[Federal Register Volume 59, Number 114 (Wednesday, June 15, 1994)]
[Unknown Section]
[Page 0]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 94-14553]
[[Page Unknown]]
[Federal Register: June 15, 1994]
=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY
Compliance With the National Environmental Policy Act: Record of
Decision for Continued Operation of Naval Petroleum Reserve No. 1 (Elk
Hills), Tupman, CA
AGENCY: Department of Energy.
ACTION: Record of decision.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: Pursuant to the Council on Environmental Quality regulations
(40 CFR parts 1500-1508), which implement the procedural provisions of
the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA), and the U.S. Department
of Energy National Environmental Policy Act regulations (10 CFR part
1021), the Department of Energy, Office of Fossil Energy, is issuing a
Record of Decision on the continued operation of Naval Petroleum
Reserve No. 1, Kern County, California. The Department of Energy has
decided to continue current operations at Naval Petroleum Reserve No. 1
and implement additional well drilling, facility development projects
and other activities necessary for continued production of Naval
Petroleum Reserve No. 1 in accordance with the requirements of the
Naval Petroleum Reserves Production Act of 1976 (Pub. L. 94-258). The
final Supplemental Environmental Impact Statement, entitled ``Petroleum
Production at Maximum Efficient Rate, Naval Petroleum Reserve No. 1
(Elk Hills), Kern County, California (DOE/SEIS-0158),'' was released on
September 3, 1993.
ADDRESSES: To receive a copy of the final Supplemental Environmental
Impact Statement or Record of Decision, please contact Mr. James C.
Killen, Director, Planning, Analysis, and Program Support Division,
U.S. Department of Energy, Naval Petroleum Reserves in California,
Tupman, California, 93276, (805) 763-6038.
FOR INFORMATION ON THE NATIONAL ENVIRONMENTAL POLICY ACT PROCESS:
Contact Ms. Carol M. Borgstrom, Director, Office of National
Environmental Policy Act Oversight, U.S. Department of Energy, 1000
Independence Avenue, SW., Washington, DC, 20585, (202) 586-4600, or
(800) 472-2756.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Naval Petroleum Reserve No. 1 (NPR-1) is a
large oil and gas field of approximately 74 square miles (47,409 acres)
located about 25 miles southwest of Bakersfield in Kern County,
California. NPR-1, which was established by Executive Order in 1912 for
National defense purposes, is jointly owned and operated by the Federal
Government under the jurisdiction of the Department of Energy (DOE),
and Chevron U.S.A. Inc. pursuant to a Unit Plan Contract that became
effective in 1944. The Government has a 78 percent interest
(approximately) in NPR-1 hydrocarbon production and Chevron's interest
is approximately 22 percent. Currently, the Government's share of NPR-1
oil production is sold on the open market, with proceeds deposited in
the U.S. Treasury, and/or transferred to the U.S. Strategic Petroleum
Reserve for storage as protection against future oil supply
disruptions. NPR-1 natural gas production is either processed into
natural gas liquids for sale on the open market, or reinjected into
NPR-1 hydrocarbon reservoirs for pressure maintenance and/or enhanced
oil recovery.
NPR-1 was maintained in essentially a shut-in reserve status until
the mid-1970's when Congress, in response to the Arab Oil Embargo of
1973, passed the Naval Petroleum Reserves Production Act of 1976 (Pub.
L. 94-258), which directed that NPR-1, the adjacent NPR-2, and NPR-3 in
Wyoming, be produced for an initial period of 6 years at the maximum
efficient rate. Under the Act, maximum efficient rate means the maximum
rate of hydrocarbon production that optimizes economic return and
ultimate hydrocarbon recovery. Public Law 94-258 also provided the
President with the authority to continue production from the Reserves
beyond the initial 6 years for an additional and unlimited number of
increments of up to three years each. For each added period of
production, the President must certify to Congress that it remains in
the National interest to continue producing the Reserves. Currently,
the Naval Petroleum Reserves are authorized for maximum efficient rate
production through April 5, 1997.
Approximately 700 million barrels of oil and 200 million gallons of
natural gas liquids have been produced from NPR-1 hydrocarbon
reservoirs since the field was opened up to full development in 1976.
