Environmental Regulatory Trainingrdcarchives.org/issues/oilgas/aogatraining.pdf · 1) Short Q&A after each topic – max 2 minutes 2) A 10 min. Q&A after each session 3) No cell phones/pages

Environmental Regulatory Training“Regulatory and Permitting 101”Alaska Oil and Gas Association December 8, 2005Marriott Hotel – Anchorage, AK

EnvironmentalRegulatory 101

Goals & Objectives of Course

• Provide regulatory agencies with basic or greaterunderstanding of regulatory/permitting programsrelating to oil and gas (North Slope focus) and otherresource development projects in Alaska.

• Provide an understanding of how regulatory andpermitting requirements are identified and integratedinto resource development project planning.

• Provide the regulatory agencies with the industryperspective on navigating the regulatory process.


Ground Rules

1) Short Q&A after each topic – max 2 minutes2) A 10 min. Q&A after each session3) No cell phones/pages – turn to vibrate4) Welcome & encourage any technical corrections

and/or clarifications during Q&A5) Note cards will be available for questions and AOGA

staff will collect6) Welcome comments and feedback following training

(see evaluation form in booklets)


Presentation Materials

• Copies of all slides provided in participant package• Request CD at registration table• Time does not allow presenters cover all the detail

regarding their topic and slide content. Slides copiesare provided as a resource.


Background/Context

• Complex and sophisticated regulatory regime for resourcedevelopment in Alaska

• Regulatory regime has evolved in parallel with the majorU.S. environmental laws

• Protection of air, land, water, habitat, wildlife, and humanenvironments

• North Slope oil and gas activities are regulated at thefederal, state, and local level

• Oil companies view permitting as a critical pathrequirement and risk to project success (schedule, termsand conditions)

• Evolving technology regarding environmental performanceand mitigation


Regulatory and Alaska Oil Industry Milestones

Regulatory Milestones

• 1953 – Outer Continental Shelf Act• 1969 – National Environmental Policy Act• 1970 – Clean Air Act, Alaska Native

Claims Settlement Act• 1972 – Federal Water Pollution Control

Act Amendments, Marine MammalProtection Act, Coastal ZoneManagement Act

• 1973 – Endangered Species Act• 1976 – Resource Conservation &

Recovery Act• 1977 – Clean Water Act (Amended

FWPCA), Alaska Coastal ManagementAct

• 1979 – U.S. Army Corps of EngineersSec. 404 Jurisdiction Over North SlopeWetlands

• 1980 – Alaska National Interest LandsConservation Act, RCRA Oil and GasWaste Exemption

Alaska Oil and Gas Milestones

• 1923 – Naval Petroleum Reserve No. 4(PET-4) Established

• 1944-52 – PET-4 U.S. Navy ExplorationProgram

• 1953 – Swanson River Oil FieldDiscovered

• 1964 – First State Lease Sale on NorthSlope

• 1968 – Prudhoe Bay Oil Field Discovered• 1974-77 – Trans Alaska Pipeline

Construction• 1976 – PET-4 Transferred to DOI,

National Petroleum Reserve Alaska• 1977 – Prudhoe Bay Oil Production

Commences• 1982 – First NPRA Lease Sale• 1987 Endicott Production Commences• 2000– Alpine Production Commences• 2001 – Northstar Production Commences



Course Outline

1. Federal Regulatory Programs2. Federally-delegated Regulatory Programs3. State Regulatory Programs4. Local Regulatory Programs (focus on NSB Title 19)5. Permitting for Resource Development Projects in

Alaska6. Agency Jurisdiction and Permits Presentation

Luncheon Presentation:The Alaska Natural Gas Pipeline –

A Permitting Overview


Course Outline (2)Federal Programs

• National Environmental Policy Act• U.S. Army Corps of Engineers Section 404/10• Clean Water Act National Pollutant Discharge Elimination

System (NPDES) Permitting• Endangered Species Act• Marine Mammal Protection Act• Bureau of Land Management Oil and Gas Permitting (NPRA)• Minerals Management Service OCS• Executive Orders Affecting Energy Projects• Other Federal Authorizations and Consultations


Course Outline (3)Federally-delegated Programs

• Clean Air Act – Air Permitting Program• Coastal Zone Management Act/Alaska Coastal

Management Program


Course Outline (4)Federal and State Programs

• Waste Management & Underground Injection Control (UIC)– Resource Conservation and Recovery Act (RCRA)– ADEC Solid Waste Regulations– Underground Injection Control Program (EPA and AOGCC)

• Oil Spill Contingency Plans– OPA 90– Oil Discharge Prevention and Contingency Plan (ADEC)– Spill Prevention, Control and Countermeasure Plan (EPA)


Course Outline (5)State of Alaska Programs

Alaska Department of Natural Resources• Unit Plan of Development• Lease Plan and Unit Plan of Operations• Miscellaneous Land Use Permits• Material Sales Contracts• Temporary Water Use and Water Rights• Title 41 Fish Habitat Permits


Course Outline (6)Local Programs

North Slope Borough Title 19 (NSB Code) LandManagement Regulations


Course Outline (7)Alaska Natural Gas Pipeline – Permitting Overview

Enabling Mechanisms• Natural Gas Act (NGA)• Alaska Stranded Gas Development Act (ASGDA)• 2004 Alaska Natural Gas Pipeline Act (ANGPA)• CFR 43 (BLM) & AS 38.35 (DNR)

Major Agency Approvals Required– FERC Certificate of Public Necessity &

Convenience– BLM and DNR Right-of-Way Leases– Others


Course Outline (8)Permitting for Resource Development in Alaska

• Company Planning Process• Industry Capital Value Process• Company Team• Permitting Strategy and Plan• Identification of Permits Required• Putting the Permitting Puzzle Together• Compliance• Examples of Permitting Timeframes• Point Thomson Project – Permitting Example


Session One

• National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) – AliceBullington, CPAI

• US Army Corps of Engineers – Alice Bullington, CPAI

• National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System(NPDES) – Judy Kitigawa, BPXA


Federal Programs


National Environmental Policy Act


National Environmental Policy ActJurisdiction

• National Environmental Policy Act – 1969• Council of Environmental Quality Implementing Regulations 40

CFR Parts 1500-1508


National Environmental Policy ActPrimary Goals

• Preventing environmental damage• Ensure federal agencies take environmental factors

into account in making their decisions• “Stop and think act”• Environmental Impact Statement (EIS) designed to

have agency systematically consider its actions• NEPA procedural rather than substantive focus• Environmental consequences (“hard look” at proposal

and alternatives)


National Environmental Policy ActPreventing Environmental Damage

Triggered by “Major Federal Action SignificantlyAffecting the Quality of the Human Environment” e.g.

federal permit, lease sale


National Environmental Policy ActTriggers

• “Significantly” as used in NEPA has to be considered according to (40 CFRPart 1508.27):– “Context” = significance of action in terms of society as a whole, affected

region, affected interests, short and long term– “Intensity” = severity of impact

1. Beneficial and adverse2. Effects on public health3. Unique environmental, cultural or historic resources4. Degree to which effects on human environment are controversial,

uncertain, unique or unknown5. Relation of action to other actions and potential for cumulatively

significant impacts6. Degree of potential effects on sites etc. eligible for listing on the

National Register of Historical Places7. Degree of effects on endangered or threatened species or their

habitat8. Whether action has potential for violation of Federal, State or local

environmental law


National Environmental Policy ActAgencies Involved

• All federal agencies must comply• CEQ issues regulations applicable to all agencies• Each agency adopts its own NEPA regulations to

implement CEQ requirements (e.g. Corps 33 CFRPart 325, Appendix B)

• EPA has dual role – NEPA oversight and implementNEPA as federal agency

• State or local government may participate as jointlead or cooperating agency (e.g. NSB on Northstarand State of Alaska on Alpine)


National Environmental Policy ActProcess – EIS Required?

• Categorical Exclusions. Examples from Corps:1. Fixed or floating small private piers, small docks, boat

hoists and boathouses.2. Minor utility distribution and collection lines including

irrigation;3. Minor maintenance dredging using existing disposal sites;4. Boat launching ramps;5. All applications which qualify as letters of permission .

• Environmental Assessment:- Finding of No Significant Impact (“FONSI”) or- Need for EIS

• Can go straight to EIS


National Environmental Policy ActProcess – Agency Involvement

• Lead Agency, Cooperating Agencies, CommentingAgencies

• Lead Agency Determination:– Amount of agency’s involvement– Project approval authority– Expertise regarding environmental effects– Length of agency’s involvement– Sequence of agency’s involvement


National Environmental Policy ActProcess – Steps

• Scoping• Formulate Purpose and Need, Statement of

“Proposed Action”• Analysis of alternatives (only “reasonable”

alternatives, “heart of EIS”)• Affected environment• NEPA does not require an agency to select the least

environmentally harmful alternative• Mitigation measures


National Environmental Policy ActProcess – Steps (continued)

• DEIS• Public comment period (typically 30-60 days)• Public hearings• Final EIS• Post-FEIS

– Record of Decision (min. 30 days after FederalRegister Notice of FEIS publication)

– Referral to CEQ (interagency disagreements –federal actions causing “unsatisfactoryenvironment effects”)


National Environmental Policy ActSummary and Issues

• EA vs. EIS significant impact on agency resourcing, applicant projectplanning and schedule

• MOA mechanism for EIS management and coordination (federal-federal, federal-state, federal-applicant)

• How federal and state permitting processes are integrated andcoordinated (what permit applications are required and when)

• Role of state, local government and applicant in process

• Importance of administrative record for sound process

• “Forty Most Asked Questions Concerning CEQ’s NationalEnvironmental Policy Act Regulations”

• www.whitehouse.gov/ceq/


U.S. Army Corps of Engineers Section 404 and Section 10


U.S. Army Corps of Engineers Section 404 and Section 10Regulatory Program Jurisdiction

• Minimizing wetland impacts• Section 404 Clean Water Act – jointly administered

by U.S. Army Corps of Engineers and U.S.Environmental Protection Agency

• Permitting program for “Discharge of Dredged or FillMaterial into Waters of the United States” (33 CFRParts 320 through 330)


U.S. Army Corps of Engineers Section 404 and Section 10Regulatory Program Jurisdictions

• “Waters of the United States” include:– Navigable waters– Interstate waters (including wetlands)– All waters that affect interstate or foreign commerce– Territorial seas (high tide line to 3 mile limit typically)– Wetlands (adjacent to navigable waters or that may be used

in interstate or foreign commerce)• Section 10 of the Rivers and Harbors Act – permitting program

for construction and activities in navigable waters alsoadministered by the Corps

• Most of the North Slope is considered “Waters of the U.S.”


U.S. Army Corps of Engineers Section 404 and Section 10Regulated Activities

• Dredged or fill material “material that is excavated or dredged fromwaters of the United States”

• Examples of regulated activities:– Dredging and disposal of material for navigation channels– Dock construction– Dredging and backfill of marine pipeline trench or overland pipeline

trench in wetlands– Gravel pad and road construction– Material site excavation in wetlands– VSM’s (if drilled and slurried)– Restoration activities– Insulated ice pads (over summering)


U.S. Army Corps of Engineers Section 404 and Section 10Regulatory Process

• Types of Permits:– Individual (15-30 day public notice)– Nationwide Permits (NWP 6)– General Permits

• NEPA review (EA etc.)• Section 401 Certification (ADEC)• Compliance with EPA 404 (b)(1) Guidelines (mitigation

sequence –avoiding, minimizing, rectifying, reducing,compensating)

• Mandatory consultation with EPA, USFWS and NMFS (inter-agency MOU’s) – administrative appeals/elevation process

• EPA Sec. 404 (c) – permit veto• Corps required to permit least environmentally damaging

practicable alternative taking into account cost, logistics, andtechnology.


U.S. Army Corps of Engineers Section 404 and Section 10 RegulatoryProgram

Summary and Issues

• Large areas of Alaska (including the North Slope) are considered jurisdictionalwetlands

• 2001 Supreme Court decision Solid Waste Agency of Northern Cook County(SWANCC) regarding Corp jurisdiction of “isolated waters”– unclear on effects toSec. 404 permitting in Alaska

• Special Alaska circumstances affect compensatory mitigation and rehabilitationissues ( withdrawn“1% Rule”) and Alaska Wetlands Initiative – working oncompensatory guidance document

• Typically the Corps has a major role in resource development project permitting(including EIS lead agency)

• General Permits and Nationwide Permits are important to the regulatedcommunity in Alaska (industry and municipalities)

• Regulatory guidance documents also apply (Regulatory Guidance Letters)


National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES)Permitting Program

• Both Federal and State wastewater discharge programs protect fresh andmarine waters by ensuring wastewater discharges meet the Alaska WaterQuality Standards.

