Hackberry Environmental Impact Statement
Executive Summary
|
|
I scanned this Executive from the full EIS. While I have gone over it, I
cannot say I have proofread it. What you see is what you get. It will give
you an idea of what is in the EIS. |
|
|
EXECUTIVE
SUMMARY
This draft
environmental impact statement (EIS) for the Hackberry LNG Terminal, L.L.C
(Hackberry LNG) Project has been prepared by the staff of the Federal Energy
Regulatory Commission (FERC or Commission) to fulfill the requirements of the
National Environmental Policy Act and the Commission's implementing
regulations under Title 18, Code of Federal Regulations, Part 380. The purpose
of this document is to inform the public and the permitting agencies about the
potential adverse and beneficial environmental impacts of the proposed project
and its alternatives; and to recommend mitigation measures that would avoid or
reduce any significant adverse impact to the maximum extent possible.
Hackberry
LNG proposes to construct and operate a liquefied natural gas (LNG) terminal,
and to construct and operate anew natural gas pipeline and ancillary
facilities in the State of Louisiana. Hackberry LNG's proposed facilities
would re-vaporize and transport up to 1,500,000 dekatherms per day of imported
LNG to the United States market. In order to provide these services, Hackberry
LNG requests Commission authorization to construct the following facilities:
-
a ship unloading slip with two berths, each equipped with
three liquid unloading arms and one vapor return arm;
-
three LNG storage tanks, each with a usable volume of
1,006,000 barrels (3.5 billion standard cubic feet of gas equivalent);
-
nine first stage pumps, each sized for 250 million
standard cubic feet per day (MMscfd);
-
ten second stage pumps, each sized for 188 MMscfd;
-
twelve submerged combustion vaporizers, each sized for
ISO MMscfd;
-
a boil-off gas compressor and condensing system;
-
an LNG circulation system;
-
a natural gas liquids recovery unit;
-
ancillary utilities, buildings, and service facilities at
the LNG terminal; and
-
a 35.4-mile, 36-inch-diameter natural gas sendout
pipeline.
PROJECT IMPACTS
The
environmental issues associated with construction and operation of the
Hackberry LNG Project are analyzed in this draft EIS using information
provided by Hackberry LNG and further developed from data requests; field
investigations; literature research; alternatives analysis; contacts with
Federal, state, and local agencies; and input from public groups and
organizations.
Construction of the Hackberry LNG Project would affect a total of about 584.3
acres of land, 100.8 acres on the terminal site and 483.5 acres along the
pipeline right-of-way. Hackberry LNG would lease 118.6 acres for the Hackberry
Terminal, of which 100.8 acres would be used for the permanent facilities,
15.8 acres would remain undisturbed, and 2.0 acres would be used as temporary
construction areas. Of the 483.5 acres of land affected by construction of the
pipeline facilities, about 198.9 acres would be retained as new permanent
right-of-way.
Construction and operation of the proposed facilities would
have minimal impacts on geologic resources. The proposed Hackberry Terminal
site lies in an area of low seismic risk. However, the site is located within
an area that is prone to hurricanes. The potential effects of flooding
associated with hurricane storm surges has been incorporated into the design
of the LNG facilities
The proposed Hackberry Terminal would be constructed
adjacent to the Calcasieu Ship Channel, which is part of the Calcasieu River.
The proposed pipeline would cross 75 perennial waterbodies, 38 intermittent
waterbodies, and one pond. Hackberry LNG has proposed to use the Horizontal
Directional Drill (HDD) technique to cross six major and intermediate named
waterbodies, including the Gulf Intracoastal Waterway, Choupique Bayou,
Houston River Canal, Houston River, Beckwith Creek, and Hickory Branch.
Another I I minor waterbodies would be drilled as part of these primary HDD
crossings. We have requested that Hackberry LNG examine the feasibility of
using the HDD technique to cross the Little River. The remaining waterbodies
along the pipeline route would be crossed using the open-cut method. To
minimize impacts on surface waters in the project area, Hackberry LNG would
implement the protective measures in the FERC's Wetland and Waterbodv
Construction and Mitigation Procedures (FERC Procedures) and its Spill
Prevention, Containment, and Countermeasures Plan.
Construction of the Hackberry LNG Project would affect a
total of about 203.1 acres of wetlands, 55.0 acres on the terminal site and
148.1 acres along the pipeline route. Of the 55.0 acres of estuarine emergent
marsh that would be permanently affected during construction of the proposed
LNG facility, 46.0 acres would be filled and 9.0 acres would be dredged.
