Alpine satellite development plan for the proposed Greater Mooses Tooth 2 development project : final supplemental environmental impact statement

2018·205.4 MB·English

by  United States. Bureau of Land Management. Alaska State Office

Proposed Greater Mooses
Tooth Two Development Project
Supplemental Environmental Impact Statement for the Alpine Satellite Development Plan
The Bureau of Land Management Today
Our Vision
To enhance the quality of life for all citizens
through the balanced stewardship of America's
public lands and resources.
Our Mission
To sustain the health, diversity, and productivity
of the public lands for the use and enjoyment
of present and future generations.
BLM Library
Ve^eral
R w Cen'er
B]d§• 50, OC-521
*0. Box 25047
Denver, CO 80225
1. BLM Cover Photos
2. Aerial of production pad, North Slope
© ConocoPhillips
3. Caribou, National Petroleum Reserve, Alaska
4. Crea Creek flowing into Lake L9819,
National Petroleum Reserve, Alaska
5. White-fronted goose, National Petroleum
Reserve, Alaska
BLM/AK/PL-18/009+1610+F0200
~n>
lb'. ‘Sfto'HtiS'
H5
2s i«
Alpine Satellite Development
Plan for the Proposed Greater
Mooses Tooth 2 Development
Project
Final Supplemental Environmental Impact
Statement
Volume 1: Chapters 1-6
Prepared by:
U.S. Department of the Interior
Bureau of Land Management
Anchorage, Alaska
In cooperation with:
Native Village of Nuiqsut
U.S. Army Corps of Engineers
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service
U.S. Bureau of Ocean Energy Management
State of Alaska
North Slope Borough
Inupiat Community of the Arctic Slope
August 2018
Total Cost of Producing the EIS: $1.1 million
Blank page.
Supplemental Environmental Impact Statement
Alpine Satellite Development Plan for the Proposed Greater Mooses Tooth 2 Development Project
Alpine Satellite Development Plan GMT2
Development Project Final Supplemental
Environmental Impact Statement
Lead Agency U.S. Department of the Interior (DOI), Bureau of Land Management (BLM)
Proposed Action To provide ConocoPhillips Alaska, Inc. (ConocoPhillips) with authorizations to
construct, operate, and maintain a drill site, pipelines, access road, and ancillary
facilities to develop and produce petroleum resources on federally managed lands
within the Greater Mooses Tooth (GMT) Unit of the National Petroleum Reserve in
Alaska (NPR-A).
Abstract ConocoPhillips is proposing to produce hydrocarbon resources from a surface
location on federal oil and gas lease AA-081800 in the NPR-A. The proposed GMT2
Project includes a drill site in the GMT Unit, a pipeline, and a road corridor to
ConocoPhillips facilities at Greater Mooses Tooth 1 (GMT1).
The BLM has lead responsibility for preparation of this draft supplemental
environmental impact statement (EIS). The U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, U.S.
Environmental Protection Agency, U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, U.S. Bureau of
Ocean Energy Management, State of Alaska, Native Village of Nuiqsut, Inupiat
Community of the Arctic Slope and the North Slope Borough are participating in the
analysis as cooperating agencies.
This supplemental EIS evaluates relevant new circumstances and infonnation since
the issuance of the Alpine Satellite Development Plan Final EIS in September 2004.
Its development also provided opportunities for public participation and to address
changes to ConocoPhillips’ proposed development plan for GMT2 (referred to as
Colville Delta 7 [CD7] in the Alpine Satellite Development Plan EIS).
GMT2 is part of the Alpine Satellite Development Plan, for which the BLM prepared
a final EIS. The record of decision approved issuance of the BLM authorizations
needed to develop the Alpine Field. The currently proposed GMT2 Development
Project is very similar to the CD7 development approved for permitting in the 2004
Alpine Satellite Development Plan Record of Decision, with changes to
accommodate access to the hydrocarbon reservoir and access to existing
infrastructure.
The supplemental EIS documents the potential effects to: Physiography; Geology;
Soils and Pennafrost; Sand and Gravel; Paleontological Resources; Water Resources;
Surface Water Quality; Climate and Meteorology; Air Quality; Acoustical
Environment; Terrestrial Vegetation and Wetlands; Fish; Birds; Terrestrial Mammals;
Marine Mammals; Threatened and Endangered Species; Sociocultural Environment;
State and Local Economy; Subsistence Harvest and Uses; Environmental Justice;
Public Health; Cultural Resources; Land Use; Recreation; Visual Resources; and.
Transportation. Also evaluated are the potential effects of spilled cmde-oil-produced
fluids, seawater, and other chemicals.
Further Information Contact Stephanie Rice, BLM Alaska, at 907-271-3202 or visit the supplemental EIS
website at http://www.blm.gov/alaska.
Supplemental Environmental Impact Statement
Alpine Satellite Development Plan for the Proposed Greater Mooses Tooth 2 Development Project
Blank Page
Supplemental Environmental Impact Statement
Alpine Satellite Development Plan for the Proposed Greater Mooses Tooth 2 Development Project
Executive Summary
What is the BLM proposing to do in this supplemental EIS?
