The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink AboutCO 104 A ') ) Image Project Order File Cover Page XHVZE This page identifies those items that were not scanned during the initial production scanning phase. They are available in the original file, may be scanned during a special rescan activity or are viewable by direct inspection of the file. r f) 1 () Lf A Order File Identifier Organizing (done) D Two-sided 1IIII1I111111111111 ~scan Needed 1111111111111111111 REf AN \?"color Items: D Greyscale Items: DIGITAL DATA OVERSIZED (Scannable) o Maps: o Other Items Scannable by a Large Scanner o Diskettes, No. D Other, Norrype: o Poor Quality Originals: OVERSIZED (Non-Scannable) o Other: Scanning Preparation BY: Helen ~ \ x 30 = + o Logs of various kinds: ~her:: I Þ~H 1 ~I rs .~ Date:~ 3 J J OS 151 vw- 111I1I1111111111111 Dateð '6/ Os 151 VVf = TOTA~ PAGES ~, (Cou~s not i Iclude cover sheet) Dateb 3/ 0$ 151 ~ NOTES: BY: Helen ¡:Mari'a _ ') Project Proofing BY: Helen ~ Production Scanning 11111111I1111111111 Stage 1 Page Count from Scanned File: lC;-:J-. (Count does include cover sheet) Page Count Matches Number in Scanning Preparation: VYES NO Date:~ a I óo!;; 151 VlilP BY: Helen ~ Stage 1 If NO in stage 1, page(s) discrepancies were found: YES NO BY: Helen Maria Date: 151 1111111111111111111 Scanning is complete at this point unless rescanning is required. ReScanned 1111111111111111111 BY: Helen Maria Date: 151 Comments about this file: Quality Checked 1111111111111111111 12/1/2004 Orders File Cover Page.doc 1. May 5,1972 2. 3. May 11, 1972 October 6, 1972 ) Conservation Order 104A Kenai Peninsula Chapter request for delay n termination of Cook Inlet Offshore Flaring Testimony Union's Application of Extension Conservation Order 104A )- ..;;.t: } ,~¡p, \ STATE OF ALASKA DEPARTMENT OF NATURAL RESOURCES DIVISION OF OIL AND GAS Alaska Oi I and Gas Conservation Committee 3001 Porcupine Drive Anchorage, Alaska 99504 Re: THE APPL I CAT ION OF UN I ON 0 I L COMPANY OF CALIFORNIA for an order amending Rule No.2 of Conservation Order No. 104 by deleting the date "July I, 197211 and substituting the date IINovember I, 1972". Conservation Order No. 104-A McArthur River Field Midd Ie Kenai "811 Oi I Pool Hem lock 0 i I Poo I West Foreland Oi I Pool June 8, 1972 IT APPEARING THAT: I. The Oi I and Gas Conservation Committee published a notice of public hearing in the Anchorage Dai Iy News on Apri I 14, 1972, pursuant to Title I I, Alaska Administrative Code, Section 2009. 2. A public hearing was held May I I, 1972 in the City Counci I Chambers of the Z. J. Loussac Library, 5th Avenue and F Street, Anchorage, Alaska, at which time operators and affected parties were heard. FINDINGS: I. Immediately fol lowing issuance of Conservation Order No. 104, operators and affected parties commenced studies to determine a beneficial use or uses of the excess casinghead gas being flared. 2. Fol lowing determination of beneficial uses of the excess casinghead gas being flared, engineering and design studies were undertaken and equip- ment and construction contracts were entered into. 3. AI I of the foregoing was accomplished with due di ligence, but was delayed owing to necessary engineering and design time, seasonal weather conditions, and construction and delivery time of specially-designed equipment. CONCLUSIONS: I. Operators of the referenced pools and affected parties have made a bona fide effort to comply with Conservation Order No. 104, but compliance wi I I be delayed by conditions beyond their control. 2. Compliance with Conservation Order No. 104 can be expected by October 15, 1972. 3. The dates in Rule Nos. I and 2 of Conservation Order No. 104 should be changed to the earliest practicable date which is reasonable, but not beyond such date. ) ) Conservation Order No. l04-A Page 2 June 8, 1972 NOW, THEREFORE, IT IS ORDERED THAT: I. Rule No. I of Conservation Order No. 104 Is amended to read as fa I lows: "Casinghead gas in excess of the maximum amount that can be beneficially utilized may be flared unti 17:00 A. M., ADST, October 15, 1972.11 2. Rule No.2 of Conservation Order No. 104 Is amended to read as fol lows: !rEffective at 7:00 A. M., ADST, October 15,1972, the flaring or venting of casinghead gas from the McArthur River Field Is prohibited, except for the amount necessary for adequate safety flares and except in emergencies." 3. The Oi 1 and Gas Conservation Committee, by administrative order or orders, may extend the date provided for in Rule Nos. I and 2 of this order. No such order or orders may extend the date beyond 7:00 A. M., ADST, November I, 1972, except pursuant to Title I I, Alaska AdminIstrative Code, Section 2012. DONE at Anchorage, Alaska, and dated June 8, 1972. AI :J?:-Jt(/~j. . ~~R. Marshal I, Jr., Executive Secretary Alaska Oi I and Gas Conservation Committee Concurrence: /~~¡{~- ~~ Burrel I, Chairman Alaska 01 I and Gas Conservation Committee tP,~Á.;AJ.~. O. K. G I I b reth, Jr., ~,1em~ . Alaska Oi I and Gas Conservation Committee ¡ , ," ] /:~ASf\A 0 I L AND GAS CONSEF~V AT I ON lA)r,¡¡\~ I TTt"::E Octobe r' 10, 1972 Re: Administrative Decision No. I04-A. I Mc Arthur River Field Mid die Ke n a i ¡ I G \1 0 i I Poo I Hem lock 0 i I Poo I West Foreland Oi I Pool Mr. Wade S. McAlister Union Oi I Company of California 909 W. 9th Avenue Anchorage, Alaska 99501 Dear [\1r. McA lister: Pursuant to Order ~Jo. 3 of Conservation Order ~~o. 104-A, the Oi I and Gas Conservation Committee hereby further amends Rule No.1 and Rule No.2 of Conservation Order No. 104 to read as fol lows: F<L1 I f) No. I "Cas i nghead gas in excess of the môx i mum amount that can be beneficially uti Ii zed may be flared no later than 7 : 00 1\. H., ^ S T, ~J 0 v e m b e r I, I 9 72 . n F<ule I'Jo. 2 "Effective no later than 7:00 A. H., AST, November I, 1972, the flaring or venting of casing head qas from the Mc Arthur River Field is prohibited, except for the amount necessary for adequate safety flares and except in emergenci es. II Unforseen manufacturing and shipping difficulties affecting fifteen valves and valve gear operating mechanisms have resulted in an unavoid- able delay in the line becoming operational '-~({!L~J:-_- ... ._ Thomas R. ~1arsh a I I, Jr. Execut i ve Secretary Alaska Oi I and Gas Conservation Committee h~'þt. 011.. ~~ I'~~. . ~ ~~Vf ,)ffØP2II~ ,,___ ~4;¡;:Ø. "~~ (II ~ . ,::::~,~ JI' " ~;~--i1">;,,. ,'::)':'1',' ~.J.J I ¡@"' \~~1, ;¡',:!;~J ,... å~i rz ~ ';~ ;'":\>;~1 , . ~ r:L___ ¡ \~ \.:' o ~-:::~- ...." .,~ ~ I. h~ :< ~ ~-::---'.:3 ))'~:':;~. Þ!~11 ,~.,:. 0 ~n -~'.. . ·~w.-..; "~ . .. ." ~~~ ~,~ -1V ~~ ., ~~~ "'1~/ON CO~\~ concu7nce : 4L~¿~~ Homer L. Bur~airman Alaska Oi I and Gas Conservation Comm i t tee t:!L(--£d,< ~ ~. O. K. G I I D retf-1, Jr., r\1emb~~- Alaska Oi I and Gas Conservation Committee #3 ,~ Union Oil and G~'~ rivision: Western Region Union Oil Company of California . 909W. 9th Avenue, Anchorage, Alaska 99501 Telephone: (907) 279-7681 '/""'" " ,-' ;.,:.;,.-t)"''' I DI,R /(t"., 1 c. ?~~)l" ~ C. ENG æ.e"'1 . 1 ËF~:~ ,if- , j~;~ ¡J 4 ENG t 5 Ü~iG--r I 1.6-Ëö[ IL..