• Federal Program– 402 Clean Water Act: created NPDES (National Pollutant Discharge

Elimination System)– Administered by EPA, but some states have partial or full primacy of the

program. Alaska is seeking primacy at this time.– NPDES is coordinated with the State (ADEC) for certification that State

Water Quality Standards are met by the NPDES permit.

• State Program– An NPDES permit may also serve as a State Wastewater Disposal Permit,

with both EPA and ADEC having oversight authorities for the permit.– The state also conducts engineering plan review on wastewater treatment

plants.


National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES)Waste Water Discharges – North Slope Oil Industry

• Most North Slope wastewaters, including oilywastewater, are managed by injection in the UICprogram.

• All wastewaters that are discharged to fresh ormarine waters must have NPDES permits, which alsoserve as State wastewater permits.

• Most wastewaters are discharged under GENERALNPDES permits for north slope oil field activities.

• There are a few individual NPDES permits (Endicott,Prudhoe STP, Kuparuk STP)


National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES)General and Individual Permits

• General NPDES Permits for– Stormwater– Gravel Pit dewatering– Fire test water– Hydrotest water– Camp domestic/sanitary waste

• Individual NPDES Permits for– Seawater Treatment Plants (3) which backwash

strainers and filters from treating seawater forwaterflood enhanced oil recovery.


National Pollutant Discharge Elimination SystemStormwater Permits – North Slope Oil Industry

Stormwater results from snow and ice melt during breakup, which resultsin runoff of water from roads and pads during May – July. The NorthSlope has one long annual runoff event, rather than frequent rainfallevents throughout the year.

• Stormwater Permit requirements include:– Identifying potential risks for pollution in runoff contaminating the

surrounding wetlands and water– Best Management Practices aimed at eliminating those risks– Inspection program before and during runoff season

• The permit covers several other water runoff activities, such as truckwash waters, water tank drainage, fire suppression test waters


National Pollutant Discharge Elimination SystemSummary and Issues

• Self monitoring and reporting are the cornerstone ofthe NPDES program. Good sampling, analysis, andreporting practices are key.

• Permitting has been streamlined using GeneralPermits.

• Prevention Programs are key to the elimination ofpollution. Best Practices are written, and routinelyevaluated, in permit required Best ManagementPractices Plans.

• North slope discharges have been decreased by theUIC waste program


Session Two

• Endangered Species Act – Caryn Rea, CPAI• Marine Mammal Protection Act – Caryn Rea, CPAI• Bureau of Land Management National Petroleum

Reserve Alaska – Alice Bullington, CPAI• Minerals Management Service – Peter Hanley, BPXA• Executive Orders – Randal Buckendorf, BPXA• Other Federal Consultations – Randal Buckendorf,

BPXA


Endangered Species Act

1973

[16 USC 1531-1543]

US Fish and Wildlife Service

National Marine FisheriesService


Endangered Species ActPurpose

Protect endangered and threatenedspecies and the ecosystemsupon which they depend, andtake the necessary steps torecover these species.

See Section 2(b) of the ESA for fulldescription of purpose


Endangered Species ActMajor Goals

• Identify endangered species• Identify threatened species• Designate critical habitat• Provide procedures to minimize or

prevent impacts• Lead federal agency must consult with

USFWS and NMFS at the onset of theproject


Endangered Species ActMajor Provisions

Prohibits import, export, “take” or trade ofany endangered species of fish andwildlife “take” includes harassing, harming,

hunting, killing, capturing andcollecting

Permitted Acts: Takings incidental to otherwise

lawful activities Subsistence takings that if

prevented would cause undueeconomic hardship

Takings for research


Endangered Species ActKey Sections

Section 4 – Species Listing

Section 7 – Interagency Cooperationvia Consultation

Section 9 – Prohibited Acts Include “Take” provisions

Section 10 – ExceptionsAllows for issuance of incidentaltake permits


Endangered Species ActListing

• List of Endangered and Threatened Wildlife [50CFR 17.11]

• List of Endangered and Threatened Plants[50CFR 17.12]

• Species in vicinity of current North Slopeoperations– Spectacled Eider (Somateria fischeri)– Steller’s Eider (Polysticta stelleri)– Bowhead Whale (Balaena mysticetus)


Petitioning for ESA Listing of Candidates

The Center for Biological Diversity(CBD) has petitioned theUSFWS for listing two currentNorth Slope species:

Yellow-billed loonPolar bear


Endangered Species ActConsultation

Section 7 (Section 7 (Interagency CooperationInteragency Cooperation) of the ESA requires federal) of the ESA requires federalagencies to use their existing authorities to conserve threatenedagencies to use their existing authorities to conserve threatenedand endangered species and, in consultation with theand endangered species and, in consultation with theUSFWS/NMFS, to ensure that their actions do not jeopardize listedUSFWS/NMFS, to ensure that their actions do not jeopardize listedspecies or destroy or adversely modify their critical habitatspecies or destroy or adversely modify their critical habitat

Can be Informal or Formal ConsultationCan be Informal or Formal Consultation


Endangered Species ActSection 7 Consultation

Mandatory consultation process requiredbetween federal agencies to ensure anyagency action is not likely to adverselyaffect a listed species or designated criticalhabitat – Section 7(a) ESA

Reference: Endangered Species ConsultationHandbook (USFWS and NMFS, March 1998)


Endangered Species ActFormal Consultation

• Biological Assessment– Applicant can be designated

to prepare (non-federalrepresentative)

• Biological Opinion (USFWS orNMFS) “Jeopardy” determination

“Likely to jeopardize the continued existence of a listed species or result in the

destruction or adverse modification of critical habitat”


Endangered Species ActExample of Northstar Biological Opinion - NMFS

Conservation Recommendations for bowhead whales:Conservation Recommendations for bowhead whales:1.1. Minimization of vessel traffic and vessel routing to avoid disturbanceMinimization of vessel traffic and vessel routing to avoid disturbance

to whales during migration.to whales during migration.2.2. Agitation technique for installation of piling.Agitation technique for installation of piling.3.3. Acoustic monitoring study to assess noise from island constructionAcoustic monitoring study to assess noise from island construction

and initial operation.and initial operation.4.4. Conduct studies to assess impacts of Northstar on whale migration.Conduct studies to assess impacts of Northstar on whale migration.5.5. Ice breaking shall not occur prior to October 15.Ice breaking shall not occur prior to October 15.


Endangered Species ActEndangered Species ActExample of Alpine Satellite Development Biological Opinion - USFWSExample of Alpine Satellite Development Biological Opinion - USFWS

USFWS USFWS ““Incidental Take StatementIncidental Take Statement”” included the following: included the following:

““Service anticipates the proposed action will likely result in the take of 3 spectacledService anticipates the proposed action will likely result in the take of 3 spectacledeiders as a result of fatal collisions with drilling/production infrastructure and 4eiders as a result of fatal collisions with drilling/production infrastructure and 4from habitat lossfrom habitat loss””

““The Service has determined that this level of anticipated killing is not likely to resultThe Service has determined that this level of anticipated killing is not likely to resultin jeopardy to the species. Also, no designated critical habitat occurs within orin jeopardy to the species. Also, no designated critical habitat occurs within ornear the ASDP Area therefore no destruction or adverse modification or criticalnear the ASDP Area therefore no destruction or adverse modification or criticalhabitat would occur.habitat would occur.

Terms and Conditions:Terms and Conditions:1.1. Develop a lighting/marking protocol intended to reduce radiation of light outwardDevelop a lighting/marking protocol intended to reduce radiation of light outward

from structures and to increase the visibility of structures to migrating eiders.from structures and to increase the visibility of structures to migrating eiders.2.2. Ground level activity (by vehicle or on foot) within 200 meters of occupiedGround level activity (by vehicle or on foot) within 200 meters of occupied

spectacled eider nests will be restricted between June 1 and August 1spectacled eider nests will be restricted between June 1 and August 1


Marine Mammal Protection Act


Marine Mammal Protection ActGoals

• Moratorium on taking and importation of marinemammals and marine mammal products

• Prohibited takings, except for:– Various scientific reasons– Hardships and good Samaritan reasons– Alaska native subsistence and traditional activities– Incidental reasons (requires Letters of

Authorization - LOA)


Marine Mammal Protection ActAgencies

• National Marine Fisheries Service– Whales, seals, sea lions and other primarily sea

based mammals

• U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service– Polar bears– Pacific walrus– Sea otters


Marine Mammal Protection Act Permitted Acts and Authorizations

• Unintentional taking and takings incidental to activities (other thanfishing) of polar bears if taking will have “negligible impact” on thespecies or its habitat (50 CFR Part 18)

• Letters of Authorization (LOA) issued by USFWS for incidental take ofpolar bear and pacific walrus for oil and gas exploration, developmentand production

• LOA regulations geographically specific and renewal of the regulationstakes about 18 months

• LOA requests must be submitted 60 days before proposed activities• Plan of Cooperation to mitigate conflicts between proposed activity and

subsistence hunters• “Incidental harassment authorization” issued by NMFS for when

proposed activities will harass (disturb) whales and seals (similar toLOA)

• Petition process required for LOA regulations (need renewing every fiveyears)

• Protects subsistence hunt of marine mammals


Marine Mammal Protection Act Summary and Issues

• Much of Alaska’s resource development is located on the coastor interfaces with the marine environment

• Marine mammals are an important subsistence resource

• Marine support and offshore oil and gas development cantrigger need for LOA or IHA related to “incidental harassment”

• Significant agency and industry supported research on somemarine mammals related to oil and gas industry and fishingindustry


Bureau of Land Management National Petroleum Reserve Alaska


Bureau of Land Management Oil and Gas PermittingNational Petroleum Reserve-Alaska (NPR-A)

Governing statutes, regulations and NEPA documents:

• The Naval Petroleum Reserves Production Act (42 USCSection 6508) - 1923

• BLM Onshore Oil and Gas Order #1 (43 CFR Part 3164)

• Northeast NPR-A EIS – August 1998 (ROD issued October1998)

• Northwest NPR-A EIS – November 2003 (ROD January 2004)

• Northeast NPR-A EID – January 2005 (ROD to be issued early2006?)


Bureau of Land Management Oil and Gas PermittingNational Petroleum Reserve-Alaska (NPR-A) - Exploration

Two exploration permitting processes:1. Notice of Staking (favored by NPR-A operators)2. Application for Permit to Drill3. Exploration requirements:

– Archeological and cultural clearances– Consultation with local communities– Consultation with “Subsistence Advisory Panel” and

“Research and Monitoring Team” (established by EIS’s andROD’s)

– Site inspections with BLM personnel– Water source studies


Bureau of Land Management Oil and Gas PermittingNational Petroleum Reserve-Alaska (NPR-A) - Development

• NEPA Evaluation (also serves as Plan of Development)• Letter requesting ROW for:

– Ice roads– Gravel roads– Pipelines– Gravel mines

• Permit to Drill process authorizes wells and drill sites• Other BLM approvals:

– Tundra travel– Material sales contract (gravel)– Mining and reclamation plan


Minerals Management Service Outer Continental Shelf (OCS) PlansExploration, Development and Production

• OCS = > 3 miles from shoreline (most coastal states)• Governing statute Outer Continental Shelf Lands Act• Implementing regulation 30 CFR Part 250• General description of timing, location and method for conduct

of project

• Supported by project specific information:

– Site clearance surveys (geohazards, archaeological,biological)

– Assessment of potential environmental effects

– Oil spill contingency plan

– Coastal Consistency Certification


Minerals Management ServiceExploration Plan Review Process

• Exploration Plan (30 CFR 250.203):– 30 calendar day state and local government review– NEPA documentation (typically Categorical Exclusion

Request or Environmental Assessment)– Coastal consistency concurrence is not required for

Exploration Plan approval, but no Application Permit to Drill(APD) can be approved by MMS until coastal consistencyconcurrence is received or presumed.


Minerals Management Service Development and Production Plan Review Process

• Development and Production Plan (30 CFR 250.204):– 60 calendar day state and local government review

– NEPA documentation:

• EIS required for at least one DPP in a frontier area

• Public review would be extended until after an FEIS isissued

– Coastal consistency determination must be received orpresumed before a DPP can be approved.


Minerals Management ServicePipeline Right-of-Way

• 30 CFR 250 Subpart J

• Authorization for DOI managed pipeline

• No mandated regulatory review schedule:

– NEPA review can be independent or incorporated withassociated DPP review.

– Consistency review can be independent or incorporated withassociated DPP review.


Minerals Management ServiceSupporting Technical Actions

• MMS exercises additional approval actions over othertechnical/engineering aspects of exploration and developmentactivities. These actions occur subsequent to public review ofan EP or DPP.