In 1992, NPR-1 became only the 13th domestic oil field to produce a
cumulative total of 1 billion barrels of oil since its initial
development began in 1912. Since 1976, revenues in excess of $15
billion have been deposited into the U.S. Treasury from NPR-1
operations. In 1988, NPR-1 hydrocarbon reserves were estimated to be
approximately 524-831 million barrels of oil and 1,790-2,497 billion
cubic feet of natural gas.
In 1979, DOE published an Environmental Impact Statement (EIS)
(DOE/EIS-0012) which described the existing environment at NPR-1 and
analyzed the petroleum development activities that were anticipated at
that time. The development activities described and evaluated included
the drilling of approximately 350 new oil, gas and water wells;
construction of two new Lease Automatic Custody Transfer facilities;
construction of two gas facilities to process up to 700 million cubic
feet per day of wet natural gas; construction of wastewater facilities
capable of disposing of approximately 30,000 barrels per day of
produced water; and construction of an additional 40,000 square feet of
building space for administration and other support facilities.
Implementation of these activities increased NPR-1's oil production to
a peak level of approximately 181,000 barrels per day by July, 1981.
Oil production at NPR-1 has declined since then to the current level of
approximately 65,000 barrels per day. NPR-1 currently produces
approximately 299-320 million cubic feet per day of natural gas and
processes 379,000-456,000 gallons per day of natural gas liquids
(propane, butane and natural gasoline).
In an Environmental Assessment prepared in 1985 (DOE/EA-0261), DOE
described the potential environmental impacts that could result from
implementation of a pilot steamflood project of the Shallow Oil Zone at
NPR-1. The Shallow Oil Zone pilot steamflood project subsequently was
implemented and a large expansion of this project is proposed and
analyzed in the final Supplemental Environmental Impact Statement
(SEIS). In 1987, DOE prepared another Environmental Assessment (DOE/EA-
0334) which described the potential impacts that could result from the
divestiture of NPR-1 and NPR-3. Implementation of this action would
require a Congressional directive, which has not occurred.
Primarily as a result of the need to drill additional oil, gas, and
water wells at NPR-1, expand the Shallow Oil Zone steamflood project,
expand natural gas operations, and reduce power costs and air pollution
emissions by constructing a cogeneration facility, the decision was
made to prepare a Supplement to the 1979 EIS to analyze the
environmental impact of these and other proposed actions. Accordingly,
DOE published a Notice of Intent announcing its decision in the Federal
Register on April 4, 1988 (53 FR 10922). Pursuant to the Notice of
Intent, three public scoping meetings were held in April 1988 and the
issues and concerns raised by the public were used in the development
of the SEIS. The basis for the SEIS is the April 1989 NPR-1 Long Range
Plan, which describes a myriad of planned operations and development
projects, maintenance activities, and environmental protection
initiatives over the next 25-30 years. A description and evaluation of
the existing NPR-1 environment also was provided in the SEIS to assess
the level of impacts, if any, that resulted from the NPR-1 activities
that were implemented following publication of the 1979 EIS.
In May 1992, DOE published and distributed approximately 200 copies
of the draft SEIS. A Notice of Availability of the draft SEIS and an
announcement of a public hearing in Bakersfield, California on June 24,
1992 was published in the Federal Register on June 5, 1992 (57 FR
24038). Only one speaker provided oral testimony at the public hearing.
DOE received 122 written comments from 13 government agencies and
interested individuals during the 55-day comment period following
publication of the Notice of Availability. DOE considered and responded
to all comments on the draft SEIS in the development of the final SEIS.
A transcript of the public hearing and all written comments on the
draft SEIS were included in the final SEIS.
The final SEIS on the proposed action was released in August 1993.
A Notice of Availability of the document was published in the Federal
Register on September 3, 1993 (58 FR 46969) which announced an
incorrect due date for comments of October 18, 1993. An amended Notice
of Availability subsequently was published in the Federal Register on
September 17, 1993 (58 FR 48650) revising the due date to October 5,
1993. Of eight comment letters received on the final SEIS, only the
Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) and a local consultant commented
on substantive issues. EPA reiterated concerns about the method used to
compare impacts of the proposed action and alternatives, completion of
the final Biological Opinion for the proposed action, ingestion of oil
field chemicals by site wildlife, waste minimization, wetlands
delineation, air quality, and sump closures, and recommended deferring
expanding operations that may impact groundwater quality in the
northeast portion of the site. EPA also recommended discussing in the
Record of Decision the feasibility of re-entering shut-in wells as an
option to drilling new wells to increase production. Michael R. Rector,
a local water resources consultant, raised concerns about groundwater
mining and com-mented that groundwater downdip from site produced water
disposal wells should be analyzed for the presence of benzene, toluene
and xylenes.
