David B. Cornue, PG, CHMM*, J. Daniel Arthur, PE*, and Mark Carl** *ALL Consulting, ** IOGCC

1. Reducing Onshore Natural Gas and Oil Exploration and Production Impacts Using a Broad-Based Stakeholder Approach David B. Cornue, PG, CHMM*, J. Daniel Arthur, PE*, and Mark Carl** *ALL Consulting, ** IOGCC

2. DOE LINGO Projects An initiative to demonstrate a new operating paradigm addressing environmental issues for oil and gas operations in sensitive areas. Three studies: • Univ. Arkansas/Argonne Lab – Fayetteville Shale play lease layouts • Michigan Tech – Antrim Shale play horizontal completions and CO2 venting • IOGCC/ALL Consulting – Adverse Impact Reduction Handbook

3. Research Details • Primary research funding for the project has been provided by the U.S. Department of Energy’s National Energy Technology Laboratory (NETL) in Tulsa, Oklahoma • Cooperators and Contributors • Federal Agencies • State Agencies • Industry • Non-industry interest groups/individuals

4. Research Contributors • Lead Researchers • Interstate Oil & Gas Compact Commission • ALL Consulting • PAC States • California Division of Oil, Gas & Geothermal Resources • Montana Board of Oil & Gas Conservation • Nebraska Oil and Gas Division • North Dakota Oil and Gas Division • Industry • Devon Energy Corp. and others yet to be identified. • Non-Governmental Organizations • Yet to be identified

5. Research Objectives The primary goal of the project is to provide a catalog of reasonable and prudent practices geared towards preventing or minimizing E&P impacts in order to support increased access to environmentally sensitive areas. This will be achieved by: • Identifying E&P environmental impact issues of concern to landowners and interest groups • Identifying technically and economically sound solutions and practices that will avoid or reduce these impacts • Summarizing the findings in a handbook format for use by E&P firms, consultants, regulators, and the public

6. Handbook - Objectives • Compilation of impact prevention and mitigation alternatives – a reasonable and prudent practices catalog • Evaluation of the feasibility of low impact E&P project planning • To increase E&P access to environmentally sensitive areas

7. Project Overview • Task 1 – E&P Practices Research • Task 2 – Interviews, Field Reconnaissance and Case Studies • Task 3 – Impact Analysis • Task 4 – Handbook preparation • Task 5 – Technology Transfer

8. Task 1: Practices Research • Identify low impact practices and technologies with guidance from PAC members • Research these practices from the viewpoints of all stakeholders • Prepare Interim Report for review by PAC members

9. Task 1: Compile Information • Common practices • Impact prevention/low impact technologies • Impact mitigation strategies • Legislation • Regulations • Guidance

10. Task 1: Data Sources • Project Advisory Council members • Industry Groups • Governmental Organizations • Non-governmental Organizations • Researchers – past and ongoing studies • Ranchers, farmers, landowners

11. Task 2: Interviews & Recon. • Interview industry representatives, plus a target group of ~100 non-industry individuals and groups • Field reconnaissance to observe specific issue/solution scenarios • Prepare Interim Report of case studies at the specific issue/solution level for review by PAC members

12. Task 2: Interviews • Industry organizations and companies • Federal, State, and Local agencies • Ranchers, farmers, and landowners • Using peer group interviewers • Concerned individuals • Non-governmental organizations

13. Task 2: Field Reconnaissance • Look at full life cycle of project activities in order to identify low impact practices, at the specific issue/solution level, from initial geophysical surveying through post-development reclamation. • Focus on impact prevention as well as impact mitigation.

14. Task 2: Case Studies Summarize individual case studies demonstrating technically reasonable and prudent practices, at the specific issue/solution level, that: • Avoid impacts • Minimize impacts that can not be avoided • Mitigate those unavoidable impacts

15. Task 3: Impact Analysis • Evaluate and analyze practices and technologies capable of achieving the low impact goal at the national and regional scales • Prepare Interim Report of case studies for review by PAC members

16. Task 3: Impact Analysis Consider the pros and cons of approaches based on: • Technical feasibility • Economic practicability • Operational practicability

17. Task 4: The Handbook Adverse Impact Reduction Handbook • A draft will be prepared for comment and then the final version will be published. • The Final document will be: • Distributed to cooperating parties • Available for download A critical phase of the project is the assembly and presentation of information gathered.

