DOCSLIB.ORG

Beaufort Sea Oil and Gas Development/Liberty Development and Production Plan Environmental Impact Statement 2001

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Beaufort Sea Oil and Gas Development/Liberty Development and Production Plan Environmental Impact Statement 2001 Alaska Outer Continental Shelf OCS EIS/EA MMS 2001-002 Liberty Development and Production Plan Draft Environmental Impact Statement Executive Summary w o r r a B B t e in a o u P fort Sea Cape Halkett T EC OJ Harri R son B P ay TY ER LIB B Colville Delta arte Bay r Isl dhoe and Pru C A U N . A S D . A Liberty Development and Production Plan, Draft Environmental Impact Statement, OCS EIS/EA, MMS 2001-001, in 3 volumes: Volume I, Executive Summary, Sections I through IX, Bibliography, Index Volume II, Tables, Figures, and Maps for Volume I Volume III, Appendices The summary is also available as a separate document: Executive Summary, MMS 2001-002. The complete EIS is available on CD-ROM (MMS 2001-001 CD) and on the Internet (http://www.mms.gov/alaska/cproject/liberty/). This Environmental Impact Statement (EIS) is not intended, nor should it be used, as a local planning document by potentially affected communities. The exploration, development and production, and transportation scenarios described in this EIS represent best-estimate assumptions that serve as a basis for identifying characteristic activities and any resulting environmental effects. Several years will elapse before enough is known about potential local details of development to permit estimates suitable for local planning. These assumptions do not represent a Minerals Management Service recommendation, preference, or endorsement of any facility, site, or development plan. Local control of events may be exercised through planning, zoning, land ownership, and applicable State and local laws and regulations. With reference to the extent of the Federal Government’s jurisdiction of the offshore regions, the United States has not yet resolved some of its offshore boundaries with neighboring jurisdictions. For the purposes of the EIS, certain assumptions were made about the extent of areas believed subject to United States’ jurisdiction. The offshore-boundary lines shown in the figures and graphics of this EIS are for purposes of illustration only; they do not necessarily reflect the position or views of the United States with respect to the location of international boundaries, convention lines, or the offshore boundaries between the United States and coastal states concerned. The United States expressly reserves its rights, and those of its nationals, in all areas in which the offshore-boundary dispute has not been resolved; and these illustrative lines are used without prejudice to such rights. Alaska Outer Continental Shelf OCS EIS/EA Liberty Development and Production Plan Draft Environmental Impact Statement Executive Summary Author Minerals Management Service Alaska OCS Region Cooperating Agencies U.S. Army Corps of Engineers Alaska District Office U.S. Environmental Protection Agency Region 10 2001 COVER SHEET Beaufort Sea Oil and Gas Development/Liberty Development and Production Plan Environmental Impact Statement 2001 Draft (X) Final ( ) Type of Action: Administrative (X) Legislative ( ) Area of Proposed Effect: Offshore Beaufort Sea marine environment and onshore North Slope of Alaska Coastal Plain Lead Agency: Cooperating Agencies: U.S. Department of the Interior, U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, Minerals Management Service Alaska District Office U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Region 10 Regional Contact: Washington Contact: Mr. Fred King Mr. George Valiulis U.S. Department of the Interior, U.S. Department of the Interior Minerals Management Service Minerals Management Service Alaska OCS Region 381 Elden Street (MS 4320) 949 East 36th Avenue Herndon, VA 20170 Anchorage, Alaska 99508 (703) 787-1662 1-800-478-2712 (Toll Free) (907) 271-6652 ABSTRACT An Interagency EIS Team was created to assist