- It. It 1! I I' ~ J t. ( t 11 d ~ It 23 GGËÓCT kif/) , c.Q 1'.,. V) To ~ ¿h.JtM'..., 'JfvtL--f ," "'- -"Eol 'I C 0 J t.f A I R[~V ··0 -' -- State of Alaska . I DRA-¡:-Y Oil & Gas Conservation Committe~· . SEC I h CONFER: ~Jï·~r: ~o..'4A,.,.. unlen :f @æ@~~w~~m J U b;,..-. OCT 6 - 1972 O_ctober 6, 1972 DIVISION OF Oil AND GA'J ANCHO~~G;-; 3001 Porcupine Drive Anchorage, Alaska 99504 Re: CONSERVATION ORDERS 103 A and 104 A Application of Extens ion Gentlemen: Reference is made to Conservation Orders affecting the flaring of cas inghead gas in Cook Inlet, State of Alaska in requiring such flaring ceased by October IS, 1972. Operators and affected parties have made a bona fide: attempt to comply with the above mentioned Conservation Orders. Pipelines have been constructed for the delivery of casinghead gas to onshore facilities and this pipeline and related facilities and equipment are near completion. Several major components for the 10" and 16" gas pipelines and facilities from East Foreland to the Nikiski Area were up to six weeks late arriving in Alaska due to IIfanufact~!!ng and shi2.2!ng d!~~icul_~~es. Fifteen valves critical to the final in- stallation of the two pipeline systems were approximately three months late- arriving in late September. The late shipment caused several days delay in final pres sure testing and clean- ing of these pipelines. The gear operators I shipped separatèly and needed in order to open and close these valves I êirrived in late September and were discovered to be the wrong size. The manufacturer was immediately notified and instructed to expedite delivery on two correct size operators and air freight them to Alaska. In addition, all available sources of these operators have been investigated. At the present time I a date of October 9 or 10 is the earliest poss ible shipment to Ala ska (from St. Louis, Mo.). Efforts are continuing in an attempt to improve de- livery. Several days of purging the pipelines with natural ga~ will be required in ~¡ ~&.~ I By: MARATHON OIL COMPANY UNION OIL COMpANY OF CALIFORNIA ,.,. "",) ....,./"'/ ./.,....-.. ,/",/ ,J/",;:: // //' ....ý/;1. "J!""';/ .//}:¡.../....i By . /.-,~-;ø' /....:--. C' /. ,,·<·f. ¿ 1 ".,/ -:¡~.~ '" . .,.4,"1' -'¿~,","" -<.......(/.' ( J"/' / ~ ) I Very truly yours, Application is hereby made for an extens ion of the implementation of the no flare order previously ordered for October 15, 1972, to be extended to November I, 1972. It is the intention of the operators and the affected parties to comply with the above referred to Conservation Orders as soon as equipment now lacking has been installed and construction completed on said pipeline. In the event the line becomes opera- tional before the requested extension date of November I" 1972, the line will be put into operation at the earliest pos sible date. Should your committee require any additional information or evidence to process this application for extent ion, we will make such information available on notice. Your Committee will be notified when said pipelines go into operation. Due to circumstances beyond the control of the parties constructing said pipelines, certain items of vital, indispensable equipment are not presently available and is contemplated that this lack of availability of required equipment will delay opera- tion of said pipeline beyond the date of October 15, 1972. Additional documenta- tion of this fact is ava ilable if required. order to reduce water content of the gas to market specifications, thus meeting the October 15 "no flare" deadline will not be possible. October 6 I 1972 State of Alaska -2- Oil & Gas Conservation Committee Application of Extens ion, Conservation Orders \, #2 'T:(\ Nt I. '. IvÐt~;, r \ 1 ~O J 0 2. ß./ /0 3 14./ ¡ 0 Y It é>",J foe A hct.v,ll "'-. C o.~ Ju o~ Î va. VI S' C v: f!7 Gilt ~~f<Â ,,¢<.,L~ h R""'Yllèl~ ~]Ç ~.(¿,l~ ') ) ) Mtn.-.. It\ )() ,., -0 ~ (G 11... Î~ s t ,WI 6,.., 1 C.D, I() c../~A TESTIMONY TO EXTEND THE DEADLINE OF THE NO FLARE PROVISION CON- TAINED IN CONSERVATION ORDER NOS. 102, 103, 104, AND 105 TO BE PRESENTED.BEFORE TI·IE ALASKA STATE OIL AND GAS CONSERVATION COM- MITTEE ON MAY 11, 1972 TESTIMONY TO BE PRESENTED BY C. L. ROBERTS My name is Claude Roberts and I am the Anchorage Division Petroleum Engineer for Marathon Oil Company. In addition, I am co....chairman of the Mechanical Coordinating Subcommittee of a Marathon-Union joint task force established to design and install a Cook Inlet gas gathering system. It is in this latter capacity that I testify today. My testimony will illustrate the tremendous effort required to study, plan, design, and install the facilities necessary to deliver gas produced on the w~st side of Cook Inlet to the market area on the east side. My first exhibit illustrates this gas gathering system and its orientation to the casinghead gas production from the McArthur River and Trading Bay Fields. The exhibit further shows the trmarket area" at Nikiski and the location of the large dry gas reservoirs ) -2- in the Cook Inlet Basin. The gas gathering system consists of the Liquid Extraction Unit at West Foreland, the large compressor facility, a 16" pipeline to Granite Point, dual 10" submarine lines to East Foreland, and finally a 16" pipeline into the Nikiski area. The status of each of these phases will be discussed thoroughly. Orders were issued for the various oil fields in Cook Inlet by the Alaska Oil and Gas Conservation Committee effective July 1, 1971. The Conservation Committee ordered: (1) casipghead gas in excess of the maximum amount that can be beneficially utilized may be flared until 7 AM, ADST, July 1, 1972; (2) effective at 7 AM, ADST, July 1, 1972, the flaring of any casinghead gas from the McArthur River Field (and all other Cook Inlet fields) is prohibited except for the amount necessary for adequate safety flares and except in emergencies; and (3) the commencement, nature, and termination of all emergencies requiring flaring of casinghead gas in' excess of the amount required for safety flares shall be reported to the Committee within 96 hours after occurrence. We had previously studied various plans to further beneficially utilize the exces~ casinghead gas in connection with. several hearings \ , -3- extending from 1968 through May, 1971. After issuance of these orders, Marathon, and 11m sure other companies as well, immediately reviewed these plans and initiated studies and investigations necessary to evaluate all available alternatives to comply with the no flare order in the relatively short period of time allowed for compliance. Market potential and financial arrangements, both of which can be handled only on a separate company-by-companY,basis, were necessary prerequisites. Conversely, the physical and mechanical aspects dictated a joint effort for consideration of a gas gathering system. Therefore, on July 12, 1971, top-level management of Marathon and Union met in Los Angeles to consider the problem. The result of this meeting was the establishment of a joint ~1arathon- Union task force to evaluate all problems and alternatives connected with such a project. Plans for formal organization with appro- priate assignments were immediately initiated. ~1arathon and Union once again reviewed the various alternatives for disposition of the relatively small casinghead gas reserve ) -4- incl~ding: (1) storage of the gas by injec~ing into known orishore structures adjacent to the Trading Bay Production Facility; (2) return of the casinghead gas to the reservoirs from which it was produced; (3) storage of the gas in the Grayling gas sands of the McArthur River Field; and (4) delivery of the gas to the market area on the east side of Cook Inlet, thus displacing gas already supplying these markets. It was again concluded that delivery of the gas to markets on the east side offered the only acceptable disposition of the gas and this was practical only if the gas gathering system could be utilized for future transportation of a substantial gas reserve. Gentlemen, the only reason we were able to consider building a pipeline system to the east ·side was because of this dry gas reserve in the HcArthur River Field. Although the review of the various alternatives of disposition were concluded quickly, several months of planning and design were necessary to identify and evaluate the many problems of building a pipeline system across Cook Inlet to the east side. ,~ :) -5- Recognizing the need for current and accurate gas production data, material balances for each of the three Trading Bay Unit platforms, the Monopod Platform, the Trading Bay Production Facil- ity, and the Liquid Extraction Unit were made. A review of the gas production forecast for Trading Bay Unit and Trading Bay Field was commenced in order to evaluate platform compression require- ments. All platform and onshore facility schematic drawings, tracing the path of the crude and gas streams were updated. Plans were made for acquiring analyses of the various crude and gas streams in order to determine the amount of processing required to make the gas deliverable. On July 21, 1971, we contacted Earl & Wright, Engineering consultants, to discuss methods of determining the best possible pipeline routes across the Inlet. On July 22, F. 11. Lindsey & Associates.were asked to furnish a proposal to perform sub-surface reconnaissance work in Cook Inlet. The purpose of this \vork was to better define the submarine ) ) -6- trench which existing bathymetric maps indicated ran north-south immediately east of the McArthur River and Trading Bay Fields platforms. It was not known whether or not the trench was contin- uous. At the same time, plans were being formulated to determine the feasibility of expanding and/or modifying the Liquid Extraction plant. The original plant was designed to process 32 million cubic feet per day of casinghead gas and 5 million cubic feet per day of crude flash vapors. Preliminary production forecasts indi- cated the gas volume would exceed this amount requiring expansion of these facilities. It was evident that some additional plant processing would be required in order to make the gas deliverable even though additional processing for liquid recovery was unecon- ornical. On July 27 and 28, our process engineers met with Fluor Cor- poration in Houston to outline various plans for modification of the plant. Fluor was requested to furnish a cost estimate for making a feasibility study for enlarging the plant and for optimizing ) ) -7- the amount of compressor horsepower that would be required to deliver plant residue gas to a pipeline system. Also, on July 27, we prepared a tabulation of anticipated compressor horsepower requirements, assuming different pressures for gas disposition on the east side. This information was mailed to various compressor manufacturers and suppliers requesting their proposal for furnish- ing the necessary horsepower on either a purchase or rental basis. On August 2, the Marathon-Union Task Force began detailed studies to solve the many problems involved in designing and con- structing a pipeline from West Foreland across Cook Inlet to the Nikiski area. In order to proceed as .rapidly as possible, the overall project was broken into two major segments, the West Side onshore facilities to be under the direction of Marathon Oil Com- pany, and the marine and East Side facilities under the direction of Union Oil Company. During the period from July 27 through August 2, 1971, crude and gas samples were obtained from the platforms in the Trading Bay Unit and the Trading Bay Field as \olell as the Trading Bay Pro- duction Facilities. In that the samples were necessarily shipped ) ) -8- by truck to Core Laboratories in Dallas, Texas, for analysis, data from these samples \olere not available for plant expansion design until early September. Marathon and Union proceeded with the general reconnaissance survey by Lindsey & Associates of the trench area as shown in Exhibit 2 in an effort to find the shortest route to the east side. If a direct route was feasible, it was evident that much time, material, and money could be saved. The results of the survey. showed that in the trench area, immediately east of the ~1cArthur River platforms, water depths were from 240 feet to 400 feet. On August 6, we met with Earl & Wright to explore the feasi- bility of a pipe lay truss (stinger) design necessary to operate in water depths of 300 feet and greater in Cook Inlet. Also on this date, we received some preliminary information from J. Ray McDermott and Brown & Root, Inc., concerning deep water pipelining in Cook Inlet. On August 13, Union conferred with Dames & Moore, Earth Science Consultants, outlining the conditions of the various possible routes ) ) -9- of the marine line. We also received additional information from Hood Corporation concerning problems of laying pipelines in Cook Inlet. Gentlemen, at this timet about mid-August, you can see that we had only scratched the surface of obtaining the necessary data to evaluate the various pipeline routes across Cook Inlet. Our preliminary discussions with the various pipeline consultants and contractors were for the purpose of updating ourselves on the "state of the art" of laying pipelines in deep water to ascertain if any of the newer techniques could be applied in Cook Inlet. Although these discussions were encouraging in that perhaps a deep water crossing could be made, more information was urgently needede This additional information had to be obtained quickly, because if the only feasible marine route was to the north opposite Granite Point, a land line approximately 26 miles long had to be installed from West Foreland during the coming winter. A pipeline across the McArthur River flats route can only be installed during freeze-up. Such a line would have to be designed, pipe and materials ordered, ) ) -10- and contractor mobilized, all in advance of freeze-up, expected as early as December 1. Only a little over two months remained for all of this activity to take place. Although preliminary studies were being made on the Liquid Extraction Unit and Compressor Station, final compressor design criteria could not be established until the route and the "market" were established. On August 23, 24, and 26, Union and Marathon personnel met with J. Ray McDermott and Brown & Root respectively to discuss possible construction mêthods of a "deep water" marine pipeline. As a result of those meetings, it was decided that it was not feasible to lay pipe across Cook Inlet with conventional pipeline