their Geolex at http://ngmdb.usgs.gov/Geolex/geolex_home.html

Common Waters layout.indd 9

10/16/2009 2:43:18 PM

46

Watershed Map of The Upper Delaware River Region

Summary The Upper Delaware River Region is a vast area covering approximately 4,500 square miles. This area can be divided into watersheds of various sizes. Broadly defined, a watershed is the area drained by a given stream. The entire drainage of the Delaware River is a single watershed. However, this large watershed can be subdivided into smaller watersheds representing the Delaware Rivers tributaries. This map shows the watersheds of major tributaries to the Delaware River in the upper basin and smaller watersheds along the main-stem of the river. This map is provided to show the drainage areas of the major tributaries to the Delaware River in the upper basin. Scope Watershed maps are available for the entire Upper Delaware River Watershed from the headwaters in the north to the Delaware Water Gap in the south. Data The watershed boundaries shown in this map were created as part of the National Park Service Water Resources Divisions Watershed Condition Assessment Project. They were generated from 10 meter digital elevation models using the Spatial Analyst Hydrology toolset in ArcGIS and based partially on the process established by Brady Mattson of the University of Georgia. About the Source This map was created by the National Park Service, Delaware Water Gap National Recreation Area and included in the Common Waters Partnership Atlas of the Upper Delaware Region. The mission of the Common Waters Partnership is to conserve clean water, natural places and working lands through cooperation, scientific research, education, and technical assistance by and for the stakeholders of the region. Availability
This map and the Common Waters Partnership Atlas of the Upper Delaware River Region are available from the Pinchot Institute for Conservation, who distributes the data on behalf of the Common Waters Partnership: www.commonwaterspartnership.org

Aquifer Information and Maps for the Upper Delaware River Region
Information about groundwater aquifers in the Upper Delaware River Watershed region can be found from several sources. The USGS has the largest store of information on groundwater characteristics, aquifers, and maps in the region. USGS information is available in a number of formats. The USGS has created a Groundwater Atlas of the United States. The Groundwater Atlas provides general information about drinking water aquifers for the entire United States, including the Upper Delaware River Region. It is available on the USGS website (link below). The USGS also has state Water Science Centers in each state. The Water Science Centers provide detailed information, including well monitoring, for aquifers throughout the state. The Water Science Centers also work with state agencies to conduct research and provide groundwater information. In Pennsylvania, the Pennsylvania Topographic and Geologic Survey works with USGS and also provides additional information and monitoring. In New York, USGS is currently working with the New York Department of Environmental Conservation on a study of the hydrogeology of selected aquifers within the Marcellus shale region to evaluate potential groundwater impacts. Aquifer maps for some parts of New York are also available.

47

Watershed Map of the Upper Delaware River Region

Upper and Middle Delaware River Basin

SCHOHARIE OTSEGO

Upper and Middle Delaware River Basin

CHENANGO DELAWARE
West Branch of the Delaware River

GREENE

BROOME
East Branch Delaware River

ULSTER

SUSQUEHANNA

Equinunk Creek

Callicoon Creek

SULLIVAN
Calkins Creek

WAYNE

Tusten Creek

Mongaup River

Neversink River

LACKAWANNA

Lackawaxen River

Shohola Creek

Sawkill Creek

PIKE

ORANGE

Flat Brook Bushkill Creek

LUZERNE SUSSEX PASSAIC MONROE ON

The upper and middle Delaware River Basin drains approximately 4,500 square miles. Brodhead Creek

MORRIS CARBON WARREN NORTHAMPTON

10/05/2009 Graphic File: Watersheds.pdf Created By: NPS, Delaware Water Gap NRA

1 inch equals 8 miles 0 7

MORRIS14

21 Miles

Data Source: The watershed boundaries were created as part of the NPS Water Resources Division's Watershed Condition Assessment Project. They were generated from 10 Meter DEMs using the Spatial Analyst Hydrology toolset and based partially on the process established by Brady Mattson of the University of Georgia.

Common Waters layout.indd 7

10/16/2009 2:41:34 PM

48

Links:
Groundwater Atlas of the United States: http://pubs.usgs.gov/ha/ha730/ USGS Pennsylvania Water Science Center: http://pa.water.usgs.gov/ Pennsylvania Topographic and Geologic Survey: http://www.dcnr.state.pa.us/topogeo/groundwater/index.aspx USGS New York Water Science Center: http://ny.water.usgs.gov/ USGS New York DEC Hydrogeology Study: http://ny.cf.er.usgs.gov/nyprojectsearch/projects/2457-CP30.html USGS New York Aquifer Maps: http://ny.water.usgs.gov/projects/bgag/aquifer.maps/index.html

General Information on Community Resources and Growth

Each major county within the Marcellus shale region of the Upper Delaware River Basin Wayne, Pike and Monroe counties in Pennsylvania and Delaware and Sullivan counties in New York have county planning agencies. Most of these counties also have comprehensive plans. County comprehensive plans provide a wealth of information about community resources, such as parks and schools. They also provide information on planned growth areas. Much of this information is mapped as a part of the comprehensive planning process. Comprehensive plans are developed in consultation with the community the plan covers. Therefore, they are an excellent resource for learning about the priorities of a community and what issues are of particular importance to a community in terms of economic growth, development, community facilities, and natural resources protection. The county planning agencies are also excellent sources for up-to-date information about issues covered in the comprehensive plans and other community resources. County comprehensive plans are available from the county planning agencies in each county. The web address for each countys planning agency at the time of this publication is provided below. Pike County: http://pikepa.org/Communityplanning.htm Wayne County: http://plan.co.wayne.pa.us/ Monroe County: http://www.co.monroe.pa.us/planning_records/cwp/view.asp?a=1551&q=605195& planning_recordsNav=|34304| Sullivan County: http://www.co.sullivan.ny.us/Departments/PlanningandEnvironmentalManagement /AboutPlanning/Sullivan2020Toolbox/tabid/3236/Default.aspx Delaware County: http://delawarecountyplanning.com/; Delaware County does not have a comprehensive plan.

49

Section III: Natural Gas Exploration and Development Regulations, NY and PA

The Marcellus shale is a vast geological formation, running from the central Appalachians in West Virginia to the Appalachian Plateau in the southern tier of New York. Because the formation underlies such a large part of the northeastern United States, crossing many jurisdictional boundaries, natural gas exploration and development targeting the Marcellus shale is governed by an array of regulations. Each state within the Marcellus shale region has its own unique regulations. In some areas, regulations from other entities, such as river basin commissions, also eect gas exploration and development. The Upper Delaware River region is no exception. Parts of the Delaware River watershed underlain by the Marcellus shale formation are located in New York and Pennsylvania, each state with its own unique regulatory structure and rules. In addition, the Delaware River Basin Commission (DRBC) has its own rules on issues eecting water quality and quantity in the Delaware River. The variations in regulations from one state or river basin to the next can be confusing. In an eort to clarify the regulatory picture, this report is a resource providing a brief summary of the primary regulations related to natural gas development in the Delaware River Basin. This report captures state regulations at a snapshot in time. Regulations in both states are subject to change and will evolve over time. At the time this report was researched, New York and Pennsylvania, as well as DRBC, were undertaking reviews of their regulations and preparing changes aecting natural gas exploration and development. This report details the regulations that were in place when it was researched and written (November 1, 2010); regulatory changes or amendments completed after November 1, 2010 are not addressed in this report. However, because many regulatory changes take the form of amendments to existing regulations rather than new regulations, in many cases the regulatory title, chapter, and section numbers referred to in this report will remain relatively accurate. The regulatory titles, chapters, and section numbers referenced in this report are a good place to start when researching natural gas regulations in New York and Pennsylvania, even if the details about the regulatory requirements provided here are out of date.

Photograph by David B. Soete

50

The bulk of this report is a matrix of current regulations. This matrix can be used to compare the regulations between the states. The matrix is broken down into several segments to ease comparison. The sections are: Well Pads Surface Water Withdrawal Ground Water Withdrawal Waste Disposal

In addition to comparing the regulations, policies, or guidance documents applicable in each state, the specific sections of the regulations, guidance documents, or policies are cited for easy reference and further study. A brief summary of the regulations in each state precedes the matrix. This summary provides an overview of the current state of regulations in New York and Pennsylvania for each of the four issue areas.

