EPA Reclassify Produced Waters as TENORM for Chain of Command Truck Manifest Accountability

From: kim feil <kimfeil@sbcglobal.net>
To: Kim Feil <kimfeil@sbcglobal.net>; Jane Lynn <jane.lynn@sbcglobal.net>
Sent: Monday, December 24, 2018, 8:48:03 PM CST
Subject: Fw: Fw: TENORM issue with class I vs class II O&G wastewater injection well reclassification request

—– Forwarded Message —–
From: “Gaye McElwain” <Gaye.McElwain@rrc.texas.gov>
To: “kimfeil@sbcglobal.net” <kimfeil@sbcglobal.net>
Sent: Thu, Dec 20, 2018 at 3:07 PM
Subject: RE: Fw: TENORM issue with class I vs class II O&G wastewater injection well reclassification request

Ms. Feil,

I have been asked to respond to your inquiry.

The transportation of NORM waste falls under the jurisdiction of the Texas Department of Health (TDH). Details can be found in the Texas Administrative Code, specifically:

Subchapter F (16 TAC 4.602): (a) Exclusions. Activities involving the recycling of oil and gas NORM waste; the decontamination of equipment and facilities that are contaminated with oil and gas NORM waste as a result of activities other than disposal of oil and gas NORM waste; the possession, use, transfer, transport, and/or storage of oil and gas NORM waste; and worker protection standards associated with such activities are under the jurisdiction of the TDH.

This link will take you to the full text:


Additional information can be found on the website for the Texas Department of State Health Services:


We hope you find this information helpful.

Gaye Greever McElwain

Communications and Outreach

Railroad Commission of Texas



From: kim feil <kimfeil@sbcglobal.net
Sent: Monday, December 17, 2018 10:09 AM
To: Jared Craighead <jared.craighead@rrc.texas.gov>
Subject: Fw: TENORM issue with class I vs class II O&G wastewater injection well reclassification request

Jared, I need to know who at the RRC can address this question about the truck manifest for O&D wastewater as it relates to Class 1 or Class 2 wells and weather the waste is considered TENORM or not.

—– Forwarded Message —–

From: kim feil <kimfeil@sbcglobal.net>

To: Christi.Craddick@rrc.state.tx.us <christi.craddick@rrc.state.tx.us>; ryan.sitton@rrc.texas.gov <ryan.sitton@rrc.texas.gov>; garrett.merket@rrc.texas.gov <garrett.merket@rrc.texas.gov>

Sent: Monday, December 3, 2018, 8:23:02 PM CST

Subject: TENORM issue with class I vs class II O&G wastewater injection well reclassification request

Sent from Yahoo Mail on Android

From: kim feil <kimfeil@sbcglobal.net>
To: “charles.maguire@tceq.texas.gov” <charles.maguire@tceq.texas.gov>
Cc: “bobby.janecka@tceq.texas.gov” <bobby.janecka@tceq.texas.gov>; “alisha.stallard@tceq.texas.gov” <alisha.stallard@tceq.texas.gov>; “brad.broussard@tceq.texas.gov” <brad.broussard@tceq.texas.gov>
Sent: Monday, November 19, 2018 11:22 AM
Subject: TENORM issue with class I vs class II injection well reclassification request
Mr Maguire, once humans touch a natural element and it changes in its composition, isn’t it considered technologically enhanced? And if there are any traces elementally of NORM, isn’t it then TENORM and subject to the more regulated class I injection well trucking manifests?
Currently produced water from the oil & gas industry are under the less regulated class II injection well truck manifests, but by definition fit the criteria in needing to be treated as Class I.
How do we get the changes made to protect our water sources? Please read below on the microbe situation as the impetuous to get these changes asap.
Thank you for your response to getting this changed at the federal level.
————————-end update—————


I reported an unaccounted spill? discharge? to the EPA today. As frackquakes begin to limit amounts of produced waste waters from the oil & gas industry to injection wells, we need more accountability than these “trip tickets” (verses a real truck manifest) from truck drivers delivering to the injection well disposal sites (that can cause frackquakes). I blogged  and wrote letters about this before (with no follow up)…. I guess we need a petition?

Here is a response from the US Dept Of Transportation when asked by a trucking company to verify if TENORM is “oil & gas waste exempt” from regulation like NORM is.

It took US DOT seven months to respond back…the trucker guy that asked was doing his job in trying to find out which “rules of the road” he needs to follow. Make sure to catch the USDOT response…. “The fracking water is not a natural material…Thus the exception in 173.401(b)(4) does not apply and the waste is subject to the HMR if the activity concentration of the radionuclides…exceed the values specified in 173.436…..”

