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 prefiling 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?