With the exception of the comments regarding comparison of
alternative action impacts, deferring operations in the northeast
portion of the site, and the feasibility of re-entering shut-in wells,
all concerns have been addressed in this Record of Decision under Major
Environmental Impacts and Mitigation Action Plan.
With regard to the comparison of alternatives, EPA commented that
it stands by its earlier comment on the draft SEIS that impacts
associated with the no action alternative should be the basis for the
comparison of alternative action impacts. DOE maintains that the
methodology used in the SEIS is the same, substantively, as that
advocated by EPA. This is explained as follows. It is EPA's opinion
that in comparing impacts between alternatives, the no action
alternative should be the baseline for the comparison. For example, if
no action has an impact of X, and the proposed action has an impact of
X+Y, then comparisons of these two alternatives should state that the
impacts of the proposed action are Y greater than no action. In
contrast, the SEIS sometimes makes this comparison by stating that no
action has an impact that is X less than the proposed action. DOE
believes that either comparison satisfies the requirement under 40 CFR
1502.14 ``* * * to present the environmental impacts of the proposal
and the alternatives in comparative form, thus sharply defining issues
* * *.''. Impacts from existing operations comprising no action are
presented in detail in Sec. 3.0, ``Existing Environment.'' Impacts of
the proposed action and the modified proposed action are presented in
detail in Sec. 4.0, ``Environmental Impacts of the Proposed Action and
Alternatives.'' A summary of the elements and impacts of no action, the
proposed action, and the modified proposed action are presented in
comparative form by Tables 2.0-1 and 2.0-2 in Sec. 2.0,
``Alternatives.'' These tables, together with supporting text, result
in a form that sharply contrasts differences between alternatives, as
required.
Regarding the comment on the northeast portion of the site, DOE is
not proposing to expand operations that may impact groundwater quality
in that area. The only activities planned in this area are remediation
or facility repair and replacement projects that are designed to
enhance the level of environmental protection. These projects are
routinely evaluated for environmental impacts, including groundwater
impacts, as a matter of standard practice prior to their
implementation.
The use of existing shut-in oil production wells for other purposes
such as waterflood, gas injection or in the development of underlying/
overlying oil or gas zones can provide a significant capital savings
and, therefore, is always given serious consideration at NPR-1. Prior
to the formal abandonment of any shut-in wells, a determination is made
that the well cannot serve any other useful purpose. Table 1.2-3 of the
final SEIS indicates that 382 new wells would be completed through the
year 2025 under the proposed action. In comparison, for this same time
period, the proposed action would involve a total of 571 conversions of
existing wells to a different use.
Alternatives Considered
Three alternatives were evaluated in the SEIS: Proposed Action, No
Action (Alternative 1), and Modified Proposed Action (Alternative 2).
In addition, Alternative 3 (Nonsteamflood Tertiary Oil-Recovery
Strategies) and two other alternatives were initially considered and
dismissed from further evaluation.
Proposed Action
The proposed action is to continue operating NPR-1 in accordance
with the requirements of the Naval Petroleum Reserves Production Act of
1976 by implementing the activities described in the 1989 NPR-1 Long
Range Plan. This includes the operation and maintenance of all existing
facilities; a program to drill, redrill, or deepen approximately 382
wells, 148 of which would be for the phased 500-acre, 625 million
British thermal units per hour Shallow Oil Zone steamflood project; a
program to perform approximately 2,663 well remedial jobs as needed to
ensure efficient operation and maintenance of approximately 2,697
wells; a program to recycle produced water to the maximum extent
technically and economically feasible for use as source water for
waterflood operations; a program to abandon approximately 1,080 wells;
construction and operation of approximately 46,250 horsepower of
additional gas compression for gas-lift and gas-injection projects
(37,500 horsepower gas; 8,750 horsepower electric); construction and
operation of compression and processing facilities to compress,
transport and process up to an additional 100-150 million cubic feet
per day of gas (fourth gas plant); construction of new facilities and
increased use of existing facilities to expand waterflood operations by
approximately 106,000 barrels per day; construction and operation of a
42-megawatt cogeneration facility; construction and operation of a
170,000-220,000 gallon per day butane isomerization facility; a program
to investigate, remediate, or otherwise manage numerous old inactive
waste sites; a program to reclaim by 1998 approximately 1,045 acres of
disturbed lands not needed for current or future NPR-1 operations; the
permitting of third parties to construct, operate and maintain
pipelines, conduct geophysical surveys and perform other necessary oil-
field related activities on NPR-1; and the continued implementation of
a comprehensive environmental protection program.