Screen shot 2016-03-09 at 9.32.01 AMScreen shot 2016-03-09 at 9.32.20 AM


But if we don’t test for radionuclides (at least not in Texas)…then BAM how do we know that all this time they have been NOT exempt from more stringent USDOT accountability?

Here is my EPA complaint today….

Screen shot 2016-03-09 at 9.14.29 AM

Screen shot 2016-03-09 at 9.14.37 AM
Screen shot 2016-03-09 at 9.50.27 AM
—– Forwarded Message —–
From: kim feil <kimfeil@sbcglobal.net>
To: Ph.D. Avner Vengosh <vengosh@duke.edu>
Cc: Buzz Pishkur <buzz.pishkur@arlingtontx.gov>; Richard Williammee <richard.williammee@txdot.gov>; “asktxdot@txdot.gov” <asktxdot@txdot.gov>; Darwin Myers <darwin.myers@txdot.gov>; Michael Peters <michael.peters@txdot.gov>; GovDelivery <txdot@service.govdelivery.com>; Joe Stasulli <joe.stasulli@rrc.state.tx.us>; Publicassist <publicassist@rrc.state.tx.us>; Jamie Hopkins <jhopkins@publicintegrity.org>; Jim Morris <jmorris@publicintegrity.org>; Lisa Eddins <lisa.eddins@rrc.state.tx.us>; “Barry.Smitherman@rrc.state.tx.us” <barry.smitherman@rrc.state.tx.us>; “Christi.Craddick@rrc.state.tx.us” <christi.craddick@rrc.state.tx.us>; “ramona.nye@rrc.state.tx.us” <ramona.nye@rrc.state.tx.us>; “texas.ogap@earthworksaction.org” <texas.ogap@earthworksaction.org>; Sharon Wilson <swilson@earthworksaction.org>; Timothy Ballo <tballo@earthjustice.org>; “aseptoff@earthworksaction.org” <aseptoff@earthworksaction.org>; “ralvarez@edf.org” <ralvarez@edf.org>; Anna Geismar <ageismar@edf.org>; EDF Energy Exchange Blog <energyexchange@edf.org>; “hanlon.edward@epa.gov” <hanlon.edward@epa.gov>
Sent: Wednesday, March 9, 2016 12:10 PM
Subject: NORM vs TENORM classifications in drilling waste transportation & injection well exemptions on USDOT truck manifests
Dr Vengosh, is it possible that produced water being transported to injection wells classify as TENORM? If so, the fluids may require radionuclide testing to see if they are exempt from USDOT truck manifests (more accountable) verses trip tickets. This could be a loophole we can fix in public protections so that we can ensure that the amounts of fluids that leave the padsites have a chain of command so that when they arrive at the injection wells, we can ensure none was spilled/released along the way. In the advent of trying to limit seismicity (being related to injection well disposal use), more than ever now we need to be vigilant in controlling and accounting for produced water being transported as a few days ago in Grant county Oklahoma, “Based on metering, the Stillwater-based company said about 18,000 barrels of wastewater remain unaccounted for, OCC Spokesman Matt Skinner said”.
Thank you for your expertise in this matter and here is more information on my blog…
—– Forwarded Message —–
From: kim feil <kimfeil@sbcglobal.net>
To: “jpoweres@nrdc.org” <jpoweres@nrdc.org>
Cc: NCTCA Group <nctca@googlegroups.com>
Sent: Wednesday, March 9, 2016 9:43 AM
Subject: followup Re: usdot & txdot catching up to NORM vs TENORM classifications in drilling waste transportation & injection exemptions?
Any follow up on this?…we had an event on Monday……
Who can help understand if the drillers have been improperly exempt from transporting and injecting TENORM as the exemptions applied to only NORM?
—– Forwarded Message —–
From: kim feil <kimfeil@sbcglobal.net>
To: “jpoweres@nrdc.org” <jpoweres@nrdc.org>
Cc: NCTCA Group <nctca@googlegroups.com>; “ArlingtonConservationCouncil@yahoogroups.com” <ArlingtonConservationCouncil@yahoogroups.com>; Jim Fuquay <jfuquay@star-telegram.com>; “jim.parajon@arlingtontx.gov” <jim.parajon@arlingtontx.gov>; “don.crowson@arlingtontx.gov” <don.crowson@arlingtontx.gov>
Sent: Wednesday, November 19, 2014 11:33 PM
Subject: {NCTCA} Re: usdot & txdot catching up to NORM vs TENORM classifications in drilling waste transportation & injection exemptions?
Still waiting for a response