methods in water deeper than 180 feet. We further felt that we could not risk trying some of the new developments of deep water pipelining in Cook Inlet, but would have to utilize the more conventional methods in order to minimize risks of installation and operation. We had previously made studies of the feasibility of using existing onshore and offshore lines in the upper Cook Inlet. It was decided that these lines could not be utilized and that it ) ) -11- would be necessary to construct a west side pipeline from the Trading Bay Production Facility at West Foreland to Granite Point and a dual submarine line from Granite Point to East Foreland. A detailed two-phase survey along the proposed northern marine route, as illustrated on Exhibit 2, was commenced immediately by Dames & Moore. The purpose of the study was to determine geologic and oceanographic conditions along alternate routes which might influence the location, design, and installation of the proposed marine pipeline. To accomplish these objectives, geophysical profiles, bottom samples, and current measurements were obtained at several locations between Granite Point and East Foreland. Specifically, the scope of work included: (1) a review of pub- lished and other available literature pertaining to the bottom conditions and oceanographic framework of the area. These included several previous studies conducted in Cook Inlet related to con- struction of offshore platforms and pipelinesi (2) geophysical profiling along selected traverses using a high-resolution boomer system and sidescan sonar; ) ) -12- (3) measurements of current speed and direction at various depths at nine different stations during periods of flood and ebb tidé; (4) sampling of surficial bottom soils at selected localities by means of clam-shell bucket; (5) a determination of maximum current velocities which might occur along the proposed route based on oceanographic data collected during the survey; (6) an engineering evaluation of soil conditions and current regime as related to pipeline design and construction. Information from this marine survey indicated a mobile bottom condition in the area between Granite Point and the northern part of ~1iddle Ground Shoals. We refer to this mobile bottom area as the "dune area" because of the shifting nature of the gravel bed and sand occurring rapidly between tides. In order to provide a sound foundation and therefore a stable pipeline system, we needed to know the bottom conditions and the extent of the dune areas. All the above information would be gathered and furnished to Earl & Wright, who had been given the contract to perform an engi- neering study required to design the submarine gas pipeline. ) ) -13- Dames & Moore performed the offshore pipeline route survey between September 8 and September 26. Profiles of the bottom and sub-bottom were obtained along four different corridors between Granite Point and the East Foreland area. Additional profiles were ohtained in the northern portion in order to further define the dunedarea. On September 2, 1971, immediately after the decision to lay the pipeline north to Granite Point, Fluor Corporation was author- ized to proceed with the proposed Liquid Extraction Unit feasibility study to determine the optimum method of modification and estimated cost. The Liquid Extraction Unit utilizes a turbo-expander to develop the refrigeration necessary to recover the maximum amount of butanes and heavier hydrocarbon liquids. This refrigeration scheme leaves the residue gas at low pressure, approximately 70 PSIG. Since the residue gas has to be delivered into a pipeline system at relatively high pressure, the question arose as to whether or not the turbo-expander provided the optimum method of obtaining the required refrigeration. It was Fluor's assignment to evaluate ) ) -14- alternative methods of obtaining the r~frigeration and thus optim- ize the amount of horsepower required for compression. The modi- fied plant would also have to operate at a higher pressure if it was to handle the anticipated increased volume of gas. The pressure level as well as the method of refrigeration greatly affecté the amount and type of horsepower required. By September 7, Marathon and Union had completed a pipeline optimization study, only 12 days after the decision was made to go north to Granite Point for a Cook Inlet crossing to East Fore- land. The optimization study considered various sizes of onshore and submarine lines to carry various volumes of gas at pressures of 700 to 1200 PSIG. This study resulted in the decision to install 16-inch onshore lines and dual 10-3/4 inch submarine lines. ) ) -15- On September 13, Marathon began preparing the specifications før the West Side line. It was necessary that these specifications include instructions for construction of a safe system, protection of the environment, and to ensure a satisfactory completion date. On September 24, Marathon placed an order for 27 miles of 16 inch, .344 wall thickness, Grade 5LX-52 ERW line pipe for the west side portion of the gas gathering system. , From September 30 through October 20, Dames & Moore and F. M. Lindsey conducted a terrain survey and a soil investigation for the proposed l6-inch west side pipeline. The purposes of this work were to provide data for pipeline routing, design for weighting and anchoring the pipe, and to provide plan and profile drawings for construction. Specifically, the scope of work included: (1) a review of the published literature pertaining to soil condi- tions of the route corridor; (2) a photo-geologic appraisal of the proposed and alternative pipeline .routes; (3) a shallow sub- surface investigation including hand-augercd boring and drillings and sampling with helicopter transportable rotary wash drill rig; ) ) -16- (4) laboratory testing of soil samples; and (5) analysis of back- fill and buoyance problems, frost penetration, studies of anchor designs, and a general review of construction problems. Following analyses of these data, s~ecifications for the construction of the line were mailed to prospective bidders on October 26, 1971. A major consideration was the'anchoringsystem necessary to over- come the negative buoyancy of a large diameter pipeline carrying natural gas through terrain such as the mud flats of the McArthur River. Tl1ree types of anchors were utilized: (1) screw-in auger type were used where the terrain was not too rocky or swampy. These were spaced approximately 80 feet apart; (2) concrete sadIe weights weigh- ing 4,000 pounds each and spaced about 25 feet apart were used where the auger anchors could not be used; and (3) concrete bolt-on weights weighing 2,300 pounds each were installed at l3-foot intervals at water crossings. All together, about 2,500 of these three types of anchors ~lere used in the 26.2 miles of line. These had to be designed, manufactured, and delivered before freeze-up. The last barge load ) ) -17- of concrete weights was offloaded at West Foreland on November 24. The Land and Legal Subcommittee was preparing the many appli- cations necessary to obtain a right-of-way. On bctober 5, 1971, application was filed with the U. S. Department of Interior, Bureau of Indian