MMS in preparing this EIS. The U.S. Army Corp of Engineers and the Environmental Protection Agency are cooperating agencies. Participating agencies include the U.S. Department of the Interior, Fish and Wildlife Service; U.S. Department of Commerce, National Marine Fisheries Service; State of Alaska, Pipeline Coordinator's Office; State of Alaska, Division of Governmental Coordination; and the North Slope Borough. BP Exploration (Alaska) Inc. (BPXA) proposes to produce oil from the Liberty Prospect (OCS Lease Y- 01650) located approximately 5 miles offshore and 1.5 miles west of the abandoned Tern Exploration Island in Foggy Island Bay in the Alaskan Beaufort Sea. BPXA's proposed action for the Liberty Prospect is to construct a self-contained offshore drilling operation (development) with processing (production) facilities located on a man-made artificial gravel island in 22 feet of water in Foggy Island Bay. BPXA proposes to construct a 12-inch common-carrier oil pipeline buried in an undersea trench (approximately 6.1 miles long) from offshore Liberty Island to an onshore landfall and then connected by an elevated onshore pipeline to a tie in with the existing onshore Badami oil pipeline (approximately 1.5 miles long). This infrastructure will, in turn, transport sales quality oil (hydrocarbons) to the Trans-Alaska Pipeline System. Buried with this pipeline in the offshore portion of this project will be an external detection system capable of detecting the presence of leaking hydrocarbons, this is in addition to two internal monitoring systems the length of the project. BPXA determined that the Liberty Prospect contains approximately 120 million barrels of recoverable crude oil. Production facilities on Liberty Island would be designed to produce up to 65,000 barrels of crude oil per day and 120 million standard cubic feet of natural gas per day. There would be producing wells, gas-injection wells, water-injection wells, and either one or two Class I industrial waste-disposal wells. The life of the proposed Liberty Prospect development is anticipated to be approximately 15-20 years. This draft Environmental Impact Statement (EIS) covers the proposed Beaufort Sea Oil and Gas Development/Liberty Development and Production Plan. This document includes the purpose and background of the proposed action, alternatives, description of the affected environment, and the predicted environmental effects of the proposed action and the alternatives. The alternative analysis evaluates five sets of component alternatives (island location and pipeline route, pipeline design, upper slope protection system, gravel mine site, and pipeline burial depth) that focus on the different effects to modifying major project elements. The EIS also evaluate the range of alternatives that could be chosen by combining the different options from the component alternatives. In addition to the mitigation required by MMS in the lease and those built into the BPXA Proposal, two proposed mitigating measures and their potential effects are evaluated. The EIS also evaluates potential cumulative effects resulting from the BPXA Proposal and alternatives. TABLE OF CONTENTS Contents–1 Contents EXECUTIVE SUMMARY: LIBERTY DEVELOPMENT AND l. Archaeological Resources, ExSum-14 PRODUCTION PLAN, ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT m. Economics, ExSum-15 n. Water Quality, ExSum-15 A. LIBERTY PROJECT, PLAN, AND o. Air Quality, ExSum-15 SCHEDULES, ExSum-1 2. Effects Summary for a Large Oil Spill, ExSum-16 1. Environmental Impact Statement Schedule, ExSum-1 a. Bowhead Whales, ExSum-16 2. The Need and Purpose for the Liberty Project, ExSum-2 b. Spectacled Eiders, ExSum-16 3. Description of the Plan, ExSum-2 c. Seals and Polar Bears, ExSum-17 4. Development Schedule, ExSum-2 d. Marine and Coastal Birds, ExSum-17 B. COLLABORATION WITH OTHER AGENCIES, ExSum-2 e. Terrestrial Mammals, ExSum-18 1. Interagency Team Meetings, ExSum-2 f. Lower Trophic-Level Organisms, ExSum-18 2. EIS Partnerships, ExSum-2 g. Fishes, ExSum-18 h. Essential