Estimating the potential toxicity of chemicals associated with hydraulic fracturing operations using quantitative structure-activity relationship modeling

Environmental Science and Technology

Volumn 50, Issue 14, 2016, Pages 7732-7742

  Yost, Erin E ^a   Stanek, John ^a   DeWoskin, Robert S ^a,b   Burgoon, Lyle D ^a,c  

^a U S ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY   (United States)

^b EtioLogic LLC   (United States)

^c US ARMY ENGINEER RESEARCH AND DEVELOPMENT CENTER   (United States)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

CHEMICALS; COMPUTATIONAL CHEMISTRY; ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY; FRACTURING FLUIDS; HYDRAULIC FRACTURING; MOLECULAR GRAPHICS; RISK PERCEPTION; STRUCTURES (BUILT OBJECTS); TOXICITY;

CONFIDENCE SCORE; FRACTURING OPERATIONS; HAZARDOUS CHEMICALS; INTEGRATED RISK INFORMATION SYSTEM DATABASE; QUANTITATIVE STRUCTURE-ACTIVITY RELATIONSHIP MODELING; QUANTITATIVE STRUCTURE-ACTIVITY RELATIONSHIPS; SPEARMAN RANK CORRELATION; UNITED STATES ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCIES;

UNCERTAINTY ANALYSIS;

DRINKING WATER; GROUND WATER; PESTICIDE; DANGEROUS GOODS;

ESTIMATION METHOD; EXPERIMENTAL STUDY; HYDRAULIC FRACTURING; OPERATIONS TECHNOLOGY; PRIORITIZATION; QUANTITATIVE ANALYSIS; RODENT; TOXICITY;

ANIMAL EXPERIMENT; ANIMAL MODEL; ARTICLE; CHRONIC TOXICITY; CONTROLLED STUDY; DATA BASE; ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION; FRACKING; GOVERNMENT; NONHUMAN; QUANTITATIVE STRUCTURE ACTIVITY RELATION; RAT; WATER CONTAMINATION; WATER SUPPLY; ANIMAL; DANGEROUS GOODS; RISK ASSESSMENT; THEORETICAL MODEL; TOXICITY; UNITED STATES;

UNITED STATES;

RATTUS;

ANIMALS; HAZARDOUS SUBSTANCES; HYDRAULIC FRACKING; MODELS, THEORETICAL; QUANTITATIVE STRUCTURE-ACTIVITY RELATIONSHIP; RATS; RISK ASSESSMENT; UNITED STATES; UNITED STATES ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY;

EID: 84979075855     PISSN: 0013936X     EISSN: 15205851     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1021/acs.est.5b05327     Document Type: Article

References (37)