– Application for Permit to Drill (30 CFR 250.414)

– Drilling unit (fit for use) (30 CFR 250 Subpart D)

– Production safety systems (30 CFR 250 Subpart H)

– Platform verification (30 CFR 250 Subpart I)


Executive Orders Affecting Energy Projects, NEPA Reviews or Permitting – Environmental Justice (Executive Order 12898)

• President William J. Clinton February 11, 1994• Mandates federal agencies to consider “disproportionately high and

adverse human health or environmental effects of its programs,policies, and activities on minority populations and low-incomepopulations”

• Creates Interagency Working Group on Environmental Justice• Each agency required to develop strategy of identifying programs and

make revisions• Agencies must conduct human health and environmental research on

affected populations• Requires agencies to collect information on subsistence fish and

wildlife consumption and assess health risks due to pollutant-bearingfish and wildlife

• Process does not necessarily directly affect applicant because itinvolves an assessment by the agencies involved in NEPA review andpermitting of a project


Executive Orders Affecting Energy Projects, NEPA Reviews or Permitting – Consultation and Coordination with

Indian Tribal Governments (E.O. 13175)

• President William J. Clinton November 6, 2000• Establishes principles for agencies interacting with “Indian Tribes”• Mandates agencies to:

– Respect Indian tribal self-government and sovereignty– In implementing federal statutes and regulations “shall grant

tribal governments maximum administrative discretion”– Implement policies that allow Indian tribes to develop their

own policies and consult with tribes in determining federalstandards

• Mandates agencies to develop consultation process with Indian tribes• Agencies must consult with Indian tribes on regulatory development.• Agencies shall not implement regulations that impose cost burden on

Indian tribes• This consultative process does not necessarily directly impact a permit

applicant because this is a federal government consultative processtriggered by a federal action such as issuing a project permit


“EJ” in the State of Alaska

• State counterpart to EO’s 12898 and 13175

• September 29, 2000 -- Administrative Order No. 186– Established policy of the State of Alaska on Tribes and Tribal

Governments– Order proclaimed that the State was recognizing and respecting the

governmental status of the 229 federally recognized tribes– Established State policy to deal with tribes on a government to

government basis

• April 11, 2001 “Millennium Agreement”– Provided a framework for government to government relationships– Put in place an implementation process that described certain

accountability, education and consultation processes


Executive Orders Affecting Energy Projects, NEPA Reviews or Permitting –

Actions to Expedite Energy-Related Projects (E.O. 13212)

• President George W. Bush May 18, 2001• Policy to increase production and transmission of energy in a safe and

environmentally sound manner• Directs agencies to coordinate NEPA review and permit evaluation on a

concurrent, rather than a sequential basis, to the extent feasible• Directs agencies to expedite review of permits or other actions related

to energy projects• Establishes Interagency Task Force to monitor and assist in

implementation of policy


Executive Orders Affecting Energy Projects,Floodplain Management (Executive Order 11988)

• President Jimmy Carter May 24, 1977• Written to require consideration of long and short

term adverse impacts associated with the occupancyand modification of floodplains

• Each federal agency shall evaluate the potentialeffects of any actions that it may take in a floodplain

• Evaluation part of the NEPA review• If an agency has determined or proposes to conduct

or allow an action to be located in a floodplain, it shallconsider alternatives to avoid adverse effects

• Generally done by the Corps as part of its Section404 (b)(1) analysis


Other Federal Authorizations and Consultations

• National Historic Preservation Act (also see SHPO)• Essential Fish Habitat (50 CFR Part 600.805-930, Subpart J)• Federal Communications Commission (FCC) – Radio and Wired

Communications and Construction Permit• Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) Standards Review –

airstrip• U.S. Coast Guard Aids to Navigation Permit (coastal facilities)• U.S Coast Guard Sec. 9 Bridge Permit• Environmental Protection Agency Ocean Dumping Permit (Sec.

103 Marine Protection, Research and Sanctuaries Act)


The Alaska Natural Gas Pipeline

A Permitting Process Overview

Gary Gustafson, BPDecember 8, 2005


Alaska Gas Pipeline Regulatory Overview

Enabling Mechanisms• Natural Gas Act (NGA)• Alaska Stranded Gas Development Act (ASGDA)• 2004 Alaska Natural Gas Pipeline Act (ANGPA)• CFR 43 (BLM) & AS 38.35 (DNR)

Major Agency Approvals Required– FERC Certificate of Public Necessity &

Convenience– BLM and DNR Right-of-Way (ROW) Leases– Others


Permitting Compliance Pledge

“The ancient Romans had a tradition: whenever oneof their engineers constructed an arch, as thecapstone was hoisted into place, the engineerassumed accountability for his work in the mostprofound way possible: he stood under the arch.”

Michael Armstrong


Miles

0 5 10 15 20 25

TAPS

Northstar

Endicott

PrudhoeBay

Kuparuk

MilnePoint

NPRA

ANWR

CoastalPlain

(1002 Area)

Colvi

lle R

iver

LJL (April, 1997)

Pt. Thomson

DevelopmentsMajor Discoveries

AlpineLiberty

Badami

Location Map

Alaska North Slope Gas Resources & Major Producers

• North Slope known resource ~ 35 Tcf• Prudhoe Bay – 8 Bcf/d of production currently

reinjected into reservoir• Ultimate resource estimates ~100 Tcf

ANS Gas Owners

ExxonMobilConocoPhillips

StateOthers

BP


77

Alaska Natural Gas Pipeline(primary mainline to lower-48)


The Natural Gas Act of 1938 (NGA)

• Umbrella Act for FERC– Under Section 7(c) of the NGA - FERC issues

certificates of public necessity and convenienceauthorizing the construction and operation ofnatural gas pipelines

– FERC reviews all aspects of a proposed project,including route, environmental impacts,engineering & design, gas supply, market, cost,financing, construction, operation, maintenance,revenues, expenses, income, tariff and rates


Alaska Stranded Gas Development Actof 1998 (ASGDA)

Alaska Stranded Gas Development Act (ASGDA), amended in2003 to specifically encourage a major gas pipeline project

– Offers sponsors of major gas projects the opportunity tonegotiate fiscal contracts with the state to reduce fiscal risks

– Encourages new investment to develop the state’s strandedgas by authorizing establishment of fiscal terms related tothe new investment

– Allows state to negotiate a PILT for the municipalities– State may adjust timing of state & local government receipts

for their share of economic rent of project


Alaska Gas Pipeline Act of 2004 (AGPA)

Passed by Congress as part of the Energy Bill

– Presumes a public need exists to construct & operate Alaskagas pipeline project

– FERC is designated the lead agency for NEPA compliance– Created Office of Federal Coordinator (OFC) to lead the

project review process & coordinate all federal agencies;upon appointment the OFC assumes all authoritiespreviously granted the Office of Federal Inspector forANGTS

– Establishes specific timeframes for completion of EIS &issuance of final order granting certificate

– All federal agency actions & reviews of project must beexpedited

– Provides for expedited judicial review


Alaska Natural Gas Pipeline Act

SEC. 104. ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEWS.

(a) COMPLIANCE WITH NEPA- The issuance of a certificate of public convenience and necessity authorizing the constructionand operation of any Alaska natural gas transportation project under section 103 shall be treated as a major Federalaction significantly affecting the quality of the human environment within the meaning of section 102(2)(C) of the NationalEnvironmental Policy Act of 1969 (42 U.S.C. 4332(2)(C)).

(b) DESIGNATION OF LEAD AGENCY-(1) IN GENERAL- The Commission--(A) shall be the lead agency for purposes of complying with the National Environmental Policy Act of 1969 (42 U.S.C. 4321 et

seq.); and(B) shall be responsible for preparing the environmental impact statement required by section 102(2)(c) of that Act (42 U.S.C.

4332(2)(c)) with respect to an Alaska natural gas transportation project under section 103.(2) CONSOLIDATION OF STATEMENTS- In carrying out paragraph (1), the Commission shall prepare a single environmental

impact statement, which shall consolidate the environmental reviews of all Federal agencies considering any aspect of theAlaska natural gas transportation project covered by the environmental impact statement.

(c) OTHER AGENCIES-(1) IN GENERAL- Each Federal agency considering an aspect of the construction and operation of an Alaska natural gas

transportation project under section 103 shall--(A) cooperate with the Commission; and(B) comply with deadlines established by the Commission in the preparation of the environmental impact statement under this

section.(2) SATISFACTION OF NEPA REQUIREMENTS- The environmental impact statement prepared under this section shall be

adopted by each Federal agency described in paragraph (1) in satisfaction of the responsibilities of the Federal agencyunder section 102(2)(C) of the National Environmental Policy Act of 1969 (42 U.S.C. 4332(2)(C)) with respect to theAlaska natural gas transportation project covered by the environmental impact statement.

(d) EXPEDITED PROCESS- The Commission shall--(1) not later than 1 year after the Commission determines that the application under section 103 with respect to an Alaska

natural gas transportation project is complete, issue a draft environmental impact statement under this section; and(2) not later than 180 days after the date of issuance of the draft environmental impact statement, issue a final environmental

impact statement, unless the Commission for good cause determines that additional time is needed.

Meet withApplicant

(All CooperatingAgencies)

Resolve Issues,Respond to Comments

Issue FEIS

Issue Certificate

0

Timeline (m

onths)

Incorporate AgencyIssues in DEIS

Issue PDEIS for CooperatingAgency Review

Prepare/Submit DEIS to Staff

Analyze PublicComments, Revise DEIS Prepare FEIS

Prepare Advanced Prelim.Draft EIS Sections for

Staff Review

Submit PDEIS to FERC for Review

Respond to DEIS Comments

Begin Scoping of

Issues/PublicMeetings

Participate in Agency Meetings(All Cooperating

Agencies)

Begin Review ofDraft Resource Reports

Participate in PublicScoping Meetings

Applicant’s Tasks

FederalGovernment

Agency Tasks = FERC =DOE

= DOI =USDOT

3rd Party Contractor’s Tasks

Stakeholder Identification and Contact:(in the following order)

- Tribal Organizations - Agencies - Citizen Groups - Landowners

Timeline (m

onths)

Present

State of Alaska’sTasks

Begin Submitting Draft Resource Reports to3rd Party Contractor

Prepare ADNRCommissioner’s Response

to Comments and Final Decision and

Finalize ROW Lease

Participate in FEIS Preparation

Begin Participation inAgency Meetings

With FERC

Submit Data Requestsas Review Progresses

Meet with Individual State and Federal Agencies to Ascertain Consensus

for Pre-Filing Program

File CompleteApplicationwith FERC

Complete Surveys/ConsultationsIncluding Alternative

Route Studies as Requested by Stakeholders

Issue Final Coastal Zone Consistency

Determination

Prepare ADNR Commissioner’s Analysis and Proposed Decision and Draft ROW Lease

Participate in DEIS Preparation

Prepare Preliminary Coastal Zone Consistency

Determination

Issue ADNR Commissioner’s Response

to Comments and Final Decision

212019181716151312-6-12-18

Issue ROWLease

Identify Preliminary Centerline

Issue ADNR Commissioner’s Analysis and Proposed

Decision and Draft ROW Lease

Issue Preliminary Coastal Zone Consistency Determination

Begin Public Comment Period and Public Hearings

DRAFT 8-22-05

FEDERAL/STATE COORDINATED PROCESS FOR THE ALASKA GAS PIPELINE PROJECT

Complete PublicComment Period

Complete Public Comment Period

Issue PF Docket and Notice of

Intent (3rd Party Contractor will be on

Board Prior to Approval)

6 14

Receive andApprovePre-filingRequest

Tribal Consultation

-8-10 -2-4

Pre-Application Planning and Activities:

- Interagency Work Team - Business Planning - Cooperative Agreements

Submit State and DOI ROW Applications

Submit Waiver Applicationto US DOT

Review for Land Management Plan

Consistency

Submit Loan Guarantee Application

to DOE

Examine Existing Resources and

Perform a Data-Gap Analysis

TribalConsultation

ProjectScoping

Plan, Notice and Host Public

Scoping Meetings

Issue Public Notice

Receive ROW Application

Sign ROD and Issue

Grant of ROW

Receive Loan

GuaranteeApplication

Enter into Reimbursable Agreement

with DOI and State

Formal Request to FERC to Use

Pre-Filing Process

Complete Route Studies, Field Surveys and Draft ResourceReports

Enter intoReimbursable Agreement

with Applicant

Pre-Filing


with ApplicantReceive Waiver Application –

Begin Review Process

Issue Public and Other Notices


Receive Application – Issue Notice of Availability Issue DEIS


Issue Final Decision onWaiver Application

Beginning of Open Season



Beginning ofOpen Season

End of Open Season

Review for LandClassification Consistency

End ofOpen Season

Begin Discussionswith State DOT/PF

RegardingHighway UseAgreement


- Interagency Work Team - Business Planning - Cooperative Agreements- DOT/PF Begin Highway UseAgreement Discussions

State and Applicant reachStranded Gas Agreement –

Approved by State Legislation


Federal Agency Coordination

Jurisdictional Issues Related to Permitting– JPO has historically coordinated all Alaska

pipeline matters, including NEPA reviews (i.e.TAPS ROW renewal)

– FERC and DOE are not currently members of JPO– Clarify supporting roles of DOE, USDOT,

Homeland Security, etc. in light of ANGPA– Tribal Council’s & Alaska Native involvement– Need for state & feds to work closely together– FERC/NEB Coordination– Cross-border issues


Regulatory Momentum is Building

“There is no question that the country needsAlaskan natural gas. The Commission standsready to act expeditiously on an application tobuild an Alaskan natural gas pipeline.”