Fish Habitat, ExSum-18 C. ISSUES, ExSum-3 i. Vegetation-Wetland Habitats, ExSum-19 1. Scoping, ExSum-3 j. Subsistence-Harvest Patterns, ExSum-19 2. Traditional Knowledge, ExSum-4 k. Sociocultural Systems, ExSum-19 3. Environmental Justice, Indian Trust Resources, and l. Archaeological Resources, ExSum-19 Government-to-Government Coordination, ExSum-4 m. Economics, ExSum-20 4. Major Issues, ExSum-5 n. Water Quality, ExSum-20 a. Disturbances, ExSum-5 o. Air Quality, ExSum-20 b. Large Offshore Oil Spills, ExSum-6 (1) Spill Assumptions and Sizes, ExSum-6 E. ALTERNATIVES AND MITIGATION, ExSum-20 (2) Oil-Spill-Trajectory Analysis, ExSum-6 1. Decision Options, ExSum-20 (3) The Chance of a Large Spill 2. Alternative II – No Action, ExSum-21 Occurring, ExSum-6 3. Component and Combination Alternatives and Their c. Cumulative Effects of Past, Present, and Future Effects, ExSum-21 Development, ExSum-7 a. Effects of Component Alternatives, ExSum-23 5. Other Issues, ExSum-8 (1) Effects of Alternative Drilling and Production a. Discharges (Water Discharges and Air Island Locations and Pipeline Emissions), ExSum-8 Routes, ExSum-23 b. Gravel Mining, ExSum-8 (a) Alternative I – Use Liberty Island c. Small Oil Spills from Liberty Facilities, ExSum-8 Location and Pipeline Route (Liberty d. Seawater Intake, ExSum-8 Development and Production e. Economic Effects, ExSum-9 Plan), ExSum-23 f. Abandonment of the Project, ExSum-9 (b) Alternative III.A – Use the Southern g. Global Climate Change and Alternative Energy Island Location and Eastern Pipeline Sources, ExSum-9 Route, ExSum-25 6. Alternatives to the Proposed Plan, ExSum-9 (c) Alternative III.B - Use the Tern Island 7. Significance Thresholds, ExSum-9 Location and Tern Pipeline Route, ExSum-26 D. EFFECTS SUMMARIES, ExSum-10 (2) Effects of Alternative Pipeline 1. Effects Summary from Construction and Routine Designs, ExSum-27 Operations from the BPXA Proposal, ExSum-11 (a) Alternative I – Use Single-Wall Pipe a. Bowhead Whales, ExSum-11 System (Liberty Development and b. Spectacled Eiders, ExSum-11 Production Plan), ExSum-28 c. Seals and Polar Bears, ExSum-12 (b) Alternative IV.A – Use Pipe-in-Pipe d. Marine and Coastal Birds, ExSum-12 System, ExSum-29 e. Terrestrial Mammals, ExSum-13 (c) Alternative IV.B – Use Pipe-in-HDPE f. Lower Trophic-Level Organisms, ExSum-13 System, ExSum-30 g. Fishes, ExSum-13 (d) Alternative IV.C – Use Flexible Pipe h.
Load more

Recommended publications
  • This Will Be the Cover Page
    SSttaattee PPiippeelliinnee CCoooorrddiinnaattoorr’’ss OOffffiiccee Fiscal Year 2010 Annual Report Contact Information State Pipeline Coordinator‘s Office 411 West Fourth Avenue Anchorage, Alaska 99501 (907) 269-6403 Cover Photograph Cover photograph of TAPS, by Benjamin Hagedorn, located just south of pipeline milepost 169 (Atigun Pass) on May 20, 2010. Table of Contents Table of Contents INTRODUCTION................................................................................................................... 1 Federal/State Joint Pipeline Office .................................................................................... 1 State Pipeline Coordinator’s Office .................................................................................. 2 Department of Natural Resources ..................................................................................... 3 State Pipeline Coordinator‘s Office .................................................................................. 3 State Pipeline Coordinator‘s Office Liaison/State Agency Representatives .................. 11 SPCO Jurisdictional Pipelines ........................................................................................ 15 STATEWIDE PIPELINES .................................................................................................. 17 Trans-Alaska Pipeline System ......................................................................................... 17 Right-of-Way Lease and Pipeline System Overview ....................................................