Current Status of Regulatory Revisions: Pennsylvania

Major changes have been proposed for Title 25 Pennsylvania Code Chapter 78, Oil & Gas Wells. As of this writing (November, 2010), the updated regulations have been approved by the Environmental Quality Board and are currently before committees of the Pennsylvania General Assembly (House and Senate). After approval by the General Assembly, the regulations will move to final approval and review by the Independent Regulatory Review Commission. Once approved by all parties, the regulations will be published in the Pennsylvania Bulletin as a final rule making. An eective date for the regulations will be determined at the time of publication. The proposed regulations strengthen the current regulations in the following areas: Well casing and cementing practices are improved to reduce or prevent gas migration from well bores into homes, other structures, water supplies, or groundwater. The changes will require wellhead pressure testing for all operating wells along with annual reporting, require retrofitting of existing wells that exceed required casing seat pressures, set new standards for casing seat pressures, require casing and cementing plans be kept on site, require welding of casings by a qualified welder, require cement well plugs to extend across gas producing formations, enhance options for blow out prevention control and availability in the event of an emergency, increase cement set time to ensure proper setting, and require corrective actions for lost circulation of cement for surface casings.

The well operators are required to notify the Department of Environmental Protection when gas migration is noted or reported in an area where gas wells exist. Follow-up actions will be required of the operator. Quarterly surveys of all operating wells are required to ensure they are structurally sound and that individual wells have not been compromised.

Current State of Regulatory Revisions: New York

The New York State Department of Environmental Conservation (DEC) has developed a Draft Supplemental Generic Environmental Impact Statement (SGEIS) on its Oil, Gas, and Solution Mining Regulatory Program for Well Permit Issuance for Horizontal Drilling and High-Volume Hydraulic Fracturing. The draft SGEIS proposes changes and additions to current regulations. The SGEIS was released in September 2009. It reviews all aspects of high volume, high pressure hydraulic fracturing operations. The draft document generated significant public comment and the New York DEC is currently preparing responses to approximately 14,000 comments. At this time is in not known when the review of public comments will be completed and what changes New York DEC will make to the draft SGEIS or its regulations as a result of those comments.

51

Current State of Regulatory Revisions: Delaware River Basin Commission

The Delaware River Basin Commission is in the process of developing regulations to address the water related concerns of natural gas exploration and development. It is expected that DRBC will require all gas drilling operations receive a permit from the Commission. Until its regulations are finalized, there is a moratorium on new gas exploration and development activities in the Delaware River Basin. It is expected that the DRBC regulations will include two pathways for regulatory approval of a drilling operation by the Commission: an approval by rule process, where by applications undergo administrative review if they meet certain requirements, and a full application review process, with commissioner approval required for applications that fail to meet the approval by rule requirements. Draft regulations are expected from the Commission in late Fall 2010, with final regulations following sometime in 2011. The Delaware River Basin Commission has existing regulations in place requiring a detailed permit application and review for water withdrawals exceeding 100,000 gallons per day over 30 a day period for any use. These regulations have been in existence for many years and aect all water withdrawals in the basin that meet the regulatory threshold. However, they are limited to only water resources impacts of water withdrawals, are not specifically targeted to gas drilling, and do not address the larger water quality and quantity concerns associated with natural gas exploration and development. The regulatory summaries that follow do not include DRBC regulations, unless otherwise noted, because it is currently unknown what they final regulations will require.

Regulations: Well Pads

This section summarizes the regulatory and permitting requirements for most aspects of well pad construction and well drilling, including: site restrictions for wells and well pads, well casing requirements, administrative issues related to permits, land owner notifications, predrilling water well monitoring plan requirements, well pad spacing requirements, handling of drilling fluids/cuttings, fresh water storage, erosion and sedimentation, site restoration, and well abandonment. References to specific components of the regulations are provided in the chart at the end of this report. Permitting and Well Site Selection New York and Pennsylvania both require permits before any well drilling occurs and require posting of copies of the permits at the well site. In New York, a permit is valid for 180 days from the date of issuance, unless commencement of drilling operations has been pursued in a diligent manner. Permits are not transferrable, but may be re-issued. New York allows for relocation of a well up to 75 feet from its original permitted location if the permitting agency is notified. Pennsylvania well drilling permits are valid for one year, and may be renewed for an additional year if all conditions in Title 25 Pennsylvania Code Chapter 78.17 are met. Generally, Chapter 78.17 requires all of the same conditions and restrictions of the initial well drilling permit. Pennsylvania allows for relocation of a well up to 50 feet from its original permitted location if the permitting agency is notified. There are requirements in both New York and Pennsylvania for bonding of the well drilling operation. A bond is a financial guarantee payable to the respective state to provide an incentive to carry out drilling in accordance with the well drilling permit and regulations and restore the well site following gas drilling. Bonds are posted at the time of application for a drilling permit. If there is a violation of the well permit or the well site is not properly restored, the bond may be collected by the state to help oset costs associated with remediation. Currently, bonding requirements in Pennsylvania require a bond of $2,500 per well. This requirement is expected to increase when Pennsylvania regulations are amended. New York requires a bond of up to $250,000 per well, or a total of $2,000,000 for all wells owned by a single company.

52

Well locations are subject to a number of site restrictions in both New York and Pennsylvania. When finalized, DRBCs regulations may also supplement these existing restrictions. Restrictions are generally in the form of buer distances, which vary based on what is being buered. The chart below lists the distances New York and Pennsylvania require from specific features: Features Water Body Wetlands Occupied Dwellings Public Buildings Water Supplies New York 50 100 100 150 varies Pennsylvania 100 100 200 200 200

Both states allow for waivers or variances from these distances in certain specific cases. For example, in Pennsylvania, the owner of a building or water well may grant permission to drill within the regulatory buer distance. In addition, waivers may be granted if buers restrict access to the gas resource owned or leased by a gas company and they take extra measures to mitigate impacts. In New York, permit applicants may apply for variances to buer distances, but must provide documentation explaining the need with their application and participate in a public hearing. New York and Pennsylvania both require the operator to notify adjacent landowners and municipal officials of a proposed well location by certified mail. In New York, a Notification and Reporting Requirements document requires notification of any local government (County, Town, or City Officials) and any surface owner aected by the drilling operations. In Pennsylvania, the well operator is required to develop a detailed map (a plat) to accompany their well permit application. This map must also be mailed to the landowner of the property where the well is located, adjacent landowners, water suppliers within 1,000 feet of the well site, and owners of rights to underlying coal seams. Other natural and cultural features must also be considered in the location of wells, though no specific regulatory isolation distances are specified. New York requires an Environmental Assessment form that requires information on the location of aquifers, public and municipal water supplies, surface waters, agricultural districts, land within a soil and water conservation plan, 100 year floodplains, wetlands and wetland buer zones, costal management areas, critical environmental areas, endangered and threatened species, and visual resources of statewide impact. If these features are within the distances to the well site specified in the Generic Environmental Impact Statement, Chapter 8, additional permits, approvals, and/or mitigation measures may be required. In Pennsylvania, other environmental values considered during the permitting process include: publicly owned parks, forests, game lands, and wildlife areas; National Natural Landmarks; National or Scenic Rivers; and habitats of rare and endangered flora and fauna and other critical communities. Areas within the 100 year floodplain the area that has a 1 in 100 chance of being flooded any given year by a river or stream are regulated by local municipal rules and vary widely. However, in Pennsylvania, a Title 25 Pennsylvania Code Chapter 105 encroachment permit is needed for structures located in floodways. A floodway is defined in Chapter 105 as: The channel of the watercourse and portions of the adjoining floodplains which are reasonably required to carry and discharge the 100-year frequency flood. An Encroachment permit is required to assure proper planning, design, construction, maintenance, and monitoring of water obstructions and encroachments, in order to prevent unreasonable interference with water flow and to protect navigation. Obstruction/encroachment permits are needed for structures such as road or pipeline crossings over or under streams, wetlands, or other water bodies to ensure these structures will not have negative impacts up or downstream. Improper construction may aect the current or cross section of the stream resulting in damage or alteration of the stream bank, change stream flow dynamics so that flood flows are altered, or be a hazard to navigation in the stream or river. Encroachment permits are also required if there are impacts to wetlands by drill pads, roads or pipelines.
53