1. Plan to Study the Potential Impacts of Hydraulic Fracturing on Drinking Water Resources, EPA/600/R-11/122; U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Office of Research and Development: Washington, DC, 2011. http://www2.epa.gov/hfstudy/plan-study-potential-impacts-hydraulic-fracturing-drinking-water-resources-epa600r-11122.
2. Study of the Potential Impacts of Hydraulic Fracturing on Drinking Water Resources: Progress Report, EPA/601/R-12/011; U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Office of Research and Development: Washington, DC, 2012; http://nepis.epa. gov/exe/ZyPURL.cgi?Dockey=P100FH8M.txt.
3. Shonkoff, S. B. C.; Hays, J.; Finkel, M. L. Environmental Public Health Dimensions of Shale and Tight Gas Development Environ. Health Perspect. 2014, 122 (8) 787-795 10.1289/ehp.1307866
4. Vengosh, A.; Jackson, R. B.; Warner, N.; Darrah, T. H.; Kondash, A. A Critical Review of the Risks to Water Resources from Unconventional Shale Gas Development and Hydraulic Fracturing in the United States Environ. Sci. Technol. 2014, 48 (15) 8334-8348 10.1021/es405118y
5. Colborn, T.; Kwiatkowski, C.; Schultz, K.; Bachran, M. Natural Gas Operations from a Public Health Perspective Hum. Ecol. Risk Assess. 2011, 17 (5) 1039-1056 10.1080/10807039.2011.605662
6. Adgate, J. L.; Goldstein, B. D.; McKenzie, L. M. Potential Public Health Hazards, Exposures and Health Effects from Unconventional Natural Gas Development Environ. Sci. Technol. 2014, 48 (15) 8307-8320 10.1021/es404621d
7. Analysis of Hydraulic Fracturing Fluid Data from the FracFocus Chemical Disclosure Registry 1.0, EPA/601/R-14/003; Office of Research and Development, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency: Washington, D.C., 2015; http://www2.epa.gov/hfstudy/analysis-hydraulic-fracturing-fluid-data-fracfocus-chemical-disclosure-registry-1-pdf.
8. Barati, R.; Liang, J.-T. A Review of Fracturing Fluid Systems Used For Hydraulic Fracturing of Oil and Gas Wells J. Appl. Polym. Sci. 2014, 131, 16 10.1002/app.40735
9. Stringfellow, W. T.; Domen, J. K.; Camarillo, M. K.; Sandelin, W. L.; Borglin, S. Physical, chemical, and biological characteristics of compounds used in hydraulic fracturing J. Hazard. Mater. 2014, 275, 37-54 10.1016/j.jhazmat.2014.04.040
10. Orem, W.; Tatu, C.; Varonka, M.; Lerch, H.; Bates, A.; Engle, M.; Crosby, L.; McIntosh, J. Organic substances in produced and formation water from unconventional natural gas extraction in coal and shale Int. J. Coal Geol. 2014, 126, 20-31 10.1016/j.coal.2014.01.003
11. Abualfaraj, N.; Gurian, P. L.; Olson, M. S. Characterization of Marcellus Shale Flowback Water Environ. Eng. Sci. 2014, 31 (9) 514-524 10.1089/ees.2014.0001
12. Revised Draft Supplemental Generic Environmental Impact Statement (Sgeis) On the Oil, Gas and Solution Mining Regulatory Program: Well Permit Issuance for Horizontal Drilling and High-Volume Hydraulic Fracturing to Develop the Marcellus Shale and Other Low-Permeability Gas Reservoirs; New York State Department of Environmental Conservation (NYSDEC): Albany, NY, 2011. http://www.dec.ny.gov/energy/75370.html.
13. Lutz, B. D.; Lewis, A. N.; Doyle, M. W. Generation, transport, and disposal of wastewater associated with Marcellus Shale gas development Water Resour. Res. 2013, 49 (2) 647-656 10.1002/wrcr.20096
14. Rahm, B. G.; Bates, J. T.; Bertoia, L. R.; Galford, A. E.; Yoxtheimer, D. A.; Riha, S. J. Wastewater management and Marcellus Shale gas development: Trends, drivers, and planning implications J. Environ. Manage. 2013, 120, 105-113 10.1016/j.jenvman.2013.02.029
15. Brantley, S. L.; Yoxtheimer, D.; Arjmand, S.; Grieve, P.; Vidic, R.; Pollak, J.; Llewellyn, G. T.; Abad, J.; Simon, C. Water resource impacts during unconventional shale gas development: The Pennsylvania experience Int. J. Coal Geol. 2014, 126, 140-156 10.1016/j.coal.2013.12.017
16. Gross, S. A.; Avens, H. J.; Banducci, A. M.; Sahmel, J.; Panko, J. M.; Tvermoes, B. E. Analysis of BTEX groundwater concentrations from surface spills associated with hydraulic fracturing operations J. Air Waste Manage. Assoc. 2013, 63 (4) 424-432 10.1080/10962247.2012.759166
17. Llewellyn, G. T.; Dorman, F.; Westland, J. L.; Yoxtheimer, D.; Grieve, P.; Sowers, T.; Humston-Fulmer, E.; Brantley, S. L. Evaluating a groundwater supply contamination incident attributed to Marcellus Shale gas development Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. U. S. A. 2015, 112 (20) 6325-6330 10.1073/pnas.1420279112
18. Drollette, B. D.; Hoelzer, K.; Warner, N. R.; Darrah, T. H.; Karatum, O.; O'Connor, M. P.; Nelson, R. K.; Fernandez, L. A.; Reddy, C. M.; Vengosh, A.; Jackson, R. B.; Elsner, M.; Plata, D. L. Elevated levels of diesel range organic compounds in groundwater near Marcellus gas operations are derived from surface activities Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. U. S. A. 2015, 112 (43) 13184-13189 10.1073/pnas.1511474112