FERC Chairman Joseph KelliherNovember 4, 2005


FERC Process

• Pre-filing discussions & process– Cooperating Agency Reviews– Scoping of Issues – Public meetings

• “Open Season” for capacity• Receive Application & Issue “Notice of Availability”• Protests and intervention• Environmental review (DEIS & FEIS)• Determination of “Need” (satisfied by ANGPA)• Public Comment & Hearings• Issue Certificate• Appeals


FERC Filing Requirements

Application Specifics

• Narrative (the “sales pitch”)• Exhibits

– Legal status– Operational

• Resource Reports (Environmental & relatedassessments)

– Commercial


Exhibits: Legal Status

Overview:

• Exhibit A – Applicant’s articles of incorporation & bylaws• Exhibit B – State authorizations to do business• Exhibit C – Company officials & organization• Exhibit D – Subsidiaries and affiliates involved in the natural gas

business that the applicant or any of its officers or directors,directly or indirectly, owns, controls, or holds 10 percent or moreof the outstanding voting securities

• Exhibit E – Other related applications and filings under sections1, 3, 4 and 7 of the Natural Gas Act filed by the applicant whichare pending before the Commission at the time of the filing of anapplication


Exhibits: Operational

Overview: Issues that require significant engineering and detail

• Exhibit F – Detailed maps showing the precise location anddetailed information concerning the facilities to be constructed

• Exhibit F-I – Environmental Report as specified in §§380.3 and380.12 of this chapter (i.e. Resource Reports)

• Exhibit G – Flow diagrams showing daily design capacity• Exhibit G-I – Flow diagrams reflecting maximum capabilities

– Exhibit G-II – Flow diagram data relating to Exhibits G andG-I

• Exhibit H – Total gas supply data


Exhibits: Commercial

Overview: Issues that need early focus to prepare for open season

• Exhibit I – Market data• Exhibit K – Cost of facilities estimate• Exhibit L – Financing plans and information• Exhibit M – Construction, operation, and management

information related to the construction or operation of the project

• Exhibit N – Revenues/Expenses/Income information• Exhibit O – Depreciation and depletion rates to be

established• Exhibit P – Tariff rate that will govern the terms and

conditions of service, including the rates thatwill apply to the service


Resource Reports (Exhibit F- I)

Overview: Extremely detailed and time consuming

• Resource Report 1 – General Project Description• Resource Report 2 – Water Use and Water Quality• Resource Report 3 – Vegetation and Wildlife• Resource Report 4 – Cultural Resources• Resource Report 5 – Socioeconomics• Resource Report 6 – Geological Resources• Resource Report 7 – Soils• Resource Report 8 – Land Use, Recreation and Aesthetics• Resource Report 9 – Air Noise and Quality• Resource Report 10 – Alternatives


North Slope Trenching Trials 2002(Alaska Gas Producers Pipeline Team photo)


Open Season Regulation Provisions (Order 2005)

• Project proponents file open season plans for Commission approval (90days prior to the open season);

• Provisions of Order No. 2004, Standards of Conduct, while conducting anopen season;

• Procedures for the allocation of capacity;• The criteria for and timing of any open seasons;• Promote competition in the exploration, development, and production of

Alaska natural gas;• Voluntary expansion open seasons which must then provide the

opportunity for the transportation of natural gas other than from thePrudhoe Bay and Point Thomson; and

• Include an assessment of in-state needs, and a listing of prospectivedelivery points within Alaska.

FERC Open Season Provisions


DNR Right-Of-Way (ROW) Lease

• Alaska Statue 38.35 – ROW Leasing Act• Process is handled through the DNR Joint Pipeline Office, State

Pipeline Coordinator• State may establish a Gas Pipeline Office & Gas Pipeline

Coordinator• Coordinate all state agency actions & with Federal Coordinator• Highway Use Agreement – requirement of DNR ROW lease, but

a DOT/PF responsibility• Reimbursable service agreement (pre-application & post-

application)• JPO has previously completed TAPS ROW lease renewal and

handled the proposed TCPL ROW lease• State JPO now preparing for gas pipeline


State ROW Leasing Process

• Receipt of Application Review for Completeness under AS 38.35.050 and11 AAC 80.005.

• Agency Review Publish Notice of Application for 60-day commentPeriod (AS 38.35.070).

• Analysis & Decision Commissioner’s Analysis, Proposed Decision andDraft Lease (AS 38.35.050 & .100). Publish Notice for 30-day

comment period done concurrently with Coastal

• Consistency Review (if project in Coastal Zone).

• Final Decision If there are no substantial changes to theCommissioner’s Analysis and/or Proposed Decision then go to next

step.

• Issue Lease Signed by Lessee and executed by the DNRCommissioner

• Appeal Process Commissioner Reconsideration or Alaska SuperiorCourt


DNR ROW Lease Specifics

DNR ROW requirements include:

• Reimbursable services agreement for ROW lease pre-application process and lease application processing

• Gap analysis for resource/environmental issues• Public scoping process• Draft commissioner’s decision, including a fit, willing & able

determination (to construct & operate pipeline)• Public notice & hearings (to consider draft decision)• Final decision• Appeal process


North Slope Trenching Trials 2002(Alaska Gas Producers Pipeline Team photo)


Washington Creek, Fairbanks Trenching Trials 2002(Alaska Gas Producers Pipeline Team photo)


BLM Right-of-Way (ROW) Lease

• Authority provided under CFR 43 – Part 2880• Managed by BLM’s Joint Pipeline Office – Federal

Pipeline Coordinator• Responsible for coordinating pipeline activities

among federal agencies and with State PipelineCoordinator

• Reimbursable services agreement (post-application)• Federal JPO recently completed TAPS ROW lease

renewal work; including EIS• Federal JPO now preparing for gas pipeline work


BLM ROW Lease Process

• BLM ROW lease will be processed concurrent with FERCcertificate application

• Public scoping process• Tribal consultation• Same EIS process used for the FERC & BLM ROW decisions

– FERC contracts with third party to do EIS gap analysis andwork with applicant on adequacy of resource reports

– FERC third party consultant prepares Draft EIS (DEIS)• DEIS and draft ROW decision published for public review and

comment• Public hearings and public comment period• Final EIS and ROW lease decision• Appeal process

Meet withApplicant

(All CooperatingAgencies)

Resolve Issues,Respond to Comments

Issue FEIS

Issue Certificate

0

Timeline (m

onths)

Incorporate AgencyIssues in DEIS

Issue PDEIS for CooperatingAgency Review

Prepare/Submit DEIS to Staff

Analyze PublicComments, Revise DEIS Prepare FEIS

Prepare Advanced Prelim.Draft EIS Sections for

Staff Review

Submit PDEIS to FERC for Review

Respond to DEIS Comments

Begin Scoping of

Issues/PublicMeetings

Participate in Agency Meetings(All Cooperating

Agencies)

Begin Review ofDraft Resource Reports

Participate in PublicScoping Meetings

Applicant’s Tasks

FederalGovernment

Agency Tasks = FERC =DOE

= DOI =USDOT

3rd Party Contractor’s Tasks

Stakeholder Identification and Contact:(in the following order)

- Tribal Organizations - Agencies - Citizen Groups - Landowners

Timeline (m

onths)

Present

State of Alaska’sTasks

Begin Submitting Draft Resource Reports to3rd Party Contractor

Prepare ADNRCommissioner’s Response

to Comments and Final Decision and

Finalize ROW Lease

Participate in FEIS Preparation

Begin Participation inAgency Meetings

With FERC

Submit Data Requestsas Review Progresses

Meet with Individual State and Federal Agencies to Ascertain Consensus

for Pre-Filing Program

File CompleteApplicationwith FERC

Complete Surveys/ConsultationsIncluding Alternative

Route Studies as Requested by Stakeholders

Issue Final Coastal Zone Consistency

Determination

Prepare ADNR Commissioner’s Analysis and Proposed Decision and Draft ROW Lease

Participate in DEIS Preparation

Prepare Preliminary Coastal Zone Consistency

Determination

Issue ADNR Commissioner’s Response

to Comments and Final Decision

212019181716151312-6-12-18

Issue ROWLease

Identify Preliminary Centerline

Issue ADNR Commissioner’s Analysis and Proposed

Decision and Draft ROW Lease

Issue Preliminary Coastal Zone Consistency Determination


DRAFT 8-22-05

FEDERAL/STATE COORDINATED PROCESS FOR THE ALASKA GAS PIPELINE PROJECT

Complete PublicComment Period

Complete Public Comment Period

Issue PF Docket and Notice of

Intent (3rd Party Contractor will be on

Board Prior to Approval)

6 14

Receive andApprovePre-filingRequest

Tribal Consultation

-8-10 -2-4


- Interagency Work Team - Business Planning - Cooperative Agreements

Submit State and DOI ROW Applications

Submit Waiver Applicationto US DOT

Review for Land Management Plan

Consistency

Submit Loan Guarantee Application

to DOE



TribalConsultation

ProjectScoping

Plan, Notice and Host Public

Scoping Meetings

Issue Public Notice


Sign ROD and Issue

Grant of ROW

Receive Loan

GuaranteeApplication

Enter into Reimbursable Agreement

with DOI and State

Formal Request to FERC to Use

Pre-Filing Process

Complete Route Studies, Field Surveys and Draft ResourceReports


with Applicant

Pre-Filing


with ApplicantReceive Waiver Application –

Begin Review Process

Issue Public and Other Notices


Receive Application – Issue Notice of Availability Issue DEIS


Issue Final Decision onWaiver Application

Beginning of Open Season



Beginning ofOpen Season

End of Open Season

Review for LandClassification Consistency

End ofOpen Season

Begin Discussionswith State DOT/PF

RegardingHighway UseAgreement


- Interagency Work Team - Business Planning - Cooperative Agreements- DOT/PF Begin Highway UseAgreement Discussions

State and Applicant reachStranded Gas Agreement –

Approved by State Legislation


Estimated Total Permits & Authorizations(State, Federal, Local)

Estimate of # of individual permits & authorizations(federal, state, local) required for a major Alaska gaspipeline & project components

Estimated No. ofpermits required

Gas Treatment Plant 41Compressor Stations 54Gas Pipeline 57Camps, Storage, Airports 62Gravel Sites, Spoil Disposal 48

Total 262


Conclusion

• Largest & most complex regulatory project everundertaken in North America (two countries)

• Permitting is a significant multi-year effort• Considerable inter-agency coordination required

some of this is already underway• ANGPA has helped to jump-start the federal review

and approval process• Key to successful permitting is to plan ahead, ensure

coordinated agency reviews & coordinate closely withthe project engineering components


Questions?


Session Three

• Clean Air Act – Randy Poteet, CPAI• Waste Management & Underground Injection Control

(UIC) – Janet Platt, BPXA


Federally-delegated Programs


Clean Air Act


Clean Air ActFederally-delegated Air Permitting Program

• Air permitting program administered by the State of Alaska, AlaskaDepartment of Environmental Conservation (ADEC) under a federally-approved State Implementation Plan (SIP)

• Of the 11 Titles of the Clean Air Act (1990) Amendments, three areparticularly important with respect to air permitting in Alaska

• Clean Air Act Title I– National Ambient Air Quality Standards (NAAQS)– New Source Performance Standards (NSPS)– Pollutant Specific National Emission Standards for Hazardous Air

Pollutants (NESHAP)– New Source Review (NSR)

• Clean Air Act Title III – Source Specific NESHAP• Clean Air Act Title V

– Operating Permits


Clean Air ActNAAQS and NSPS

• National Ambient Air Quality Standards (NAAQS) – Health-based standards designed to protect public health and generalwelfare:– Particulate matter (PM10, PM2.5)– Sulfur dioxide (SO2)– Nitrogen dioxide (NO2)– Ozone (O3)– Carbon monoxide (CO)– Lead (Pb)

• NOx is most significant pollutant on North Slope but at level ofone third of NAAQS

• New Source Performance Standards (NSPS) – Technology-based emission standards for certain pollutants

• Almost all of Alaska is an attainment area (exceptions includeJuneau and Eagle River for PM10)


Clean Air ActHazardous Pollutants and New Source Review

• National Emission Standards for Hazardous Air Pollutants(NESHAPS) – Technology-based emission standards for 168Hazardous Air Pollutants (HAPS). Implemented through Part 61standards and part 63 Maximum Available Control Technology(MACT) standards.