Affairs, to construct a pipeline across the Moquawkie Indian Reservation. On October 7, application was made to the Department of Army, Alaska District Corps of Engineers, for a permit to construct a pipeline across several rivers along the route from West Foreland to Granite Point. On November 1, application for a right-of-way construction permit was delivered to the State of Alaska, Division of Lands. Data from the Dames & Moore terrain study and the Lindsey survey were a necessary part of these appli- cations, thus precluding the filing of these applications any earlier. Our process engineers received Fluor's feasibility study for the Liquid Extraction Unit modifications on October 4. Critical to our design was the final disposition of the gas on the east side of the Inlet. Two markets with sufficient capacity ) -18- ) to handle the total expected volumes existed. The Collier Chemical complex could utilize the gas at approximately 650 PSIG, but the gas would have to be further processed. Swanson River Field pres- sure maintenance project could take the gas without further proces- sing, but the pressure would need to be maintained at lOSOPSIG. In July, 1971, Union initiated feasibility studies for an east side plant to process the gas for removal of the propane and heavier hydrocarbon components to provide suitable gas feed stock to the Collier Chemical Plant. Five engineering and construction companies were consulted and proposals for processing, storage, and other facilities required to produce and make disposition of liquefied hydrocarbons were developed. Simultaneously, surveys and studies were undertaken to develop markets for the products that would be produced. Engineering consultants and Union Oil Company had to determine not only a suitable processing design, but availability of equip- ment, materials, construction manpower, suitable sites for facili- ties, and numerous other factors critical to design and timing. In ) ) -19- addition to locating product consumers, marketing research also required development of many other factors such as production forecasts, type and quantity of products, type and size of storage tanks, transportation and loading facilities, etc. By November 23" 1971, it was determined that a plant on the east side was not feasible and plans for the plant were abandoned. This left Swanson River Field as the only market capable of taking all the gas expected from the Trading Bay Production Facility Com- pressor Station. In the meantime, Marathon was proceeding with preparation of compressor inquiries to obtain quotations for equipment to meet pressure conditions of both possible gas markets'. On October 27, specifications were mailed to three manufacturers of compressor equipment. I would like to digress just for a moment to better explain the need for the considerable front-end engineering required to design the large compressor facility. ) -20- ') Normal compressor design parameters include gas rate predictions, temperatures, suction(. and discharge pressures. This installation was further complicated by rapidly declining gas rates, .variable gas compositions, and variable operating conditions. It will be necessary for this compressor facility to perform under a wide range of operating conditions including the LEX running and not running, one submarine line inoperative, one machine down for maintenance, etc. These are the types of variables that must be analyzed prior to finalizing a design, purchase, and installation of a 7200 horse- power compressor station. It was these factors that lead us, last year at the May hearing, to advise that a minimum of 18 months would be required to complete such a project. To have been prepared to go to bid on a compressor station of this size and complexity within a period of four months was indeed an accomplishment. By November 1, the west side pipe and materials were on order, bids were out to pipeline contractors and compressor manufacturers. To be safc, only four weeks were left to mobilize on the west side ) -21- ) of the Inlet and to receive and unload the 27 miles of 16-inch pipe. On November 3, all 16-inch pipe and cqating materials left Seattle by barge. On November 9, bids \'lere received from three contractors for the construction of the 16~inch west side pipeline. On November 12, the construction contract \'las awarded to Locher Company. On November 13, the barge ca~rying the 16-inch pipe arrived at West Foreland and was beached for unloading operations. On November 22, we completed the offloading and storing of the pipe at a storage site adjacent to the Trading Bay Production Facility. On November 30, a plant engineering subcommit'tee representing the plant owners reviewed the Liquid Extraction Unit modifications and compressor requirements. A recommendation to purchase three Cooper- Bessemer 2400 horsepower compressor units was made and purchase orders were issued on December 2, 1971. On December 1, the State of Alaska, Division of Lands, "granted a permit for the construction of right-of-way across "state lands from Nest Foreland to Grani te Point. On Decernber 6, a crew from ') ') -22- F. M. Lindsey & Associates began the construction survey for the . pipeline route. On December 13, the U. S. Department of Interior, Bureau of Indian Affairs, granted an easemènt for the construction of the pipeline right-of-way across the Moquawkie Indian Reserva- tion. On that date, Locher completed the barging of their equip- ment to West Foreland and began the constructiQn of their pipeline camp. Most of the construction material had been transported to the staging area before the ice conditions in Cook Inlet shut down barge traffic. However, 650 sets of scre\'¡-in anchors and all the pipeline valves and fittings had to be transported to the job site by air. On December 22, the Departme~t of the Army, Corps of Engi- neers, issued a permi t for crossing the four major rivers betvleen West Foreland and Granite Point. We were mobilized and all the permits necessary for beginning construction of the West Side pipe- line had been received. Locher Company commenced right-of-way clearing operations on December 18, but unfavorable weather conditions caused consi- derable problems resulting in some delay of the construction ) ) -23- schedule. However, through a diligent effort, the contractor com- pleted the construction effort on Harch 22 following a successful hydrostatic test of the pipeline. All that remained was the envi- ronmental restoration of the right-of-way. Fertilizing and reseed- ing operations along various areas of the right-of-way were completed on April 4. While Marathon was occupied in mobilizing materials and the contractor on the west side, Union Oil Company was busy analyzing the mass of data acquired in the detailed marine survey. Earl & ~'¡right were commissioned on September 5 to develop design criteria for gas pipelines crossing Cook Inlet from Granite Point to East Foreland. The Dames & Moore study ,furnished informa- tion of the water current velocities and directions and the bottom soil conditions along the pipeline route. Earl & Wright used this information to study the design requirements f0r twin lO-inch and twin 12-inch