# Data Sources and Provenance

---

## Primary Dataset: USGS Documented Unplugged Orphaned Oil and Gas Wells (DOW)

**Citation:**
Grove, C.A., and Merrill, M.D., 2022, United States Documented Unplugged Orphaned Oil and Gas Well Dataset: U.S. Geological Survey data release, https://doi.org/10.5066/P91PJETI.

**Related report:**
Merrill, M.D., Grove, C.A., Gianoutsos, N.J., and Freeman, P.A., 2023, Analysis of the United States documented unplugged orphaned oil and gas well dataset: U.S. Geological Survey Data Report 1167, 10 p., https://doi.org/10.3133/dr1167.

**ScienceBase item:** https://www.sciencebase.gov/catalog/item/62ebd67bd34eacf539724c56
**DOI:** https://doi.org/10.5066/P91PJETI
**Interactive map:** https://energy.usgs.gov/usdowdb
**Published:** August 22, 2022
**Data currency:** July 1, 2019 – June 2, 2022

### Coverage
- **117,672 wells** in **27 states**
- States: AL, AK, AR, CA, CO, IL, IN, KS, KY, LA, MI, MS, MO, MT, NE, NV, NM, NY, ND, OH, OK, PA, TN, TX, UT, WV, WY

### Orphaned Well Definition
Varies by state. Included if state designates as orphaned, or if ALL of the following apply:
1. No production for average of 12 months (6–24 months depending on state)
2. Well is unplugged
3. No responsible party for future use or plugging
4. Location is documented

### Data Collection Method
- Direct requests to state oil and gas regulatory agencies (email, phone, or website download)
- Location format conversion performed using BLM Township Decoder and KGS LEO 7.0 (Kansas and Montana only)
- No other manipulations beyond reformatting and explanatory notes

### State Agencies (27 sources)

| State | Agency | Data Description |
|---|---|---|
| AL | Alabama Oil and Gas Board | Abandoned wells |
| AK | Alaska Oil and Gas Compact Commission | Orphan wells |
| AR | Arkansas Dept. of Transformation and Shared Services GIS | Abandoned orphan wells |
| CA | CA Dept. of Conservation, Geologic Energy Management Division (CalGEM) | Idle wells |
| CO | Colorado Oil and Gas Conservation Commission | Orphan wells |
| IL | Illinois Dept. of Natural Resources | Temporarily abandoned wells |
| IN | Indiana Dept. of Natural Resources | Orphan abandoned wells |
| KS | Kansas Corporation Commission | Abandoned wells |
| KY | Kentucky Energy and Environment Cabinet | Orphan wells |
| LA | Louisiana Dept. of Natural Resources | Orphan wells |
| MI | Michigan Dept. of Environment, Great Lakes, and Energy (EGLE) | Orphan wells |
| MS | Mississippi State Oil and Gas Board | Orphan and potentially orphan wells |
| MO | Missouri Dept. of Natural Resources | Orphan and abandoned wells |
| MT | Montana Board of Oil & Gas Conservation | Orphan wells |
| NE | Nebraska Oil & Gas Conservation Commission | Abandoned and shut-in wells |
| NV | Nevada Bureau of Mines and Geology | Abandoned and shut-in wells |
| NM | New Mexico Oil Conservation Division | Orphan wells |
| NY | NY State Dept. of Environmental Conservation | Unknown status wells |
| ND | North Dakota Dept. of Mineral Resources | Abandoned wells |
| OH | Ohio Dept. of Natural Resources | Orphan and potential orphan wells |
| OK | Oklahoma Corporation Commission, Oil and Gas Conservation | Orphan wells |
| PA | Pennsylvania Dept. of Environmental Protection | Orphan wells |
| TN | Tennessee Dept. of Environment and Conservation | Forfeited wells |
| TX | Texas Railroad Commission | Orphan wells |
| UT | Utah Division of Oil, Gas and Mining | Orphan wells |
| WV | West Virginia Dept. of Environmental Protection | Abandoned wells |
| WY | Wyoming Oil & Gas Conservation Commission | Orphan wells |

### Data Quality Notes

**Coordinate accuracy:** No formal positional accuracy tests were conducted. Coordinates are state-provided. Some were converted from PLSS descriptions using BLM/KGS tools (KS, MT).

**Type field completeness:** 9 states submitted data without type classification (blank field): OH, PA, KY, KS, IN, NM, TN, AK, and Oklahoma has ~1,081 blank rows. These are coded `Unknown/Unspecified` in `well_type_normalized`. This is a source-data limitation, not a processing error.

**Status terminology:** Status language is not standardized across states. Ranges from "Abandoned Orphaned Well" (explicit) to "AB" (code), "Idle" (CA usage), or state-specific terms. Do not compare status values cross-state without normalization.

**Alaska wells (12):** Very small count; Alaska data may underrepresent actual orphaned well inventory.

**California wells (3,338):** Classified as "Idle" per CalGEM definition — California's statutory definition of idle wells differs from other states' orphan definitions. May warrant separate treatment in analysis.