    [Show full text]
  • Beaufort Sea Nearshore Fish Monitoring Study
    Beaufort Sea Nearshore Fish Monitoring Study: 2017 Annual Report Prepared for Hilcorp Alaska, LLC 3800 Centerpoint Drive, Ste. 1400 Anchorage, Alaska 99503 2017 Beaufort Sea Nearshore Fish Monitoring Beaufort Sea Nearshore Fish Monitoring Study: 2017 Annual Report By Justin T. Priest Duncan G. Green Bridget M. Fletcher Trent M. Sutton University of Alaska Fairbanks College of Fisheries and Ocean Sciences Department of Fisheries 2150 Koyukuk Drive Fairbanks, Alaska 99775 University of Alaska Fairbanks – College of Fisheries and Ocean Sciences ii 2017 Beaufort Sea Nearshore Fish Monitoring This report was prepared under contract to Hilcorp Alaska, LLC. Questions about this report may be addressed to: Hilcorp Alaska, LLC., Environmental Specialist, 3800 Centerpoint Drive, Anchorage, Alaska 99503. This study was conducted under Alaska Department of Fish and Game Permit No. CF-17-063. Report should be cited as: Priest, J. T., D. G. Green, B. M. Fletcher, and T. M. Sutton. 2018. Beaufort Sea Nearshore Fish Monitoring Study: 2017 Annual Report. Report for Hilcorp Alaska, LLC by the University of Alaska Fairbanks, College of Fisheries and Ocean Sciences, Department of Fisheries, Fairbanks, Alaska. University of Alaska Fairbanks – College of Fisheries and Ocean Sciences iii 2017 Beaufort Sea Nearshore Fish Monitoring Executive Summary The Beaufort Sea Fish Monitoring Program is the most comprehensive and continuous sampling efforts to monitor the assemblage structure and health of anadromous and amphidromous fishes in nearshore waters of the central Beaufort Sea near Prudhoe Bay, Alaska. This program was initiated to monitor and, if necessary, direct mitigation of environmental impacts on nearshore fishes related to oil and gas development, with a particular emphasis on species of subsistence importance in the region.
    [Show full text]
  • Federal Register/Vol. 86, No. 103/Tuesday, June 1, 2021
    29364 Federal Register / Vol. 86, No. 103 / Tuesday, June 1, 2021 / Proposed Rules DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR Leesburg Pike; Falls Church, VA 22041– potential and documented Industry 3803. effects on these species; natural history Fish and Wildlife Service • Electronic submission: Federal and conservation status information of eRulemaking Portal at: http:// these species; and data reported from 50 CFR Part 18 www.regulations.gov. Follow the Alaska Native subsistence hunters. We [Docket No. FWS–R7–ES–2021–0037; instructions for submitting comments to have prepared a draft environmental FXES111607MRG01–212–FF07CAMM00] Docket No. FWS–R7–ES–2021–0037. assessment in conjunction with this We will post all comments at http:// rulemaking, which is also available for RIN 1018–BF13 www.regulations.gov. You may request public review and comment. that we withhold personal identifying The proposed regulations include Marine Mammals; Incidental Take information from public review; permissible methods of nonlethal During Specified Activities; North however, we cannot guarantee that we taking; mitigation measures to ensure Slope, Alaska will be able to do so. See Request for that Industry activities will have the AGENCY: Fish and Wildlife Service, Public Comments for more information. least practicable adverse impact on the Interior. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: species or stock, their habitat, and their ACTION: Proposed rule; notice of Marine Mammals Management, U.S. availability for subsistence uses; and availability of draft environmental Fish and Wildlife Service, 1011 East requirements for monitoring and assessment; and request for comments. Tudor Road, MS–341, Anchorage, AK reporting. Compliance with this rule, if 99503, Telephone 907–786–3844, or finalized, is not expected to result in SUMMARY: We, the U.S.