18. Task 4: Draft Handbook A draft of the Adverse Impact Reduction Handbook will be prepared from: • Interim Reports • Comments on the Interim Reports received from PAC members • New information that may become available

19. Task 4: Final Handbook • The Draft Handbook will be reviewed by PAC members and select federal and state agencies • Comments on the assembled document will be provided by reviewers • A Final Handbook will be prepared after assimilation of the comments received

20. Task 4: Handbook Distribution The Final document will be: • Distributed to cooperating parties • Available for download

21. Task 5: Technology Transfer Dissemination of the information gathered is also key to the success of the project. This will be accomplished in two manners: • Web availability of the Handbook • Presentations at professional venues

22. Task 5: Presentations We hope to be able to make presentations to groups such as: • IOGCC • AAPG • SPE • GWPC • AGU • And/or other appropriate venues

23. Project Timeline

24. Issues to Consider We anticipate the project will examine a variety of potential issues which may include: • Pre-drilling exploration activities • Access and pipeline/utility corridors • Pits • Produced water • Air emissions • Dust • Noise • Traffic • Post-production reclamation • Visual resources • Cultural and historical resources

25. Solutions to Consider We anticipate the project will examine a variety of potential prevention and mitigation solution which may include: • Stockpiling of topsoil at well pads and corridors for rehab • Shielding equipment with vegetation for sight and sound • Micro turbines to reduce air emissions and generate power • Directional drilling to minimize the number of well pads • Closed-loop mud systems to avoid use of mud pits, minimize well pad size and minimize waste volumes • Aquifer storage and recovery for produced water management • Emergency plans in flood prone areas for protection of pipelines and tanks

26. Task 1: Practices Research Expected to include documents such as: • Reasonable and Prudent Practices for Stabilization (RAPPS) of Oil and Gas Construction Sites – IPAA • Oil and Gas at Your Door? A Landowners Guide to Oil and Gas Development – OGAP • Pit Pollution – OGAP • Doing it Right, a Blueprint for Responsible Coal Bed Methane Development in Montana – NPRC • The Western Heritage Alternative – BCA • MT HB790 committee findings and associated testimony • Montana Statewide Oil and Gas Environmental Impact Statement – BLM • A Guide to Practical Management of Produced Water from Onshore Oil and Gas Operations in the United States – DOE • Federal and State regulations • Other documents identified by the PAC and through the course of research

27. Task 2: Interviews May include representatives of: • Devon Energy Corp. and other E&P firms • State O&G Agencies • Federal land and resource management agencies • BLM • USFS • Non-governmental organizations: • Oil and Gas Accountability Project • Northern Plains Resource Council • Vermejo Park Ranch • Individual ranchers/farmers/landowners • Other entities/individuals identified by the PAC

28. Task 2: Field Reconnaissance Will be conducted on an issues/solutions basis at locations to be identified during the research phase, but may include locales such as: • Fort Worth Basin – Barnett Shale Play – E&P in a highly urbanized area • Powder River Basin – CBNG – area has been subject to much scrutiny as well as implementation of low-impact solutions • Vermejo Park Ranch, NM – CBNG – considered by some to be a model of low impact E&P • Other locations identified by the PAC

29. Task 2: Case Studies May include issues/solutions such as: • Fort Worth Basin, TX • Rig lighting • E&P near a major airport • Powder River Basin, MT & WY • Roads, increased access, traffic, dust • Compressor noise and air emissions • Vermejo Park Ranch, NM • Excluding drilling from specific areas, limiting wells per section, limiting well pad and corridor size, “camouflage” of equipment, noise restrictions, produced water reinjection, rapid reclamation • Other issues identified by the PAC

30. PAC Member Responsibilities Participation/input from contributors and cooperators are integral to both the research and the final products. Input is requested in the identification of: • Documents of potential interest • Issues for consideration • Prevention/mitigation strategies for consideration • Entities/individuals to interview • Field reconnaissance projects of interest • Case studies to document • Timely review and comment on Interim Reports and Draft Handbook

31. ALL Project Manager Dave Cornue, PG ALL Consulting 1718 S. Cheyenne Ave. Tulsa, OK 74119 918-382-7581 dcornue@all-llc.com www.all-llc.com IOGCC Project Manager Mark Carl IOGCC 900 N.E. 23rd Street Oklahoma City, OK 73152 405-525-3556 mark.carl@iogcc.state.ok.us www.iogcc.state.ok.us Contact Information