Well Construction New York and Pennsylvania also regulate all aspects of construction of the gas well itself. Well casings are required for all gas wells to prevent the migration of gas or fluids into sources of fresh water and to prevent diminution of fresh water aquifers. Regulations require well casing installed and cemented in place to depths below fresh water aquifers. Both New York and Pennsylvania require this procedure; however, at this time only New York requires pressure testing under their Casing and Cementing Practices standards. At this time neither New York nor Pennsylvania requires testing of private or public water supply wells prior to commencement of the natural gas exploration or development operations. Under Pennsylvania law, there is a presumption of responsibility for water well pollution or diminution of water supplies within 1000 feet of a gas well and within 6 months of completion of the gas well. However, the gas well permittee may be able to limit liability if it can show that a water well was contaminated prior to the commencement of the natural gas exploration or development operation by conducting a predrilling or prealteration survey as identified in Title 25 Pennsylvania Code Chapter 78.52. This section requires the gas well permittee to utilize the services of an independent certified drinking water laboratory for the analysis of the drinking water well. The survey must include the following: the location of the water supply and the name of the surface landowner or water purveyor; The date of the survey and name of the certified laboratory and the name of the person who conducted the survey; A description of where and how the sample was collected; A description of the type and age, if known, of the water supply, and treatment, if any; The name of the well operator, name and number of well to be drilled and permit number, if known; The results of the laboratory analysis. There is no list of chemicals or bacterial analysis that is required for the water analysis in the regulations; however, Penn State University has prepared a recommended list of sampling parameters. The spacing requirements for gas well sites in New York is defined in Title 6 NYCRR 553, Well Spacing and Well Spacing and Integration Conditions. These regulations currently require 40 acre spacing units one well pad (which may contain multiple wells) per 40 acres - with no wellbore within 330 feet of a unit boundary. This means one well pad per 40 acres, with no well located within 330 feet of a property boundary. Section 553 also provides that an operator may apply for a spacing order to establish spacing of wells to promote eective development, use, or conservation of the gas resource. Spacing orders allow for closer spacing of well pads. A public hearing is required before a spacing order is approved. Details on the requirements for the spacing order can be found in Title 6 NYCRR 553.3. In Pennsylvania, the well sites must be 1,000 feet apart in areas that have coal deposits and at least 330 feet from another claim or tract boundary. Pennsylvania also has well spacing orders that may be applied for gas wells other than the Marcellus wells, pursuant to Act 359 and Act 214. Act 214, the Coal and Gas Resource Coordination Act, requires coordination of coal mines and gas well operators with natural gas or oil wells that may penetrate a workable coal seam. Act 359, the Oil and Gas Conservation Law, defines and prohibits waste in the production of oil and gas. This act does not apply to Marcellus shale wells, as the act provides exceptions for wells that do not penetrate the Onondaga Formation and the Marcellus formation lies above the Onondaga formation according to the Pennsylvania Geologic Survey. Drilling fluids and drill cuttings from the drilling activity are regulated in both states. Fluids and cuttings can be stored in on-site tanks or impoundments. Both states require a plan for the ultimate disposal of such fluids. Additional environmental permits may be required for disposal of the fluids. Drilling muds may be disposed of in place or removed to a land fill. In New York, fluids must be removed within 45 days of completion of drilling operations, while in Pennsylvania the fluids may remain on the site for up to 270 days after completion of drilling operations. Both states allow for the use of lined storage ponds for waste fluids or sealed tanks. All pits must be lined and must have sufficient freeboard to prevent overtopping during rain events. Both lined or unlined impoundments or may be utilized for storage of fresh water for use in the hydraulic fracturing operation. Impoundments in both states may require additional permits if the size of these facilities meets regulatory thresholds related to the construction of impoundments.

54

These regulatory thresholds include depth, height, and other specific engineering specifications. In Pennsylvania, if a storage pond dam is higher than 15 feet, has a contributory drainage area greater than 100 acres, or the impounding capacity at maximum storage elevation exceeds 50 acre-feet, then a Dam Safety Permit is required. New York requires a permit if a dam is higher than 15 feet and the maximum capacity is greater than 3 million gallons or if a dam is higher than 6 feet and the maximum capacity is greater than 1 million gallons. Produced water (water that returns to the surface during the production phase of a well) is regulated in both states and plans for the disposal of this waste is required. During the drilling phase, both states conduct site inspections to verify conformance with applicable regulations and procedures. Emergency reporting of spills are required within 2 hours in New York. Pennsylvania also requires reporting of spills and mandates immediate notification for fires or gas explosions. Upon completion of the drilling operation and conversion to gas production, both states require site restoration. Pennsylvanias requirements are currently more stringent than New Yorks. Well Plugging is required by both states once the well is depleted and is no longer producing gas. Erosion and Sediment Control Erosion and sediment control refers to management practices employed to reduce soil erosion and discharge of sediment and storm water runo to water bodies. Both states have permitting programs for these activities under the Federal Clean Water Act, National Pollution Discharge Elimination Program. While some gas well related activities may be exempted from federal regulation, Pennsylvania and New York include erosion and sedimentation control activities in their permitting programs. In Pennsylvania, a general permit (ESCGP-1) may be utilized, but in high quality or exceptional value watersheds an individual permit may be needed for disturbances exceeding five acres. Erosion and sediment control plans are required and must be submitted with the well permit application and posted at the well pad site. In New York, permits are needed if earth disturbance exceeds 1 acre and must specifically address water quality management practices if a disturbance exceeds five acres.

Regulations: Surface Water Withdrawal

In order to withdraw surface water from streams or other water bodies for use in drilling or hydraulic fracturing operations, regulations require several factors be taken into consideration to protect downstream water uses and aquatic life. These factors are: site location restrictions, passby flow requirements, aquatic life at withdrawal location, invasive species control, impingement and entrainment of flows, water metering, water tracking, site operations, on-site water storage, and administrative issues. Key parts of these regulations are summarized below. Surface water withdrawal in New York requires a permit if the withdrawal is greater than 100,000 gallons per day for consumptive use. In Pennsylvania, there is no permitting program for surface water withdrawals unless the water will be used for a public drinking water supply. Reporting of the quantity of water withdrawn is required in both states, even if a permit is not required. The Delaware River Basin Commission requires permits for surface or groundwater withdrawals greater than 100,000 gallons per day during any 30-day period for water withdrawals that take place from waters within the Delaware River Basin. Local regulations control placement of water withdrawal structures in floodplains and floodways. Depending on the type of structure proposed, the facilities may be as simple as a hydrant with a pipe extending into the stream or as significant as a pump and storage facility supplying a separate water body. If there is encroachment into the stream, Pennsylvania requires an encroachment permit. Neither New York nor Pennsylvania charge fees for water withdrawals. However, river basin commissions may charge fees.