    [Show full text]
  • Accidental Oil Spills and Gas Releases;
    APPENDIX A Accidental Oil Spills and Gas Releases; Information, Models, and Estimates; and Supporting Figures, Tables, and Maps Posted at: https://www.boem.gov/Liberty/ This page intentionally left blank. Appendix A Liberty Development and Production Plan Final EIS Table of Contents Contents A-1 Accidental Large Oil Spills ...................................................................................... 1 A-1.1 Large Spill Size, Source, and Oil-Type Assumptions ............................................................ 1 A-1.1.1 OCS Large Oil Spill Sizes .......................................................................................... 1 A-1.1.2 Onshore Large Oil Pipeline Spill Size ........................................................................ 1 A-1.1.3 Source and Type of Large Oil Spills .......................................................................... 2 A-1.1.4 Historical Loss of Well-Control Incidents on the OCS and North Sea ....................... 2 A-1.2 Behavior and Fate of Crude Oils ............................................................................................ 3 A-1.2.1 Generalized Processes Affecting the Fate and Behavior of Oil................................. 3 A-1.2.2 Assumptions about Oil Spill Weathering .................................................................... 4 A-1.2.3 Modeling Simulations of Oil Weathering .................................................................... 4 A-1.3 Estimates of Where a Large Offshore Oil Spill May Go ........................................................
    [Show full text]
  • 2012 AEDC Resource Extraction Report
    AEDC 2012 RESOURCE Extraction 10-Year Project Projection Sponsored by: Research provided by Petroleum News and North of 60 Mining News Resource Extraction Project Projection TABLE OF CONTENTS Preface ............................................................................................................................................................................................... 4 Executive Summary ..................................................................................................................................................................... 5 Background Information Overview ......................................................................................................................................... 10 Oil & Gas Resource .................................................................................................................................................................... 11 Four oil sources, two drivers, could raise northern Alaska’s oil and natural gas output ............................................ 11 Cook Inlet ..................................................................................................................................................................................... 13 Proposed Projects – Oil & Gas ................................................................................................................................................ 15 Projects to be Watched – Oil & Gas .....................................................................................................................................
    [Show full text]
  • 2011 AEDC Resource Extraction Report
    2011RESOU R CE EXT R ACTION PR OJECT PR OJECTION Research provided by Petroleum News and North of 60 Mining News RESOURCE EXTRACTION PROJECT PROJECTION TABLE OF CONTENTS Preface .................................................................................................................................................................................................. 3 Executive Summary ........................................................................................................................................................................... 4 Background Information Overview ......................................................................................................................................... 13 Oil & Gas Resource ................................................................................................................................................................ 14 Four oil sources, two drivers, could raise northern Alaska’s oil output ................................................... 14 Despite declines, Cook Inlet still active ................................................................................................................... 16 Proposed Projects – Oil & Gas ............................................................................................................................................ 19 Projects to be Watched – Oil & Gas ................................................................................................................................. 23 Existing
    [Show full text]
  • OIL SPILL PREVENTION and RESPONSE in the U.S. ARCTIC
    OIL SPILL PREVENTION and RESPONSE IN THE U.S. ARCTIC OCEAN Unexamined Risks, Unacceptable Consequences (Photo credits for cover, clockwise from le!: Oil rig, Stockbyte/Getty Images; spectacled eider, U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service; children, Burgess Blevins/Getty Images; bearded seal, Brendan Kelly. Background ice photo: Nuka Research and Planning LLC.) OIL SPILL PREVENTION and RESPONSE IN THE U.S. ARCTIC OCEAN: Unexamined Risks, Unacceptable Consequences November 2010 Commissioned by: Report Prepared by: U.S. Arctic Program, Pew Environment Group Nuka Research and Planning Group, LLC Pearson Consulting, LLC Scientific peer review conducted by three experts in oil spill response, oceanography and Arctic marine ecology. OIL SPILL PREVENTION and RESPONSE IN THE U.S. ARCTIC: Unexamined Risks, Unacceptable Consequences Acknowledgments We wish to thank three individuals for reviewing this report in its !nal draft form: Nancy Bird, Prince William Sound Science Center; Rolf Gradinger, University of Alaska Fairbanks; and one anonymous reviewer. These individuals were asked to review the draft because of their diverse perspectives and technical expertise. The purpose of this independent review was to provide candid and critical comments on the analysis and reasoning contained in the report to assist the Pew Environment Group in making it as sound as possible. Although these reviewers provided many constructive comments and suggestions, they were not asked to endorse the conclusions or recommendations, nor did they see the !nal report before its release. We also wish to thank the many people who helped make this report possible: • Nuka Research and Planning Group LLC sta", especially lead authors Elise De Cola and Tim Robertson, and designer Kathleen George.
