A lawsuit filed in the 9th Circuit Court of Appeals by Earthjustice on behalf of five conservation groups is challenging Trump administration approval of the first offshore oil drilling project in federal waters in the Arctic.
Hilcorp Alaska received approval in October from federal authorities to build and operate its Liberty project, an artificial drilling island with a 24-acre footprint in about 20 feet of water, and a 5.6-mile pipeline under Arctic waters to transport oil into onshore pipelines.
The lawsuit contends approval of the project violates federal law, while ignoring the causes and effects of climate change.
Kristen Monsell, oceans legal director for the Center for Biological Diversity, a plaintiff in the lawsuit, called the Liberty project a “bad step down a very dangerous path. An oil spill in the Arctic would be impossible to clean up in a region already stressed by climate change,” Monsell said.
A key focus of the lawsuit is that the project would be in the heart of polar bear habitat, and polar bears are already being stressed by climate change.
While climate change is also indicated to be moving some fisheries north, with a strong likelihood of that trend continuing, the Liberty project would not impact the North Pacific Fishery Management Council’s current Arctic fishery management plan, which includes the Chukchi and Beaufort seas. The only possible biomass in those waters that would allow for commercial exploitation are snow crab and Arctic cod, but at this time there are no authorized fisheries within the Arctic FMP.
John Callahan, a spokesman for the federal Bureau of Ocean Energy Management in Anchorage, said that the agency is in receipt of the filing, but cannot comment on any litigation. Officials for Hilcorp had not responded by this newspaper’s Dec. 19 deadline to a request for comment, but according to that company’s own website, the project is to be built “upon years of proven technology and safe operations in shallow waters off of Alaska’s North Slope.”
The project is the largest undeveloped, light oil reservoir on the north Slope, with an estimated 80-150 million barrels of recoverable oil, and the field has a life expectancy of 15 to 20 years, the company states on the website. Peak production of between 60,000 and 70,000 barrels a day is projected within two years of initial production.
Approval of the project notwithstanding, construction of the Liberty project has been delayed by a lack of stable shoreline sea ice in the rapidly warming Arctic area. In fact, according to federal reports, the past five years have been the hottest on record for this area.
Liberty estimated that its gravel island will take about two years to construct, and that development of Liberty will help offset declining oil production on the North Slope, which increases the life span of the Trans-Alaska oil pipeline system.
Meanwhile the Earthjustice lawsuit has begun its march through the appeals court on behalf of the Center for Biological Diversity, Friends of the Earth, Greenpeace, Defenders of Wildlife and Pacific Environment,
The appeal is proceeding under the Outer Continental Shelf Lands Act, which as amended provides guidelines for implementing an outer continental shelf oil and gas exploration and development program. The appeals court must now decide whether the action approved by BOEM complies with federal law. The plaintiffs contend that several federal laws are being violated here, including the Outer Continental Shelf Lands Act, the Endangered Species Act and the National Environmental Policy Act.
The permitting agency did not consider how this project will further stress polar bears, the impacts of potential oil spills on polar bears, and how new oil development would impact climate change, Monsell said.
The plaintiffs also contend that Hilcorp has a track record of not complying with federal regulations in Alaska and elsewhere, even though federal law requires the permitting agency to take such incidents into consideration.
Monsell said the appeals court is expected to hear arguments in the case after all briefings are concluded in May, then take a few months to rule on the case. A decision is expected before the end of 2019, she said.