Hackberry LNG would mitigate for the permanent loss of these wetlands by
creating at least 85 acres of coastal marsh in an area near the proposed
terminal site using material dredged during construction of the facility. Of
the 148.1 acres of wetland that would be temporarily affected during
construction of the proposed pipeline, 12.1 acres of forested and scrub-shrub
wetlands would be permanently converted to different vegetation types as the
result of vegetation maintenance activities during pipeline operation. To
minimize impacts on wetlands, Hackberry LNG would implement the protective
measures in our Procedures, including limiting the construction right-of-way
width to 75 feet in wetlands.
Construction of the proposed pipeline would also result in
the clearing of about 148.0 acres of forest vegetation. Maintenance of the
right-of-way during pipeline operations would result in the permanent loss of
about 74.2 acres of forest land. Most of this forest land is currently in pine
plantation and is harvested regularly as part of normal silviculture
activities.
The U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service identified one federally
listed endangered species and the National Marine Fisheries Service (NMFS)
identified 11 federally listed endangered or threatened species that could
potentially occur in the project area. Based on our analysis of information on
these species, we have determined that the project would have no effect on six
of these species and would not likely adversely affect the other six species.
This draft EIS serves as a Biological Assessment which is necessary for
compliance with Section 7 of the Endangered Species Act.
The NMFS
also identified Essential Fish Habitat (EFH) for brown shrimp, white shrimp,
and red drum in the vicinity of the proposed project. Because Hackberry LNG
would implement conservation measures to avoid or minimize potential impacts
on EFH, we believe that there would be no substantial adverse impacts on the
managed fisheries in the project area. This draft EIS includes an EFH
Assessment that is necessary for compliance with the Magnuson-Stevens Fishery
Conservation and Management Act.
There are two residences potentially located within 50 feet
of the proposed construction right-of-way. Hackberry LNG has proposed two
alternative construction methods (open-cut and HDD) and has prepared
site-specific plans for these residences, located at Mileposts 16.3 and 16.4.
We have recommended that if the open-cut method is used to construct the
pipeline near these residences, Hackberry LNG develop site-specific screening
plans to replace trees/screening removed during construction.
Hackberry LNG has not received its Coastal Use Permit and
subsequent consistency determination from the Louisiana Department of Natural
Resources (LDNR). We have recommended that Hackberry LNG file documentation of
the LDNR's determination that the project is consistent with the laws and
rules of the Louisiana Coastal Resources Program before construction.
Hackberry LNG conducted cultural resources surveys of the
proposed LNG terminal site and the pipeline route. No cultural resources were
found on the terminal site. The cultural resources survey of the pipeline
corridor identified two archeological sites, an archaeological "find spot",
and two historic period standing structures. The archeological sites and "find
spot" were determined to be not eligible for listing on the National Register
of Historic Places (NRHP). The historic period standing structures were
determined to be potentially eligible for listing on the NRHP but Hackberry
LNG would avoid both sites during construction. Because cultural resources
surveys have not been conducted in all areas potentially affected during
project construction, we have recommended that Hackberry LNG defer
construction of the LNG terminal and pipeline facilities and use of all
staging, storage, and temporary work areas and new or to-beimproved access
roads until these surveys are completed and the cultural resources survey
reports, any required treatment plan, and State Historic Preservation Office
comments are filed and approved by the FERC.
Air emissions during construction of the proposed LNG
terminal and natural gas pipeline would be localized and temporary and would
not significantly affect air quality in the region. Air emissions resulting
from operation of the LNG facility would be low since equipment would burn
natural gas, and the vaporizers
and hot oil heaters would use burners with low nitrogen oxide (NOr) emissions.
Hackberry LNG would limit
NO., emissions to 239.6 tons per year at the proposed LNG
terminal.
We have examined potential ship traffic congestion impacts
from the additional LNG ship traffic. We evaluated factors that may cause
vessel delays, as well as the specific operational differences between LNG
vessels and other large vessels in the Calcasieu Ship Channel, and recommended
several mitigation measures which would benefit all channel users and may
reduce some of the current sources of vessel delays.
We completed a cryogenic design and technical review, as
well as a thermal radiation and vapor dispersion exclusion zone analysis, for
the proposed Hackberry Terminal. Several areas of concern were noted and
specific recommendations, to be addressed prior to construction, have been
identified.
