?glOHI/?lmUNITED STATES ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY REGION IX 4? ?0?99 75 Hawthorne Street San Francisco, CA 95105-3901 OFFICE OF THE REGIONAL ADMINISTRATOR Matt Rodriquez Secretary for Environmental Protection California Environmental Protection Agency 1001 I Street PO. Box 2815 Sacramento, CA 95812-2815 John Laird Secretary California Natural Resources Agency 1416 Ninth Street, Suite 1311 Sacramento, CA 95814 Dear Secretaries Rodriquez and Laird: The Safe Drinking Water Act was passed by Congress in 1974 to protect public health by regulating the nation's public drinking water supplies. The SDWA authorizes the United States Environmental Protection Agency to protect underground sources ofdrinking water. This role is of particular importance at this time ofdrought and diminished water supplies. Since 1983, California?s Division of Oil, Gas and Geothermal Resources has been granted primary responsibility from EPA to implement the requirements ofthe Safe Drinking Water Act?s Underground Injection Control Program. The State?s authority covers certain types of injection wells, used primarily to inject steam or water for enhanced oil/ gas recovery, or to inject waste water (such as brines) from oil and gas production (Class II). EPA approves the locations where injection into groundwater aquifers may be allowed. These aquifers are generally those that are not used and have no use as potential sources of drinking water. Aquifers with high quality water are protected and should not receive Class 11 oil and gas related injection ?uids. requires DOGGR to administer the State Program in accordance with approved statutes and regulations, including the requirements and procedures described in a Memorandum of Agreement between the EPA and DOGGR. In 2011, EPA conducted an audit of the State Program that highlighted speci?c deficiencies. Additionally, in 2012, EPA performed a preliminary review focused on aquifer exemptions, the results of which were shared with DOGGR (copy enclosed). The review raised questions about the alignment ofClass II injection wells with approved aquifer exemption boundaries. DOGGR then initiated a broad review of Class II injection in the State to ensure that wells have been appropriately authorized to inject within the aquifer exemption boundaries approved by the EPA. After reviewing tiles for existing 'Class 11 well permits and GIS mapping of the wells in question, DOGGR determined that it had authorized some injection ofoil and gas?related disposal fluids such as brines into non-exempt Princh (In Recycled Paper aquifers containing high quality water. Additionally, DOGGR identified the presence of water supply wells in the vicinity ofsome of the injection wells. On July 1, 2014, the State issued orders requiring the affected operators to cease injection in non-exempt, fresh water aquifers and to submit data needed to assess the potential threat to human health and potential impacts to water quality. Exercising our authority under 40 CPR. 145.32, EPA requests that DOGGR take the following actions and provide the following information to the EPA: 1. Drinking Water Source Evaluation EPA requests that the State provide, within 60 days of receipt of this letter, its initial assessment of whether any existing and potential sources of drinking water are at risk of contamination from improper Class ll injection, including the following: a. The location of private and public water system wells that may be at risk due to permitted Class ll injection activities. b. A plan to ensure protection of human health from actual or potential exposure to drinking water affected by any injection wells. c. In coordination with the State Water Resources Control Board, Regional Water Quality Control Boards and the California Department ofPublic Health, a plan to communicate this information to the public and to address subsequent questions and concerns. 2. Documentation of Aquifer Exemptions When EPA approved State primacy in 1983, EPA also approved a number of aquifer exemptions. Following up on our 2012 preliminary review, we are working to evaluate the historical records on aquifer exemptions. To facilitate our evaluation. EPA asks that DOGGR provide all documents that pertain to the State?s requests for aquifer exemptions, approval or denial of such requests, and any post?primacy appeals by the State regarding aquifer exemptions. Please provide any information within 30 days of receipt of this letter. 