• New Source Review (NSR) – Construction permitting programfor new major stationary sources and major modifications atexisting major stationary sources.


Clean Air ActAlaska Air Permitting Program

Alaska Air Permitting Program• Revised rules became effective on October 1, 2004

– Adopted EPA rules– Permitting of minor sources and minor modifications– Updated and streamlined rules

• EPA SIP approval of revised rules pending• Three types of air permits

– Title I (NSR) Construction Permits– Title V Operation Permits– Minor Permits

• ADEC Air Program permit fee structure changed February 2005


Clean Air ActConstruction Permitting Program

• Title I (NSR) Construction Permits– Prevention of Significant Deterioration (PSD) for

major stationary sources and major modifications• Revised State Title I Construction Permit program

generally aligned with federal rules• PSD applicability is now determined on a project-by-

project basis


Clean Air ActConstruction Permitting Program Triggers

PSD Permit Triggers:• Any new major stationary source with potential to emit (PTE) a

criteria pollutant >250 tpy• New specifically listed major stationary source with potential to

emit (PTE) a criteria pollutant >100 tpy• Major modification of existing major stationary source (increase

in actual emissions greater than certain thresholds as a result ofphysical change or change in method of operation). Examples:– NOx > 40 tpy, CO > 100tpy


Clean Air ActConstruction Permitting Process

Construction (PSD) Permitting Process:1. Pre-application meeting (ADEC and Federal Land Manager if

applicable)2. Permit application: dispersion modeling, BACT, Air Quality

Related Values (AQRV) analysis3. ADEC Completeness Review4. ADEC preliminary permit and Technical Analysis Report (TAR)5. Public Comment – 30 days6. ADEC – final permit, final TAR and response to comments

Notes:– Total time: 9 to 18 months– Additional 18 months up front if meteorological and/or

ambient pollutant data collections is required.– Permit must be obtained before on-site construction can

commence.


Clean Air ActTitle V Operating Permits

• The revised Title V operating program is generally aligned withfederal rules

• Sources subject to Title V:– Any major source– Any source subject to a standard or limit

• A new facility has 12 months after commencing operation undera new Construction Permit to apply for a Title V OperatingPermit.


Clean Air ActTitle V Permitting Triggers

Title V Operating Permit Triggers:• Major stationary source with PTE >100 tpy of criteria pollutant

• Stationary source with PTE of single hazardous air pollutant >10tpy or PTE of total hazardous pollutants >25 tpy

• Addition of new significant emission unit at major stationarysources

• Changes to an existing significant emissions units at stationarysources

• Changes in monitoring, record keeping, and reportingprocedures


Clean Air ActTitle V Operating Permitting Process

Title V Operating Permitting Process:1. Complete application for new stationary source required to be

submitted 12 months after operations begin (operations cancontinue while ADEC processes application).

2. Significant revisions to an existing permitted stationary sourcecannot be made until the permit revision is approved by ADECand EPA.

3. Significant Title V permit revision processing time 3 to 6months

4. Title V permit or permit revision can be processed concurrentwith construction or minor permit, or separately afterconstruction or minor permit issued.


Clean Air ActConstruction vs. Title V Permits

Construction Permit (PSD) vs. Title V OperatingPermit

• Construction:– New source or modification prior to

commencing on-site construction– Typically established emission limits (e.g.

BACT)• Title V

– All sources existing and new– Not intended to establish new emission limits– Extensive monitoring, reporting and record

keeping requirements– Certification of Compliance Status


Clean Air ActAlaska Minor Permit Program, General Permits,

Owner Requested Limits, Pre-approved Emission Limits

Minor Permit Program Summary:• Permit required for a new or modified stationary emission

source if potential emissions are greater than certain thresholdbut below PSD threshold

• New permit program anticipated to issue permits within 90 daysbut “fast track” program exists for certain minor permits to beprocessed in 30 days

• A minor General Permit (mGPI) is available for portable oil andgas operations

• Owner Requested Limits (ORL’s) and Pre-approved EmissionLimits (PAEL’s) remain available

• Permit must be obtained before construction commences


Clean Air ActSummary and Issues

• Program administered by the State• Technically complex and lengthy permitting program

(Construction and Title V)• Air permits part of ACMP ADEC “carve out” (greater permitting

flexibility)• Special problems related to BACT in Arctic climate• Significant compliance obligations• New Source Performance Standards are non-delegated and

administered by EPA.


Waste Management and the Alaska OilIndustry

Federal and State Programs


Waste Management Program Objectives

Federal and state waste management programs aredesigned to:– Minimize waste generation– Encourage waste recycling– Minimize land impacts of waste disposal and

storage– Environmentally sound handling, transportation,

and disposal of wastes– Cradle to grave management


Waste Management Regulatory Programs

• Resource Conservation and Recovery Act (RCRA)

• ADEC Solid Waste Regulations

• Underground Injection Control (UIC) Program (EPAand AOGCC)


Waste Management and the Oil Industry in AlaskaWaste Classification (1)

• Regulated Hazardous Waste (RCRA)– Characteristic – ignitability, corrosivity, reactivity, toxicity– Non-specific sources (F List) e.g. spent solvents– Specific source wastes (K List) –described according to

industry/unit where generated e.g. heat exchanger bundlecleaning sludge from petroleum refining (e.g. PBU crude oiltopping unit)

– Acutely hazardous commercial chemical products (P List)e.g. nitroglycerine


Waste Management and the Oil Industry in AlaskaWaste Classification (2)

• Hazardous waste exemptions:– the “E&P” exemption (e.g. drilling fluids, produced water and

associated oil and gas wastes)– Household waste (e.g. camp waste)– residues in RCRA-empty drums

• Special Rules for Managing:– Used Oil (can be recycled)– Universal Waste (subset of hazardous waste) – simplified

handling requirements as long as recycled– Fluorescent lamps and light bulbs– Lead acid batteries


Waste Management and the Oil Industry in AlaskaRegulators

• EPA:– RCRA hazardous wastes (no state RCRA program)– UIC Class I injection wells

• ADEC:– municipal/domestic wastes (e.g. landfills)– solid waste facility permitting (e.g. G&I facility, landfill,

storage cells)

• AOGCC:– UIC Class II oil and gas wells


Waste Management and the Oil Industry in AlaskaRCRA “E&P” Exemption

Exemption covers:• Substances extracted from down hole or injected down hole to

facilitate the drilling, operations or maintenance of an oil and gaswell

• Drilling fluids, work over fluids, produced water

• Wastes that come into contact with down hole fluids duringprocessing

• Vessel sediments, pigging wastes, gas dehydration wastes

• Note: fluids, solids and associated wastes from DOT regulatedpipelines (49 CFR) are not “E&P” exempt under RCRA


Waste Management and the Oil Industry in AlaskaWaste Volumes and Disposal

• Produced water is by far the largest volume of potential wastegenerated and is beneficially reused by reinjection into the reservoirsfor enhanced oil recovery (EOR) or disposal in Class I or II wells.

• Drilling cuttings and associated fluids (the second largest waste byweight) are injected down hole in Class I, Class II wells or annularinjection.

• Hazardous wastes comprise a very small amount of total wastesgenerated and are temporarily stored in the oil fields prior totransportation to permitted lower 48 facilities for disposal/recycling.

• Non-hazardous wastes (such as camp refuse) are incinerated ordisposed in the NSB landfill, or are recycled (e.g. scrap metal).

• North Slope oil industry does not operate municipal landfills (applicablewastes taken to NSB Oxbow facility)


3,668 tonsRecycled offsiteNon-Hazardous Waste(includes scrap metal, usedoil, computers, etc.)

3,482 tonsNSB Oxbow landfillNon-Hazardous Waste(medical waste and asbestosshipped offsite for disposal)

71 tonsTemporary storage on site,shipped to approved Lower 48facilities for disposal

Hazardous Waste(e.g. paints, solvents)

95,645,014 tonsClass I / II WellsProduced Water

161,814 tonsClass I / II WellsDrill Cuttings & AssociatedFluids

VolumeDisposalWaste

Waste Volumes & Disposition Examples 2003


Waste Management and the Oil Industry in AlaskaADEC Solid Waste Facility Permits

• ADEC General Permit SWG0308000 Construction and Operation of aMonofill for the storage of oil and gas exploration and production wasteand RCRA non-exempt non-hazardous waste generated on the NorthSlope

• Applies to long term storage of drilling wastes and other non-hazardousindustrial wastes

• Application for coverage:– Description of facility– Site plan and design drawings– Surface water and visual monitoring plan– Certification of GP limitations (type of wastes etc.)

• Permit conditions:– Limitations on type of wastes– Design requirements (e.g. liner)– Operations (e.g. fluid management)– Visual and surface water monitoring– Cell closure (waste removal, facility decommissioning)


Waste Management and the Oil Industry in AlaskaApplicable ADEC Solid Waste Management Regulations

• Solid Waste Management 18 AAC 60 as amended August 8,2003

• Construction, operation or modification of a solid waste facilityrequires a permit (18 AAC 60.200)

• Treatment of > 5 tons/day or 10 tons in a single batch of solidwastes requires a solid waste treatment permit:– G&I facilities at Badami, Northstar, DS 4

• Temporary storage of drilling wastes for less than one yearrequires permit (18 AAC 60.430) and regulations specify designstandards

• Inactive reserve pit closure plan approvals (18 AAC 60.440)


Waste Management and the Oil Industry in AlaskaWaste Management Facilities – PBU Example

• Grind and Inject Facility (DS4)– Class II solids and liquids– Reserve pit wastes (NRDC Program) (85% of total handled)– On-going drilling and production wastes

• Pad 3 Injection Facility– UIC Class I Injection Wells (primary facility function disposal

of fluids that cannot be injected into Class II)– 3 lined storage cells (oily wastes)

• 25 Class II water disposal wells• Hazardous Waste Storage Facility at BOC Pad


Waste Management and the Oil Industry in AlaskaSummary and Issues

• Importance of underground injection technology for wastemanagement (Class I/II wells)

• Understanding the E&P RCRA exemption is critical tounderstanding North Slope waste management practices.

• Understanding what is eligible for injection into Class I wellversus Class II well is important.

• Challenge in storing solid wastes in active zone freeze-thawcycle creates problems for liners

• Below grade freeze back provides appropriate encapsulation ofnon-oily wastes

• Active program of reserve pit closures using G&I facility andinjection wells


Underground Injection


Underground Injection Control Program

• Program under Safe Drinking Water Act to protect undergroundsources of drinking water

• North Slope – no underground sources of drinking water(USDW) or aquifers exempted because too saline as freshwater sources

• Five classes of wells– Class I: industrial, hazardous and non-hazardous; municipal

waste– Class II: oil and gas– Class III: mining– Class IV: shallow hazardous and radioactive waste injection– Class V: other (does not fit Class I-IV)


Underground Injection Control Program Oil Industry Wells on North Slope

• Two classes of wells primarily used in Alaska by the oil and gasindustry:– Class I non-hazardous industrial (administered by EPA) = 8

wells– Class II:

• Enhanced Oil Recovery (EOR) – water, gas, miscibleinjectant = 1100 Class IIR wells

• Produced water disposal and solids slurry injection =25 Class IID wells

• State of Alaska primacy since 1986• Administered by the Alaska Oil and Gas Conservation

Commission (AOGCC)


Underground Injection Control ProgramClass I Wells on North Slope

Class I Wells on North Slope (EPA Permitted)

• Non-hazardous, non-exempt oil and gas wastes

• Majority of wastes eligible for Class II (produced water, drillingfluids) but addition of treated domestic camp water and brine(from seawater treatment) creates need for Class I industrialwells

• Replaces or minimizes other surface and ocean dischargepractices for handling same wastes


Underground InjectionBest Practice on North Slope for Waste Management

• Elimination of reserve pits by use of grind and inject technology hasreduced the size of a well pad development by 70% compared to earlydays of operations.


