Document ID: USCG-2008-0035-0007
Agency: uscg
Document Type: Notice
Title: Proposed Expansion of the Cove Point Facility, Cove Point, MD: Final Supplemental Environmental Assessment and Finding of No Significant Impact
Posted Date: 2008-06-25T04:00Z

[Federal Register: June 25, 2008 (Volume 73, Number 123)]
[Notices]               
[Page 36094-36095]
From the Federal Register Online via GPO Access [wais.access.gpo.gov]
[DOCID:fr25jn08-95]                         

-----------------------------------------------------------------------

DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY

Coast Guard

[Docket No. USCG-2008-0035]

 
Proposed Expansion of the Cove Point Facility, Cove Point, MD: 
Final Supplemental Environmental Assessment and Finding of No 
Significant Impact

AGENCY: Coast Guard, DHS.

ACTION: Notice of Availability of Final Supplemental Environmental 
Assessment and Finding of No Significant Impact.

-----------------------------------------------------------------------

SUMMARY: The Coast Guard announces the availability of the Final 
Supplemental Environmental Assessment (EA) and the Finding of No 
Significant Impact (FONSI) that evaluated the potential environmental 
impacts resulting from the proposed issuance of a Letter of 
Recommendation (LOR) on the suitability of the waterway for the 
expansion of the Cove Point LNG facility for Dominion Cove Point LNG, 
LP, in Cove Point, MD.

ADDRESSES: Comments and material received from the public as well as 
documents mentioned in this notice as being available in the docket, 
are part of the Coast Guard docket number USCG-2008-0035 and are 
available for inspection or copying at the Docket Management Facility, 
U.S. Department of Transportation, room PL-401, 400 Seventh Street, 
SW., between 9 a.m. and 5 p.m., Monday through Friday, except for 
Federal Holidays. You may also find this docket on the internet at 
http://www.regulations.gov.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: If you have questions on this notice, 
call Lieutenant Commander Rogers Henderson, Coast Guard, telephone 202-
372-1411 or Mr. Ken Smith, Coast Guard, telephone 202-372-1413. If you 
have any questions on viewing material on the docket, call Renee V. 
Wright, Program Manager, Docket Operations, telephone 202-366-9826.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: In accordance with the National 
Environmental Policy Act of 1969 (Section 102(2)(c)), as implemented by 
the Council of Environmental Quality regulations (40 CFR parts 1500-
1508), the applicant prepared a Final Supplemental EA and the Coast 
Guard prepared the FONSI for the Proposed Expansion of the Cove Point 
Facility, Cove Point, MD.

