Search USGSSearch

USGS · ofr20181057

Preliminary geologic framework developed for a proposed environmental monitoring study of a deep, unconventional Marcellus Shale drill site, Washington County, Pennsylvania

Abstract

Background In the fall of 2011, the U.S. Geological Survey (USGS) was afforded an opportunity to participate in an environmental monitoring study of the potential impacts of a deep, unconventional Marcellus Shale hydraulic fracturing site. The drill site of the prospective case study is the “Range Resources MCC Partners L.P. Units 1-5H” location (also referred to as the “RR–MCC” drill site), located in Washington County, southwestern Pennsylvania. Specifically, the USGS was approached to provide a geologic framework that would (1) provide geologic parameters for the proposed area of a localized groundwater circulation model, and (2) provide potential information for the siting of both shallow and deep groundwater monitoring wells located near the drill pad and the deviated drill legs. The lead organization of the prospective case study of the RR–MCC drill site was the Groundwater and Ecosystems Restoration Division (GWERD) of the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency. Aside from the USGS, additional partners/participants were to include the Department of Energy, the Pennsylvania Geological Survey, the Pennsylvania Department of Environmental Protection, and the developer Range Resources LLC. During the initial cooperative phase, GWERD, with input from the participating agencies, drafted a Quality Assurance Project Plan (QAPP) that proposed much of the objectives, tasks, sampling and analytical procedures, and documentation of results. Later in 2012, the proposed cooperative agreement between the aforementioned partners and the associated land owners for a monitoring program at the drill site was not executed. Therefore, the prospective case study of the RR–MCC site was terminated and no installation of groundwater monitoring wells nor the collection of nearby soil, stream sediment, and surface-water samples were made. Prior to the completion of the QAPP and termination of the perspective case study the geologic framework was rapidly conducted and nearly completed. This was done for three principal reasons. First, there was an immediate need to know the distribution of the relatively undisturbed surface to near-surface bedrock geology and unconsolidated materials for the collection of baseline surface data prior to drill site development (drill pad access road, drill pad leveling) and later during monitoring associated with well drilling, well development, and well production. Second, it was necessary to know the bedrock geology to support the siting of: (1) multiple shallow groundwater monitoring wells (possibly as many as four) surrounding and located immediately adjacent to the drill pad, and (2) deep groundwater monitoring wells (possibly two) located at distance from the drill pad with one possibly being sited along one of the deviated production drill legs. Lastly, the framework geology would provide the lateral extent, thickness, lithology, and expected discontinuities of geologic units (to be parsed or grouped as hydrostratigraphic units) and regional structure trends as inputs into the groundwater model. This report provides the methodology of geologic data accumulation and aggregation, and its integration into a geographic information system (GIS) based program. The GIS program will allow multiple data to be exported in various formats (shapefiles [.shp], database files [.dbf], and Keyhole Markup Language files [.KML]) for use in surface and subsurface geologic site characterization, for sampling strategies, and for inputs for groundwater modeling.

Explore related subjects

90° N90° S · 180° W ← longitude → 180° E
Source-reported bounding extent: 40.3° to 40.3833° latitude; -80.4833° to -80.3833° longitude. This indicates report coverage, not an exact sampling location. View area on OpenStreetMap.

Keep this discovery

Explore connections, maps & timelines

BibTeXRIS

Robert G. Stamm. 2018-06-08. Preliminary geologic framework developed for a proposed environmental monitoring study of a deep, unconventional Marcellus Shale drill site, Washington County, Pennsylvania. https://doi.org/10.3133/ofr20181057

Cite the original work for its findings. Save a collection to share your selection of sources.

