United States
Environmental Protection
Agency
Municipal Environmental Research
Laboratory
Cincinnati OH 45268
Research and Development
EPA-600/S2-81-210 Oct. 1981
Project  Summary
Pipeline  Landfalls:  A
Handbook of Impact
Management Techniques

Ann W. Gowen and Michael J. Goetz
  This project provides detailed in-
formation on the environmental im-
pacts associated with outer conti-
nental shelf (OCS) pipelines. The
report is designed  to be  used by
scientists or engineers involved in
offshore petroleum pipeline planning,
including pipeline corridors and pipe-
line landfalls.
  Available methods are presented for
managing the environmental effects
of pipeline installation at the landfall.
Two basic techniques are available: (1)
Choosing a  site that has the fewest
constraints  to pipeline installation,
and (2) using construction and restor-
ation techniques that minimize the
effects of installation-related activities
at the chosen landfall.
  The report provides an overview of
factors that may be considered in
evaluating potential pipeline landfall
sites. Major technical and  environ-
mental constraints discussed include
the physical, geological, and biological
characteristics of suggested sites.
Other factors influencing site selec-
tion—coastal topography adjacent to
offshore  development areas, econo-
mics, existing onshore infrastructure,
and state and local coastal policy—are
also presented.
  Because other considerations may
result in the final selection of landfall
sites with less favorable natural
characteristics, emphasis is placed on
the site itself and site-specific methods
of installation and restoration designed
to minimize the potential effects of
pipeline installation in both favorable
and unfavorable coastal systems. Past
experience indicates that environmen-
tally acceptable landfall installation is
possible under unfavorable conditions
with the use of such methods.
  Two approaches are considered: (1)
Alteration of technical construction
and restoration methods to fit  the
constraints  present at a particular
landfall, and (2) preinstallation planning
by government and industry officials
to insure that construction methods
selected  address both technical re-
quirements and environmental con-
cerns posed by the chosen landfall.
Specific examples of  North Sea  and
Gulf Coast installations are used to
illustrate technical methods that have
been applied successfully to minimize
pipeline effects in a variety of coastal
ecosystems.
  This Project Summary  was devel-
oped by EPA's Municipal Environ-
mental Research Laboratory, Cincin-
nati, OH, to announce key findings of
the research project that is fully
documented in a separate report of the
same title (see Project Report ordering
information at back).

Background
  In 1977, the New England/New York
Coastal Zone Task Force, a  group
affiliated with the New England River
Basins Commission (NERBC) and made
up of state coastal zone program
managers, recommended that the U.S.
Environmental Protection Agency (EPA)

-------
initiate a  research project on the
environmental impacts  of oil and gas
pipeline construction and operation.
The  Task Force felt that should oil
and/or gas be found on the region's
outer continental  shelf (OCS), they
would need this type of information to
make sound decisions regarding OCS
pipeline routing.  EPA, recognizing
NERBC's continuing interest in OCS-
related  activities,  responded with a
formal request that NERBC undertake
this  project,  entitled  "OCS Pipeline
Construction and Operations: Potential
Environmental Problems and Recom-
mendations for Mitigation of Impacts."
Work was begun in January 1978.
  Two final reports have been completed
thus  far. One report, "North  Sea
Pipelines: A Survey of Technology,
Regulation and Use Conflicts in Oil and
Gas  Pipeline Operation," (EPA-600/7-
80-023)  was  published in  February
1980. In May 1980, a  second report,
"Choosing Offshore Pipeline Routes:
Problems and Solutions" (EPA-600/7-
80-114), was issued. This report is the
final in this series, all  of which were
prepared by the  staff of the New
England  River Basins Commission
under the sponsorship of EPA's Munici-
pal Environmental Research Laboratory
in Cincinnati, Ohio.