55

Pass-by flow requirements refer to the amount of water flow that needs to be maintained in a stream to protect downstream uses and aquatic life. New York law provides that no alteration of flow that will impair the waters for their best use is allowed. Pennsylvania requires a stream flow analysis and may set pass-by flow requirements through the information in a Water Management Plan. The river basin commissions are also involved in this process and routinely set pass-by flow requirements as a part of their approval processes. Drought Contingency Plans are factored into the approval process by Pennsylvania for Water Management Plans and by river basin commissions for withdrawal permits. All withdrawals have limits on the amount of water that may be withdrawn with respect to the actual stream flow, and during drought periods no water may be withdrawn if it impacts downstream uses or aquatic life. Aquatic life surveys are used to determine if there are any potential negative eects on aquatic life at the withdrawal location. Surveys at the withdrawal location are not required in New York and Pennsylvania. The Susquehanna River Basin Commission does conduct surveys at sites in the Susquehanna River watershed. Pennsylvania requires a Pennsylvania Natural Diversity Index review and resolution of hits (hits are an indication that a threatened or endangered species may be in a specific location) prior to approval of a Water Management Plan. Invasive species controls prevent the spread of invasive species from one location to another. Neither New York nor Pennsylvania requires invasive species control at withdrawal sites. However, river basin commissions may include invasive species controls in their permitting processes. While specific regulations do not exist at this time, docket conditions allow the commissions to consider and require controls if appropriate. An example of this is found in the Stone Energy docket for water withdrawal from the Lackawaxen River, July 2010. Impingement and entrainment refers to the possibility that the withdrawal intake structure can impact aquatic life at a site. Pennsylvania may require a permit under Chapter 105 depending on the type of intake structure proposed. Details of the Pennsylvania requirements for these structures can be found in the Department of Environmental Protection, Bureau of Watershed Management, General Permit, BDWM-GP-4 INTAKE AND OUTFALL STRUCTURES at http://www. elibrary.dep.state.pa.us/dsweb/Get/Document-72809/3930-PM-WM0504.pdf. In New York, these issues would be addressed in the SEGIS Process, however detailed regulations for intake structures could not be located except under Title 6 NYCRR 704, which applies to Thermal Discharges. Water metering to track the amount of water withdrawn from surface waters must follow river basin commission guidelines and reporting requirements. In addition, the quantities withdrawn must be reported to the states following the requirements for reporting in the respective state. Tracking of the water once it is withdrawn is not required by New York or Pennsylvania, but may be tracked by river basin commissions.

Regulations: Ground Water Withdrawal

Withdrawal of groundwater from wells for use in drilling and hydraulic fracturing operations is not common at this time, but may occur in the future. Regulations require consideration of the following if groundwater wells are utilized for gas drilling operations: site location, well spacing, pump test requirements, groundwater withdrawal limits, water tracking, site operations, and administrative items. Permitting for groundwater withdrawals for use in gas drilling operations is not required by either New York or Pennsylvania. However, river basin commissions do require approvals. Both states have withdrawal registration requirements if regulatory thresholds are met. In Pennsylvania, the threshold is 10,000 gallons per day over any 30 day period. New York requires reporting by any person who withdraws or is operating any system or method of withdrawal that has the capacity to withdraw more than 100,000 gallons per day.

56

Site location restrictions are minimal. Flood plain issues are left to the local municipal regulations. Water withdrawal wells must be flood proofed. Required distances of a proposed well from various resources and structures are not defined in state regulations, except for restrictions applicable to wetlands. In Pennsylvania, groundwater withdrawal cannot impact wetland hydrology under provisions in the Clean Stream Law. Pump testing of wells is required by DRBC and New York has a recommended pump test procedures for water supply applications in conjunction with the Susquehanna River Basin Commissions aquifer testing protocol. Pennsylvania does not regulate pump testing or groundwater withdrawals except for public water supply wells. Water metering to track the amount of water withdrawn from ground waters must follow DRBCs water metering and reporting guidelines. In addition the quantities withdrawn must be reported to New York or Pennsylvania following the requirements for reporting in the respective state. Tracking of the water use once it is withdrawn is not required by the respective states, but may be tracked by DRBC. Usage fees are not set by either New York or Pennsylvania, though New York does have an annual $50 reporting fee. DRBC may also set user fees.

Regulations: Waste Water Disposal

Disposal of the drilling and hydraulic fracturing fluids is one of the most critical components of the drilling process. Currently, in Pennsylvania these fluids are being hauled to approved treatment facilities for treatment and disposal. Re-use and recycling of these fluids has become more prevalent in order to decrease the costs of trucking and disposal, in addition to reducing the volume of fresh water that must be hauled to well sites for the hydraulic fracturing operation. Both states regulate the disposal of waste water removed from well sites and require treatment at permitted facilities under the National Pollution Discharge Elimination permit programs. Approval for discharge from waste water treatment facilities may also require approval from DRBC. Factors that are considered in the permitting process include: reclamation and waste disposal, flowback disposal, flowback storage, and hazardous waste transportation. Reclamation and re-use of the fluids is not required by either state. In New York, fluids in pits must be removed within 45 days of completion of drilling operations, while in Pennsylvania it must be removed within 270 days. Both states require disposal of fluids in a permitted treatment plants or injection wells permitted by EPA. De-watered drilling mud may be land applied or buried on-site if specific requirements are met. In Pennsylvania, drill cuttings may be buried on site or land applied if the requirements of Title 25 Pennsylvania Code Chapters 78.62 and 78.63 are met. In New York, the provisions Title 6 NYCRR 554.1(b) prohibits the pollution of the land and/or surface or ground fresh water resulting from exploration or drilling. In addition Title 6 NYCRR 554.1(c)(1) requires submittal of a plan to demonstrate that no pollution will occur from the activities. Both New York and Pennsylvania require disposal of flowback water at approved disposal facilities and according to approved disposal plans. Once the wells go into production, there is additional water that may flowback from the well - commonly referred to as production brine. Water that returns to the surface during hydraulic fracturing process or as production brine must be stored in lined storage ponds or in sealed tanks. New York and Pennsylvania regulates flowback storage through their gas well program or through the waste management regulations in the respective states. Hazardous waste transportation in both states is regulated under the Waste Management Regulations which require a hauler approval process and tracking.

57

Regulatory Summary Chart and Citations for Specic Regulations:

Both New York and Pennsylvania have regulatory frameworks in place for the regulation of Marcellus shale natural gas exploration and development activities. These regulations are summarized in detail in the chart below. The chart breaks down the regulations by category and activity within category, notes if an activity is regulated and in some cases how, and provides a reference for where each regulation can be found in either New Yorks or Pennsylvanias code. Many of the specific processes that horizontal drilling and hydraulic fracturing utilize were not anticipated when the states regulations were formulated and adopted. As a result, both New York and Pennsylvania are in the process of revising their regulations as this report is being written. New York has developed a Draft SGEIS and is in the process of addressing comments on its contents. This process will lead to changes in New Yorks regulations. Pennsylvania has proposed extensive changes to Title 25 Pennsylvania Code Chapter 78, Oil & Gas Wells, to strengthen its regulation of shale gas operations. The changes proposed strengthen the casing and cementing requirements, rules for blow-out prevention devices, provide greater protection of water supplies, and other items designed to improve and update the regulations. In addition, Pennsylvania has adopted regulations, Title 25 Pennsylvania Code Chapter 95, to strengthen the Total Dissolved Solids (TDS) portion of its Water Quality Regulations due to the need to address the high TDS of Marcellus shale gas well return water. The Delaware River Basin Commission is also in the process of developing regulations that will address gas well development and its impact on waters in the Delaware River Basin. Official copies of the regulations, laws, and supporting documents may be found on the web sites of the respective states and the Delaware River Basin Commission. New York: http://www.dec.ny.gov/65.html. Pennsylvania: http://www.dep.state.pa.us/dep/deputate/minres/oilgas/lawsregulations.htm. Delaware River Basin Commission: http://www.state.nj.us/drbc/regula.htm.

58

Well Pad Development Matrix

New York
NYSDEC (pre-GEIS) Well pad construction/ Drilling permit requirement? Per well pad? Per individual well? Yes Yes Yes >75 requires notification and preapproval with written notification within 5-days 180 days from permit issuance Yes Regulation/ Law Citations NYCRR 552 NYCRR 552 NYCRR 552 PADEP

Pennsylvania
Regulation/ Law Citations

Yes No Yes Up to 50 with verbal notification then written notice within 10-days 1 year Yes

Act 223 & 25 Pa. Code

Chapter 78

25 Pa. Code Chapter 78

Permit relocation (move well location up to x ft)? Commencement of operation Posting of permit required at site?