    [Show full text]
  • Petroleum News 082904
    page Aurora has permit issues at Hanna; 4 plans gas storage at Nicolai Creek Vol. 14, No. 18 • www.PetroleumNews.com A weekly oil & gas newspaper based in Anchorage, Alaska Week of May 3, 2009 • $2 Nikiski: Refinery with a view EXPLORATION & PRODUCTION Moving on Liberty COURTESY TESORO COURTESY SDI, river bridge upgrade and drilling rig construction near completion By ALAN BAILEY Petroleum News fter years of planning and design there are Anow tangible signs on the ground of progress towards first oil from BP’s 100 million-barrel Liberty field, offshore in the Beaufort Sea, about 15 miles east of Prudhoe Bay. On the North Slope workers are putting the fin- ALASKA FRONTIER CONSTRUCTORS ishing touches to the extension of the Endicott satellite drilling island, where Liberty’s drilling rig Setting the sheet-pile retaining wall for the Liberty will be located, and to the upgrades to the extension to the Endicott satellite drilling island. Sagavanirktok River road bridge, an essential Liberty drilling rig is nearly finished, Darryl component of the transportation support infra- Luoma, BP’s general manager for the Liberty proj- structure for the Liberty project; and in Vancouver, ect, told the Alaska Support Industry Alliance Wash., fabrication of Parker Drilling’s massive see LIBERTY page 18 NATURAL GAS Eresman: the future’s a gas EnCana CEO says North America ‘flush’ with resource costing less to produce Tesoro’s Alaska refinery on the Kenai Peninsula now uses crude oil By GARY PARK leading production and pipeline compa- from around the world, not just from Cook Inlet and the North Slope; For Petroleum News nies speaking at a Vancouver Board of see story on page 8.
    [Show full text]
  • Docket No. FWS‒R7‒ES‒2021‒0037; FXES111607MRG01–212–FF07CAMM00]
    This document is scheduled to be published in the Federal Register on 06/01/2021 and available online at Billing Code: 4333–15 federalregister.gov/d/2021-11496, and on govinfo.gov DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR Fish and Wildlife Service 50 CFR Part 18 [Docket No. FWS‒R7‒ES‒2021‒0037; FXES111607MRG01–212–FF07CAMM00] RIN 1018–BF13 Marine Mammals; Incidental Take During Specified Activities; North Slope, Alaska AGENCY: Fish and Wildlife Service, Interior. ACTION: Proposed rule; notice of availability of draft environmental assessment; and request for comments. SUMMARY: We, the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, in response to a request from the Alaska Oil and Gas Association, propose to issue regulations authorizing the nonlethal, incidental, unintentional take by harassment of small numbers of polar bears and Pacific walruses during year-round oil and gas industry activities in the Beaufort Sea (Alaska and the Outer Continental Shelf) and adjacent northern coast of Alaska. Take may result from oil and gas exploration, development, production, and transportation activities occurring for a period of 5 years. These activities are similar to those covered by the previous 5- year Beaufort Sea incidental take regulations effective from August 5, 2016, through August 5, 2021. This proposed rule would authorize take by harassment only. No lethal take would be authorized. If this rule is finalized, we will issue Letters of Authorization, upon request, for specific proposed activities in accordance with this proposed regulation. Therefore, we request comments on these proposed regulations. DATES: Comments on these proposed incidental take regulations and the accompanying draft environmental assessment will be accepted on or before [INSERT DATE 30 DAYS AFTER THE DATE OF PUBLICATION IN THE FEDERAL REGISTER].
