2 promulgated regulations creating an Underground Injection Control Program to protect from contamination aquifers that are, or could become, potential sources of drinking water. In 1981, California’s Division of Oil and Gas. Staff Comments Railroad Commission 1of Texas Overall Comments: The Railroad Commission of Texas (RRC) wishes to foster the means of safe, efficient, and effective capture and stor. Utah DEQ: Programs: Utah Underground Injection Control Program. January 2003 Objectives Underground Injection Control (UIC) Program. There are five classes of injection systems in the Federal UIC program. There are 30 types of injection systems ('wells') recognized by EPA ranging from.
The Environmental Protection Agency's (EPA) role in the Underground Injection Control (UIC) class II program is to oversee and enforce fluid injection into wells associated with oil and gas production, known as. Underground Injection Control (UIC) Program. Office of Oil and Gas . Underground Injection Control (UIC) Program. In 1974, Congress passed the Safe Drinking Water Act, which required the U.S. EPA to establish a system of regulations for underground injection activities. Each year Americans generate large.
General Information. Underground Injection Control (UIC). EPA Correspondence and Guidance Documents.
On Friday, May 1. Division of Oil, Gas, and Geothermal Resources of the Department of Conservation and the State Water Resources Control Board sent an update to the U. S. Environmental Protection Agency on the State agencies’ ongoing corrective review of underground injection well information. The objective of the review has been to identify wells that may have been improperly permitted to inject produced fluids into non- hydrocarbon producing, non- exempt aquifers. This update focuses particular attention on those wells that may have the highest risk to California aquifers from contamination due to oil and gas production. November 3, 2. 01. US EPA response to October 1.
Category 1 and 2 wells. October 1. 5, 2. 01. Joint Letter from the Department of Conservation and State Water Resources Control Board to US EPA re Category 1 Well Review Findings. October 1. 5, 2. 01.
Joint Letter from the Department of Conservation and State Water Resources Control Board to US EPA re Category 2 Well Review Findings. July 3. 1, 2. 01. Re: July 3. 1, 2.
Submittal of Review Information for Category 2 Wells. July 1. 5, 2. 01. US EPA Deliverable. US EPA response to May 1. Underground Injection Control.
May 1. 5, 2. 01. 5 Letter from the Department of Conservation and State Water Resources Control Board to US EPA re resolve compliance issues. Aquifer Exemption Guidance Document. United States Environmental Protection Agency's Response to February 6, 2. Letter Regarding Underground Injection Control. February 6, 2. 01. Letter from the Department of Conservation and State Water Resources Control Board responding to US EPA re Underground Injection Control. December 2. 2, 2.
Letter from US EPA to Department of Conservation and State Water Resources Control Board. March 9, 2. 01. 5 Letter from US EPA to Department of Conservation and State Water Resources Control Board. Division, State Water Board, and US EPA Aquifer Exemption Workshops. Joint workshops conducted by the Division, the State Water Board, and the US EPA were held in Bakersfield and the L. A. These workshops were intended to provide a brief history of the State’s primacy delegation from US EPA, as well as an outline of the data requirements and process for requesting an aquifer exemption under the Safe Drinking Water Act. All three agencies provided short presentations regarding their specific role, and were available to answer general questions about the aquifer exemption application process.
Copies of the presentations by the three agencies are found below: The link below is to a list of issued well permits that may currently have a corresponding well injecting into an aquifer potentially needing an aquifer exemption, pursuant to the US EPA’s request. This list is best understood as a list of well permits, rather than wells. Wells can be proposed and permitted without ever being drilled or converted to an injection well. Even where a well has been drilled, it may already have been plugged and abandoned or issued other orders preventing injection. Determining the current status of the wells listed here is part of the Division’s February 6, 2. US EPA. This list was generated by identifying one or both of the following characteristics: The permit is for a well located outside the productive limits of a field as those limits were identified in the State’s Primacy application to the US EPA; The permit is for a well injecting within the productive limits but into multiple zones, one of which may not be exempted by the Memorandum of Agreement (MOA) with the US EPA.
The Division acknowledges that many of these wells may not need an aquifer exemption, but a formal determination cannot be made until an evaluation, of the specific well(s) and injection zone(s), is completed. Please note that the evaluation of these well permits has begun and the list continues to change. However, to be consistent with the US EPA’s letter to the Division dated December 2.
Division’s response on February 6, 2. August 2. 01. 4, and a list of the enhanced oil recovery permitted wells as of October 2.
The Division will update the list periodically. California’s primacy delegation was made based on one or both of versions of this document. Some related documentation is also included.