NYCRR 552.3

Act 223 & 25 Pa. Code Chapter 78

NYCRR 552.2 NYCRR 552.2

Act 223 & Chapter 78 25 Pa. Code Chapter 78

Well Pad Siting Restrictions

Floodways 100-year floodplain Local munic rules Local munic rules National Flood Insurance Program Local munic rules Local munic rules, Fluids can not be stored in floodway Local munic rules 100 from water bodies (waiver can be granted) and wetlands >1-acre. Also required for access roads and pipelines 100 ft Impact needs to be considered No No 200 from existing building or water well unless permission granted by owner 200 None Not addressed Local Municipal Rules, Permit Conditions Local munic rules

Water bodies

50 from water bodies

NYCRR 552.3

Act 223

Wetlands buffer Sensitive areas (T&E species habitat) Forested areas Steep slopes - > 15%

permit - 100 buer Impact needs to be considered Permit for State Parklands (OPRHP) No 100 from occupied dwellings 150 from public buildings 75 from public roads Not addressed 2,640; site specific SEIS required if less than 1000 from municipal well; between 1000 & 2000 a site specific assessment and SEQRA determination required

NYCRR 664 GEIS GEIS Not addressed

ACT 223 Act 223 Not addressed Not addressed

Occupied homes

NYCRR 553.2

Act 223

Public buildings Public roads setback Well-head protection areas

NYCRR 553.2 NYCRR 553.2 Not addressed

Act 223 Not addressed Not addressed

Public water supply

1992 Findings in GEIS

200

Act 223

59

Well Pad Development Matrix

New York
NYSDEC (pre-GEIS) Stormwater controls? Yes Regulation/ Law Citations ECL Article 17 PADEP

Pennsylvania
Regulation/ Law Citations 25 Pa. Code Chapter 102 25 Pa. Code Chapter 102 25 Pa. Code Chapter 105 Not addressed

Yes

Erosion controls? Stream/wetland encroachments? Visual impacts

Yes

ECL Article 17

Yes

Yes Case-by case basis Shall be such to prevent pollution& mitigation of oil, gas, etc. from one pool to another. 1994GEIS If surface casing utilized, then must be grouted Yes

NYCRR 663

Yes No

Casing Requirements

Casing requirements

NYCRR 554.1

Yes

25 Pa. Code Chapter 78.81, 78.84

Grouting requirements Required casing pressure test

NYCRR 554.4 Casing and Cementing Practices Document

Yes Proposed

25 Pa. Code Chapter 78.85 Proposed in 25 Pa. Code Chapter 78 update

Administrative
Permit length Permit renewal/ extension? Transfer of ownership Variances Water use fees (total volume, consumptive use) Bonding requirement 180 days Yes No, but may be re-issued permitted with public notice and hearing None Yes NYCRR 552.2 NYCRR 552.3 NYCRR 552.3 NYCRR 553.4 Not addressed NYCRR 552.2 1-year Yes-if significant funds have been expended Yes Some None Yes Act 223 Act 223 Act 223 & 25 Pa. Code Chapter 78.13 Act 223 Not addressed Chapter 78.302

Adjacent Land Owner Notification

Contact method Responsible party for notification Certified Mail & municipality Operator Notification and Reporting Requirements Notification and Reporting Requirements Certified mail Permit applicant Act 223 Act 223

Pre-drilling Adjacent Well Monitoring Plan

Mandatory requirement? Monitoring radius Monitoring frequency No none specified none specified none specified none specified none specified No, Voluntary with standards under Chapter 78.52 1000 none specified 25 Pa. Code Chapter 78.52 Act 223 none specified

60

Well Pad Development Matrix

New York
NYSDEC (pre-GEIS) Monitoring parameters Remediation plan required? none specified Yes Regulation/ Law Citations none specified NYCRR 555.5 PADEP

Pennsylvania
Regulation/ Law Citations none specified Act 223 & 25 Pa. Code Chapter 78

none specified Yes

Well-Pad Spacing Requirements (unitization)

Do not apply to solution mining wells. 1,320 from any other well; 660 from any boundary line of any lease Horz. Well-40-acre spacing unit, 330 from another unit w/ necessary additional acreage Vert. Well-40-acre spacing unit, 460 from another unit Wells must be >1,000 from any another well in coal areas

General spacing requirements

NYCRR 553; Well Spacing and Integration Conditions

Act 223, Act 214

Horizontal well

NYCRR 553; Well Spacing and Integration Conditions

at least 330 from another claim property or tract boundary

Act 223, Act 214

Vertical well

NYCRR 553; Well Spacing and Integration Conditions

at least 330 from another claim property or tract boundary

Act 223

Handling for Drilling Fluids/Cuttings (Pre-Frac)

Storage (tanks vs. impoundments) Can be stored onsite in tanks or in impoundments Drilling mud not considered polluting fluids, disposal plan required 2000 feet None NYCRR 556.5 Can be stored on-site in tanks or in impoundments Uncontaminated Can be left in pit or spread on land, if land is not frozen, saturated, or snow covered 200 feet Minimum 20 depth to bedrock Some 25 Pa. Code Chapter 78.56

Disposal of drill cuttings below surface casing seatpits Distance from water supply Minimum soil depth for disposal NORM (Naturally Occurring Radioactive Materials) analysis Removal of drilling fluids pit

NYCRR 554.1

25 Pa. Code Chapter 78.57

SEIS REQUIRED IF LESS THAN 1000 Not addressed 6 NYCRR Part 380 & part 360 NYCRR 554.1(c)(3);N otification & Reporting requirements

25 Pa. Code Chapter 78.61 25 Pa. Code Chapter 78.61 & 78.62 Rad Protection Regs and Waste Management Regs 25 Pa. Code Chapter 78.56

None Maximum of 45 days hold after cessation of drilling operations

270 days

Freshwater Storage (Pre-frac)

Tanks vs. impoundments both allowable Lined impoundments - Unlined impoundments allowed if soils are suitably nontransmissive NYCRR 608 &NYCRR 673 both allowable Lined impoundments - Unlined impoundments allowed if soils are suitably non-transmissive 25 Pa. Code Chapter 78

Liner

NYCRR 608 &NYCRR 673

25 Pa. Code Chapter 78.62

61

Well Pad Development Matrix

New York
NYSDEC (pre-GEIS) Suitable freeboard to prevent fluid escape Regulation/ Law Citations NYCRR 608 & NYCRR 673 PADEP

Pennsylvania
Regulation/ Law Citations 25 Pa. Code Chapter 78.62

Freeboard required

Suitable freeboard to prevent fluid escape

Depth restrictions

Yes

NYCRR 608 &NYCRR 673

Impoundment floor must have 24 buer above seasonal high water table Prior to creating Pit, waste control and disposal plan req.

25 Pa. Code Chapter 78.62

Flowback storage (Post-frac)

Pollution of land and/or surface orground fresh water is prohibited

NYCRR 556.5

25 Pa. Code Chapter 78.62

Storage Structures
Lined w/ 6 debris free sub-grade. Min 30 mil (thick enough to not fail). Syn. flexible liner w/ coefficient of perm no greater 1 x 10-7 cm/sec and w/ strength and thickness to maintain liner integrity. Must not >250,000 gal in single or connected network of pits; Total Volume of all pits on a tract not to exceed 500,000 gal. Subbase designed to be smooth, debris free. Bottom min. 20 above seasonal high groundwater table. at least 2 feet of freeboard remain at all times, If open pit unless the tank is provided with an overflow system to a standby tank or pit with sufficient volume to contain all excess fluid or waste. Unless a CSL permit (691.1691.1001) or 78.57 or 78.58 (control, storage and disposal of production fluids) approval in place; Pit must be removed or filled within 9 months after completion of drilling No brine discharge or other fluids on or into the ground or into the waters. reasonably protected from unauthorized acts of third parties.

