Compliance With the National Environmental Policy Act: Record of Decision for Continued Operation of Naval Petroleum Reserve No. 1 (Elk Hills), Tupman, CA

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