Alternative 1: No Future Development (No Action)
This alternative provides for continued production of NPR-1 by
operating and maintaining existing wells and facilities only. It does
not include any new development projects needed to enhance efficiency
or off-set natural production declines (no new drilling, enhanced
recovery, cogeneration, etc.). It does include all maintenance
projects, facility development projects and environmental protection
initiatives included in the proposed action that are necessary for
maintaining the safety and quality of the NPR-1 environment.
Alternative 2: Proposed Action Excluding the Shallow Oil Zone
Steamflood Expansion, Gas Processing Expansion, and Cogeneration
Project (Modified Proposed Action)
This alternative provides for all activities included in the
proposed action, except that the 148-well, 500-acre Shallow Oil Zone
steamflood expansion would not be implemented; expansion of NPR-1's gas
processing capacity by 100-150 million cubic feet per day (fourth gas
plant) would not be undertaken; and the 42-megawatt cogeneration plant
would not be constructed.
Alternative 3: Nonsteamflood Tertiary Oil-Recovery Strategies
This alternative provides for all of the activities included in the
proposed action and implementation of nonsteamflood tertiary recovery
techniques that have been carried out on a limited basis at other oil
fields. Examples of these techniques include alkali surfactant polymer
injection, micellar polymer injection, carbon dioxide injection and in-
situ combustion. Although these techniques may have potential in the
long term, their implementation in NPR-1 hydrocarbon reservoirs cannot
be considered by decision-makers in the reasonably foreseeable future
due to limited technical data and unfavorable current and projected
future economic conditions. For this reason, studies were not completed
to scope these programs to the level of detail needed to address
potential environmental impacts. Accordingly, this alternative was
dismissed from further consideration in the SEIS.
Divestiture
The possibility of selling the Government's interest in NPR-1
(divestiture) was initially announced in the Notice of Intent to
prepare this SEIS as an alternative in the context of continued
operations and future development (53 FR 10922, April 4, 1988).
Analysis of this alternative would have expanded on the 1987
Environmental Assessment of Divestiture (DOE/EA-0334). This alternative
is considered highly speculative in the absence of Congressional action
and, therefore, was not developed in the SEIS.
EPA's Proposed Alternative (No Action followed by Proposed Action)
In its comments on the draft SEIS, EPA recommended analysis of an
additional alternative that would involve implementing the no action
alternative for the near term and then proceeding with the proposed
action at a later date. A brief analysis of this alternative was
included in the final SEIS. The analysis indicated that ultimate
hydrocarbon recovery losses of approximately 66 million barrels of oil
and 132 billion cubic feet of natural gas would occur by deferring
development activities at NPR-1 for a period of 10 years. Because this
alternative would not allow DOE to meet the purpose and need for the
proposed action, which is to produce NPR-1 at the maximum efficient
rate in accordance with the Naval Petroleum Reserves Production Act of
1976, it was dismissed from further consideration in the final SEIS.
Environmentally Preferred Alternative
The environmentally preferred alternative is the no action
alternative (Alternative 1). Habitat disturbance associated with this
alternative is significantly less than for all other alternatives
analyzed in the SEIS. Future impacts associated with continued NPR-1
operations would diminish more rapidly under this alternative as NPR-
1's economic life would be reached much sooner than would occur under
other alternatives (approximately 2000-2010). This alternative would
require legislative redirection of DOE's current mission to produce
NPR-1 in accordance with the Naval Petroleum Reserves Production Act of
1976.
Decision:
DOE has decided to continue current NPR-1 operations and implement
additional well drilling, facility development projects and other
activities necessary for continued production of NPR-1 in accordance
with the requirements of the Naval Petroleum Reserves Production Act of
1976 (Pub. L. 94-258).