BLM Alaska prepared this supplemental EIS to analyze an application by ConocoPhillips to construct,
operate, and maintain a drill site, access road, pipelines, and ancillary facilities to support development of
petroleum resources at the proposed Greater Mooses Tooth 2 (GMT2) site within the National Petroleum
Reserve in Alaska (NPR-A). The key issues in this supplemental EIS center on oil and gas production
decisions, the protection of surface resources, access to subsistence resources, and appropriate mitigation
measures.
The purpose of this supplemental EIS is to evaluate any relevant new circumstances and information that
have arisen since the Alpine Satellite Development Plan Final EIS, dated September 2004. Additionally,
the BLM completed the NPR-A Integrated Activity Plan/Environmental Impact Statement Record of
Decision in 2013 to determine the appropriate management of BLM-administered lands (public lands) in
the nearly 23-million-acre NPR-A. This supplemental EIS tiers to both of these previous National
Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) analyses and incorporates them by reference.
What are the major issues and focus of controversy?
The key issues in this supplemental EIS are analysis of impacts to surface resources, particularly
subsistence resources, and analysis of socioeconomic impacts. Much of the analysis focuses on issues
raised in scoping, such as subsistence and wildlife protections; impacts of and contributions to global
climate change; impacts to water quality and air quality; air traffic effects; economic benefits to Alaska
Natives; and cumulative effects of oil and gas development on the North Slope. The supplemental EIS
examines a range of alternatives for the GMT2 Project, and considers relevant and reasonable mitigation
measures, consistent with BLM policy.
Of particular interest is the proximity of the GMT2 site to the Village of Nuiqsut, and potential impacts to
subsistence. Potential impacts to subsistence may result from hunter avoidance of the area, changes in
access to subsistence use areas, resource (particularly caribou) availability, community participation in
subsistence activities, aircraft traffic, spills, and rehabilitation of infrastructure upon abandonment. The
BLM’s analysis of subsistence impacts under ANILCA Section 810 found that development of the GMT2
Project may significantly restrict subsistence activities for the village of Nuiqsut, and the cumulative
effects of GMT2 and other development on the North Slope may significantly restrict subsistence
activities for the villages of Nuiqsut, Anaktuvuk Pass, Atqasuk and Utqiagvik.
What measures are being taken to reduce impacts?
All action alternatives incorporate ConocoPhillips’ existing lease stipulations for the GMT Unit, as well
as best management practices contained in the 2013 NPR-A Integrated Activity Plan/Environmental
Impact Statement Record of Decision. ConocoPhillips has requested that the BLM grant deviations to two
stipulations/best management practices (Appendix I). The BLM will determine whether or not to grant
these deviations in its Record of Decision.
As the GMT2 applicant and primary oil development company in the Nuiqsut area, ConocoPhillips has
attempted to mitigate impacts from flights in its exiting Alpine Development Field, and financially
contributes to subsistence support programs in the community. ConocoPhillips has also incorporated
project designs, such as subsistence pullouts, to reduce impacts to subsistence and other resources.
iii
Supplemental Environmental Impact Statement
Alpine Satellite Development Plan for the Proposed Greater Mooses Tooth 2 Development Project
The BLM is considering the adoption of new potential mitigation measures as part of its GMT2
supplemental EIS authorization, which are analyzed for applicable resources throughout Chapter 4 of this
document. The BLM will determine which new mitigation measures to adopt in its Record of Decision.
What alternatives are being considered by the BLM?
The final supplemental EIS contains three action alternatives and a no-action alternative (Alternative D).
Alternative A, the Proponent’s Proposal, consists of an 8.2-mile gravel road and pipeline connecting the
GMT2 pad with existing infrastructure at GMT1. Alternative B, the Alternate Road Alignment, consists of
a 9.4-mile road and pipeline connecting the GMT2 pad to existing infrastructure. The alternate road
alignment follows the watershed divide between the Fish Creek and Ublutuoch drainages. Alternative C,
Roadless Development, consists of an 8.6-mile pipeline connecting GMT2 with infrastructure at GMT1,
and an airstrip and occupied structure pad to support operations at GMT2.
Alternative A is the BLM’s preferred alternative. The identification of a preferred alternative does not
constitute a commitment or decision in principle, and there is no requirement to select the preferred
alternative in the Agency’s record of decision. If warranted, the BLM may select a different alternative
than the preferred alternative in its record of decision.
The BLM’s final supplemental EIS analysis reached a preliminary conclusion that Alternative A would be
the least environmentally damaging alternative that meets the purpose and need for the GMT2 Project.
Development of GMT2 under all action alternatives may significantly restrict subsistence for the village
of Nuiqsut; however, Alternatives A and B would likely have the fewest impacts to subsistence. These
alternatives require less air traffic close to the community compared to Alternative C, and air traffic is the
most frequently reported caribou hunting impact associated with development. Alternative A requires the
least amount of gravel fill compared to Alternatives B and C, which is a primary consideration for the
Corps of Engineers in determining the least environmentally damaging practicable alternative for aquatic
resources.
What is next?