Underground Injection Control ProgramGrind and Inject Technology

• Class I/II wells allow zero surface/marine discharge of most oiland gas wastes

• Grind and inject technology major waste management tool forNorth Slope oil and gas operations:– Terminated surface discharge to reserve pits (1993)– On-going drilling operations– New grind and inject facility constructed 1998 (DS4)– Reserve pit excavation and closure program– Oily waste cells 1 and 2 at Pad 3 will be handled through G

& I Facility only by special permit (Class V overlay)


Underground Injection Control ProgramArea Injection Orders (Class II)

• Administered by the AOGCC (20 AAC 25.460)• Authorize the drilling and operation of EOR (Class IIR) and

disposal wells (Class IID)• Allows an operator to obtain approval for underground injection

of fluids on an area basis rather than each individual well• Area Injection Orders (AIO) exist for each of the fields• Description of the confining and injection zone• Description of the fluids to be injected• Monitoring and reporting requirements• Primary concern is the integrity of the well and confinement of

fluids.


Session Four

• Coastal Zone Management Act/Alaska CoastalManagement Program – Mark Major, CPAI

• Alaska Department of Natural Resources – CashFay, BPXA


Coastal Zone Management


Hurricane Katrina – August, 2005


Hurricane Katrina – August, 2005


Shishmaref, Alaska Coastal Erosion


Coastal Zone Management Act

• Coastal Zone Management Act of 1972 (amended 1996)– “to preserve, protect, develop, and where possible to restore

or enhance, the resources of the Nation’s coastal zone forthis and succeeding generations”

• Voluntary requirements for coastal states to develop andimplement coastal management programs

• Grants:– Administrative (Section 306)– Coastal resource improvement (Section 306A)– Coastal zone enhancement (Section 309)


Coastal Zone Management ActCoordination Mandates

Coordination and cooperation (Section 307):

• Consistency of federal activities with state managementprograms (certification process)

• Applicants for federal license or permit certification ofconsistency with enforceable policies of a state’s program

• Certification for OCS activities


Coastal Zone Management ActFederal Regulations

CZMA implementing regulations:

• Subpart A (15CFR Part 923):– Requirements and process for

approval/amendment/termination of state coastalmanagement programs

– Requirements and process for obtaining Section 306 and309 grants

• Subpart B Uses Subject to Management:– “permissible land uses and water uses within the coastal

zone which have a direct and significant impact”– Program must contain enforceable policies


Coastal Zone Management ActFederal Regulations (2)

• Subpart C – Special Management Areas– Plans to designate areas of “particular concern”– Dependent on how comprehensively policies address state

and national interests and degree of specificity of policieswith respect to specific resources and uses

• Subpart D – Boundaries– Includes typical types of coastal morphology (beaches,

saline waters, salt marshes, transitional and intertidal areas,islands)

– Inland extent (can be defined by watersheds, area of tidalinfluence)



Subpart E – Authorities and Organization: requirements forapproving state plans

• Demonstration of statutory and regulatory tools for coastalmanagement (ensure compliance)

• Three techniques (one or a combination) for control of land andwater uses:– A - State standards and requirements for local control– B - Direct state control with necessary authority and

standards– C - State review on a case by case basis of all actions (local

government, private land owners) affecting coastal zone• State must have organization to effectively manage program



Subpart H Amendments/Termination of Approved Programs:

• Routine vs. Substantial Changes

• Substantial Changes if one or more of the following programareas are involved:– Uses subject to management– Special management areas– Boundaries– Authorities and organization– Coordination, public involvement and the national interest


Coastal Zone Management ActLands Excluded from Coastal Zone

• Lands excluded from the coastal zone:

– Lands owned, leased or held in trust by the federalgovernment

– Exclusion does not remove federal agencies fromconsistency provisions of Section 307 “when federal actionson these excluded lands have spillover impacts that affectany land or water use or natural resource of the coastal zonewithin the purview of a state’s management program”


Coastal Zone Management ActState Program Amendments

Amendment review process:

1. Determination that changes, if adopted by the program, wouldbe still approvable (if not Assistant Administrator will advisestate why amendment cannot be approved).

2. If likely approvable, a determination on whether an EIS isrequired.

Note: Routine program change can be submitted case by case orannually (state must public notice such changes)


Coastal Zone Management ActFederal Consistency Regulations (15 CFR Part 930)

• Revised federal consistency regulations December 2000specifying requirements and process for coastal consistency offederal actions

• New “effects” definition – “effect on any coastal resource”means any reasonably foreseeable effect on a coastal use orresource resulting from a federal action

• Subpart D – Consistency for federal agency activities requiring afederal license or permit

• Subpart E – Consistency for OCS exploration and developmentactivities


Coastal Zone Management ActFederal Consistency Regulations ( 15 CFR Part 930)

• Federal license or permit (gas pipeline e.g. FERC 7c, BLMROW)

• Applicant certifies consistency

• Process:1. State review of information adequacy2. Public comment (“minimum time necessary”)3. State notifies federal agency after 3 months if decision not

made4. State has to complete review by 6 months (but can be

extended)


Alaska Coastal Management Program (ACMP)Milestones (1)

• Alaska Coastal Management Act 1977

• ACMP Regulations 6 AAC 80 adopted in 1978

• Final ACMP EIS 1979

• 6 AAC 50 adopted 1984

• ABC List adopted 1995 (most items)

• 6 AAC 50 amended 2003

• HB 191 passed 2003


Alaska Coastal Management Program (ACMP)Milestones (2)

• Executive orders transferring ACMP management to DNR andother permit streamlining measures - 2003

• New ACMP regulations and amendments (July 1, 2004,amended October 29, 2004) :– 11 AAC 110 ACMP Implementation (consistency process

etc.)– 11 AAC 112 Statewide Standards of the ACMP– 11 AAC 114 District Coastal Management Plan

Requirements• The NOAA Office of Coastal Resource Management (OCRM)

completed the Final Environmental Impact Statement for theACMP Revisions on November 28, 2005

• Comments are due to OCRM by December 27, 2005


Alaska Coastal Management ProgramOverview

• ACMP administered by Office of Project Management andPermitting in DNR (created by Executive Order in 2003transferring ACMP from Division of Governmental Coordination)

• Activities requiring permits and authorizations in coastal zonehave to be found consistent with applicable statewide standardsand enforceable coastal district policies

• State and federal permits cannot be issued without a finding ofconsistency

• ADEC permits automatically consistent upon issuance (“ADECcarve out”)

• Permits on A and B List (inc. General Permits and NationwidePermits) already consistent


Alaska Coastal Management ProgramMajor Program Revisions 2004

• ADEC statutes and regulations exclusive policies of ACMP for thosepurposes

• Issuance of ADEC permits and authorizations constitute adetermination of consistency

• Revised statewide standards (11 AAC 112)

• Revised district program requirements (revised plans to be submitted toDNR July 1, 2005 and approved by July 1, 2006, otherwise sunset)

• New requirements for district enforceable policies:– May not duplicate a matter regulated by state or federal law or

regulation unless specifically related to local concern


Alaska Coastal Management Program11 AAC 110 ACMP Implementation

• Consistency process in 11 AAC 110 similar to expired 6 AAC 50• Article 2 State Consistency Process• Article 3 Consistency Review Process for Federal Activities• Article 4 Consistency Review Process for Activities Requiring a

Federal Authorization• Article 5 Public Participation• Article 6 Elevation• Article 7 General and Nationwide Permits, Categorically

Consistent Determinations, and Generally ConsistentDeterminations

• Article 8 Project Modifications and Renewals of Authorizations• Article 9 General Provisions


Alaska Coastal Management Program11 AAC 110 ACMP Implementation (2)

Article 2 State Consistency Process (one or more stateauthorizations)

• Submittal of Coastal Project Questionnaire (CPQ) including:

– Detailed project description– Consistency certification statement– Data, information, evaluation to demonstrate how project is

consistent with state standards and district enforceablepolicies

– Maps, diagrams, technical data, site information– “copies of all resource agency authorization applications”


Alaska Coastal Management Program11 AAC 110 ACMP Implementation (3)

• Information requests – “one bite of the apple”• Review participant comments objecting to applicant’s consistency

certification must be specific to an enforceable policy and state howany alternative measure, if adopted by the applicant, would achieveconsistency with those policies

• Proposed consistency determination (Day 24 or Day 44):1. Concurrence with applicant’s certification, or2. Object to applicant’s certification with recommended alternative

measure and allow applicant to:a. adopt alternative measure, orb. otherwise modify project to achieve consistency, orc. abandon the project.

• Final Consistency Determination:a. Concurb. Object i.e. found inconsistent

• Elevation (request within 5 days of Final, maximum of 45 days forelevation process)


REVIEW SCHEDULE* 30-Day 50-Day

Start-Up: Review packet distributed and PN posted or published D 1 D 1

Information Requests: Deadline for reviewers to request

additional information. The review may be stopped until that

information is received.

D 13 D 25

Comment Deadline: Public, district and agency reviewers. D 17 D 30

Proposed Determination: The coordinating agency will develop a

proposed consistency determination that will be presented to the

applicant and reviewers for concurrence.

D 24 D 44

Final Determination**: Will be issued upon agreement of the

proposed determination by the applicant and reviewers unless an

elevation is requested.

D 30 D 50

Elevation Process: Must be submitted within 5 days of issuance of

consistency determination

D 80 D 100

* Review schedule in calendar, not business days

** State agencies required to issue permits within 5 days of consistency determination

ACMP Consistency Review ProcessTimelines


Alaska Coastal Management Program11 AAC 110 ACMP Article 3 Federal Activities

Article 3 covers a federal consistency determination or an authorizationfrom one or more state resource agencies and a federal consistencydetermination (federal activity – see 15 CFR 930.31)

Article 3 consistency review process:• Completed within timeframes in 15 CFR 930.30-930.46• Review initiated “immediately” upon receipt of federal

consistency determination• Day 1 public notice and start of 30-day public comment period• Day 25 deadline for request for additional information• Day 44 Proposed Consistency Response

a. Concurrence with the federal consistency determinationb. Objection with any proposed alternative measures, orc. Request for time extension

• Final Consistency Determination (or federal agency mayelevate)


Alaska Coastal Management Program11 AAC 110 ACMP Article 4 Federal Authorizations

• Article 4 covers a federal consistency certification or an authorizationfrom one or more state resource agencies and a federal consistencycertification

• Article 4 lists federal authorizations subject to consistency review

• Applicant for federal authorization provides certification that includes aCPQ and list of information as specified in Article 2

• Article 2 Process 50 days (similar to Article 3):– 21-day completeness review– 30-day public comment period– Proposed and Final Consistency Determination


Alaska Coastal Management Program11AAC 110 Article 5 Public Participation

• Article 5 covers public notice, public comments, and public hearings.• Public Notice:

– Solicits comments on a proposed project– Specifies comment deadlines– Provides the proposed schedule for consistency review

• Public Comments:– Provides guidance on submission of comments– Describes what happens with public comments

• Public Hearings:– Sets forth procedures for deciding to hold public hearings– Describes process for notification of public hearing– Sets forth procedures for comments provided at hearing


Alaska Coastal Management Program11 AAC 110 ACMP Article 6 Elevation

• Applicant, resource agency or coastal district may elevate within5 days a proposed consistency determination to thecommissioner (DNR)

• Elevation limited to: (1) consistency with respect to enforceablepolicies, or (2) any alternative measure or other projectmodification to achieve consistency

• Review schedule suspended (no more than 45 days)• Elevation meeting with DNR, resource agencies, affected

coastal district and applicant to hear requestor’s concerns withthe commissioner

• Commissioner’s decision (within 45 days) and issuance of finalconsistency


Alaska Coastal Management Program11 AAC 110 ACMP Article 7 A and B List

• Article 7 codifies A and B List in regulation for General andNationwide Permits, Categorically Consistent Determinations (AList), and Generally Consistent Determinations (B List)

• Scope of Review:a. If part of project is an activity covered by GP or NWP

(previously found consistent) that part is excluded fromconsistency review

b. No additional review if all permits/authorizations on A or BList

c. Exclude A and B List activities that are part of a project if theimpacts of those activities have temporary and de minimisimpact

d. If part of a project includes A or B listed activities and anindividual consistency review (C List), all activities shall beincluded in the scope of the consistency review.