Discussion and Justification of Decision
Pursuant to the Naval Petroleum Reserves Production Act of 1976 and
subsequent Presidential certifications, DOE is required to produce NPR-
1 at the maximum efficient rate through April 5, 1997. To continue to
meet this mandate, continued and enhanced NPR-1 operations are
necessary.
The decision to produce the Naval Petroleum Reserves at the maximum
efficient rate was initially authorized by Congress in 1976 to address
emergency energy needs in response to the Arab oil embargo of 1973-
1974. At that time, the Naval Petroleum Reserves were administered by
the Secretary of the Navy. Effective October 1, 1977, the DOE
Organization Act (Pub. L. 95-91) transferred jurisdiction of the Naval
Petroleum Reserves to the new DOE. NPR-1 oil production since 1976 has
either been sold on the open market, transferred to the Department of
Defense for national security purposes, or transferred to the Strategic
Petroleum Reserve for storage in the event of future oil supply
disruptions.
In recent years, Congress has recognized other significant reasons
for continued maximum efficient rate production of the Naval Petroleum
Reserves. In addition to military preparedness and National defense
reasons, the following issues were considered in the most recent
extension of the Naval Petroleum Reserves Production Act:
1. National economic impacts, including the direct effect on net
Federal revenues and the broader effects on the economy;
2. National energy strategy, reflecting the effects of oil import
requirements in the absence of an extension; and
3. Local and regional concerns, involving the effects of operating
the Naval Petroleum Reserves on local economies and on upstream and
downstream elements of the petroleum industry in the areas served by
the Naval Petroleum Reserves.
Selection of the no action alternative (Alternative 1) would not
allow DOE to meet the statutory mandate to produce NPR-1 at the maximum
efficient rate, and would result in ultimate recovery losses of up to
500 million barrels of oil and more than 250 billion cubic feet of
natural gas reserves. This represents a reduction of 58 percent of the
remaining oil reserves and 20 percent of the remaining gas reserves,
respectively. Under this alternative, the economic return on NPR-1
investment would be greatly diminished in comparison to that of the
proposed action.
Selection of the modified proposed action alternative (Alternative
2) would eliminate important facility projects including Shallow Oil
Zone steamflooding, expanded gas processing, and cogeneration power
production that are needed to ensure continued maximum efficient rate
production at NPR-1, as required by the Naval Petroleum Reserves
Production Act of 1976. As in the case of Alternative 1, implementation
of Alternative 2 would not allow DOE to meet its statutory mandate.
Major Environmental Impacts and Mitigation Action Plan
The environmental impacts that could result from implementation of
the proposed action were summarized in Table 2.0-2 and analyzed in
detail in Section 4.0 of the final SEIS. DOE believes that most of
these impacts can either be eliminated or reduced to acceptable levels.
Accordingly, a total of 88 mitigation commitments were made in the
final SEIS to ensure impact levels would be minimized to the maximum
extent possible. These mitigation commitments form the basis of the
NPR-1 Mitigation Action Plan to reduce potential impacts from proposed
action activities. The NPR-1 Mitigation Action Plan provides detailed
activities, implementing organizations, activity milestone dates and
mitigation monitoring protocol. Upon publication of the Record of
Decision in the Federal Register, the Mitigation Action Plan will be
made available for public review in reading rooms at the offices of the
Naval Petroleum Reserves in California and DOE Headquarters in
Washington, DC. The plan will also be provided to local libraries.
As noted earlier, EPA and a private water resources consultant
provided substantive comments on the final SEIS. EPA encouraged DOE to
continue ongoing efforts to identify wetland resources on NPR-1. As
detailed in the Mitigation Action Plan, a formal wetland delineation
study of potential wetlands on NPR-1 will be conducted in 1994. This
study will be coordinated with both the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers
and EPA. If jurisdictional wetlands are identified, DOE will comply
with the provisions of the Clean Water Act regarding wetland
disturbances.
