Waterways Suitability Assessment Process LCDR Dan McQuate Office - - PowerPoint PPT Presentation

Waterways Suitability Assessment Process

LCDR Dan McQuate Office of Facility and Port Compliance, Facilities and Cargo Division (CG-FAC-2)

References

• 33 CFR 127
• NFPA 59A
• NVIC 01-2011
• Sandia National Laboratory reports
• MSM Vol. II

Letter of Intent and Waterways Suitability Assessment in general

• Required from owner or operator under 33 CFR

127.007 when:

– Intending to build a new facility – Planning new construction to expand or modify marine terminal operations at an existing facility

• Applies to both LNG and LHG
• LOI: File no later than the date of pre-filing

request with permitting agency (Federal, State, or local)

– In all instances: at least 1 year prior to the start of construction

WSA Timelines

• Preliminary WSA submitted before entering pre-

filing with FERC

– If not FERC jurisdictional, due when submitting LOI

• Follow-on WSA due when submitting application

to FERC

– If not FERC jurisdictional, due at least 180 days before transferring LNG or LHG

• Facility owner/operator must annually review the

WSA until operations begin

• Submit a final report to COTP at least 30 and no

more than 60 days prior to start of operations

NVIC 01-2011

• Guidance Related to Waterfront Liquefied

Natural Gas (LNG) Facilities

– Intended for FERC jurisdictional facilities – Can be used as a guide by COTP’s for any facility regulated under 33 CFR 127

Preliminary WSA

• Often shorter than 10 pages long
• Applicants provide an outline to the COTP of what they plan

to cover in Follow-on WSA

• Brief discussion on:

– Port characterization – Characterization of LNG Facility and LNG Tanker Route – Risk Assessments for Maritime Safety and Security – Risk Management Strategies – Resource Needs for Maritime Safety, Security, and Response – Risk Mitigation Measures and Conclusions

• Allows COTP to ensure applicant ID’d all pertinent port

stakeholders

Follow-on WSA

• Complete analysis of topics covered in Preliminary

WSA

• Identify:

– Credible security threats – Navigational safety hazards for LNG and LHG marine traffic – Appropriate risk management strategies – Resources needed to carry out risk management strategies

• Will include “Sandia Zones”
• Additional resources needed when the facility goes

into operation should be identified and provided by the applicant, not the Coast Guard or other agencies

WSA Wrap Up

• The amount of effort necessary for a WSA can

vary by the facility.

– Factors include location, current vessel traffic, local politics, etc.

• The vast majority of the work on the WSA is

completed by the project proponent

• COTP/COTP staff engagement early in the

process makes next steps easier

Letter of Recommendation

• Coast Guard’s recommendation to the

jurisdictional agency as to the suitability of the waterway for LNG or LHG marine traffic

• Assess the current state of the waterway
• Does not determine which waterway user should

have usage rights

• If there is no jurisdictional agency, no LOR is

issued

– COTP retains authority to ensure the maritime safety and security of the waterway

Letter of Recommendation

• 33 CFR 127.009 outlines regulatory requirements
• Recommendation based on:

– WSA; – Density and character of marine traffic in the waterway; – Locks, bridges, or other man-made obstructions in the waterway; – Factors adjacent to the facility – water depths, tidal range, protection from high seas, natural hazards, underwater pipelines and cables, and distance of berthed vessel from the channel; and – Any other issues affecting the safety and security of the waterway and considered relevant by the COTP

Review and Validation of WSA

• COTP reviews and validates WSA

– Checklist in Enclosure 4 of NVIC 01-2011 – Work with Local and State Governments, key stakeholders (AMSC, Harbor Safety Committee, etc.), public, and others as ID’d by the COTP

• Protect SSI and commercially proprietary

information

Review and Validation of WSA

• Review: examine the WSA to determine if it

includes all information necessary to assess the suitability of the waterway for LNG marine traffic.

• Validate: “reality check” of follow-on WSA to

determine if it presents a realistic and credible analysis of the public safety and security implications of LNG traffic

COTP Response

• COTP drafts LOR and LOR Analysis

– Must not impose requirements or mandate conditions – Receive feedback from State before issuing LOR and LORA

• Sample of LOR and LORA included in NVIC 01-

2011

Contents of LOR Analysis

• Assumptions made
• Description of port
• Summary of methods used to review WSA
• ID stakeholders that participated
• Whether waterway is suitable or not

– Example verbiage in Enclosure 6 of NVIC

Letter of Recommendation Analysis

• This document is Sensitive Security

Information (SSI)

• Outlines the information and decision-making

rationale used by the COTP in assessing the suitability of the waterway

• Looks at territorial sea boundary to the facility

Other LOR Notes

• Issuance does not constitute agency action –

NEPA not necessary

• The owner or operator, or government in the

jurisdiction of the facility may request reconsideration of the LOR

• Other persons may comment by submitting

comments and relevant information to the agency having jurisdiction for the project

Questions?