Liner

Yes

NYCRR 556.5

25 Pa. Code Chapter 78.62

State design criteria for impoundments

Yes

NYCRR 608 &NYCRR 673

Act 223 & 25 Pa. Code Chapter 78

Freeboard required

No fluids allowed to escape over or into adjacent lands or into streams or other bodies of water

NYCRR 665.5

Act 223 & 25 Pa. Code Chapter 78

Removal/rehabilitation of impoundment area

Yes

NYCRR 555.5

25 Pa. Code Chapter 78

Non-domestic wastewater (Brine disposal)

Yes

NYCRR 556.5

25 Pa. Code Chapter 78.55

Site enclosures

No

none specified

25 Pa. Code Chapter 78

62

Well Pad Development Matrix

New York
NYSDEC (pre-GEIS) Regulation/ Law Citations PADEP

Pennsylvania
Regulation/ Law Citations

Erosion and Sedimentation Control

E & S plan required? Permit required? Yes Yes Article 17, Titles 7,8 and Article 70 Article 17, Titles 7,8 and Article 70 Yes Yes, if over 5 acres 25 Pa. Code Chapter 78.53 & Chapter 102 25 Pa. Code Chapter 102

Site Restoration
Restoration required? Site inspections Erosion & sedimentation control during restoration Specific site restoration requirements Emergency reporting spills Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes, within 2 hours for reportable quantities NYCRR 555.5 NYCRR 550.5 Article 17, Titles 7,8 and Article 70 NYCRR 555.5 NYCRR 595.3 Yes, 270 days after operations cease Yes Yes Yes Yes, immediately for fires or gas explosions 25 Pa. Code Chapter 78 25 Pa. Code Chapter 78.902-906 25 Pa. Code Chapter 78.902-906 25 Pa. Code Chapter 78.902-906 25 Pa. Code Chapter 79

Pipelines
Permitting of environmentally sensitive areas wetlands & streams: Federally delegated Air & Water resources; NY PSC has siting jurisdiction over all lines operating at 125 psi or more and over 1,000 feet in length NY PSC has siting jurisdiction over all lines operating at 125 psi or more and over 1,000 feet in length

Gathering lines

Article VII of the Public Service Law

Erosion & Sediment Control, Wetland and stream Impacts

25 Pa. Code Chapter 102 & 105

Interstate

Article VII of the Public Service Law

Erosion & Sediment Control, Wetland and stream Impacts: Pa PUC approval

25 Pa. Code Chapter 102 & 105

Well Abandonment
Plugging required Yes NYCRR 555 Yes Act 223

63

Surface Water Withdrawal Matrix

New York Pennsylvania

NYSDEC (pre-GEIS) Application/permit required (Surface water) Review threshold - surface water (gpd/consumptive use)

Regulation/ Law Citation

PADEP Water Management Plan Required for Marcellus Wells Reporting Requirement under Act 220 for over 10,000 gpd

Regulation/ Law Citation Water Management Plan

Yes

NYCRR 605

100,000

Reporting requirement, Article 15, Title 33

Act 220

Reporting: Reports are required to DRBC for withdrawals of 100,000 gallons per day during any 30 day period.

Site Location Restrictions

Floodway 100-year floodplain Floodproofing requirements Navigational hazard concerns (submerged vs. floating) Local Regulations Local Regulations No No Not addressed Not addressed Local Regulations Local Regulations No Yes Not addressed 25 Pa. Code Chapter 105

Pass-by Flow Requirements

No alteration that will impair the waters for their best usages No Clean Streams Law, Water Management Plan Water Management Plan

Rule Based / enforceable

NYCRR 703.2

Yes

Fishery policy

Not addressed

Yes

Aquatic Life Survey at Withdrawal Location

Yes, requires PNHI Review and conflict resolution Yes

Desktop GIS survey Results used to modify pass-by requirement

No

Not addressed

Water Mangement Plan Water Management Plan, Clean Streams Law

No

Not addressed

Invasive Species Control

Disinfection requirement Water use restriction Through RBCs Through RBCs Through RBCs Through RBCs

Impingement and Entrainment

Specific intake design Intake location Instantaneous withdrawal velocity No No No Not addressed Not addressed Not addressed Yes Permit may be required under Chapter 105 Yes 25 Pa. Code Chapter 105 25 Pa. Code Chapter 105 Water Management Plan

64

Surface Water Withdrawal Matrix

New York
NYSDEC (pre-GEIS) Regulation/ Law Citation

Pennsylvania
Regulation/ Law Citation

PADEP

Water Metering
Electronic measurement Instantaneous real-time reporting Intake only Storage tank outlet No No No No Not addressed Not addressed Not addressed Not addressed Yes Yes Yes Yes Water Mangement Plan Water Mangement Plan Water Mangement Plan Water Mangement Plan

Water Tracking
Source summary (which withdrawal location) Real-time tracking & reporting Water use and reporting Truck manifest Destination summary (wells vs. dust control) Water Mgmt Plan must be submitted before each Marcellus well development Yes Yes Yes Yes Water Management Plan Water Mangement Plan Water Mangement Plan Water Mangement Plan Water Mangement Plan

No

Not addressed

No No No No

Not addressed Not addressed Not addressed Not addressed

Site Operations
Emergency management plan Drought contingency plan No No Not addressed Not addressed Yes Restrictions based on flow Water Mangement Plan Water Mangement Plan, Clean Streams Law

Onsite Water Storage

Pond storage restrictions Yes NYCRR 608 &NYCRR 673 Yes 25 Pa. Code Chapter 105

65

Groundwater Withdrawal Matrix

New York
NYSDEC (pre-GEIS) Regulation/ Law Citation PADEP PA does not have groundwater withdrawl permitting requirements, except for public water supplies

Pennsylvania
Regulation/ Law Citation

Application/permit required (Groundwater)

No

Not Addressed

Registration: 10,000 g/d over any 30-day period W/ Registration, SEQR state is required for all Review threshold - groundwater Reporting requirement, Act 220 within 1000 feet of a public water agencies, (gpd/consumptive use) Article 15, Title 33 PWS hydropower facilities and operations that withdraw or use more than. Reporting: Reports are required within the Delaware River Basin for withdrawals of over 100,000 gallons per day during any 30-day period.

Site Location Restrictions

floodplain development permit issued by the local government floodplain development permit issued by the local government; 25 Pa. Code Chapter 105 Permit may be required floodplain development permit issued by the local government Yes Yes

Floodway

Not Addressed

25 Pa. Code Chapter 105

100-year floodplain

No For Public Water Supply only Visual Case by case

Not Addressed

25 Pa. Code Chapter 105 25 Pa. Code Chapter 105 25 Pa. Code Chapter 105

Floodproofing requirement Aesthetic concerns / (Wild & Scenic River)

Title 10 GEIS

Required Buffers of Proposed Well

Wetlands None Not Addressed Withdrawal can not impact wetlands hydrology Clean Streams Law

Pump Test Requirements

defers to NYSDEC Recommended Pump Test Procedures for Water Supply Applications in conjunction with the SRBCs aquifer testing protocol

Pump test required?

NYCRR 601.5

None , follows River Basin Commissions

Not Addressed

66

Groundwater Withdrawal Matrix

New York
NYSDEC (pre-GEIS) Regulation/ Law Citation

Pennsylvania
Regulation/ Law Citation

PADEP

Water Metering
Electronic measurement Instantaneous real-time reporting None None Not Addressed Not Addressed Yes Yes Water Management Plan Water Management Plan

Site Operations
Drought contingency plan Title 10 Inferred 51.33(b)(2), (7), Not Addressed Yes Water Management Plan

Onsite Water Storage

lined with 6 in of debris free material, Liner thickness - min 30 mil , Liner meets EPA 9090 method; 78.56-.63; Dam Safety Program Form 3140-PM-WE0001; and WE0002 and Form 3930-PM-WE 0036

Pond storage restrictions

No

Not Addressed

25 Pa. Code Chapter 78.56-63 & 25 Pa. Code Chapter 105

Waste Water Disposal Matrix

New York
NYSDEC (pre-GEIS) Regulation/ Law Citation

Pennsylvania
Regulation/ Law Citation

PADEP

Reclaimation & Waste Disposal

Fluid disposal plan Yes 45 days after well completion, unless DEC gives permission for longer time frame for re-use of fluids NYCRR 554.1 Yes, under permit conditions and PPC Plan 25 Pa. Code Chapter 78.60

Timing

NYCRR 554.1

270 days to close pits after operations cease

Act 223, 25 Pa. Code Chapter 78

Fluid disposal restrictions

Yes

NYCRR 554.1

Must be removed, cannot discharge to any Commonwealth waters unless permitted under Cleam Streams Law Yes, for non-frac fluids

Act 223, Clean Streams Law

Land application permitted?