    [Show full text]
  • New Developments in Upstream Oil and Gas Technologies Hearing
    S. HRG. 112–30 NEW DEVELOPMENTS IN UPSTREAM OIL AND GAS TECHNOLOGIES HEARING BEFORE THE COMMITTEE ON ENERGY AND NATURAL RESOURCES UNITED STATES SENATE ONE HUNDRED TWELFTH CONGRESS FIRST SESSION TO RECEIVE TESTIMONY ON NEW DEVELOPMENTS IN UPSTREAM OIL AND GAS TECHNOLOGIES MAY 10, 2011 ( Printed for the use of the Committee on Energy and Natural Resources U.S. GOVERNMENT PRINTING OFFICE 67–090 PDF WASHINGTON : 2011 For sale by the Superintendent of Documents, U.S. Government Printing Office Internet: bookstore.gpo.gov Phone: toll free (866) 512–1800; DC area (202) 512–1800 Fax: (202) 512–2104 Mail: Stop IDCC, Washington, DC 20402–0001 COMMITTEE ON ENERGY AND NATURAL RESOURCES JEFF BINGAMAN, New Mexico, Chairman RON WYDEN, Oregon LISA MURKOWSKI, Alaska TIM JOHNSON, South Dakota RICHARD BURR, North Carolina MARY L. LANDRIEU, Louisiana JOHN BARRASSO, Wyoming MARIA CANTWELL, Washington JAMES E. RISCH, Idaho BERNARD SANDERS, Vermont MIKE LEE, Utah DEBBIE STABENOW, Michigan RAND PAUL, Kentucky MARK UDALL, Colorado DANIEL COATS, Indiana JEANNE SHAHEEN, New Hampshire ROB PORTMAN, Ohio AL FRANKEN, Minnesota JOHN HOEVEN, North Dakota JOE MANCHIN, III, West Virginia BOB CORKER, Tennessee CHRISTOPHER A. COONS, Delaware ROBERT M. SIMON, Staff Director SAM E. FOWLER, Chief Counsel MCKIE CAMPBELL, Republican Staff Director KAREN K. BILLUPS, Republican Chief Counsel (II) C O N T E N T S STATEMENTS Page Banks, Kevin R., Director, Division of Oil and Gas, Alaska Department of Natural Resources, Anchorage, AK .................................................................... 15 Bingaman, Hon. Jeff, U.S. Senator From New Mexico ........................................ 1 Davis, Thomas, Director, Reservoir Characterization Project, Colorado School of Mines, Golden, CO ........................................................................................... 3 Epstein, Lois, P.E., Director, Arctic Program, The Wilderness Society, Anchor- age, AK .................................................................................................................