ALTERNATIVES CONSIDERED
We considered the
alternatives of no action or postponed action. While the no action or
postponed action alternatives would eliminate the environmental impacts
identified in this draft EIS, the objectives of the proposed project would not
be met and Hackberry LNG would not be able to provide a new source of natural
gas supply to the United States market.
Our analysis of alternatives
included an evaluation of the use of existing LNG import and storage systems,
as well as recently proposed offshore facilities, to meet the objectives of
the proposed Hackberry LNG Project. We also compared five potential terminal
site alternatives to the LNG terminal site proposed by Hackberry LNG. In
examining alternative sites for an LNG import terminal, we have concluded that
a site along the Industrial Canal, located 5 miles north of the proposed site,
has several advantages which warrant further investigation. Use of this site
may not require filling or excavating of wetlands and could shorten the
proposed pipeline by about 7.2 miles. Consequently, we are seeking additional
information regarding the suitability and availability of this site. The final
EIS will incorporate additional analysis of the Industrial Canal Site.
Our alternatives analysis
includes the evaluation of existing pipeline systems that could be used to
reduce the length of the proposed pipeline and still accomplish the objectives
of the proposed project. Additionally, we examined six pipeline route
alternatives to determine if impacts associated with the proposed route could
be avoided or reduced by following a different alignment.
Finally, we reported on the 22
alternative dredge disposal sites that Hackberry LNG evaluated for use during
construction of the LNG terminal. Final selection and use of a disposal site(s)
would require approval by the COE and LDEQ.
PUBLIC INVOLVEMENT AND AREAS OF CONCERN
On July 15, 2002, the FERC issued a Notice of Intent to
Prepare an Environmental Impact Statement for the Proposed Hackberry LNG
Terminal Project, Request for Comments on Environmental Issues, and Notice of
Public Scoping Meetings and Site Visit (NOI). The NO) was sent to 417
interested parties including Federal, state, and local officials; agency
representatives; conservation organizations; local libraries and newspapers;
intervenors in the FERC proceeding; residents within 0.5 mile of the proposed
LNG terminal; and property owners along the proposed pipeline route.
On August 6, 2002, FERC staff
conducted a public scoping meeting i n Sulphur, Louisiana to provide an
opportunity for the general public to learn more about the proposed project
and to participate in our analysis by commenting on issues to be included in
the draft EIS. We received a total of 18 comments, both written and oral.
Issues raised related to water quality, coastal wetlands, protected species,
land use and property values, ship traffic, and alternatives analysis.
Comments and concerns provided during scoping have been incorporated and
addressed, where appropriate, in this document. A transcript of the public
scoping meeting and all written comments are part of the public record for the
Hackberry LNG Project.
On the day of the meeting, FERC staff also conducted a site
visit, open to the public, to the LNG terminal site and pipeline route. In
addition, FERC staff attended an interagency meeting, on September 11, 2002,
with representatives of Federal and state resource agencies, as well as
representatives of Hackberry LNG. This meeting was also publically noticed and
open to the public.
This draft EIS was filed with the U.S. Environmental
Protection Agency and mailed to 318 Federal, State, and local agencies,
elected officials, Native American groups, newspapers, public libraries,
intervenors to the FERC's proceeding, and other interested parties (i.e.,
landowners, other individuals, and environmental groups who provided scoping
comments).2 A formal notice that the draft EIS is available for review and
intervenors are official parties to the proceeding and have the right to
receive copies of case-related Commission documents and filings by other
inlervenors. Likewise, each interven r must provide 14 copies of its filings
to the Secretary of the Commission and must send a copy of its filings to all
other intervenors. Only intervenors have the right to seek rehearing of the
Commission's decision.
ES-4
comment has been published in
the Federal Register. The public has 45 days to review and comment on the
draft EIS both in the form of written comments and at public meetings planned
in the project vicinity. All comments received on the draft EIS will be
addressed in the final EIS.
MAJOR CONCLUSION
We conclude that, with the
use of Hackberry LNG's proposed mitigation and adoption of our recommended
mitigation measures, construction and operation of the proposed facilities
would have limited adverse environmental impact. The impacts would be most
significant during the construction period. As part of our analysis, we have
developed specific mitigation measures that we believe to be appropriate and
reasonable for construction and operation of the proposed project. We believe
these measures would substantially reduce the environmental impact of the
project.
|