Yes

NYCRR 556

25 Pa. Code Chapter 78.56

67

Waste Water Disposal Matrix

New York
NYSDEC (pre-GEIS) Well injection permitted? On-site disposal? Yes, with state and EPA Permit Yes On-site burial with landowner approval if no polymer or oil-based drilling muds are used None Regulation / Law Citation NYCRR 556.5 NYCRR 556.5 PADEP Yes, with EPA permit Yes May be land applied or buried on site if meets regulatory requirements Minimum 20 depth to bedrock

Pennsylvania
Regulation / Law Citation EPA Regs Applied 25 Pa. Code Chapter 78.60 25 Pa. Code Chapter 78.61, 78.62 25 Pa. Code Chapter 78.61, 78.62

Drilling mud disposal

NYCRR 556.5

Minimum soil depth for disposal

Not addressed

Flowback Disposal
Section 7.1.8.1, flowback water cannot be taken to a publicly owned treatment works without the Departments approval. On-site burial with landowner approval if no polymer or oil-based drilling muds are used Frac liquids must be disposed at DEP approved, permitted treatment plant,or an injection well permitted by EPA MUD - Returns circulate through line pit and series of tanks to remove cuttings and Susp Solids. Routed to lined pit and closed, if PA standards are not exceeded. No discharge to water of the Commonwealth unless meets Cleam Stream Law, may be land applied if meets requirements of Chapter 78 Disposal must be consistent with the Clean Streams Law, and Chapter 78 Some

Frac fluids

NYCRR 554.1

Clean Streams Law and 25 Pa. Code Chapter 78.57, 78.60

Drill mud

NYCRR 556.5

25 Pa. Code Chapter 78.61, 78.62

Drilling fluids

Treated as industrial wastewater

NYCRR 554.1

Clean Stream Law and 25 Pa. Code Chapter 78.60

Production brine NORM( Naturally Occurring Radioactive Materials) analysis Removal of drilling fluids pit

Yes

NYCRR 556.5

Clean Stream Law and 25 Pa. Code Chapter 78.54 Rad Protection Regs and Waste Management Regs 25 Pa. Code Chapter 78.56

None Maximum of 45 days hold after cessation of drilling operations

6 NYCRR Part 380 & part 360 NYCRR 554.1(c)(3);N otification & Reporting requirements

270 days

68

Waste Water Disposal Matrix

New York
NYSDEC (pre-GEIS) Regulation / Law Citation

Pennsylvania
PADEP Regulation / Law Citation

Hazardous Waste Transit

General requirements Approved, permitted hauler, tracking from required NYCRR 364 Yes, utilizing waste management regulations 35 P.S. Section 6018.101 et seq.

Interstate
US DOT Pipeline & Hazardous Matls Safety Admin (PHMSA) oversight Hazardous Materials Transportation Regulations Federal Motor Carrier Safety Administration (FMCSA)

Yes

US DOT

Yes

US DOT

Yes

NYCRR 364

Yes, utilizing waste management regulations Yes

35 P.S. Section 6018.101 et seq. FMCSA

Yes

FMCSA

Intrastate
State registration or operating authority for transporting hazardous materials Yes, waste management regulations 35 P.S. Section 6018.101 et seq.

Yes

NYCRR 364

69

Public Dialogue Participants

The following organiza ons and individuals par cipated in the Marcellus Shale Project public dialogue. Their par cipa on in no way indicates an endorsement of the report or its ndings.
Aqua Pennsylvania http://www.aquaamerica.com/Pennsylvania/Pages/Home.aspx Aqua Pennsylvania is a water company providing quality water and wastewater service, in a manner consistent with applicable standards for public health and environmental quality standards. (Steve Clark) Catskill Citizens for Safe Energy http://www.catskillcitizens.org/ Catskill Citizens for Safe Energy is a volunteer grassroots organization intended to give residents a voice in the emerging energy decisions in the Catskills. (Jeffrey Allison, Bruce Ferguson) Building Consensus for Sustainability http://www.consensusbuilders.net/ Building Consensus for Sustainability works to create a neutral forum which encourages and fosters opportunities for parties to nd where their shared interests may be, leading to solutions that can be implemented and are sustainable. (Buck Moorhead) Chesapeake Energy http://www.chk.com/Pages/default.aspx Chesapeake Energy is the second-largest producer of natural gas, a Top 20 producer of oil and natural gas liquids and the most active driller of new wells in the U.S. Headquartered in Oklahoma City, the companys operations are focused on discovering and developing unconventional natural gas and oil elds onshore in the U.S. (Mike Atchie, Brian Grove, Paul Hartman) Damascus Citizens for Sustainability http://www.damascuscitizens.org/about.html Damascus Citizens for Sustainability (DCS) is a grassroots nonprot, 501(c)(3), organization dedicated to protecting the Upper Delaware River Basin and beyond from the ravages of deep-shale gas extraction and the threat posed by the natural gas industry. (Barbara Arrindell, Bernie Handler) Delaware Highlands Conservancy http://www.delawarehighlands.org/ The Delaware Highlands Conservancy is a land trust dedicated to conserving the natural and cultural heritage of the upper Delaware River Watershed. We are committed to sustaining our rural quality of life and focused on the connections between local citizens, a healthy environment, and a strong local economy. (Sue Currier) Delaware River Basin Commission http://www.state.nj.us/drbc/ Delaware River Basin Commission is a regional body with the force of law to oversee a unied approach to managing a river system without regard to political boundaries. The members of this regional body include the four basin state governors and the Division Engineer, North Atlantic Division, U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, who serves as the federal representative. (Carol Collier, Ken Najjar) Easton Suburban Water http://www.eswater.net/about.html Easton Suburban Water Authority was incorporated in 1957 by the City of Easton to provide high-quality water to the municipalities surrounding the city. The Authority serves more than 30,000 customers in a service area that includes the City of Easton, the Townships of Palmer, Forks, Bethlehem, Williams and Lower Nazareth, and the Boroughs of Wilson, West Easton and Glendon. About 28,300 customers are residential, 1,500 are commercial, 125 are industrial and 90 are institutional. The Authority has the ability to produce 10 million gallons of water per day at the Water Treatment Plant, which draws water from the Delaware River. (Roy White, Chuck Wilson) Hess Corporation http://www.hess.com/default.aspx The Hess Corporation (known as Amerada Hess Corporation prior to May 2006) is an integrated oil company based in New York City, New York, USA. The company explores, produces, transports, and renes crude oil, as well as natural gas. (Gene Linscombe, Dean Jamieson)