3. Tiered Review of Class 11 Wells Any injection from, Class 11 wells into an aquifer that meets the definition of an underground source ofdrinking water (less than 10,000 mg/L total dissolved solids). absent an EPA-approved aquifer exemption. is inconsistent with UIC regulations and State Program primacy requirements. EPA understands the State is currently evaluating all potential Class 11 wells that may be injecting into underground sources of drinking water. EPA supports the State?s plans to complete the review of all affected wells within the next several months, and to take responsive action to protect underground sources of drinking water. with priorities for review based on I proximity to water supply wells and the potential that receiving formations may be in current use as sources of drinking water. Please provide the following: a. Within 30 days of receipt of this letter, the number and location of all Class II wells, by DOGGR district. permitted to inject in non-hydrocarbon?producing formations with water quality below 10,000 mg/L total dissolved solids, other than the 25 formations listed in Attachment A to this letter. For each identi?ed well, please include the operator?s name, well type, depth, ?eld and formation names, date injection commenced. the water quality (TDS) of both the injection formation and the injection fluid, and any other pertinent details. In addition, please provide any associated orders or actions to cease injection in such formations (excluding the seven orders dated July 1, 2014) and plans to ensure future protection of underground sources of drinking water. b. Within 90 days of receipt of this letter, the number and location of all Class II wells, by DOGGR district, permitted to inject in hydrocarbon-producing formations with water quality below 10,000 mg/L TDS located in non-exempt aquifers. For each identi?ed well, please include the operator?s name, well type, depth, field and formation names, date injection commenced, the water quality (TDS) of both the injection formation and the injection fluid, and any other pertinent details. c. Within 60 days of receipt of this letter, a plan and timeline for completion of a searchable database ofall the Class 11 well information statewide (along with a GIS overlay of the injection wells, injection formations, and aquifer exemptions) and submission to EPA of any new or revised aquifer exemption requests, which the State determines are appropriate. 4. State Program Consistency On November 16, 2012, DOGGR provided an action plan to the EPA in response to the EPA's '2011 audit of the State Program?s consistency with federal regulations. The action plan addresses the identified deficiencies, including clarification of the regulatory definition of underground sources ofdrinking water and improved procedures for well testing and aquifer analysis. Please provide, within 30 days of receipt of this letter, a status report on progress on this action plan (copy enclosed), along with'a schedule for any plan revisions and for completing implementation of the action plan. In conducting the ongoing program evaluation, goal is to ensure that the State?s Program complies with all necessary requirements, is implemented in accordance with the approved Program, and provides the transparency necessary for facilitating oversight of the Program. Thank you for your prompt attention and continued cooperation as we pursue resolution of these issues. Sincerely, Attachment and Enclosures CC: Mark Nechodom, Director, California Department of Conservation Jason Marshall, Deputy Director, California Department of Conservation Bruce Reeves, ChiefCounsel, California Department of Conservation Tom Howard, Executive DirectOr, State Water Resources Control Board Jonathan Bishop, Chief Deputy Director, State Water Resources Control Board Pamela Creedon, Executive Of?cer, Regional Water Quality Control Board Clay Rodgers, Assistant Executive Officer, Regional Water Quality Control Board Mark Starr, Deputy Director, California Department of Public Health Steven Bohlen, Oil and Gas Supervisor, Division of Oil, Gas and Geothermal Resources California Department of Conservation ATTACHMENT A EPA Approved Aquifer Exemption formations for which no information is requested: Field McCool Ranch Asphalto San Ardo San Ardo Ramona Cat Mountain Simi San Ardo San Ardo San Ardo Monroe Swell Buena Vista Kern Bluff Kern River Mountain View Pleito Pleito Poso Creek Coalinga Coalinga Guij arral Hills Helm Riverdale Turk Anticline Sutter Buttes Gas 0 Oil and/or gas producing Formation /Zone ?D?Sand Tulare Continental Aurignac Pico Undifferentiated Sespe Santa Margarita Monterey Sand Montcrey Sand Santa Margarita Tulare Vedder Vedder Kern River Chanac Kern River Santa Margarita Santa Margarita Etchegoin-Jacalitos Etchegoin?Jacalitos* Tulare?Kern River Pliocene San Joaquin Kione*