As indicated in the final SEIS and associated Mitigation Action
Plan, DOE is committed to remediating all inactive sumps and managing
active sumps in accordance with Waste Discharge Requirements issued by
the State of California's Central Valley Regional Water Quality Control
Board. DOE is actively proceeding with plans to continue the
remediation of historic produced water sumps. The Mitigation Action
Plan also provides details (Mitigation Nos. WG-30 and WR-9) of a site-
wide sump closure plan that was approved in 1991 by the Central Valley
Regional Water Quality Control Board. EPA will be provided a copy of
this closure plan as suggested in their comment. DOE is permitted to
sump wastewater at NPR-1 by Waste Discharge Requirements #58-491 and
#68-262, which prohibit the release of wastewater into unlined sumps
located on alluvial soils if the wastewater exceeds 1,000 parts per
million total dissolved solids. Accordingly, wastewater sumps on or
near alluvial soils have been lined or taken out of service. DOE will
continue to ensure the integrity of the liners at these locations.
DOE will complete a Groundwater Management Protection Plan for NPR-
1 in 1994. The management plan will include, among other components, a
site-wide Groundwater Monitoring Plan. On September 28, 1993 DOE
briefed the California Department of Water Resources, the California
Central Valley Regional Water Quality Control Board and the Kern County
Water Agency on the development of these groundwater plans. DOE
acknowledged the need to better characterize groundwater in the
northeast portion of NPR-1 due to its proximity to a subsurface water
bank under development by the water agencies. DOE facilitated a
discussion of their respective interests regarding the development of
NPR-1 groundwater plans. Future data review and exchange activities
were discussed, which DOE will honor. Continued interactions with these
agencies will be given a high priority by DOE.
The Groundwater Protection Management Plan will also address
concerns raised by Mr. Rector regarding the withdrawal of waterflood
source water and produced water injection activities on the south flank
of NPR-1. DOE regularly monitors the quality of the source well water,
including tests for volatile organics such as benzene, toluene, and
xylenes as Mr. Rector suggested in his comment. Potential adverse
impacts to the NPR-1 aquifer from groundwater withdrawal will continue
to be monitored as well.
Other concerns raised by EPA regard issues with the potential for
major environmental impacts. Acknowledgement of these concerns is
included in the following discussion of the major environmental impacts
associated with the proposed action and the principal mitigation
measures planned to minimize the impacts.
1. Potential Erosion from Construction Disturbances to 1,569 Acres On
and Off NPR-1
Soil Conservation Service erosion control/site-rehabilitation
measures will be implemented in planning, design, and operational
activities.
2. Slight Possibility of Subsidence and Induced Seismicity Due To
Increased Withdrawal of Source Water From the Tulare Formation and Oil
and Gas Withdrawal From Deep Producing Formations
NPR-1 facilities will be designed in accordance with the latest
edition of the Uniform Building Code and the recommendations of the
NPR-1 Geotechnical and Earthquake Engineering Study.
3. Production of Drilling Wastes Associated With A 382-Well Drilling
Program, 2,663 Remedials, and 1,080 Abandonments
Drilling fluid additives utilized at NPR-1 will be limited to those
that are included on the list of approved nonhazardous drilling fluid
additives issued by the California Department of Health Service in
1982.
4. 100,000-181,000 Barrels Per Day of Produced Wastewater Would Require
Recycling or Disposal
To the extent technically and economically feasible, produced water
will be recycled for use as source water for waterflood operations.
5. Nonhazardous Solid Waste Quantities from Construction and Operations
Would Increase Above the Current Volume of 24,000 Cubic Yards Per Year
NPR-1 will establish and implement a waste minimization program to
reduce the volume of all nonhazardous solid wastes.
6. Hazardous Waste From Construction and Operations Would Increase
Slightly Above the Current Level of Approximately 19,800 Pounds Per
Year
Hazardous waste minimization reviews will be conducted for all
proposed facility projects. State of California regulatory
requirements, such as the Hazardous Waste Reduction and Management
Review Act of 1989 (SB 14) will be followed. In addition, NPR-1 will
comply with Executive Order 12856 (Federal Compliance with Right-to-
Know Laws and Pollution Prevention Requirements) which was signed on
August 3, 1993. This order requires Federal agencies to the maximum
extent possible to reduce, recycle and treat toxic chemical waste. As
required by the Order, NPR-1 will report in a public manner toxic
chemicals entering any wastestream from the facility, and will improve
local emergency planning, response and accident notification
procedures.
7. Fugitive Particulate Emissions from Construction Activities and
Seismic Survey Disturbances on Approximately 8,349 Acres
NPR-1 will develop and implement a particulate matter control plan.