Introduction
  One of the major concerns associated
with offshore oil and gas is the trans-
portation of petroleum from platform to
shore. Although pipelines are generally
accepted as the safest method of oil and
gas transportation, their possible effects
on  the locations chosen  as pipeline
routes are still uncertain. This project,
sponsored by EPA, is designed to
provide information on the environ-
mental effects of  OCS oil and  gas
pipelines  to officials in frontier areas
who may become involved in planning
pipeline routes from offshore develop-
ment areas to land. This document
presents  methods for  minimizing the
environmental effects of pipeline instal-
lation at the landfall.
  The  report focuses  on two  major
methods of minimizing potential impacts:
choosing  a  site  that has the  fewest
constraints on pipeline installation, and
using  construction and restoration
techniques that minimize the effects of
installation-related activities at the
chosen landfall. Criteria are  described
for choosing or evaluating the relative
environmental acceptability of various
landfall sites, site-specific methods of
pipeline installation, and site restoration
methods that have been successfully
used to minimize effects in  favorable
and unfavorable coastal environments.
Two types of site-specific techniques
are considered: technical installation
and restoration methods that specifically
address the physical constraints of a
particular site, and cooperative planning
between government and industry to
develop acceptable and effective regu-
lations for a particular landfall. Specific
examples of North Sea and U.S. instal-
lations are used to illustrate  the effec-
tiveness of these  impact-mitigating
methods.

Recommended Management
Techniques
  The following are suggested technical
and planning methods that maybe used
to minimize the potential impacts of
pipeline installation  at a  landfall.
Although it is recognized that all these
methods may  not be usable in  every
instance, they should be considered in
the evaluation of any proposed pipeline
installation.  In the final analysis,
individual  assessments of any landfall
site  will  be  necessary, and impact
management  methods and regulations
must be developed based on the specific
constraints of the site.

Management Technique No. 1:
Landfall Site Selection
  Landfall  site selection is  based on
consideration of a  number of physical
criteria, including the physical/geo-
logical structure  of  the  area  and
adjacent  ocean, and  the ecological
systems at and adjacent to the landfall
that may be  affected  by  pipeline
installation. Based  on these criteria,
geologically  less favorable  landfalls
would  include those with eroding
shorelines, steep slopes, rocky  coast-
lines, or high-velocity, nearshore currents.
Biologically sensitive areas include wet-
lands,  barrier beaches and island,
unstable  sand dunes,  and unique
and/or rare  or endangered species
habitats.  More preferable would be
coastal areas  that are gently sloping
(less than 10% grade), with sandy or
firm sediments and  no fragile or
unusual habitats.
  Other criteria (such as coastal topog-
raphy adjacent to offshore development
areas,  economics, existing onshore
infrastructure, and state and local
coastal policy) may, however,  cause
final selection  of  landfalls  with  less
favorable characteristics. The remaining
methods focus on technical and planning
techniques  for  minimizing  potential
impacts at the chosen site.

Management Techniques No. 2.
Technical Installation Methods
  Installation impacts may be minimized
by a  number of methods  that are
appropriate for use in any coastal
system. Although it is recognized that it
may not always be possible to employ
these  techniques,  they  should  be
considered  in planning any pipeline
installation.

General Technical Methods—
  General technical methods include:
  • Scheduling to avoid key ecological
    seasons to  minimize  impacts on
    local plant and animal species;
  • Minimizing  the  size of  the area
    affected and, therefore, the extent
    of impact;
  • Restoring the land/water interface
    area immediately to minimize risk
    to landward coastal systems (e.g.,
    wetlands or dunes); and
  • Restoring the entire affected area
    physically and ecologically to a
    condition as closely approximating
    the original as possible.
Certain coastal ecosystems require few
additional methods to restore them to
original condition after installation
activites have been completed. These
areas  include flat  or  gently  sloping
beaches with no dunes and industrialized
or commercially  developed waterfront
areas.

Specialized Technical
Restoration—
  The presence of other coastal features
such as  dunes,  cobble beaches, rock
cliffs, and wetlands may require the use
of more specialized methods  to assure
more complete functional and aesthetic
recovery. These  specialized  technical
restoration methods include:
  • Dunes—Artificial  stabilization
    techniques (e.g.,  snow fences,
    gabions, or  Christmas tree  tops)
    may be considered  to assure dune
    recovery, particularly in coastal
    areas  prone  to wind  or wave
    erosion. Dunes may be  naturally
    stabilized by replanting with native
    vegetation.
  • Cobble  beaches—Where blasting
    is necessary, non-native  materials
    may be required for trench refilling
    and restoration of the beach form

-------
     and function. In this case, new fill
     should approximate the general
     size, shape, and  distribution  of
     original  surface  materials,  if
     possible.
  •  Rock cliffs—As with cobble beaches,
     blasting for trench preparation will
     require refilling with non-native
     materials. In this case, however, it
     is likely that use of concrete would
     be necessary to restore functional
     integrity, making total  aesthetic
     restoration impossible.
  •  Wetlands—As  stated previously,
     wetlands may be the most difficult
     of all coastal ecosystems to restore
     to original functional or aesthetic
     conditions. Restoration  programs
     would need to be designed on a
     case-by-case basis to address the
     key impacts expected in the affected
     wetland system.