19. Review of State and Industry Spill Data: Characterization of Hydraulic Fracturing-Related Spills; EPA/601/R-14/001; Office of Research and Development, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency: Washington, D.C., 2015. http://www2.epa. gov/hfstudy/review-state-and-industry-spill-data-characterization-hydraulic-fracturing-related-spills-1.
20. Retrospective Case Study in Killdeer, North Dakota: Study of the Potential Impacts of Hydraulic Fracturing on Drinking Water Resources, EPA 600/R-14/103; Washington, D.C., 2015; http://www2.epa.gov/hfstudy/retrospective-case-study-killdeer-north-dakota.
21. Assessment of the Potential Impacts of Hydraulic Fracturing for Oil and Gas on Drinking Water Resources (External Review Draft), EPA/600/R-15/047; U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Office of Research and Development: Washington, DC, 2015; http://cfpub.epa. gov/ncea/hfstudy/recordisplay.cfm?deid=244651.
22. US Environmental Protection Agency Terminology services(TS): Vocabulary catalog-IRIS glossary; http://ofmpub.epa.gov/sor-internet/registry/termreg/searchandretrieve/glossariesandkeywordlists/search.do?details=&glossaryName=IRIS%20Glossary.
23. Yost, E. E.; Stanek, J. J.; DeWoskin, R. S.; Burgoon, L. D. Overview of Chronic Oral Toxicity Values for Chemicals Present in Hydraulic Fracturing Fluids, Flowback and Produced Waters Environ. Sci. Technol. 2016, 50 (9) 4788-4797 10.1021/acs.est.5b04645
24. Wattenberg, E. V.; Bielicki, J. M.; Suchomel, A. E.; Sweet, J. T.; Vold, E. M.; Ramachandran, G. Assessment of the Acute and Chronic Health Hazards of Hydraulic Fracturing Fluids J. Occup. Environ. Hyg. 2015, 12 (9) 611-624 10.1080/15459624.2015.1029612
25. Elliott, E. G.; Ettinger, A. S.; Leaderer, B. P.; Bracken, M. B.; Deziel, N. C. A systematic evaluation of chemicals in hydraulic-fracturing fluids and wastewater for reproductive and developmental toxicity J. Exposure Sci. Environ. Epidemiol. 2016, 1-10 10.1038/jes.2015.81
26. Roy, K.; Kar, S.; Das, R. N. Understanding the Basics of QSAR for Applications in Pharmaceutical Sciences and Risk Assessment; Academic Press, 2015.
27. Rupp, B.; Appel, K. E.; Gundert-Remy, U. Chronic oral LOAEL prediction by using a commercially available computational QSAR tool Arch. Toxicol. 2010, 84 (9) 681-688 10.1007/s00204-010-0532-x
28. Venkatapathy, R.; Moudgal, C. J.; Bruce, R. M. Assessment of the oral rat chronic lowest observed adverse effect level model in TOPKAT, a QSAR software package for toxicity prediction J. Chem. Inf. Comput. Sci. 2004, 44 (5) 1623-9 10.1021/ci049903s
29. Moudgal, C. J.; Venkatapathy, R.; Choudhury, H.; Bruce, R. M.; Lipscomb, J. C. Application of QSTRs in the selection of a surrogate toxicity value for a chemical of concern Environ. Sci. Technol. 2003, 37 (22) 5228-5235 10.1021/es034201p
30. Compilation of Physicochemical and Toxicological Information About Hydraulic Fracturing-Related Chemicals (Draft Database), EPA/600/R-15/134; U.S. Environmental Protection Agency: Washington, D.C., 2015. https://cfpub.epa. gov/ncea/hfstudy/recordisplay.cfm?deid=308341.
31. Guidance Document on the Validation of (Quantitative) Structure-Activity Relationships [(Q)SAR] Models; ENV/JM/MONO(2007)2; Organisation for Economic Co-Operation and Development: Paris, 2007. http://www.oecd.org/officialdocuments/publicdisplaydocumentpdf/?doclanguage=en=env/jm/mono(2007)2.
32. IRIS Frequent Questions; Office of Research and Development, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency: 2015. http://www.epa.gov/iris/help-ques.htm#whatiris.
33. Analysis of Hydraulic Fracturing Fluid Data from the FracFocus Chemical Disclosure Registry 1.0: Project Database, EPA/601/R-14/003; U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Office of Research and Development: Washington, D.C., 2015. http://www2.epa.gov/hfstudy/epa-project-database-developed-fracfocus-1-disclosures.
34. Hayes, T. Sampling and analysis of water streams associated with the development of Marcellus shale gas; Marcellus Shale Coalition: Des Plaines, IL, 2009. http://eidmarcellus.org/wp-content/uploads/2012/11/MSCommission-Report.pdf.
35. Sanderson, H.; Johnson, D. J.; Reitsma, T.; Brain, R. A.; Wilson, C. J.; Solomon, K. R. Ranking and prioritization of environmental risks of pharmaceuticals in surface waters Regul. Toxicol. Pharmacol. 2004, 39 (2) 158-183 10.1016/j.yrtph.2003.12.006
36. Walker, J. D.; Knaebel, D.; Mayo, K.; Tunkel, J.; Gray, D. A. Use of QSARs to promote more cost-effective use of chemical monitoring resources. 1. Screening industrial chemicals and pesticides, direct food additives, indirect food additives and pharmaceuticals for biodegradation, bioconcentration and aquatic toxicity potential Water Qual. Res. J. Canada 2004, 39 (1) 35-39
37. Walker, J. D.; Dimitrova, N.; Dimitrov, S.; Mekenyan, O.; Plewak, D. Use of QSARs to promote more cost-effective use of chemical monitoring resources. 2. Screening chemicals for hydrolysis half-lives, Henry's Law constants, ultimate biodegradation potential, modes of toxic action and bioavailability Water Qual. Res. J. Canada 2004, 39 (1) 40-49