|
BLM releases Mooses Tooth final SEIS Bureau of Land Management preferred alternative includes road, but is not ConocoPhillips proposal; drilling pad, access road moved Kristen Nelson Petroleum News
The Greater Mooses Tooth 1 development in the National Petroleum Reserve-Alaska is one step closer to moving ahead - but not exactly as operator ConocoPhillips Alaska requested.
The federal Bureau of Land Management released the final supplemental environmental impact statement for GMT1 Oct. 29, but said its preferred Alternative B was not Alternative A proposed by the company.
The agency said Alternative B “focuses on keeping the proposed road and pipeline outside of the BLM-established Fish Creek buffer, and has two fewer stream crossings than Alternative A.”
The agency said it would formally publish the document in the Federal Register on Nov. 7 with a record of decision to be issued “at least 30 days after the publication of the final SEIS.”
GMT1 is the development of a discovery made at Lookout and originally proposed as drill site CD-6. When it was determined that CD-6 was not in the same reservoir as the Colville River unit, drill sites CD-1 through CD-5, CD-6 was renamed GMT1, part of the Greater Mooses Tooth unit.
Drilling pad, road moved BLM said the main differences between Alternative B and Alternative A include moving the drilling pad some 700 feet to the southwest; routing the access road and pipeline from GMT1 to the CD-5 drill site south of the Fish Creek setback; a new tie-in pad for the pipeline east of the CD-5 drill site; eliminating a bridge over Crea Creek and a culvert at Barely Creek.
BLM said Alternative B would have a slightly larger footprint and greater fill requirement than Alternative A and said the route “may be more technically challenging for road construction and maintenance (e.g., poor soils, thaw stability) due to the extent of thaw basins along the route.”
Both alternatives include an 11.8-acre gravel pad, 33 wells and gravel supply from the Arctic Slope Regional Corp. mine site.
Alternative B has a mile more of access road, 8.6 miles compared to 7.6 miles for Alternative A, and 18.2 miles of elevated pipelines on vertical support members compared to 17.9 miles for Alternative A.
The total gravel footprint of Alternative B is larger at 80.4 acres, compared to 72.7 acres for Alternative A.
Other alternatives considered in the final SEIS were C, which evaluated Nuiqsut as a hub for industrial activity with upgrades of roads and the Nuiqsut Airport; Alternative D1, with no year-round road access between GMT1 and existing Colville River unit facilities at Alpine; Alternative D2, similar to D1 but with only seasonal drilling; and Alternative E, the no action alternative.
Congressional delegation disagrees The Republican members of Alaska’s congressional delegation, Sen. Lisa Murkowski and Congressman Don Young, objected to BLM’s assessment.
Murkowski said in an Oct. 29 statement that Interior’s final SEIS was released “after months of delay,” and rejected ConocoPhillips’ preferred alternative in favor of “a longer and more expensive road option.”
“Though I’m glad Interior has finally issued this review, I am concerned about the critical project decisions that are being left for the record of decision, which could impact whether this project moves forward or not,” Murkowski said. Interior needed to finalize the SEIS by the end of October to allow the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers and the Environmental Protection Agency “sufficient time to complete the permitting process in time for ConocoPhillips to begin production by 2017,” but, Murkowski said, BLM will leave its final decision open until the Corps and EPA finish their reviews.
“Federal leaseholders need to have a permitting process that is timely and predictable in order to invest the billions of dollars it takes to develop America’s energy resources,” she said.
Young said he was “pleased to see a plan that includes an access road,” but said he shared “some of the same concerns expressed today by industry representatives that this assessment leaves us with too many unanswered questions regarding the future of this project and dismisses a preferred road alternative.”
He also said the BLM assessment leaves the Greater Mooses Tooth project “up against pending reviews by the EPA and Army Corps of Engineers, which have previously held up a number of Alaskan projects, including production within CD-5.”
“It remains to be seen what mitigation and other requirements will pile onto this process, but for now I am happy to see it move forward,” Young said.
Conoco has objections In an Oct. 29 statement provided to Petroleum News by email, ConocoPhillips said:
“We are pleased that the BLM has chosen a roaded alternative as their preferred alternative for GMT1. However, the roaded alternative the agency has chosen, Alternative B, is not the alternative that ConocoPhillips proposed. The proposed project, which is Alternative A, has the lowest environmental footprint, requires the least amount of gravel, and remains the best Alternative in ConocoPhillips’ view. We are currently pursuing a Corps of Engineers 404 permit for Alternative A. The Corps has not yet determined which alternative is the ‘least environmentally damaging practicable alternative’ (LEDPA). ConocoPhillips expects that the BLM has flexibility to approve the alternative selected by the Corps.”
| 