Response to Comments

    The Coast Guard requested comments on the Draft Supplemental EA 
when the Notice of Availability for the Draft Supplemental EA was 
published on March 13, 2008 (73 FR 13551). The Coast Guard received 
nine comments on the draft Supplemental EA.
    Two commenters agreed with the Coast Guard that the proposed action 
will not have a significant impact on the State of Maryland's 
environment or historic properties.
    One commenter stated the current security measures for the facility 
and during tanker loading/unloading operations are insufficient. The 
Coast Guard disagrees because the facility is regulated under the 
Maritime Transportation Security Act (MTSA) of 2002 and as a result 
must comply with a Coast Guard approved Facility Security Plan. Foreign 
vessels which make LNG deliveries to the terminal must have a valid 
International Ship Security Certificate on board attesting to the 
vessel's compliance with the International Convention for Safety of 
Life at Sea and the Ship and Port Facility Security (ISPS) Code. The 
ISPS Code is the foreign equivalent to MTSA requirements. In addition, 
Cove Point has been receiving LNG shipments and operating in compliance 
with the safety and security provisions and operating restrictions of 
the Letter of Recommendation (LOR) issued by the Coast Guard to Cove 
Point in 2002.
    One commenter discussed the applicability of the Sandia 2005 risk 
assessment to the proposed Expansion Project. The Coast Guard disagrees 
that this is applicable since the Sandia 2005 assessment referenced by 
the commenter is apparently the Sandia Report SAND2005-7339: ``Review 
of the Independent Risk Assessment of the Proposed Cabrillo Liquefied 
Natural Gas Deepwater Port project.'' This report is not applicable to 
this proposed project because it addresses a deepwater project with a a 
Floating Storage and Regasification Unit (FSRU), and not the waterway 
for an LNG terminal. Instead, the applicable Sandia report for Cove 
Point is the 2004 Sandia Report, SAND2004-6258: ``Guidance on Risk 
Analysis and Safety Implications of a Large Liquefied Natural Gas Spill 
on Water.'' This report identifies three ``Zones of Concerns''. The 
Sandia 2004 report shows the conservative maximum hazard distance is 
defined as Zone 3, which would occur in the unlikely event of a LNG 
vapor cloud release but would only create a hazard within a distance of 
about 2.2 miles from the point of the release.
    One commenter suggested a major LNG spill would affect the cooling 
towers of the Calvert Cliffs Nuclear Power Plant. The Coast Guard 
disagrees with this comment since the plant is well outside the 
furthest potential impact zone, Zone 3, i.e. the distance of 2.2 miles, 
per the applicable Sandia report.
    One commenter stated that the air pollutants from LNG tankers, 
marine escorts, and traffic specifically related to LNG were not 
addressed since the Maryland Department of the Environment covers only 
stationary equipment. The Coast Guard disagrees with this comment. 
These air pollutants were addressed in the April 2006 FERC FEIS, 
Appendix H, ``General Conformity Determination for the Proposed Cove 
Point Expansion Project'' which the Supplemental EA adopted. The 
General Conformity Rule, found in 40 CFR Part 51, Subpart W and 40 CFR 
Part 93, Subpart B, applies to proposed actions in a nonattainment or 
maintenance area that are not otherwise regulated under the New Source 
Review (NSR) programs or Operating Permit Program. Consequently, the 
General Conformity Rule applies to direct emissions, such as 
construction and vessel activity emissions, which are not long-term 
stationary source operations. As part of the General Conformity 
Determination, LNG ships and tugs emissions were estimated based on 
roundtrip operation in state waters.
    One commenter declared that uncontrolled toxic air pollutants from 
the proposed project are expected to form toxic particulates matter 
hazardous to human health. The Coast Guard disagrees with this comment. 
As the Supplemental EA and FONSI discuss, we found that there will be 
no significant adverse impact from the toxic air pollutants and 
disagreed that these pollutants are uncontrolled. These pollutants are 
subject to the U.S. EPA Clean Air Act's National Emission Standards for 
Hazardous Air Pollutants (HAP). Under the HAP permitting process, it 
was established the proposed project's total potential HAP emission 
rate, 11 tons per year (tpy), was well below the threshold for 
facilities subject to HAP regulations which is 25 tpy.
    One commenter expressed concern regarding the volume of ballast 
water intake from the increase of LNG tankers resulting in an increase 
of salinity of the Chesapeake Bay. The Coast Guard

[[Page 36095]]

disagrees with this comment. The volume of water removed by each LNG 
ship as a percentage of the total amount of the Bay is negligible and 
would not increase salinity in the Chesapeake Bay.
    One commenter stated the impact of seawater intake for ballast from 
the increase in LNG tankers did not address the impact to aquatic 
organisms. The Coast Guard disagrees with this comment. The potential 
impacts to the aquatic organisms were addressed in Section 7 of the 
Supplemental EA. The calculated seawater intake on the LNG vessels is 
0.6 feet per second. This velocity is similar to the 0.5 feet per 
second identified by the National Marine Fisheries Service as 
minimizing entrainment and impingement of aquatic organisms.

Supplemental Environmental Assessment

    We prepared a Supplemental EA to identify and examine the 
reasonable alternatives and assess their potential environmental 
impacts. The Supplemental EA examined the potential effects associated 
with the incremental increase in LNG ship traffic within U.S. 
territorial waters on natural, cultural, and human resources.
    Our preferred alternative is to issue a LOR with conditions. This 
action will assure that the waterway is suitable, safe, and 
environmentally sound for the increased LNG vessel traffic resulting 
from the Cove Point Expansion Project. This preferred alternative as 
well as other alternatives are further described in the supplemental 
EA.
    The Coast Guard determined the Supplemental EA adequately discusses 
the environmental issues and impacts of the proposed action. It 
provides sufficient evidence and analysis for determining that an 
environmental impact statement is not required. Therefore, a Finding of 
No Significant Impact was issued for the preferred alternative of the 
proposed action.

    Dated: June 17, 2008.
Capt. M.L. Blair,
Acting Director of Commercial Regulations and Standards.
[FR Doc. E8-14288 Filed 6-24-08; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 4910-15-P