|
MMS, state, North Slope Borough support BP pipeline plan for Northstar, view shortest offshore segment as safest Corps, other cooperating agencies support alternative route to West Dock as best environmentally; most agency preferences to be stated when records of decision issued Kristen Nelson PNA News Editor
The U.S. Army Corps of Engineers issued the final environmental impact statement for the Northstar project on Feb. 5. Some of the cooperating agencies indicated an agency preference for the pipeline route — the only difference between proposals for the project — while others won’t make that decision until they issue records of decision following the public comment period on the FEIS.
The U.S. Minerals Management Service, one of the cooperating agencies in the EIS process, has endorsed as its agency-preferred alternative BP Exploration (Alaska) Inc.’s proposal for a pipeline running straight to shore from Seal Island. The North Slope Borough and the state have also endorsed the BP route, which has the shortest offshore pipeline segment of any of the proposed routes.
In the draft EIS, agencies agreed on a different proposal as the environmentally preferred alternative — a longer pipeline route which comes aground at West Dock, eliminating possible thaw bulb problems, and routes onshore pipelines along existing road or pipeline corridors. MMS identifies BP plan as preferred alternative The MMS said in the FEIS that it identified two principal benefits of BP’s proposed route in selecting it as the agency’s preferred alternative. One of the most significant public concerns raised throughout the public process was the risk of oil spills from the subsea pipeline and the MMS concluded that adopting the shortest offshore pipeline segment “is prudent and the most responsible alternative given the public’s concern.”
MMS also said that site-specific surveys, facilities design and engineering have been completed for BP’s proposal and have been under review by state and federal agencies for several years. Selection of an alternative route would require new and complete re-engineering of the pipeline including additional field surveys and could delay the construction schedule another 1 to 2 years, delaying royalty revenue to the federal government and to the state.
In the DEIS, MMS agreed with the other agencies that the proposal with a West Dock terminus for the offshore portion of the pipeline was the environmentally preferred alternative. In the FEIS, MMS said its environmentally preferred alternative is either BP’s proposed route or a similar route with a slightly longer offshore pipeline segment.
MMS noted that selection of an agency preferred alternative was not the completion of its approval process, and that its “final decision may or may not match the agency preferred alternative, pending any resulting information following publication of the FEIS” and completion of the development plan review and completion of the agency’s record of decision. State, North Slope Borough endorse BP’s plan The state of Alaska, in comments on the DEIS, endorsed BP’s plan noting that the shortest offshore segment is preferable and that exhaustive review of that pipeline route had been completed and the state was prepared to issue a right-of-way lease for that proposed pipeline route.
The North Slope Borough also endorsed BP’s plan, stating “that the greater the length of pipeline under water, the greater the risk of a leak or damage to this pipeline.” The borough said it believes BP’s plan is consistent with the borough’s policy “requiring offshore oil transport systems to be specifically designed to withstand geological hazards, specifically sea ice.” Mitigation measures Included in the FEIS are additional mitigation measures under active consideration by cooperating agencies. The intent of the measures is described, but actual wording would be developed by each agency according to their regulatory authority and responsibility. Mitigation measures that may be developed as part of agency records of decision include requirements for a complete shutdown of the pipeline during broken ice conditions, prohibition of drilling the first development well during broken ice conditions and prohibition of drilling exploration wells into untested formations during broken ice conditions. All three measures are “intended to minimize the risk of an oil spill when clean-up efficiencies are likely to be low.”Thirty day public comment period Comments on the FEIS will be accepted for 30 days ending March 8. The Corps will then prepare a record of decision to determine whether the permit should be issued, denied or issued with conditions, considering public and resource agency comments and a wide range of public interest factors.
The Corps said that no specific date can be given for completion of the record of decision because it cannot forecast the quantity or detail of resource agency and public comments or the time required to consider those comments, but that a generalized estimate of a minimum of 30 days is normal in many circumstances.
An executive summary, or a complete set of eight volumes of the final EIS may be requested by calling 907 753-2712. Libraries and public agencies throughout the state will have the final EIS eight-volume set for public use.
BP Exploration (Alaska) spokesman Paul Laird said Feb. 8 that BP was evaluating the FEIS and would probably have comments in a couple of weeks.
| 