Kim Feil

From: kim feil <kimfeil@sbcglobal.net>
To: jpoweres@nrdc.org
Cc: NCTCA Group <nctca@googlegroups.com>; “ArlingtonConservationCouncil@yahoogroups.com” <ArlingtonConservationCouncil@yahoogroups.com>; Jim Fuquay <jfuquay@star-telegram.com>; “jim.parajon@arlingtontx.gov” <jim.parajon@arlingtontx.gov>; “don.crowson@arlingtontx.gov” <don.crowson@arlingtontx.gov>
Sent: Friday, May 23, 2014 12:56 PM
Subject: usdot & txdot catching up to NORM vs TENORM classifications in drilling waste transportation & injection exemptions?

I noticed that http://texasalliance.org/txdot-begins-saltwater-row-regulations/ article references the injection well classifications and how it relates to seismic concerns/controls, but please clarifiy if the classifications pertain to whether…
1) when brine is treated it is not natural anymore and therefore not exempt and maybe should have been going into more regulated Class I wells instead of the less regulated Class II wells?
2) or if the classification being referenced for treated brine (therefore not exempt) should also include the txdot truck consignment/shipping of the waste.  Should there have been TRUCK MANIFESTS (verses less regulated trip tickets) and appropriate hazmat truck signage mandates along with water test results all along?
3) Is the term NORM or TENORM related to this txdot regulations review effort now that I found this document/letter where usdot recognizes non exempt status?
I need to understand if the industry has incorrectly assumed exempt status, or if there is a review effort to “correct” this exempt status?
If you read my blog, I had an issue with USDOT taking 7 months to respond to this trucking waste hauling company…but now I’m just plain ol interested in how the NRDC can assist with finding out if all along this TENORM related waste being driven around should have not been exempt and if the trucks shipping it around should have been measuring the radionuclides all this time?
Maybe they have been measuring the radionuclides because even the exempt NORM becomes nonexempt when it goes ten times the recommended amount….how do we know if they measured in the first place?

Kim Feil
——————responses as follows———

Message body

About Kim Triolo Feil

Since TX Statute 253.005 forbids drilling in heavily settled municipalities, I unsuccessfully ran for City Council Seat to try to enforce this. Since Urban Drilling, our drinking water has almost tripled for TTHM's. Before moving to Arlington in 1990, I lived in Norco’s “cancer alley”, a refinery town. It was only after Urban Drilling in Arlington did I start having health effects. After our drill site was established closest to my home, the chronic nosebleeds started. I know there are more canaries here in Arlington having reactions to our industrialized airshed (we have 55-60 padsites of gas wells). Come forward and report to me those having health issues especially if you live to the north/northwest of a drill site so I can map your health effects on this blog. My youtube account is KimFeilGood. FAIR USE NOTICE: THIS SITE MAY CONTAIN COPYRIGHTED MATERIAL THE USE OF WHICH HAS NOT ALWAYS BEEN SPECIFICALLY AUTHORIZED BY THE COPYRIGHT OWNER. MATERIAL FROM DIVERSE AND SOMETIMES TEMPORARY SOURCES IS BEING MADE AVAILABLE IN A PERMANENT UNIFIED MANNER, AS PART OF AN EFFORT TO ADVANCE UNDERSTANDING OF THE SOCIAL JUSTICE ISSUES ASSOCIATED WITH EMINENT DOMAIN AND THE PRIVATIZATION OF PUBLIC INFRASTRUCTURE (AMONG OTHER THINGS). IT IS BELIEVED THAT THIS IS A 'FAIR USE' OF THE INFORMATION AS ALLOWED UNDER SECTION 107 OF THE US COPYRIGHT LAW. IN ACCORDANCE WITH TITLE 17 USC SECTION 107, THE SITE IS MAINTAINED WITHOUT PROFIT FOR THOSE WHO ACCESS IT FOR RESEARCH AND EDUCATIONAL PURPOSES. FOR MORE INFORMATION, SEE: HTTP://WWW.LAW.CORNELL.EDU/ TO USE MATERIAL REPRODUCED ON THIS SITE FOR PURPOSES THAT GO BEYOND 'FAIR USE', PERMISSION IS REQUIRED FROM THE COPYRIGHT OWNER INDICATED WITH A NAME AND INTERNET LINK AT THE END OF EACH ITEM. (NOTE: THE TEXT OF THIS NOTICE WAS ALSO LIFTED FROM CORRIDORNEWS.BLOGSPOT.COM)
This entry was posted in avner vengosh, benzene, cityofarlington, injection wells, spill, Uncategorized and tagged , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , . Bookmark the permalink.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s