**File checksums (MD5):**
- `US_orphaned_wells.csv`: `52539416efe461884034fb8d9bb184b2`
- `US_orphaned_wells.zip`: `5a454abeae6d11bd837e3c5c29cb1ea0`
- `US_orphaned_wells.xml`: `1122b28bb82aea35c880f643c3570335`

---

## Census Tracts: 2021 TIGER/Line Cartographic Boundary File

**Source:** U.S. Census Bureau
**File:** `cb_2021_us_tract_500k` (1:500,000 scale)
**Coverage:** 85,230 tracts, all 50 states + DC + territories
**CRS:** NAD83 (EPSG:4269), reprojected to WGS84 (EPSG:4326) for database storage
**Vintage:** 2021 (aligns with 2017–2021 ACS 5-year estimates)
**Download:** https://www.census.gov/geographies/mapping-files/time-series/geo/cartographic-boundary.html

### Spatial Join Notes
- 117,156 of 117,672 wells (99.6%) matched via `ST_Within`
- 516 wells on tract boundaries resolved via `ST_DWithin` (5km) then KNN (`<->`)
- 4 wells on state borders were misassigned to neighboring state tracts and manually corrected to match USGS state attribution

### ACS Join Key
Use `wells.tract_geoid` (= `census_tracts.geoid`, 11-digit FIPS) to join to any ACS table. The 2021 5-year estimates are the recommended vintage.

**Suggested ACS tables for EJ analysis:**

| Table | Content |
|---|---|
| B19013 | Median household income |
| B03002 | Race and Hispanic/Latino origin |
| B17001 | Poverty status |
| B25035 | Median year structure built (housing age proxy) |
| B23025 | Employment status |
| B15003 | Educational attainment |

---

## Plugging Cost Estimates

### Raimi et al. (2021) — Primary Reference

**Citation:**
Raimi, D., Krupnick, A., Shah, J.S., and Thompson, A., 2021, Decommissioning Orphaned and Abandoned Oil and Gas Wells: New Estimates and Cost Drivers. *Environmental Science & Technology*, 55(15), 10224–10230. https://doi.org/10.1021/acs.est.1c02234

**Organization:** Resources for the Future (RFF)
**Estimates:** Low $9,000 / Median $76,000 / High $280,000 per well
**Method:** Bottom-up engineering cost model using 2.1 million documented wells; variables include depth, casing, age, location, regulatory requirements.
**Scope:** National (onshore U.S.)
**Use in this project:** Primary basis for `state_liability` calculated fields.

### EPA OLEM (2018)

Older EPA estimate widely cited in policy documents. Central estimate $25,000. Considered low by most recent literature due to pre-inflation data and exclusion of complex well types. Use with caution.

### Carbon Tracker (2020)

**Citation:** Carbon Tracker Initiative, 2020. *Fault Lines: How Diverging Oil and Gas Company Strategies Link to Stranded Asset Risk.*
Emphasizes investor/financial risk framing; useful for Chapter 5 stranded asset discussion.

### IOGCC (2023)

State-reported figures aggregated by the Interstate Oil and Gas Compact Commission. Methodology varies significantly by state; use for within-state comparisons, not cross-state.

### Pennsylvania DEP (2022)

Actual program expenditure data from PA DEP plugging contracts 2016–2022. Mid estimate $68,000. PA is one of the most data-rich state programs and can serve as a benchmark for high-documentation states.

---

## IIJA / Bipartisan Infrastructure Law Funding

**Legislation:** Infrastructure Investment and Jobs Act (IIJA), Public Law 117-58, signed November 15, 2021
**Program:** Orphaned Well Site Plugging, Remediation, and Restoration Program
**Administering agency:** Office of Surface Mining Reclamation and Enforcement (OSMRE), Dept. of the Interior
**Total appropriation:** $4.7 billion over 5 years

### Program Structure

| Phase | Amount | Mechanism | Status |
|---|---|---|---|
| Initial grants | $25 million | Formula to states with existing programs | Announced 2021 |
| Phase 1 formula grants | $150 million | Formula based on documented well counts | Announced Nov 2022 |
| Phase 2 performance grants | $4.275 billion | Competitive, based on state plugging performance | Ongoing |
| Federal lands | $115 million | OSMRE direct plugging on federal land | Ongoing |

**Phase 1 per-state allocations in `state_liability.iija_phase1_formula_usd`** are approximate figures from DOI press releases (Nov 2022). Verify exact amounts from official OSMRE grant letters before publication.
**Source:** https://www.doi.gov/pressreleases

### Coverage Gap
Using Raimi et al. (2021) median estimates ($76,000/well × 117,672 wells):
- **Estimated national liability:** ~$8.94 billion
- **IIJA Phase 1 total:** ~$310 million
- **Coverage:** ~3.5% of median estimated liability

This gap is the central financial argument of Chapter 5.

---

## State Governance Data (RA-collected)

### Transition Offices

**Source:** Climate Policy Dashboard — Just Transition Offices and Staff
https://www.climatepolicydashboard.org/policies/climate-governance-equity/just-transition-offices-and-staff
**Coding protocol:** See `Undergrad Student Instructions.md` in project research files
**Coded by:** Julian Tong, RA
**PI supervision:** Dr. David P. Adams

### Plugging Prioritization Schemes

**Source:** IOGCC Prioritization Report, July 10, 2023
https://oklahoma.gov/content/dam/ok/en/iogcc/documents/publications/prioritization_report_7.10.23.pdf
**Coding protocol:** See `Undergrad Student Instructions.md`
**Coded by:** Julian Tong, RA

### Theoretical Framework

The engineering/justice typology (Adams) classifies state prioritization approaches:

- **Engineering:** Prioritizes technical risk factors (methane, groundwater, pressure) without explicit equity/density dimensions
- **Justice:** Explicitly incorporates DAC scores, EJ indexes, or disadvantaged community status into scoring
- **Mixed (density-aware):** Uses population density or urban/rural classification but not explicit EJ language

The `v_state_governance.framework_type` column implements this classification automatically from RA-coded variables.