Management Technique No. 3:
Planning Methods
  Increased government involvement in
pipeline  landfall siting  and regulation
will require coordination and interaction
between the developer and public
officials throughout project develop-
ment.  To encourage this  cooperative
planning and to facilitate development
of acceptable and effective regulations
for a particular installation, these
planning methods may be considered:
• Environmental assessment prep-
  aration—Such  preparation is an
  important means of identifying
  major potential impacts and in-
  formation needs before construc-
  tion.
• Single-agency planning and  per-
  mitting—These procedures mini-
  mize  the time necessary to obtain
  required permits and variances in
  original stipulations. They may also
  foster better communication be-
  tween developers  and regulators
  by clearly defining key participants
  in regulation development.
• Ongoing consultation between
  developers and regulators—Such
  communication fosters develop-
  ment of installation stipulations
  appropriate to the  landfall's tech-
  nical and environmental constraints
  and allows the flexibility to change
  original  plans  if   necessary  or
  desirable as construction proceeds.
• Establishing restoration goals—
  Goal-setting will focus restoration
  efforts on minimizing major identi-
  fied potential effects, rather than
  on attempting a complete replica-
  tion of original conditions—which
  is often  impossible to achieve
  except  over  a long-term  natural
  restoration cycle.
• Long-term monitoring programs—
  These programs would provide a
     method for ongoing assessment of
     restoration success and the oppor-
     tunity  to  identify  and remedy, if
     necessary, an initially unsuccessful
     restoration effort.

Conclusions
  The  major conclusion that may be
drawn from  these examples is  that
pipelines can generally be installed in
most coastal systems  with little  evi-
dence  of environmental damage.  The
main exceptions are  rock cliffs  and
wetlands. In the  case of rock cliffs
(where blasting is required), restoration
with original materials  is not possible;
the concrete required to refill the trench
may not be acceptable on ecological or
aesthetic grounds. Because of their very
loose sediment structure,  wetlands
(particularly those -that are highly
saturated) are probably the most difficult
of all coastal ecosystems to restore to
original aesthetic or functional condi-
tion. Only  recently have large-scale
restoration  activities been  attempted.
Although insufficient time has elapsed
to draw final conclusions, early results
of these restoration attempts appear to
be very encouraging.
  The  full  report  was submitted  in
fulfillment  of  Interagency Agreement
EPA-78-D-X0063 by New England River
Basins Commission under the sponsor-
ship of the U.S. Environmental Protection
Agency.
                                           Ann W. Gowen and Michael J. Goetz are with the New England River Basins
                                             Commission, Boston, MA 02109.
                                           John S. Farlow is the EPA Project Officer (see below).
                                           The  complete report, entitled "Pipeline  Landfalls:  A Handbook of Impact
                                             Management Techniques," (Order No. PB 81-242 950; Cost: $ 17.00, subject
                                             to change) will be available only from:
                                                   National Technical Information Service
                                                   5285 Port Royal Road
                                                   Springfield, VA 22161
                                                   Telephone: 703-487-4650
                                           The EPA Project Officer can be contacted at:
                                                   Oil and Hazardous Materials Spills Branch
                                                   Municipal Environmental Research Laboratory—Cincinnati
                                                   U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
                                                   Edison, NJ 08837
   US GOVERNMENT PRINTING OFFICE, 1981 — 559-017/7396

-------
United States
Environmental Protection
Agency
Center for Environmental Research
Information
Cincinnati OH 45268
Postage and
Fees Paid
Environmental
Protection
Agency
EPA 335
Official Business
Penalty for Private Use $300

RETURN POSTAGE GUARANTEED
                           PS   0000329
                           u  s  ENVIR  PROTECTION
                           REGION  s LIBRARY
                           230  S DEARbORN  STREET
                           CHICAGO IL 60604

-------