American Oil and Gas Reporter - November 2018 - 27

Recognition Of An Asset
The Smart Perspective About
Wastewater Management
With oil and natural gas production comes produced water, extracted from geological formations along with some chemicals
used during the exploration, drilling and production process. Thus,
the dramatic growth in unconventional production is accompanied
by an increase in produced water. And while our nation benefits
from the recovery of energy, many states with oil and gas resources
lack an abundance of fresh water, and their limited supplies are
subject to numerous competing demands. With arid states in need
of water, the availability of produced water in these same states
offers a potential solution: using treated wastewater from oil and
natural gas production as an important and environmentally
beneficial addition to America's water supply.
That was the recommendation from Lee Fuller, Independent
Petroleum Association of America executive vice president, in
a statement at the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency's
October public hearing about its study of oil and gas extraction
wastewater management. EPA conducted a study of centralized
waste treatment (CWT) facilities that accepted oil and gas extraction wastewater from 2014-2017. The earlier study compiled
data on CWT facilities that accepted such wastewater, available
treatment technologies with their associated costs, discharge
characteristics, financial characteristics of CWT and the environmental impacts of discharges from CWT facilities.
A current study, announced in May 2018, aims to provide a
more holistic study of wastewater management under the Clean
Water Act. Industry representatives at the October hearing advocated innovative solutions in which EPA could offer states
options to improve their water assets. IPAA argues that federal
regulators should provide states with the needed framework
instead of serving as the hands-on regulator.
Regulation of produced water management primarily falls
under the federal authority of the CWA, the Safe Drinking
Water Act, and the Resource Conservation and Recovery Act.
However, states are the primary managers of water assets within
their boundaries. States also are in the best position to understand
the unique geologic characteristics of their production.
In Texas, "water usage in the three major Texas shale plays,
Barnett, Eagle Ford and Permian Basin, demonstrates how factors
such as the shale formation's geology (permeability, depth and
composition), local climate and water sources influence the water
management of specific regions." Such was the finding from a
July 2014 study, Sustainable Water Management in the Texas Oil
and Gas Industry, published by the Atlantic Council. As David
Clark, president of the Pennsylvania Grade Crude Oil Coalition
put it at the October hearing, this state-level knowledge argues
for "flexibility between federal and state regulators, recognizing
that many environmental issues require regional solutions."
The oil and gas industry is committed to reusing water
where practical, but a conducive regulatory framework could
go much further, potentially putting produced water back into
our country's water supply. Petroleum Association of Wyoming
Vice President John Robitaille describes that state's produced
water as "water that works." It is entirely consumed in Wyoming's

"The oil and gas industry is committed to
reusing water where practical, but a
conducive regulatory framework could go
much further, potentially putting produced

water back into our country's water supply.

arid environment, benefitting agricultural operations and creating
significant wildlife habitat. However, EPA's unconventional oil
and gas regulations limit such beneficial use. EPA's ongoing
study creates an opportunity to establish the framework for cooperative federalism that will respect regional differences among
and even within oil and gas producing states.
One obstacle to allowing produced water transfers from one
party to another is EPA's effluent limitations guidelines. If EPA
can recognize produced water as a resource rather than a
discharge, then the agency can open the door to states' effective
produced water management without unnecessary constraints
of regulation under the CWA.
Clearly, there is a need for science and technology-based
effluent criteria that will allow discharges while still protecting
the environment, but resource protection need not cancel beneficial
use. Federal and state regulators must work with industry to
resolve liability issues that can stifle produced water transfers.
An encouraging step is the memorandum of understanding
between New Mexico and EPA, effective July 2018, which will
clarify and encourage an understanding of "the existing regulatory
and permitting frameworks, and associated policy decisions . . .
related to the re-use, recycling, and beneficial use of waters
originating from oil and natural gas activities."
To update the 2014 Atlantic Council study, the Texas Alliance
of Energy Producers and IPAA are sponsoring a new study,
Sustainable Produced Water Policy, Regulatory Framework and
Management in the Texas Oil and Gas Industry: 2019 and
Beyond, scheduled for release in spring 2019. As PGCC's Clark
puts it, "Federal rule making is often a blunt instrument that
should be exercised with restraint." Let us use this opportunity
for federal restraint to provide states with the options to
encourage oil and gas production and simultaneously improve
water asset management.
r

SUSAN GINSBERG is vice

president of crude oil and natural gas regulatory affairs for
the Independent Petroleum Association of America. She covers legislation and regulation,
focusing on the CFTC and
FERC. Her experience in natural gas regulatory affairs spans
more than three decades.
NOVEMBER 2018 27

American Oil and Gas Reporter - November 2018

Table of Contents for the Digital Edition of American Oil and Gas Reporter - November 2018