lines, taking into account static stability, dynamic stability, pipe metallurgy, corrosion protection, stabilization methods, installation problems and procedures, and relative costs. ) -24- ) As indicated on Exhibit 2, the route would proceed in a direc- tion perpendicular to the shore line for a distance of 8,800 feet from Granite Point to a location northeast of the northernmost Amoco platform in the Granite Point Field. It then proceeds for a dis- tance of approximately 30,000 feet to a point northeast of Middle Ground Shoals and thence for a distance of 71,700 feet to a point on the East Foreland, in the visinity of Nikishka #2. On both sides of the Middle Ground Shoals area, the water depths are about 150 feet at mean low, low water, while at the Shoal crossing, the water depth is only about 70 feet. Bottom conditions along the route vary from gravel, cobbles, and boulders in the vicinity of Granite Point to large stretches of sand and gravel between t1iddle Ground Shoals and the East Foreland. Conventional pipe laying methods for deep water and strong currents such as experienced in the Cook Inlet call for a lay truss supported both at the lay barge and on the bottom, as illustrated on Exhibit 3. The pipe lay truss acts as a cradle f9r the pipeli~es as they are being laid. Without support from both the surface and ) -25- ) the bottom, the lay truss would simply be swept away in the strong currents of Cook Inlet. The lay truss must be of sufficient length to provide for a safe pipe laying configuration consisting of overbend and sag-bend which stresses the pipe to no more than 80 percent of minimum yield. The total length of the lay truss designed for this pipe laying operation is about 340 feet long and weighs approximately 300 tons. An underwater pipeline is much different from ~ pipeline on land, since it must have sufficient weight for static stability, must avoid resonance caused by long unsupported spans, and must have sufficient strength to avoid buckling or overstressing during the pipe laying operation. A pipeline across Cook Inlet is differ- ent from the usual underwater line because of the bottom soil con- . ditions and current velocities which are very high and persist at bottom depth. When bottom irregularities 'or scouring result in excessive span lengths and flutter of the unsupported lines, or when high current velocities result in horizontal movement of the lines, it is necessary. -26- ) to provide additional support and anchoring. A line on the bottom of Cook Inlet is subjected to both a lift force and a drag force which vary with the. square of the current velocity. The lift force is counteracted by the weight of the line, its contents, and any weight coating provided, while the drag force is resisted by friction bet\'leen the·. pipe and the bottom soils. Protection against corrosion is another important design para- meter and cathodic protection in Cook Inlet presents some unusual problems. Corrosiveness is about eight times as high in Cook Inlet as it is for normal sea water. The swift currents, high dis- solved oxygen, and abrasion by suspended solids, accelerate corro- sion rates. Two basic cathodic protection systems were analyzed. One- impressed current, and two - sacrificial anodes (zinc bracelets). Armed with the mass of data supp~ied by Dames & Moore and the study by Earl & Wright, Union and Marathon personnel held engi- neering conferences with Brown & Root, Inc., and J. Ray McDermott, \, J ) -27- Inc., in Houston and New Orleans during the week of November 30 ~ December 5, 1971. These meetings resulted in the finalization of the marine pipeline system. The line consists of dual 10-3/4 inch OD, .594 wall thickness, grade SLX52 seamless line pipe. Concrete weight coating will be applied, using one, two, and three 1/2-inch thicknesses of '190 pound per cubic foot concrete. The pipe lay truss was designed to withstand two times the force exerted on it by the weight of the pipelines when filled with sea water, and the force exerted by the sea water flowing perpendicular to the lay truss at a velocity of 7.1 knots. It was further stipulated that the truss would not be permanently deformed by bending in a storm current of 8.4 knots. The truss was designed and is being built so that the pipe would not be stressed to more than 80 percent of the minimum yield from the time it leaves the lay barge until it is landed on the sea floor. On December 2, Union Oil Company issued a purchase order for 246,000 feet of 10-3/4 inch seamless line pipe. The pipe will be ') '-28- ) coated with a cold-tar corrosion coat and with a sufficient thick- ness of the 190 pourid per cubic foot steel reinforced concrete weight coating necessary to provide bottom stability. Zinc anode bracelets will be installed every 340 feet for corrosion protection. On December 23, a preliminary draft of the general project' construction specifications was mailed to McDermott and Brown & Root. The final drafts were ma!led on January 17, 1972, and the bid due date was established as January 31. Concurrently to the preparation of the specifications for install~ng the submarine lines, bid specifications were prepared for the continuous posi- tioning service necessary to guide the lay barge on its proper course, the radiographic inspection of the welds, helicopter service, dock and stevedore service. All business arrangements had been completed for the installation of the corrosion ~lrap, cathodic protection bracelets, and weight coating of the 10-3/4" pipe prior to its transportation to Cook Inlet. Negotiations were commenced with the various tug and barge companies concerning the transporta- tion of the pipe to Cook Inlet. ) -29- Referring back to Exhibit 1, you will note that the proposed routing of the East Side pipeline from the beach approach to the Swanson River Field line tie-in will follow a general southerly direction to the Swanson River line junction and beyond to the Collier plant. To comply with the Natural Gas Pipeline Safety Act requirements, this pipeline will be designed for Class III construction utilizing 16" OD, .344 \'lall thickness, Grade 5LX52, ERlv, steel pipe. Approxi- mately 28,500 feet of pipe will be required between the shore approach and the Collier plant tie-in. It is planned to ship this 16" pipe from Vancouver, Washington, along with the 10-3/4" pipe for the dual submarine line. union Oil and Marathon decided to install a liquid hydrocarbon recovery system to collect any liquid hydrocarbons that may accu- mulate in the line. It is possible that at the operating condi- tions of the pipeline system, a retrograde condensation problem may exist. Also, in the event of an LEX plant upset, it is possible that liquid hydrocarbons can enter the pipeline system. For these ) -30- reasons, it was felt mandatory that an extensive liquid recovery system be designed. While the engineers were designing the submarine line and the East Side facility, our lawyers and land men were preparing the necessary applications to secure all the required permits for the construction of these facilities. Applications for permits to construct the marine line were mailed out early in January and negotiations for the right-of-way acquisition