    [Show full text]
  • HOUSE RES COMMITTEE -1- January 21, 2011 POSITION STATEMENT: Provided an Overview on the Responsibilities of the Division of Oil & Gas
    ALASKA STATE LEGISLATURE HOUSE RESOURCES STANDING COMMITTEE January 21, 2011 1:06 p.m. MEMBERS PRESENT Representative Paul Seaton, Co-Chair Representative Peggy Wilson, Vice Chair Representative Alan Dick Representative Neal Foster Representative Cathy Engstrom Munoz Representative Berta Gardner MEMBERS ABSENT Representative Eric Feige, Co-Chair Representative Bob Herron Representative Scott Kawasaki OTHER LEGISLATORS PRESENT Representative Dan Saddler COMMITTEE CALENDAR OVERVIEW(S): DIVISION OF OIL & GAS~ DIVISION OF GEOLOGICAL AND GEOPHYSICAL SURVEYS~ AND ALASKA OIL & GAS CONSERVATION COMMISSION - HEARD OVERVIEW(S): DIVISION OF GEOLOGICAL AND GEOPHYSICAL SURVEYS - SCHEDULED BUT NOT HEARD PREVIOUS COMMITTEE ACTION No previous action to record WITNESS REGISTER KEVIN BANKS, Director Division of Oil & Gas Department of Natural Resources (DNR) Anchorage, Alaska HOUSE RES COMMITTEE -1- January 21, 2011 POSITION STATEMENT: Provided an overview on the responsibilities of the Division of Oil & Gas. CATHY FOERSTER, Engineering Commissioner Alaska Oil & Gas Conservation Commission (AOGCC) Department of Administration (DOA) Anchorage, Alaska POSITION STATEMENT: Gave a presentation on the Alaska Oil & Gas Conservation Commission (AOGCC). ACTION NARRATIVE 1:06:06 PM CO-CHAIR PAUL SEATON called the House Resources Standing Committee meeting to order at 1:06 p.m. Representatives Seaton, Wilson, Munoz, Foster, Gardner, and Dick were present at the call to order. Representative Saddler was also present. OVERVIEW(S): Division of Oil & Gas, Division of Geological and Geophysical Surveys, and Alaska Oil & Gas Conservation Commission 1:06:06 PM CO-CHAIR SEATON announced that the only order of business would be overviews from the Division of Oil & Gas, Department of Natural Resources (DNR), and from the Alaska Oil & Gas Conservation Commission (AOGCC).
    [Show full text]
  • 2019 Annual North Slope Science Review
    2019 Assessment, Inventory, and Monitoring – Scott Guyer Annual Bureau of Land Management – Stacey Fritz North Slope Bureau of Ocean Energy Management – Cathy Coon BPX Alaska – Chrissy Pohl Science Review ConocoPhillips Alaska – Robyn McGhee U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service – Wendy Loya Hilcorp – Beth Sharp National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration – Robyn Angliss National Park Service – Lois Dalle-Molle OilSearch – Ryan French U.S. Geological Survey – Grant Hilderbrand & John Pearce General Study Information NSSI ANSSR May 16, 2019 Study Title: Assessment, Inventory and Monitoring (AIM) for GMT2 Lead Organization(s): Bureau of Land Management Other Organization(s): Alaska Center for Conservation Science (UAA) Lead Investigator(s): Jeanne Osnas (UAA), Scott Guyer (BLM) Other Investigator(s): Anjanette Steer (UAA), Timm Nawrocki (UAA) Investigator Contact(s): Scott Guyer BLM 907-223-6759 Duration of Study: Two-Year Data Collection and analysis. Description: On July 22, 2013, ConocoPhillips Alaska, Inc. submitted an application with BLM for a proposed drill site location and majority of the infield roads and pipeline route on BLM-managed lands. The proposed GMT1 drilling and production pad is approximately 14 miles west of the Alpine Central Facility. Study / Resource Subject Categories NSSI ANSSR May 16, 2019 Subject of Study: Soils, Permafrost, Wetlands, terrestrial Monitoring, climate and impacts from development BLM AIM – Assessment, Inventory, and Monitoring 25 m 25 General Study Information NSSI ANSSR May 16, 2019 Study Title: Purpose: Some of the original sample plots from the BLM 2012 AIM Pilot project are near the proposed GMT-1 development. However, a higher density of sampling prior to the construction and installation of GMT-1 is need to establish current habitat conditions to be able to assess any impacts to the local environment from this development and comply with the level of monitoring identified in the Record of Decision (ROD).
    [Show full text]