Alaska Coastal Management Program A-B-C List

• Whenever possible, A & B-List is utilized

• A-List = Categorically Consistent Approvals– State (DEC, DNR, DF&G)

• B-List = General Concurrence Determinations (GCD)– 50 GCD’s– 34 Nationwide Permits– General State & Federal Permits

• C-List = Individual Project Consistency Reviews


Alaska Coastal Management Program A-List Examples (ADNR/DOG)

Lease Operation Approval in the North Slope Borough for thefollowing activities:

1. Winter-season cable trenchments when the vegetative mat isreplaced

2. Pipelines installed on existing vertical support members3. Gravel placements within the inside perimeter of pads4. Temporary (one year or less) placements of camps or

equipment at existing pads5. Installation and winter-season placement of temporary snow

fences6. Installation of liners inside the berm of existing, previously

utilized reserve pits7. Clean-up activities on existing pads8. On-pad placement of light poles, railings, electrical

towers/poles, modules and associated oil and gas buildings


Alaska Coastal Management Program B-List Examples Applicable to the Oil Industry

• GCD-5 Equipment crossing of fish streams• GCD-5A Low water crossings (TAPS) corridor• GCD-7 Culvert and bridge installation• GCD-8 Temporary and permanent water use (100,000 gpd or less)• GCD-24 Exploration sampling, geologic reconnaissance, and/or small scale

drilling• GCD-25 Winter seismic surveys for oil and gas in the North Slope Borough• GCD-32 Maintenance and repair activities along the trans-Alaska Pipeline

System• GCD-34 Ice road and ice pad construction in the North Slope Borough• GCD-36 Training and temporary staging for oil spill response• GCD-45 Storage of materials at existing pads in the North Slope Borough• GCD-46 Installation of permanent snow fences, power transmission lines, and

light poles• GCD-47 Construction of pipelines on new VSMs and installation of pig launcher

and receiving pads (note: not for major cross-country lines associated with majorprojects or other non-routine projects)

• GCD-48 Gravel additions of .33 acres or less in the North Slope Borough


Alaska Coastal Management ProgramSummary and Issues

• Provides a mechanism to ensure responsible futuredevelopment in coastal zone areas

• Provides additional input into permitting processes particularlythrough review of projects with respect to conformity with districtenforceable policies

• Provides input to OCS activities• ACMP has been the only mechanism to coordinate permitting of

projects requiring multiple permits (now this is done throughDNR/OPMP)

• Importance of A and B List (HB 191 mandated expansion)


State Programs(non federally-delegated)


Alaska Department of Natural Resources


Alaska Department of Natural Resources

• Much of North Slope oil and gas development onstate lands

• Focus of DNR Programs is land use and resourcemanagement (e.g., gravel, water)

• Approval of oil and gas infrastructure required todevelop subsurface

• Oil and gas leasing


Alaska Department of Natural ResourcesUnit Plan of Development (POD)

• Filed for DNR/DOG approval as an exhibit to Unit Agreement(11 AAC 83.343)

• Description of proposed development activities “on data that isreasonably available at the time the plan is submitted”:– Long range reservoir development and production– Further exploration within unit in areas not yet included in

participating area– Proposed operations for minimum of one year– Surface location of facilities (pads, roads, docks etc.)

• Filed for DNR/DOG approval as an exhibit to Unit Agreement(11 AAC 83.343)

• Regular updates of POD required (typically annually)• Annual report to Commissioner describing previous year

activities


Alaska Department of Natural ResourcesLease Plan of Operations and Unit Plan of Operations

• Lease Plan of Operations to be submitted to DNR/DOG prior toconducting operations “for all or part of a leased area or area subject toan oil and gas exploration license” (11 AAC 83.158)

• Unit Plan of Operations to be submitted to DNR/DOG prior toconducting operations “for all or part of the unit area” (11 AAC 83.346)

• Lease Plan of Operations not required if activities would not require aland use permit or if done under an approved Unit Plan of Operations

• Unit Plan of Operations not required if activities would not require aland use permit

• DNR requires Lease Plan of Operations amendments for “anything thatcasts a shadow”


Alaska Department of Natural ResourcesLease Plan of Operations and Unit Plan of Operations (2)

• Both Lease Plan and Unit Plan are approvals of surfaceactivities/operations to develop subsurface oil and gas resource

• Same information required for both submittals:– Sequence and schedule of operations– Information on facilities (roads, pads, wells etc.)– Plans for rehabilitation– Description of operating procedures to minimize adverse

impacts to other natural resources, fish and wildlife habitatsetc.


Alaska Department of Natural ResourcesMiscellaneous Land Use Permits

• Administered by DNR/DMLW (11 AAC 96.005-010)

• Permits for activities on state lands except DNR leased lands,permits that convey interest in land (e.g. coal prospecting),home site and homestead entry permits, and reserved formultiple use management or other state lands withdrawn frompublic domain

• Inter-division memorandum specifying respective responsibilitiesfor authorizing surface activities between predecessor divisionsof DOG and DMLW


Alaska Department of Natural ResourcesMiscellaneous Land Use Permits (2)

Land use permits required for (11 AAC 96.010):

• Use of explosives and explosive devices

• Uses not listed in 11 AAC 96.020 as generally allowed uses

• Hydraulic prospecting or mining equipment methods

• Drilling >300 feet, including exploration drilling and stratigraphic testwells on state land not under oil and gas lease

• Geophysical exploration (minerals or oil and gas)

• Commercial recreation camps

• Event/assembly of >50 people


Alaska Department of Natural ResourcesMiscellaneous Land Use Permits (3)

Typical land use permits for oil and gas activities:• Off-road (tundra) travel• Ice road and pad construction• Storage on non-unit gravel pads• Research camps (remote, temporary)


Alaska Department of Natural ResourcesMaterial Sale Contracts

• DNR administers the “Disposal of Timber and Materials” throughcompetitive bid as provided by AS 38.05110-38.05.120

• Gravel and sand are “materials”

• 10% refundable deposit, contract typically 10 yrs

• Mining and rehabilitation plan

• Current North Slope contracts $1/cu.yd

• Single contract may cover multiple mine sites, and multiple contractsmay cover single mine sit

• Annual gravel use reporting and payment by contract holder


Alaska Department of Natural ResourcesTemporary Water Use and Water Rights

• Water Use = Consumptive and non-consumptive use– Water is a resource of the state– Extraction from rivers, lakes, streams, reservoirs (inc.

abandoned mine sites)– Baseline data on water quality and source water volumetric

data (may be required)– Intake screens required for fish-bearing water bodies (fish

entrainment issue)– Limits of appropriation may be imposed by ADNR/OHMP

• Water use appropriation responsibility of DMLW


Alaska Department of Natural ResourcesTemporary Water Use (11 AAC 93.210-220)

• Temporary water use permits for significant amounts for lessthan five years and not otherwise appropriated

• Simplified process:– Application with location, quantities, schedule, equipment– Commissioner consultation with ADNR/OHMP and ADEC– Discretionary notification to adjacent land owners, state or

federal agencies, local government– Discretionary public notice


Alaska Department of Natural ResourcesWater Rights (11 AAC 93.040-140)

• Application information– Location/legal description– Hydrologic information (>100,000 gpd)– Use (quantities, schedule,impoundment structures)– Standard water quantities (e.g. single-family home)

• Discretionary department investigation• Public notice (newspaper), notice to adjacent landowners• Discretionary public hearings• Permit to appropriate water (term variable depending upon use and

volumes)• Certificate of Appropriation

– Beneficial use for two years– Compliance with permit– Discretionary department investigation– Conditions to maintain specific quantity of water (e.g. fish and

wildlife habitat protection)


Alaska Department of Natural ResourcesSummary and Issues

• Most North Slope oil and gas exploration and development todate has taken place on state lands.

• State has various land management tools:– Oil and gas lease terms and conditions– Plan of Development commitments– Unit/Lease Plan of Operations approvals (surface activities

in support of subsurface development)– Other state resource use – gravel and water– Pipeline ROW leasing and other ROW’s

• Management responsibilities shared by DOG, DMLW andSPCO


Alaska Department of Natural ResourcesSummary and Issues (2)

DNR Unit/Lease Plan of Operations regulations lackspecificity on requirements. Problem areas include:

• Amendments/modifications of projects (“cast ashadow issue”)

• Requirement for as-builts• Permit program vs. inventory?


Alaska Department of Natural ResourcesTitle 41 Fish Habitat Permits


Title 41 “Fish Habitat” Permits

• Administered by the Alaska Department of NaturalResources/Office of Habitat Management and Permitting(OHMP)

• No regulatory process – statutorily driven• Manages/controls activities in fish streams (e.g. bridge

construction, training structures, ice road crossings, other instream work, water withdrawal)

• Can restrict seasonal appropriations of water• Permitting:

– Providing free passage of anadromous and resident fish infresh waterbodies (AS 41.14.840)

– Protecting freshwater anadromous fish habitat under theAnadromous Fish Act (AS 41.41.870)


Other State of Alaska Permits and Authorizations

ADEC:• Permit to Construct (wastewater disposal/Drinking water

system)• Permit to Operate (wastewater disposal/drinking water system)• Sec. 401 Water Quality Certification (Sec. 402 and 404 permits)• Wastewater disposal permit (NPDES application and Class I)• Food Service PermitAOGCC:• Permit to Drill, Pool Rules, Area Injection Orders, Metering, etc.ADNR State Historic Preservation Office• Sec. 106 National Historic Preservation Act consultation

(Archeological, cultural, historic resources)


Session Five

• Oil Spill Contingency Plans – Mike Bronson, BPXA• North Slope Borough Title 19 – Mark Major, CPAI


Alaska Department of Environmental Conservation


Oil Discharge Prevention and Contingency Planning

Oil spill plans are legal commitments to the public andinclude:

• Protect the environment• Capability to respond to and clean up oil spills• Description of oil equipment (tanks, wells, piping,

etc.) and operations


Alaska Department of Environmental ConservationOil Discharge Prevention and Contingency Plan (ODPCP)

• Program is administered by ADEC Division of Spill Preventionand Response (SPAR).

• Planning and oil equipment regulations at 18 AAC 75 areundergoing multi-year multi-phase revision.

• Phase 1 regulations for Response Plans for oil exploration andproduction facilities were issued April 2004.

• Phase 2 regulations for Tanks, Pipelines and Maintenance aredue 2006.


Alaska Department of Environmental ConservationODPCP Requirements

ODPCP regulatory requirements in 18 AAC 75:• Apply to onshore and offshore (within 3-miles) exploration and

production facilities and crude oil transmission lines.

• Describe how an operator can prevent, report and respond to aspill of oil.

• Describe how the facility complies with the ADEC oil spillprevention regulations.


Alaska Department of Environmental ConservationODPCP Format and Content

ODPCP format/content:• Part 1 - Response Action Plan

– What actions to take during a spill and reportingrequirements

• Part 2 – Prevention– Equipment and procedures to prevent oil spills

• Part 3 – Supplemental Information– Summarizes facilities and operations

• Part 4 – Best Available Technology (BAT)– Details how aspects of the facility are meeting BAT (e.g.

pipeline leak detection)• Cross-reference tables to show how plan meets the federal plan

requirements


Oil Pollution Act of 1990 (OPA 90)

Applied lessons learned from Exxon Valdez oil spill to Clean Water Act andother federal statutes

• Changed the Marine Inspection Act (double hulled tankers)• Changed shipper liability provisions• Changed oil spill liability trust funds• Expanded oil spill contingency planning requirements for facilities and

vessels:– Detailed response plans backed up by equipment and training– Specific requirements for Prince William Sound (PWS) pre-

positioned response equipment (e.g. hatchery protection)

• Granted states authority to go beyond federal contingency planningrequirement

• Required PWS vessel escort tow packages• Created Regional Citizens Advisory Councils for PWS and Cook Inlet• Expanded Natural Resource Damage provisions and trustees


Oil Spill PlansFederal Requirements

• U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (includes EPA FacilityResponse Plan and Spill Control and Countermeasure Plan)– Applies to facilities landward of the coastline (e.g. Greater

Prudhoe Bay, Milne Point, Badami)• U.S. Coast Guard

– Applies to facilities that conduct oil transfersover navigable waters (Greater Prudhoe Bay,Badami, Northstar)

• Minerals Management Service– Applies to facilities seaward of the coastline (Northstar,

Endicott, Point McIntyre 2)• Department of Transportation

– Applies to facilities with onshore sales oil pipelines(Northstar, Endicott, Milne Point, Badami, Kuparuk, Alpine)when in service


Oil Spill Prevention and Contingency PlanningJurisdictions - North Slope Oil Fields

ADEC EPA USCG DOT MMSPrudhoe Bay X X X - XMilne Point X X - X -Endicott X - - X XBadami X X X X -Northstar X - X X XKuparuk X X - X -Alpine X X - X -


Oil Discharge Prevention and Contingency PlanningRequirements

• Agencies require renewal of plans every 5 years.

• ADEC requires public comment period for plans and renewalprocess takes one year.

• MMS allows operators to follow state format and renewalprocess if operations lie in state waters.

• U.S. EPA SPCC Plans must be certified by a ProfessionalEngineer.

• All plans are periodically reviewed and amended.


