|
EPA re-proposing Cook Inlet discharges EPA puts less stringent limits back out for public comment, but also adds more stringent limits as a possible back-up plan Eric Lidji For Petroleum News
The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency’s attempt to permit discharges from oil and gas facilities in Cook Inlet took a step forward recently by taking two steps back.
The EPA is re-proposing less stringent limits for six substances commonly discharged from oil and gas operations — including mercury, copper and silver — into Cook Inlet. But it also re-proposed older and more stringent limits for those same substances and came up with a strategy for deciding when it would use one set of limits or the other.
The limits are categorized by platform and by substance.
The limits come as part of a General Permit under the National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System. Created in 1972, the NPDES is a federal water pollution control program, often managed by the states, that regulates discharges into waterways.
The permit is particularly knotty because more stringent limits could force operators to modify platforms in Cook Inlet, upgrades that might prove uneconomic. But conservationists in the region worry about the impact of discharges on local fisheries.
The EPA is taking comments on its re-proposal and plan through June 20.
Controversial exceptions The Cook Inlet drilling platforms built in the 1960s discharged drilling waste and produced water directly into the sea. The EPA introduced zero-discharge standards for offshore platforms in 1995, but gave an exception to Cook Inlet platforms, saying it would be impractical to retrofit the facilities, especially considering their limited lifespan.
That exception continues to rile environmental groups, commercial fishermen and some Native villages in the region, who claim that the discharges — even at regulated limits — impact important subsistence, commercial and recreational fisheries in Cook Inlet. The oil industry, meanwhile, argues that the strong tides in Cook Inlet quickly disperse the waste materials, and point to studies finding no evidence of industry contamination.
When the EPA renewed the general permit for oil and gas facilities in Cook Inlet in May 2007, it increased previous limits for discharges into the water. To avoid “backsliding,” federal law requires the EPA to make sure any less stringent standards still comply with state-level “anti-degradation policies” that guide water quality standards.
9th Circuit challenge That June, a coalition led by Cook Inletkeeper challenged the new general permit in the U.S. Court of Appeals for the 9th Circuit. Among other complaints, they said the anti-degradation policy in Alaska needed work. In particular, they said the Alaska Department of Environmental Conservation needed to put the policy up for public notice and comment, and needed to craft a plan explaining how it would implement the policy.
The EPA ultimately agreed. In late 2010, the court told DEC to issue a public notice about the certification and take comments on it, and to issue an implementation plan.
In addition to Cook Inletkeeper, the plaintiffs included United Cook Inlet Drift Association, Cook Inlet Fishermen’s Fund, the Native Village of Port Graham and the Native Village of Nanwalek. Trustees for Alaska represented the coalition.
In early May 2011, the DEC gave the EPA a draft certification for the less stringent 2007 limits — a final certification will eventually be required — including an anti-degradation analysis. The EPA is now re-proposing the 2007 limits and taking public comment.
While the EPA said it believes the draft anti-degradation analysis will be enough to meet the exceptions to the backsliding provision, it is also re-proposing the more stringent limits from the earlier general permit in case that backsliding exception doesn’t apply.
The EPA is taking comments on that strategy, as well as on the re-proposed limits, but is not taking comments on how those older, more stringent limits were calculated.
| 