EPA also recommended that measures be implemented to ensure
compliance with the requirements of EPA's emissions trading policy. It
should be noted that all air permitting operations at NPR-1 are closely
coordinated with the San Joaquin Valley Unified Air Pollution Control
District to ensure compliance with applicable regulations. Accounting
of emission reductions is a District staff function. These issues are
closely monitored by the California Air Resources Board and Region IX
of EPA.
8. Increases in Current Operational Emissions By A Maximum of
Approximately 133.6, 124.2, 367.0, 0.7, 5.8, and 85.8 Pounds Per Hour
of Reactive Organic Gas, Nitrogen Oxide, Carbon Monoxide, Sulfur
Dioxide, Total Suspended Particulate, and Particulate Matter With
Aerodynamic Diameters Less Than 10 Microns, Respectively, As the Result
of Proposed New Sources
New compressor engines will be equipped with low nitrogen oxide
emission precombustion chambers. Steam generators, heaters, and
cogenerators also will be equipped with appropriate low nitrogen oxide
combustion technology. Anode beds will be watered frequently to reduce
reactive organic gas emissions.
EPA also inquired if, in the absence of a State Implementation
Plan, whether the impacts of continued and proposed NPR-1 operations
would be in conformity with the provisions of the Federal Clean Air
Act. NPR-1 will operate either under locally mandated New Source Review
regulations if the State Implementation Plan is approved by EPA, or
under Federally mandated New Source Review regulations if the plan is
not approved. Further, operations regulated under New Source Review
would be exempt from the conformity provisions as outlined in the March
1993 draft Rule (55 FR 13866). It should also be pointed out that in
1994, EPA will review the local Air Pollution Control District's
proposed Federal operating permit program. Even if EPA approves the
operating permit program, EPA would still retain the authority to veto
permits that are not issued in accordance with the approved program.
9. Oils, Chemical, and Produced Waters Could Inadvertently Spill and
Degrade Groundwater
All spills will be cleaned up as they are identified in accordance
with the NPR-1 Spill Prevention, Control, and Countermeasure Plan.
10. Development of 1,569 Acres of Wildlife Habitat On and Off NPR-1 and
Potential for Adverse Impacts To Wildlife From Inadvertent Harassment,
Vehicle Mortality and Contact With Hydrocarbons and/or Oil-Field
Chemicals
Preactivity surveys will be conducted by qualified personnel prior
to any construction, maintenance, clean-up, or other ground disturbance
in undeveloped areas to minimize the amount of habitat disturbed and to
avoid protected species and their habitat to the maximum extent
possible. Disturbed habitats will be revegetated as part of an ongoing
habitat reclamation program.
In 1987, the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service rendered a non-jeopardy
Biological Opinion for the continued operation and development of NPR-1
at the maximum efficient rate of production. On October 9, 1991,
consultation for maximum efficient rate production was reinitiated by
DOE for the SEIS, and by letter dated May 28, 1993 (received by DOE on
June 7, 1993), the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service issued a draft
Biological Opinion for this action which also concluded non-jeopardy.
This consultation is still in progress, and when it is completed DOE
will comply with the requirements contained in the new Biological
Opinion. The U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service indicated by letter dated
April 12, 1993, that the 1987 Biological Opinion will remain in effect
for all activities specifically described therein until the current
consultation is complete. DOE will continue to comply with the
requirements of the 1987 Biological Opinion until such time as they are
superseded by new requirements in subsequent Biological Opinions.
Most impacts associated with the proposed action of the SEIS and
the 1993 draft Biological Opinion (including those associated with no
action) were addressed in the 1987 Biological Opinion. For those
proposed new activities that were not so addressed, DOE will not make
any irreversible or irretrievable commitments of resources which would
foreclose the formulation or implementation of any reasonable and
prudent alternatives needed to avoid violating section 7(a)(2) of the
Endangered Species Act until the impacts of these new activities have
been subjected to review under section 7 of the Endangered Species Act.
EPA recommended that no Record of Decision be issued until a new final
Biological Opinion had been issued, and discussed the need to prepare
additional National Environmental Policy Act documentation should the
final Biological Opinion require modified operations not evaluated in
the SEIS. DOE believes that the limitation on proceeding with new
activities pending receipt of a final Opinion assures compliance with
the Endangered Species Act. Furthermore, DOE commits to completing such
documentation if required by the new Opinion.