at East Foreland commenced shortly thereafter. Please refer to Exhibit 4, illustrating the engineering and construction schedule for the dual submarine portion of the project. The vertical axis is the percent of project days from July 1, 1971, to completion. The horizontal axis shows the actual time frame in months. Note that 40 percent of project time was required to obtain the final design criteria. On January 31, bid proposals for installing the dual submarine lines were received from Brown & Root and J. Ray HcDermott. Because of the substantial cost involved with this portion of the project, ,) -31.... ) an extensive evaluation of each of the contractor's bids was re- quired. By mid-February, J. Ray McDermott Co. was selected as the contractor to install the submarine pipeline and mobilization of the pipelaying spread commenced immediately. The logistics required to mobilize a complete pipelaying spread with the necessary auxiliary support systems and personnel are tremendous. The lay barge had to go into drydock for extensive refitting and revamping in order to perform work in Cook Inlet. Heavier anchors and wires had to be installed. A large gimbel- type hitch, required to hold the pipelaying truss, had to be fabricated and connected to the lay barge. Tugs, pipe barges, crew living quarters, had to be negotiated for and mobilized. This equipment is only found on the Gulf Coast and along the West Coast. It is no small task to solve the logistics of mobilizing such an operation. You will note that it was mid-December before the final design of the marine pipeline system was completed; now, 90 days later, men, equipment, and materials began their journey to Cook Inlet. ) -32- ) McDermott's lay barge departed Harvey, Louisi.ana, on April 8. It will require approximately 60 days for its trip to Cook Inlet with its scheduled arrival sometime during the first week of June. It will require about seven days to unload the barge at Kenai and to connect the lay truss'which is being fabricated in Anchorage (fabrication of the truss commenced on April 15). We expec~ to have the lay barge on the right-of-way at Granite Point by June 14. .. About 50 days will be required to lay pipe across Cock Inlet, and we plan to hydrostatically test the system by ~id-August, 1972. A schedule for the construction of the East Side pipeline and liquid handling facility has been prepared, and is illustrated as Exhibit 5. Final engineering design was completed and spccifi- cations for construction went out to bid on March 28. Ilood Con- struction Company of Whittier, Califorriia, was awarded the bid on April 24. The installation of the line should commence shortly after the pipe's arrival at Nikiski between Hay 15 and June 1. It should take approximately 45 days to complete construction of the pipelines. ) ) -33- Bids on the equipment for the liquid handling facilities were received on May 1; equipment was ordered May 4; and delivery is estimated around August 1. Completion date for the east side liquid handling facility is scheduled for October 1, with start- up estimated by October 15. Exhibit 6 shows the schedule for the compressor station and modifications to the Liquid Extraction plant at West Foreland. As mentioned earlier, the three large compressors were placed on order in early December, 1971. This provided for the necessary shop space while all the design parameters were being finalized. Marathon personnel met with CB/Southern on January 26 to finalize these parameters. I will describe some of the equipment to indicate the order of magnitude of facilities comprising the 7200 horsepower compressor plant. There will be three 2400 horsepower units. Each unit will consist of an engine skid, two piping skids, one gas cooler skid, one lube oil module skid, and one utility cooler skid. The total station will therefore be comprised of 18 large skids. The esti- mated weight of this equipment is over 1,200,000 pounds and will ') -34- ') require 21 rail cars for transportation from Hous~on to Anchorage. This entire compressor station will be housed in a building 46 feet wide by 150 feet long with an eave height of 27 feet. The design functions of the expanded compressor station are to compress approximately 48 million cubic feet of gas per day received from the McArthur River and Trading Bay Fields platforms from 150 PSIG to about 425 PSIG. Approximately 6-1/2 million cubic feet per àay of crude flash vapors will be compressed from 10 PSIG to 525 PSIG. This portion of the compressor station is referred to as the boosting service 'and delivers gas to the Liquid Extraction Unit. T11e remainder of the horsepower will be used for transporta- tion and will compress approximately 45 million cubic feet per day of LEX residue gas from 150 PSIG up to 1200 PSIG, which is the ' pressure necessary to enter the pipeline facility. Fluor Corporation was selected as contractor for the installa- tion of the compressor units, designed and fabricated by CB/Southern. As prime contractor, Fluor will also make the modifications to the Liquid Extraction Unit. On February 23 and 24, Fluor carne to ) ) -35- Anchorage to discuss the final process and mèchanical flow of the plant modifications and the compressor installation. A construc- tion agreement was executed on March 22. Fluor's construction superintendent moved to Anchorage on April 10 and commenced mobili- zation of the subcontractors necessary to excavate and prepare foundations for the large compressor skids and to do the installa- tion work. These contractors are mobilized and are waiting for the ice to leave the Inlet so that they can barge their equipment to the construction site. One of the large compressor units should arrive in Anchorage the first of June. The second and third units will arrive in Anchorage around June 21. Tl1ese units will be barged from Anchorage to the Trading Bay Production Facility, unloaded, skidded into position, and set on their foundations. The final engine should be in place by July 15. Once the units are in place, a critical phase of the construc- tion effort has passed. However, considerable work remains to be done prior to completion estimated by October I, 1972. In order ). -36- to allow for contingencies and provide sufficient time to de-bug the system, we anticipate final start-up about November 1. This is two months ahead of the time frame which we testified to in a previous hearing. I would like to assure you that every effort has been made and will continue to be made to place this pipeline system, com- pressor station, and plant facilities into operation at the very earliest date. Hopefully, I have been able to illustrate the magnitude of the project and to emphasize the tremendous amount of front-end designing and engineering required for such a massive project. Since the most costly portion of this project still remains to be completed, a final cost is not known at this time: however, when this project has been completed, the cost as presently estimated will be in excess of 25 million dollars. Finally, I hope I have shown the good faith which Union Oil Company and Marathon Oil Company put forth to comply ~lith the Committee's orders pro- hibiting the flaring of casinghead gas. Although my presentation ) -37- has been quite lengthy, I have covered only the major points of ,the project; and I would now solicit any q~estions that you may have. Thank you. CLR/jmk #1 ,-. )"~ ~~- \.,.:"".'