After at least 30 days have passed since the issuance of the final supplemental EIS, BLM will issue a
record of decision that determines whether to issue authorizations associated with ConocoPhillips’
application. In doing so, BLM will select an alternative among the range of alternatives evaluated in the
final supplemental EIS and will determine which, if any, new potential mitigation measures to adopt.
IV
Supplemental Environmental Impact Statement
Alpine Satellite Development Plan for the Proposed Greater Mooses Tooth 2 Development Project
Contents of Volume 1
Acronyms.xiii
Chapter 1. Introduction.1
1.1 Project Location and Land Status.1
1.2 History of Operations in the Area.2
1.3 Purpose and Need for the Project.3
1.4 Purpose and Need for Federal Action.4
1.4.1 Support for Federal Decisions.4
1.4.2 Laws, Regulations, and Permits.4
1.4.3 Related NEPA Analyses.12
1.4.4 Scope of Supplemental EIS.15
1.4.5 Changes and New Information.15
1.5 Public Involvement.18
1.5.1 Scoping. 18
1.5.2 Other Stakeholder Opportunities.19
Chapter 2. Proposed Project and Alternatives.21
2.1 GMT2 Project Changes Over Time.21
2.1.1 Project as Proposed in 2004 Alpine Satellite Development Plan Record of Decision.21
2.1.2 Project Evaluated by the BLM in 2012 and 2014.21
2.1.3 2015 GMT2 Project Proposed by ConocoPhillips.22
2.1.4 Summary of Changes in the GMT2 Project over Time.22
2.2 Lease Stipulations and Best Management Practices.25
2.3 Alternatives to the Proposed Project.25
2.3.1 Alternatives Selection Process.26
2.3.2 Alternatives Considered But Not Carried Forward.27
2.3.3 Alternatives Carried Forward in the Supplemental EIS.27
2.4 Features Common to All Alternatives.31
2.4.1 Schedule.31
2.4.2 Location.32
2.4.3 Drill Pad and Support Facilities.32
2.4.4 Pipelines.33
2.4.5 Ice Roads and Ice Pads.35
2.4.6 Gravel Supply Options.35
2.4.7 Camp Requirements, Locations, and Availability.37
2.4.8 Water Use.37
2.4.9 Erosion Control Measures.37
2.4.10 Spill Prevention and Response.38
2.4.11 Fuel and Chemical Storage.40
2.4.12 Waste Handling and Disposal.40
2.4.13 Abandonment and Reclamation.41
2.5 Alternative A: ConocoPhillips’s Proposed Project, Preferred Alternative.42
2.5.1 Project Components.42
2.5.2 Location.42
2.5.3 Drill Pad and Support Facilities.43
2.5.4 Access.43
2.5.5 Gravel Requirements.45
2.5.6 Camps.46
2.5.7 Water Use.46
2.5.8 Spill Prevention and Response.47
v
Supplemental Environmental Impact Statement
Alpine Satellite Development Plan for the Proposed Greater Mooses Tooth 2 Development Project
2.6 Alternative B: Alternate Alignment of GMT1-GMT2 Access Road.47
2.6.1 Project Components. 48
2.6.2 Location.48
2.6.3 Drill Pad and Support Facilities..48
2.6.4 Access.48
2.6.5 Gravel Requirements...51
2.6.6 Camps. 51
2.6.7 Water Use.52
2.6.8 Spill Prevention and Response.52
2.7 Alternative C: Roadless Development.53
2.7.1 Project Components. 54
2.7.2 Location.54
2.7.3 Drill Pad and Support Facilities.54
2.7.4 Access.56
2.7.5 Gravel Requirements.58
2.7.6 Camps. 58
2.7.7 Water Use.59
2.7.8 Spill Prevention and Response. 59
2.8 Alternative D: No Action. ...59
2.9 Comparison of Alternatives.60
2.9.1 Access.64
2.9.2 Spill Prevention and Response.65
Chapter 3. Affected Environment.67
3.1 Introduction.67
3.1.1 Proj ect Study Area.67
3.1.2 Existing and Planned Infrastructure.67
3.1.3 Hazardous and Solid Waste Sites.68
3.2 Physical Characteristics.69
3.2.1 Terrestrial Environment.69
3.2.2 Water Resources.75
3.2.3 Atmospheric Environment. 81
3.2.4 Climate Change.108
3.3 Biological Resources. Ill
3.3.1 Vegetation and Wetlands. Ill
3.3.2 Fish.114
3.3.3 Birds.117
3.3.4 Mammals.136
3.3.5 Threatened and Endangered Species.148
3.4 Social Systems. 153
3.4.1 Overview of Nuiqsut. 153
3.4.2 Cultural Resources.153
3.4.3 Sociocultural Systems. 167
3.4.4 Economy...169
3.4.5 Land Use. 177
3.4.6 Subsistence.180
3.4.7 Public Health. 228
3.4.8 Environmental Justice. .........233
Chapter 4. Environmental Consequences.236
4.1 Introduction.236
4.1.1 Project Study Area and Methodology. 236
4.1.2 Project Alternatives and Major Project Components. 237
vi