EPA also questioned what steps DOE will take to prevent ingestion
of chemicals by threatened, endangered and other animal species on NPR-
1. DOE has in place a comprehensive program to prevent the ingestion of
oil field chemicals by wildlife. This program includes, but is not
limited to, adherence to the facility Spill Prevention Control and
Countermeasure Plan; proper storage, handling and disposal of chemical
containers; procuring bulk chemicals whenever possible to eliminate
storage in the field; proper management of hazardous wastes in
conforming 90-day storage facilities; prompt evacuation of oily fluids
from structures; managing current waste disposal sites in accordance
with permit requirements; and remediating historical waste disposal
sites. These standard management practices all provide protection from
ingestion of oil field chemicals by wildlife.
To further reduce the potential for adverse impacts to listed
species, DOE agrees to implement the following mitigation activities
addressed in the May 28, 1993 draft Biological Opinion:
a. Continue to implement an endangered species program,
including the NPR-1 Wildlife Management Plan;
b. Continue to conduct the endangered species worker education/
training program;
c. Continue to conduct preactivity surveys as appropriate to
minimize habitat disturbances and harm or mortality to listed
species;
d. To the extent feasible, avoid sensitive habitats such as San
Joaquin kit fox dens, giant and Tipton kangaroo rat burrows, and
burrows potentially utilized by blunt-nosed leopard lizards;
e. Refrain from destroying San Joaquin kit fox dens that cannot
be avoided until approval is obtained from the U.S. Fish and
Wildlife Service;
f. Continue to implement a habitat reclamation program to
reclaim disturbed areas that are no longer needed for oil-field
operations;
g. Minimize off-road vehicle travel;
h. Prohibit employees from bringing pets onto NPR-1;
i. Clean up oil and chemical spills in accordance with the Spill
Prevention Control and Countermeasure Plan.
j. Continue to evaluate sumps and catch basins to identify
potential hazards to wildlife and remediate these hazards to the
extent feasible;
k. Continue to evaluate and, to the extent feasible, remediate
well cellar covers posing hazards to wildlife; and
l. Continue to report to the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service on
an annual basis on the status of the endangered species program.
11. Potential Disturbance of Cultural Resources From Development of
1,569 Acres On and Off NPR-1
NPR-1 will develop and implement a cultural resource management
plan for the protection of cultural resources.
12. Potential for Well Blowouts and Gas Explosions From Closed
Compressor Facilities
DOE will continue to conduct internal safety appraisals of all NPR-
1 facilities.
Unavoidable Adverse Impacts
The unavoidable adverse impacts resulting from the proposed action
that cannot be fully mitigated are as follows:
1. Some soil erosion would occur, especially in areas of new
construction if major storms occur before soil stabilization measures
take effect.
2. There is some potential for subsidence as the result of oil,
gas, and water withdrawals from underlying geologic structures.
3. Inadvertent releases of oil or other oil field chemicals that
are not entirely recovered on a timely basis could, over a period of
time, migrate into and degrade groundwater aquifers.
4. Small net increases in the NPR-1 emissions of carbon monoxide
and particulate matter could occur, resulting in minor increases in
ambient concentrations of these pollutants in western Kern County.
5. There would be unavoidable, long-term adverse impacts to a net
of 74 acres of wildlife habitat on and off NPR-1 as a result of
permanent construction disturbances. (See Table 2.2-1 on page 2-11 of
the final SEIS.)
6. The loss of habitat, potential exposure to hydrocarbons or other
oil field chemicals and site activities may result in the death, injury
and displacement of some plants and animals, including threatened and
endangered species.
7. There is a very small potential that produced wastewater
disposed of into disposal wells and sumps might degrade off-site
groundwaters.
8. Increased consumption of energy and fresh water supplies would
occur.
Conclusion
The production of NPR-1 in accordance with the Naval Petroleum
Reserves Production Act of 1976 continues to serve a vital role in
National defense, U.S. Treasury revenues, and local, regional, and
National economics. Until Congress and the President modify the mission
of DOE with respect to the Naval Petroleum Reserves, DOE will continue
to produce NPR-1 in the most efficient and environmentally responsible
manner possible.
Issued at Washington DC, this 25th day of February, 1994.
Marvin I. Singer,
Acting Assistant Secretary for Fossil Energy.
[FR Doc. 94-14553 Filed 6-14-94; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6450-01-P