70

HRG, Inc., Herbert, Rowland & Grubic, Inc. http://www.hrg-inc.com/index.asp An engineering service rm offering expertise in the areas of transportation, environmental site assessments, civil and water resources, site design, surveying, GIS and water and wastewater engineering. (Mark Spatz) Joint Landholders Association of New York, Inc http://www.jlcny.org A coalition of 38 landowner groups representing 800,000 acres who seek to foster, promote, advance and protect the common interest of the people as it pertains to natural gas development through education and best environmental practices. (Inge Grafe-Kieklak) Kittatinny Canoes http://www.kittatinny.com Kittatinny Canoes is a Delaware River Trip Company that offers a wide variety of camping and water experiences. (Dave Jones) Miller Environmental Inc. http://www.miller-env.com/ Miller Environmental, Inc. is a rm that provides professional operations and management services for the water industry including the treatment of drinking water, municipal and industrial wastewater as well as conveyance and collections systems associated with these environmental utilities. (William Ronyack) Monroe Conservation District http://www.monroecd.org/ The Monroe Conservation District provides information and technical assistance to farmers, homeowner/renters, educators, businesses, developers and government agencies. The District does this by assisting with agriculture management planning, educational displays, demonstrations and informational workshops, tree seedling sales, native plant and book sales. Wildlife habitat planning, and forestry assistance is also provided. Soil Survey books are available for information on soils and soil capabilities and construction site erosion control. (Orianna Richards, Craig Todd) National Park Service Upper Delaware Scenic and Recreational River http://www.nps.gov/upde The Upper Delaware Scenic and Recreational River stretches along approximately 73 miles (117 km) of the Delaware river from Hancock, NY to Sparrowbush, NY. Most of the land in this unit of the National Park Service is privately owned; the federal government owns only approximately 30 acres (12 ha). Upper Delaware Scenic and Recreational River is a partnership of individuals; private landowners; and local, state, and federal governments working to protect the river, its environment, and the communities in the valley. (Carla Hahn, Don Hamilton, Sean McGuinness) Delaware Water Gap National Recreational Area http://www.nps.gov/dewa/index.htm Delaware Water Gap National Recreation Area, administered by the National Park Service, preserves almost 70,000 acres (28,000 ha) of land along the Delaware Rivers New Jersey and Pennsylvania shores, stretching from the Delaware Water Gap northward almost to the New York state line. Middle Delaware National Scenic River is a designated 40-mile (64 km) section of the river entirely within the recreation area. (Denise CookeBauer, Patrick Lynch) NE PA Audubon http://www.nepaaudubon.org/ The Northeast Pennsylvania Audubon Society (NEPAS) was founded in 1971 as a local chapter of the National Audubon Society. Its mission is to conserve and restore our environment to benet humanity as well as birds and other wildlife through education, action, and advocacy. NEPAS is a non-prot 501(c)(3) organization with about 600 members. (Barbara Leo) Neweld Exploration Company http://www.newd.com/ An independent crude oil and natural gas exploration and production company headquartered in Houston, Texas. We were founded in 1989 and went public in 1993. (Alan Branhing, Jack Cochran, Peter Chacon)

71

Northern Wayne Property Owners Association http://nwpoa.club.ofcelive.com/default.aspx NWPOA is an organization that represents an 100,000 acre+ group of landowners in northern Wayne County and Susquehanna County PA, who signed leases in the summer of 2009 and thereby have partnered through a landowner-friendly lease with Hess Corporation. It also represents 44,000 acres of reassigned Chesapeake leaseholders. (Marian Schweighofer, Mike Uretsky) Orange County Planning http://www.co.orange.ny.us/orgMain.asp?orgid=53&storyTypeID=&sid=& The Orange County Department of Planning is engaged in issues of land use planning, transportation, agriculture, training, resource management, open space and economic issues that affect the county. (Julie Richmond) Penn State Cooperative Extension http://www.extension.psu.edu Penn State Extension offers practical how-to education and problem-solving assistance based on university research. We strive to help people make informed decisions to better their lives, businesses, and communities. (Dave Messersmith) Pike County Conservation District http://www.pikeconservation.org Pike County Conservation District is committed to natural resources conservation through leadership, education, technical assistance, planning and enforcement to ensure the long term protection and sustainable use of Pike Countys natural resources and implementation of environmentally sound development and land use practices. (Susan Beecher, Rylan Coker) Pike County Planning Ofce http://www.pikepa.org/communityplanning.htm Pike County Ofce of Community Planning is the County Department that comprehensively addresses county-wide planning issues and initiatives. The Community Planning Ofce responsibilities include development, management and implementation of County planning initiatives and coordination and implementation of the Pike County Comprehensive Plan. Other core responsibilities of the Ofce of Community Planning are to provide professional technical planning assistance to municipal governments in such areas as municipal comprehensive planning, zoning, subdivision and land development, and to support and help facilitate local municipal and multi-municipal planning initiatives. (Scot Boyce, Sally Corrigan) Pinchot Institute for Conservation http://www.pinchot.org The mission of the Pinchot Institute is to advance conservation and sustainable natural resource management by developing innovative, practical, and broadly-supported solutions to conservation challenges and opportunities. We accomplish this through nonpartisan research, education and technical assistance on key issues inuencing the future of conservation and sustainable natural resource management. (Aaron Lien, Bill Manners, Nick Niles) Pocono Environmental Education Center (PEEC) http://www.peec.org The Pocono Environmental Education Center advances environmental awareness, knowledge, and appreciation through hands-on experience in a natural outdoor classroom. (Jeff Rosalsky) Rural Bethel Landowners Coalition The Rural Bethel Landowners Coalition is a landowner coalition that has as its position the assurance of fair leases, honest royalty percentages, safe drilling practices and proper restoration of our lands. (Al Larson) Sullivan Area Citizens for Responsible Energy Development Sullivan Area Citizens for Responsible Energy Development (SACRED) is a coalition of residents in and around Sullivan County, NY who support renewable energy resources and oppose hydraulic and horizontal gas drilling given its inherent risks to human health and the environment. (Layrsa Dyrszka) Sullivan County Soil and Water Conservation District http://www.sullivancountyswcd.com Conservation districts are local governmental subdivisions established under state law to carry out a program for the conservation, use and development of soil, water and related resources. Districts are resource management agencies, coordinating and implementing resource and environmental programs at the local level in cooperation with federal and state agencies. (Brian Brustman)

72

Sullivan County Planning and Environmental Management http://www.co.sullivan.ny.us/Departments/PlanningandEnvironmentalManagement/tabid/3225/Default.aspx The Sullivan County Division of Planning & Environmental Management is responsible for the creation of programs that foster orderly development and redevelopment of the Countys physical infrastructure in a manner that conserves natural resources while providing economic opportunity for area residents. (Luiz Aragon, Ethan Cohen, Heather Jacksy) Sullivan Delaware Property Owners Association http://Sullivandelawaregroup.org Property owners association representing landowners owning 70,000+ acres who are interested in entering into an environmentally responsible and nancially benecial leasing arrangement for natural gas extraction. (Bill Graby, Noel van Swol) Sullivan Renaissance http://www.sullivanrenaissance.org Community beautication organization to enhance the appearance of Sullivan County, NY while awakening community pride. (Denise Frangipane) The Lackawaxen River Conservancy (TLRC) http://www.Lackawaxenriver.org The Lackawaxen River Conservancys mission is a cohesive group of local residents who have joined together and are committed to protection and preservation of the Lackawaxen River, its wildlife, watershed and natural beauty. TLRC was formed in summer of 2001 by residents living in the Pike County portion of the Lackawaxen River drainage area. (Win Olsen) Town of Highland http://www.Townofhighlandny.com The Town of Highland is comprised of ve hamlets: Barryville, Eldred, Highland, Lake, Minisink Ford, and Yulan, and located along the Delaware River on the western border of Sullivan County. (Frederick Bosch) Town of Tusten http://www.tusten-narrowsburg.org The Town of Tusten is contains the hamlet of Narrowsburg and is located along the Delaware River on the western border of Sullivan County. (Peg Harrison) Upper Delaware Council http://www.upperdelawarecouncil.org The Councils existence evolved from special provisions in the 1978 legislation which designated the Upper Delaware River as a component of the National Wild and Scenic Rivers System, and called for development of a management plan and a program providing for the coordinated implementation and administration of the plan. (Bill Douglass, Dave Soete) Upper Delaware River Roundtable http://www.uduuf.org/upper-delaware-roundtable The Upper DelAWARE River Roundtable is a networking initiative to foster communication and collaboration between regional partners and stakeholders in the Upper Delaware River Valley and provide tools and educational activities for governmental entities to enhance the future of this national natural resource. (Laurie Stuart) Wayne Conservation District http://www.waynecd.org The Wayne Conservation district assists landowners and county residents with the conservation and management of Wayne Countys natural resources. The Wayne County Conservation District was formed in 1969 to address conservation issues related to soil, water, air, plants, wetland and wildlife habitat preservation and improvement, and environmental quality concerns in the county. (Jamie Knecht, Bob Muller, Paul Reining) Willow Wisp Organic Farm http://www.willowwisporganic.com/ An organic farm that grows a diverse mix of organic vegetables, herbs, and cut owers in Abrahamsville, PA. (Greg Swartz)

73

74

75

76