KEEP EXPLORING

Related USGS reports

Estimating aftershock risk for entry into earthquake-damaged buildings

We present a simple method to estimate the risk of experiencing strong shaking from aftershocks during entry into earthquake-damaged buildings. We compute wait times until the probability of strong ground shaking from aftershocks reaches a predefined risk threshold; for example, a 0.4 percent probability of experiencing Modified Mercalli Intensity 7 or greater shaking during the planned building entry. We also develop a relation between aftershock probability and the probability of strong shaking, so that users can reference the U.S. Geological Survey aftershock forecast during an ongoing aftershock sequence to determine if the risk threshold has been met. We apply our method to active continental regions (for example, the Western United States), stable continental regions (for example, the Central and Eastern United States), and subduction zones (for example, Cascadia or Alaska).

Open-File Report

End-user needs for remote sensing wetlands of the Prairie Pothole Region of North America

The Prairie Pothole Region (PPR) of North America comprises globally important grassland and wetland ecosystems critical for numerous populations of migratory birds. Due to the importance of this region for migratory birds, and particularly waterfowl, and the threats of habitat loss due to intensifying agriculture, there is a mature and diverse system of conservation organizations, agencies, and partnerships that spends hundreds of millions of dollars annually on habitat conservation to support migratory bird populations. Remote sensing can be a powerful tool for observing and evaluating global change at large scales as well as expanding inferences from field studies to the broader landscape with statistical models. However, development and utilization of these tools has lagged behind their demand for several reasons, including concerns over spatial and temporal resolution and accuracy of products; perception of a misalignment with decision-maker needs; technological barriers such as skill sets of conservation professionals, computing resources, data access, and usability. In this report, we summarize the needs of conservation professionals and scientists who use or want to use remote sensing data products to inform science about wetland change and conservation of wetlands in the PPR. We assembled this information through several methods leading up to, during, and following a January 2026 PPR Wetland Remote Sensing Workshop. The workshop included United States and Canadian scientists, conservation professionals, and policy experts. Our goal was to bring together end-users and remote sensing product developers jointly to explore reducing the lag between product development and utilization of products to inform science and conservation. Specifically, we aimed to identify gaps in wetland remote sensing that limit effective monitoring, management, and conservation in the PPR, and to develop a framework that outlines pathways to address these gaps by fostering collaboration, improving communication networks, encouraging discussion, and building on existing and ongoing efforts. This report summarizes our participants’ descriptions of end-user needs and the outcomes of the workshop.

Prairie Pothole region

Bathymetric survey and storage capacity of Upper Lake Mary near Flagstaff, Arizona in 2024

The U.S. Geological Survey (USGS), in cooperation with the city of Flagstaff, collected bathymetric, light detection and ranging (lidar), and land-survey data of Upper Lake Mary in Arizona during the months of April and October 2024. The city of Flagstaff uses a combination of groundwater from well fields throughout the Flagstaff area and surface water, mainly from Upper Lake Mary, for its potable water supply. The purpose of the survey is to update previous surveys using new technology and compare the results to previous surveys to determine if there was a decrease in storage capacity that could affect the city’s water supply. The lakebed was mapped in April 2024 using a vessel equipped with a multibeam echosounder (MBES) and mobile lidar scanner with positioning captured using a real-time kinematic global navigation satellite system (RTK GNSS) base and receivers. In October 2024, areas of the reservoir that were too shallow for the boat and shoreline that were not captured by the vessel-based lidar were surveyed on foot using hand-held RTK GNSS receivers. At full pool (spillway elevation of 6,831.82 feet above NAVD 88 [2,082.34 meters (m)], Upper Lake Mary has a storage capacity of 16,449.80 acre-feet (20,290,611.73 cubic meters) and a surface area of 953.57 acres (3,860,926.075 square meters). The reservoir is 5.7 miles (9.7 kilometers) long and varies in width from 326 feet (99.36 m) near the central, narrow portion of the reservoir to 2,613 feet (796.44 m) in the upper portion. Comparisons between this survey and the previous two surveys from the 1950s and 2006 indicate no apparent decrease in reservoir area or storage capacity. Results of the 2024 survey indicate that Upper Lake Mary’s storage capacity increased by 0.9 percent from the 2006 survey and a 1.6 percent increase in surface area from the 2006 survey.

Arizona