FERC
Approves Natural Gas Pipeline through
Gulf Marine Habitat
David N.
Harris, Jr., 2L
On February 22 the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission (FERC)
granted approval to Gulfstream Natural Gas Pipeline, L.L.C.
for construction of a 744 mile natural gas pipeline in the
Gulf of Mexico.1 The pipeline will stretch from the southern
tip of Mississippi and Alabama to Florida crossing through
Gulf of Mexico essential fish habitat and marine reserve areas.2
The pipeline will supply natural gas to sites of future gas
powered electric generation plants planned to meet Florida
population growth over the next 30 years. Gulfstream plans
to begin construction in June after submitting mitigation
plans to counter damage to the marine environment in the Gulf.
Determining the Effects on Habitat
To meet the statutory requirements of planning the pipeline,
Gulfstream conducted an Environmental Assessment (EA) to comply
with the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA). The EA
described the scope and identified significant impacts on
the environment. Because the EA found that the project will
have significant effects on the environment, Gulfstream prepared
an Environmental Impact Statement (EIS) to assess, among other
items, the effects on Essential Fish Habitat (EFH) designated
for federally-managed species in the Gulf.
EFH is defined as “those waters and substrate necessary
for spawning, breeding, feeding, or growth to maturity”3
and actions having potential adverse effects on EFH require
an impact analysis. In 1999, the Gulf of Mexico Regional Fishery
Management Council and the National Marine Fisheries Service
designated the majority of the Gulf of Mexico as EFH. Because
the pipeline will traverse EFH, Gulfstream was required to
conduct an EFH analysis to supply (1) a description of the
action, (2) an identification of direct, indirect, and cumulative
impacts, (3) the effects of the action on EFH, and (4) a proposal
for mitigation of adverse effects. The analysis concluded
that 25 of 27 species in the area will face some sort of adverse
impact through the construction, operation, and maintenance
of the pipeline. Gulfstream must also determine the adverse
effects on areas containing prey species to determine the
impairment placed on these species to act as food sources.
Pipeline Construction and its Impacts
To install the pipeline underwater, a remote operated sled
will excavate a trench with high pressure air and water jets.
In shallow water installation, divers will create trenches
using hand-held jets. Finally, barges and other support vessels
will install the pipeline while anchored above the excavation
site.
Excavation. The majority of impacts result from the excavation
process required to install the pipeline. The first widespread
impact originates from sedimentation and turbidity from the
jetting process: an estimated 2886 acres of sea bottom will
be affected.4 By increasing the suspended material in the
water column, eggs and larva of demersal and pelagic fish
species may face substantial mortality rates. Adult species
may encounter less adverse impact because projections assume
they will avoid the construction area. Along with the effects
on eggs and larva, the hard bottom and soft bottom communities
will face impairment and destruction from the jetting process.
Installation. The second widespread impact occurs from the
anchoring and cable sweeping related to the installation of
the pipeline. Anchoring barges used to install the pipeline
leave anchor scars on the sea floor which remain after an
anchor is removed from the sea bottom. As a result, the hard
bottom and soft bottom communities are destroyed or severely
impaired from anchor placement. Each “anchor footprint”
affects a 320 square foot area of bottom habitat that is essential
to support reef fisheries. These “footprints” cumulatively
affect 60 acres of bottom habitats.5
Furthermore, cable sweeps occur when cable attached to anchors
drag across the sea bottom. These sweeps disturb and may destroy
live fauna and breeding grounds for fish species. This impact
is by far the greatest single impact on EFH. The estimated
area affected is over 46,068 acres of hard bottom and 5,950
acres of live soft bottom habitat.6 The installation and excavation
effects occur simultaneously.
Maintenance and Recovery. Gulfstream estimates 32 acres of
live and hard bottom habitat impacts for the actual pipeline.7
The U.S. Department of Transportation and the Minerals Management
Service require a pipeline in less than 200 feet of water
to be covered by 3 feet of soil or bottom particulate. Periodic
pipeline inspections must occur in these areas in order to
monitor earthen cover of the pipeline. These inspections cause
minimal adverse effects on the habitat as compared with the
other more wide spread impacts occurring from the excavation
and installation process.
Gulfstream estimated the recovery periods to range from temporary
impacts (day to weeks to recover) to permanent impacts (more
than 20 years to recover). The sedimentation and turbidity
is expected to be a temporary impairment but the anchoring
and cable sweeping will likely cause permanent damage to the
habitat’s live fauna and substrate. The impacts to the
hard and live bottoms habitats will also adversely affect
prey species that act as food sources for federally managed
fish species.
Mitigation of Effects on EFH
After reviewing the adverse effects from the EFH analysis,
the FERC incorporated these considerations by making the approval
of Gulfstream’s certificates conditional upon mitigation.
Generally, Gulfstream must avoid EFH wherever possible. To
accomplish this, the FERC requires Gulfstream to follow very
specific mitigation measures. For example, Gulfstream cannot
conduct construction activities in the grouper marine reserve
at Steamboat Lumps during the gag grouper spawning time (January
through May).8
Furthermore, Gulfstream must develop and implement a plan
to monitor hard bottom and live bottom impacts resulting from
the construction process. The plan must be completed and approved
prior to the beginning of construction activities. Developed
in consultation with the Minerals Management Service and the
National Marine Fisheries Service, the plan will provide monitoring
of activities that include pipeline trench, anchor strike
and cable sweep areas.
In order to limit the damage that occurs due to anchor strikes
and cable sweeps, Gulfstream will use digital global positioning
systems and geographically referenced digital maps of hard
bottom areas to aid in the placement of anchors. The anchor
placement must avoid hard bottom impact when possible. To
aid in the monitoring study, Gulfstream will supply an “as
built” anchor plat showing the location of all anchor
strikes that impact the delineated hard bottom areas.9
Finally, Gulfstream has contributed at least $350,000 in the
Gulfstream Environmental and Recreational Trust Program to
grant awards to projects demonstrating community and environmental
need, especially for projects that are near the pipeline route.
This program is scheduled to begin once the construction for
the pipeline has commenced and continue for five years after
operation has begun.10
Conclusion
The adverse effects caused by the construction and installation
activities along the route of the pipeline pose substantial
impacts to EFH and areas designated as unique marine reserve
habitat. The FERC has determined that Gulfstream has made
attempts to mitigate the impact of the pipeline on these areas
in the Gulf but is requiring additional mitigation measures
in order to insure that effects on the environment are minimal.
This project demonstrates the responsibility placed upon proposed
projects that may adversely affect EFH to establish plans
and alternatives that will minimize that adverse effect.
Endnotes:
1. Originally, Gulfstream was one of two competing pipeline
proposals. Buccaneer Gas Pipeline Company (“Buccaneer”)
proposed the other. During the last few months, because of
corporate mergers, The Williams Companies and Duke Energy
Corporation acquired 100 percent membership interests in Gulfstream
on February 8, 2001. With the purchase of Gulfstream, the
company that was further along in the permitting process,
the Buccaneer proposal was abandoned. The Buccaneer pipeline
was likely to have greater adverse impacts on essential fish
habitat and marine reserves in the Gulf.
2. FERC Order issuing Certificates. 94 FERC 61,185 (2001)
at 12 (on file with editors).
3. 16 U.S.C. § 1802(10) (2001).
4. ERC Draft Environmental Impact Statement. FERC Docket No.
CP00-06-000, pg. 5-7 (On file with editors).
5. Id.
6. Id.
7. Id.
8. See. 94 FERC 61,185 at 22.
9. Id.
10. For more information from Gulfstream, visit www.gulfstreamgas.williams.com.