.".'\.. !.;_...~.....'..A4ASKA CONSERVATION SOCIETY (.. ,., (/ .'. '7 (\ KENAI ~E~prSULA CHAPTER ~<:, \. !' P. O. BOX 563 ;..~~~;. ..-7 SOLDOTt-..A r~;.)........:.),r~~'~-Y,~....,.<..~~. ALASKA 99669 v.''w A~ HaDf 1E~7~ ~ W æ Sì 1\\ J Division of Oil and Gas MAY 81lJ12 3001 Porcupine Drive CO, Anchorage, Alaska DIVISION OF OIL I.ND G....:"; ANCHO't\!; ~ ... ¡ø..- DIR --tC.GfO[ r¡J¡..¡ .-f_C.. ENG ..IQP r J ENG I -r2 [NG r- "'--r' 3 f N "3 I ---r- 4 f N(~ ! ._--,-- 5' fNG I I J GF':X I -----'-·2· GFOL ,- '---r'3 GEOl ,_.. -,-'REV --,- ...._. ',-6RÄFt-, ./ l~SËë' - 1- CONFÊR, . FILE, ""- It) i."8~ 10 oS -A~ lð" . ~~/OG-. RE: Request for delay on termination of Cook' Ihlet offshore flaring This organization would oppose a delay in termination of offshore flaring for the following reasons: 1. -Continued flaring provides obvious air pollution which can be seen from Kenai almost any day as a low-lying cloud of blaèk (the evening of 4/23/72, it looked yellow-greenish) smoke over the Inlet. 2. The flaring of the offshore casinghead gas is a waste of a resource. 3. The additional wasting of the resource should not be permitted to continue --- le~t it make the installation of another LNG plant or other such type of gas reprocessing for trans-shipment less economically feasible. Does not the fact that the proposed plant under consideration by Pacific Electric Service Co. contradict the earlier statements regarding lack of feasibility for the usage of the gas from the offshore platforms? 4. Even if it may be essential to extend the deadline, this ,organization recommends that it be done on a month~to-month basis ~~~~t~~e review required for co~:ng ::::::i~ditional JA S E. FISHER Pr sident P. S. The Pipe coating is not bei g accomplished in Alaska for the project. Is the lack of the 60-80 jobs involved in the required pipe coating considered by this Division in its~deliberations over the delay in gas flaring termination deadline? Oil, C't .' fl. J..e lo~-A EXHIBIT" A" (. b. J () t.J - A SCHEMATIC GAS FLOW - DIAGRAM COOK INLET GAS GATHERING SYSTEM UNION OIL COMPANY OF CALIFORNIA MAY 10 J 1912 PREPARED B. .Y. HOE!8..S·.ßÞMIER~~N.. -.AL..ASKA CORp' . . - Al'iÇI·W.l.!A~fr, AI"A".(Í~ 'I ð f{, t ~¡,. (J1.. ( % ( \ ., AFfFD~2vIT 51 A 1E OF ALASKA, ) THIRD JUDICIAL DISTRICT, ) ssP .....bar.y..L..shak.e....... .............. being first duly sworn on oath she deposes and says that...._.......... is the....~~g~.~..~ºf...~.~~..... Qf the Anchorage News, a daily news. paper. That said newspaper has been approved as a legal news- .paper by the Third Judicial Court, Anchorage, Alaska, and it is now and has been published in the English language continually as a daily newspaper in Anchorage, Alaska, and it is now and during all of said time was printed in an office maintained at the aforesaid place of publication of said news. paper. That the annexed is a true copy of ð ..~~gl?-J.........~9.~J.~~ .1930 liS it WllS published in regulðr Issues (lInd not in supplemental form) of said newspaper for. a period of .....~~.~....... insertions, commencing on the .14.... dðy of ....April........... ,19 7.2 , and ending on the.....).l~........ day of of ~JJril.................. , 19...72., both dates inclusive, and that such newspaper was regularly distributed to its subscribers dur- ing al/ of sa·id period. That the full amount of the fee charged for the foregoing publication is the sum of S 12.50 which amount has been paid in full at the rate of 25¢ per I ine; Mini. mum charge $7 .50. /~ IÍ / l/;¡ / 1/ / /. )/l,¿t/~· //.. / /.,.:_x.. ....~...l~-}. ~~ Subscribed and sworn to before r' / .' me this .14... day of."pril........ 19 'OJ" . . (0;:. h,·'.··. ".:.:" '"" ....~ ~d ,1-.... :"~. .,I Å ;44.. 1"'\......... ;-"..04 '''''''. A.-... '-." .:... .A...... ~ 1 i I 1 "It , .......Ie ~.~.' '¡\, ,,"':1 . . n_; _ _"'_~",. .,_""-__.....-;...l',~-- tt"":'J!I!"!I'......*'o·""" ~- _. ~~ OF PUBLIè""ÀTION NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARING STATE OF ALASKA DEPARTMENT OF NÞ.TURAL RESOURCES Aluka Oil and Gu Conservation Committee Conservation File Nos, 102, 103, 104 a!'lei 105 Re: The application of Union Oil Company of California, Atlantic RichfielÒCom· pany, Shell Oil Company, 1M Amoco Production Company for orders amend- ing Rule No. 20f Conserv.tion Order Nos, 102, 103, 104 .nd 105 by delet- ing the date "July 1, 1972" and lub- stituting in its place the date "Novem- ber 1, 1972." Notice is hereby given fhat fhe refer- enced companies have requested the Oil and Gas Conservation Committee to issue orders 'which extend the period of time from July 1, 1972 to November 1, 1972, during which casinohead oas in addition to the amount necessary for ufety can be flared from th. oil pools identified in the refer- enced conservation orders covering the fol- lowing fialds: (iranite Point, Trading Say, McArthur River, and Middle Ground Shoal. Th. hearing will be h.ld at 9:00 a.m., ,Mey 11, 1972. in the City Council Chlm- ! bers of the Z.J, Loussac library. 5th Ave- ! nue and F Street, Anchorage. Alaska, It which time operators of the identifi.d oil pools and affected Ind intertlttd perti.... will b. heard. Thomas R. Marshall, Jr. Executive Secretary Alaska Oil and Gas Conservation Committee 3001 POrcupine Drive Anchorage, Alaska 99504 Publish: April 14. 1972 Leul Nltti'e No. 1930 J 0 ~ A ,1 _~_-I ......'_... , '1 .:.. ;'.) u ) h r ,_ ~d~ It. ~ -t. I t. i ~ f -""-'""..-~>! '~>;"~ .-M'.... -~ ~<._"~........""'.J""--.-:y~-"",.,.,..Þ!~,:."~~;~,~~,_;<__,_,,.JW~.;__~"~.,..-.~'''':'':'''''''~'(..'''~¡;~~~'t~':'7''':;'':\':':''~; . _.' ~~J~ <. .. ; /' -'... -~' NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARING STATE OF ALASKA DEPARTMENT OF NATURAL RESOURCES Alaska Oi I and Gas Conservation Committee Conservation Fi Ie Nos. 102, 103, 104 and 105 Re: The application of Union 01 I Company of Cal ifornia, Atlantic Richfield Company, She I I Oi I Company, and Amoco Production Company for orders amending Rule No.2 of Conservation Order Nos. 102, 103, 104 and 105 by deleting the date "July I, 1972" and substituting in its place the date "Novembe r I, 1972". Notice is hereby given that the referenced companies have requested the Oi I and Gas Conservation Committee to Issue orders which extend the period of time from July I, 1972 to November I, 1972, during which casinghead gas in addition to the amount necessary for safety can be flared from the oi I pools identified in the referenced conservation orders covering the fol lowing fields: Granite Point, Trading Bay, McArthur River, and ~1iddle Ground Shoal. The hearing wi I I be held at 9:00 a.m., May I I, 1972, in the City Counci I Chambers of the Z. J. Loussac Library, 5th Avenue and F Street, Anchorage, Alaska, at which time operators of the identified 01 I oools and affected and interested parties wi I I be heard. óL. If. #t(~.~ Thomas R. ~~arsha I I, Jr. Executive Secretary Alaska Oi I and Gas Conservàtion Committee 3001 Porcuoine Drive Anchorage, Alaska 99504 Publish: April 14, 1972