a) A Class
VI injection well has mechanical integrity if both of the following conditions
exist:
1) There is no significant leak in the
casing, tubing, or packer; and
2)
There is no significant fluid movement into a USDW through channels adjacent to
the injection well bore.
b) To evaluate the absence of significant
leaks under subsection (a)(1), the owner or operator must, following an initial
annulus pressure test, continuously monitor each of the following parameters:
1) The injection pressure, rate, and injected
volumes;
2) The pressure on the
annulus between the tubing and the long-string casing; and
3) The annulus fluid volume, as specified in
Section
730.188(e);
c) At least once per year, the
owner or operator must use one of the following methods to determine the
absence of significant fluid movement under subsection (a)(2):
1) An approved tracer survey, such as an
oxygen-activation log; or
2) A
temperature or noise log.
d) If required by the Agency, at a frequency
specified in the testing and monitoring plan required by Section
730.190,
the owner or operator must run a casing inspection log to determine the
presence or absence of corrosion in the long-string casing.
e) The Agency must require any requested
alternative test that the Agency has determined is necessary to evaluate
mechanical integrity under subsections (a)(1) or (a)(2) after obtaining the
written approval of USEPA.
BOARD NOTE: Corresponding
40 CFR
146.89(e) provides that the
Agency must submit a written request to USEPA setting forth the proposed test
and all technical data supporting its use to obtain approval for a new
mechanical integrity test. USEPA stated that it will approve the request if
USEPA determines that the proposed test will reliably demonstrate the
mechanical integrity of wells for which its use was proposed. USEPA stated that
it will publish any alternative method that USEPA has approved in the Federal
Register, and the Agency must approve use of the published method if the Agency
has determined that the method is appropriate to evaluate mechanical integrity,
unless USEPA restricts its use at the time of approval by
USEPA.
f) In conducting and
evaluating the tests enumerated in this Section or others that the Agency has
required by permit, the owner or operator and the Agency must apply methods and
standards generally accepted in the industry. When the owner or operator
reports the results of mechanical integrity tests to the Agency, the owner or
operator must include a description of the tests and the methods used. In
making its evaluation, the Agency must review monitoring and other test data
submitted since the previous evaluation.
g) The Agency must require additional or
alternative tests if the Agency determines that the results presented by the
owner or operator pursuant to subsections (a) through (d) are not satisfactory
to demonstrate that there is no significant leak in the casing, tubing, or
packer or that there is no significant movement of fluid into a USDW resulting
from the injection activity, as required by subsections (a)(1) and
(a)(2).