EPA Spill Prevention, Control and Countermeasure PlanScope and Applicability

• Facilities inland of the natural coastline (seaward ofthe coastline MMS oil spill regulations apply – 30CFR Part 254)

• U.S. Environmental Protection Agency SPCC Planamendments by February 2006, implemented byAugust 2006 (40 CFR 112). News flash!

• SPCC regulations for petroleum oils – 40 CFR 112.1to 112.10


EPA Spill Prevention, Control and Countermeasure PlanScope and Applicability (2)

• Regulation of oil containers (also produced water,solid oily waste, liquid oily waste, grease, somechemicals)

• Bulk oil containers 55-gallons and greater

• Portable tanks

• Oil piping

• Training in oil equipment operation


EPA Spill Prevention, Control and Countermeasure PlanScope and Applicability (3)

• Non-transportation facilities on shore including:– Vehicles transporting oil exclusively within facilities

– not interstate or intrastate– Drill rigs– Fuel Loading racks– Well equipment

• SPCC regulations do not apply to facilities underDOT jurisdiction (e.g. sales oil pipelines).


EPA Spill Prevention, Control and Countermeasure PlanObligations

Plan• EPA does not approve plan but can review plan.• Certified by a Professional Engineer• Plan describes the oil equipment, spill prevention

equipment and practices meeting SPCC regulations.Implementation• Secondary containment requirements for bulk oil

containers if practicable (110%)• Inspections and integrity tests of tanks and tank

appurtenances• Record keeping of inspections (keep 3 years)


Local Programs

(example of North Slope Borough)


North Slope Borough



North Slope Borough Coastal Zone


North Slope BoroughTitle 19 Land Management Regulations - Zoning

• North Slope Borough (NSB) has Title 29 of State of Alaska CodePlanning and Zoning Authority

• Land Management Regulations under Title 19 of NSB Code (current1990, revisions proposed)

• Zoning districts:– Barrow (4; Mixed Use, Suburban Residential, Industrial, Reserve)– Village– Conservation (default for most of Borough)– Resource Development (grandfathered or rezoning required for

new developments in Conservation District)– Transportation Corridor (e.g. TAPS)

• Rezoning – recommendation of Planning Commission, approval byBorough Assembly, applicant submits “Master Plan”

• Zoning defines use, activities requiring permits, type of permits required


North Slope BoroughTitle 19 Land Management Regulations - Permitting

• Three types of NSB permits:– Conditional Use Permit – uses elevated to the Planning and Zoning

Commission by the Administrator that may not conform to Boroughpolicies

– Administrative approval (approval without public comment by LandManagement Administrator for minor activities)

– Development Permit (draft permit issued for 20 day public commentperiod) – major activities/projects – total 35 day process

• Type of permit depends in part upon zoning district, type/size of projectand discretion of Administrator

• Land management policies are criteria for approval and conditioningpermits:– Village– Economic Development– Offshore Development– Coastal Management and Areawide– Transportation Corridor


North Slope BoroughTitle 19 Land Management Regulations

Summary and Issues

• Provides local control of resource development andother activities, and protection of subsistenceresources

• NSB currently revising:– Coastal Management Plan– Title 19 Land Management Regulations

• Recently updated NSB Comprehensive Plan will beused as a guidance tool for revising above programs

• Importance of consultation with local communities byproject proponents


Session Six

Permitting for Resource Development Projects

Peter Hanley, BPXA


Permitting for Resource Development Projects in Alaska


Permitting for New Resource Development ProjectsCompany Planning Process Example

• Major Companies typically have formal projectplanning, development and execution processes

• Example: BP Major Projects Common Process(MPCP)– Rigorous analytical and decision process from

conceptual engineering to project operation– Identifying and managing risks and opportunities– Front-end loading– Bring consistency to BP projects– Deliver projects with world class execution


BP Major Projects Common Process (MPCP)Stages

Five Stages:• Appraise=Assess strategic fit, analyze economics, identify

options for potential projects• Select=Develop and evaluate options, conduct conceptual

engineering, select alternative, set design basis, conductenvironmental studies, initiate permit applications

• Define=Preliminary design of selected option, permitapplications submitted, permits processed

• Execute=Detail design, procurement, fabrication, construction,drilling

• Operate=Production, ensuring project meets goals


BP Major Projects Common Process (MPCP)Decision Making

• Each step in process involves passing through formal reviewsand recommendations with a Decision Support Package (DSP) -“gates”

• Select preliminary Project Execution Plan details strategies,tasks, and risk management that will occur in the define andexecute stages

• Decision to proceed, recycle, or dispose made at end of Select• Risk assessment is a major part of the process including

permitting risk (schedule, costs, permit stipulations, litigationetc.)

• Stakeholder consultations are an integral part of all stages


MPCP Stages


Permitting for New Resource Development ProjectsCompany Team

• Multi-disciplinary team:– HSE (environmental, permitting, safety etc.)– Engineers– Commercial– External Affairs– Drilling– Subsurface– Contractors/consultants

• Project planning includes Permitting Strategy and Plan

• For permitting – key document developed – Project Description(control document)


Permitting for New Resource Development ProjectsPermitting Strategy and Plan

Permitting Strategy and Plan elements:1. Evaluation of required permits2. Data gathering (environmental studies)3. Determination of information needs for permit applications and

schedule:• Issue of different detail of information for different permits (e.g.

civil construction vs. air emissions)• Define information needed from various groups in multi-

disciplinary team• Issue of risk reduction – value of permits received vs. cost and

schedule exposure• Flexibility for project changes vs. detail required (e.g. air permit)

4. Mechanisms for iterative approach to incorporate environmentalfactors into engineering design and project execution plans


Permitting for New Resource Development ProjectsIdentification of Permits Required

Identification of required permits:• Land owner/manager and jurisdictions• Location – onshore or offshore, in the coastal zone or outside,

wetlands or uplands• Conceptual scope of the project in terms of potential impacts to

media: land, air, water and biota• Conceptual scope of project in terms of project resource needs

(e.g. water and gravel)• Conceptual scope of the project with respect to site access and

transportation needs• Questionnaire to organization initiating project (similar to CPQ)

to identify permit requirements


Putting the Permitting Puzzle TogetherActivities or Project Components Triggering

Federal Reviews, Permits or Authorizations (North Slope Oil and Gas)

• “Significant federal action” = EIS• Civil works – pads, roads, dock, airstrip, VSM’s in wetlands and

waters of the U.S. = Corps Sec. 404• Civil works in navigable waters = Corps Sec. 10• Wastewater discharge, construction runoff, pipeline hydrotesting

= EPA NPDES permit (General and/or individual)• Endangered species in project area (e.g bowhead whale,

spectacled eider) = USFWS and NMFS Sec. 7 consultation,Biological Opinion, Jeopardy Determination

• Marine traffic, surveys = NMFS IHA• Polar bears in project area = USFWS LOA• Indigenous people in project area = Federal agency

consultations with tribal governments



Federal Reviews, Permits or Authorizations (North Slope Oil and Gas) - 2

• Non-exempt, non-hazardous disposal well = EPA Class IIndustrial well permit (UIC)

• Fuel storage, transfer, pipelines = MMS/EPA/DOT/USCG Spillplan(s)

• Temporary storage, handling and transport of hazardous waste= EPA RCRA storage facility permit



Federally-delegated Reviews, Permits or Authorizations (North Slope Oil and Gas)

• Major stationary emission sources (turbines, heaters, drill rigetc.) = ADEC PSD Construction Permit and Title V OperatingPermit

• Project location in coastal zone (North Slope Borough) =ADNR/OPMP ACMP Consistency Review

• Enhance Oil Recovery (EOR) wells = AOGCC Class IIRUIC/Area Injection Order

• Exempt waste disposal wells = AOGCC Class IID UIC/AreaInjection Order

• Wastewater disposal, discharge of fill wetlands/navigable waters= ADEC Sec. 401 Water Quality Certification



State Reviews, Permits or Authorizations (North Slope Oil and Gas)

• Construction and operations on Unitized oil and gas leases =ADNR/DOG Unit/Lease Plan of Operations

• Construction, operation and abandonment common carrier salespipeline = SPCO Pipeline ROW Lease

• Tundra and other off-road travel, ice roads, temporary camps,miscellaneous activities = ADNR/DMLW Miscellaneous LandUse Permit

• Gravel mining and use = ADNR/DMLW Material Sales Contract• Water use = ADNR/DMLW Temporary Water Use Permit and

Water Rights• Construction and other activities affecting fish streams =

ADNR/OHMP Title 41 Permit• Fuel storage, transfer, pipelines = ADEC Oil Discharge

Prevention and Contingency Plan


Putting the Permitting Puzzle TogetherActivities or Project Components Triggering Local (North Slope Borough)

Reviews, Permits or Authorizations (North Slope Oil and Gas) - 2

• Construction and Operations in North Slope Borough = NSBRezoning and Master Plan (Title 19 Land ManagementRegulations)

• Subsequent construction and operations not shown on MasterPlan = NSB Development Permit or Administrative Approval


Permitting for New Resource Development ProjectsCompliance

• Obtaining project permits is only part of the story for anapplicant, compliance is the other part.

• In reviewing draft permits or negotiating permit conditions, theability to comply with permit conditions is critical.

• Compliance is both complying with the permit conditions butalso the permitted scope of work

• Environmental Management System (EMS)

• ISO 14001 Certification (voluntary program)


Examples of Permitting Timeframes*

• New water source• New gravel source• Contaminated site rehab• Solid waste storage facility

• Gravel pad expansion• Small, new pads• Pipelines (non-common

carrier)• Exploration well

Medium Projects(3 - 6 months)

• Multiple new pads• New developments• Modification or new

emissions (air permit)

• New modules/skids• VSMs• Cable trenching• In-field ice road

Large Projects(3 - 36 months)Note: If an EISinvolved, 18-36months)

Small Projects(2 - 4 weeks)

* Timeframes are from the submittal of complete application


Permitting Timeline ExampleSmall Project (On-Pad Improvement)

Day 0 –Project sanctioned

(internal)/envr.staff notified

Day 10 –Complete Project

Description

Day 10 – ApplicationsSubmitted

Day 24 – Permits Issued

24 days from start to finish

Permits Required (generally)1. ADNR LO/NS Amendment2. NSB Administrative Approval


Permitting Timeline ExampleMedium Project (Pad Expansion)


Description


Day 75 – Permits Issued


Permits Required (generally):1. ADNR LO/NS Amendment (Day 42)

GC-48 Gravel Additions of .33 Acres or Less in the NSB2. USACE NWP #18 Minor Discharge (Day 72)3. NSB Development Permit, PN required (Day 75)




Permitting Timeline ExampleMedium Project (Pad to Pad Pipeline)


Description


Day 138 – FinalAuthorization Issued


Permits Required (generally):1. ADNR Off-road Travel (in-place)2. ADNR LO/NS Amendment (Day 63)3. ADNR Fish Habitat Permit (Day 63)4. NSB Administrative Approval (Day 66)5. ADNR Land Use Permit (storage) (Day 138)6. Letter of Non-Objection from Right-of Way owners (Day 115)

Day 66 –PermitsIssued

Day 115 – Letter ofNon-Objection Issued




Permitting Timeline ExampleMedium Project* (ACMP Review Required)


Description


Day 145 –Permits Issued


Submittals Required (generally):1. Coastal Project Questionnaire2. Permit Applications3. Maps

* Theoretical ExampleAssuming “50-day” consistency review

and no elevation process. Elevation process can add

another 50 days to schedule

Pre-review assistance

Pre-application meetings

Day 91 –Determination ofCompleteness

Day 91 –Public Notice

“Day 1”

Day 141 –Consistency

Determination“Day 50”

RFAI

Day 121 – PNComment Deadline

“Day 30”




Permitting Timeline ExampleLarge-Scale Project (EIS and ACMP Review Required)

InitiateEIS

ReviewPermitsIssued

Project Scoping

Team Formation

Pre-application meetings

Pre-review assistance

Prepare ProjectDescription

Projectinitiated

6 months - 2 years

Scoping

Mitigation

Studies

RFAI

Biological Opinions

Permit Negotiation

18 months – 3 years

Initiate ACMPProcess (6

months prior toROD) ROD

Within60

days

Procurement

ComplianceTraining

Construction

Operate

SubmitApplicationfor NEPAReview

MOU’s

Applicant Project Cycle

Conceptual Preliminary Detail Execute Operate


Wrap Up

Agency Jurisdiction and Permits Presentation

Peter Hanley, BPXA


Documents

Environmental Regulatory Trainingrdcarchives.org/issues/oilgas/aogatraining.pdf · 1) Short Q&A after each topic – max 2 minutes 2) A 10 min. Q&A after each session 3) No cell phones/pages