Letter to the Daily Astorian

Letter: Alarm bells ringing
The Dec. 24 story in The Daily Astorian, "Storm blows county off guard on LNG," demonstrates LNG speculator NorthernStar's willingness to mislead the public. In executive Joe Desmond's criticisms of the Columbia River Estuary Study Taskforce report, the story's author reports on several of Desmond's statements.

Statement: The draft said LNG tankers had been identified as targets for "malicious intent." Desmond's letter said that statement was speculation not supported by intelligence. Reality: Here are two quotes from "LNG Facilities in Urban Areas: A Security Risk Management Analysis for Attorney General Patrick Lynch, Rhode Island," by Richard Clarke of Good Harbor Consulting: (1) "In a recently released document known simply as the National Planning Scenarios, DHS (Department of Homeland Security) indicated that a potential terrorist attack on a chemical or gas tanker is the number six doomsday scenario for the U.S. government." And (2) "MS-13, a Central American criminal organization with a large membership in East Boston, is feared to be targeting the LNG facility and tankers near Boston. MS-13 has a strong presence in harborside neighborhoods of East Boston alongside which LNG tankers Everett."

Statement: The draft said the estuary is in danger from a damaged LNG vessel. Desmond wrote that there is no proof of this assertion. Reality: The responsibility of proof lies in the lap of the developer. Since it is conceivable that damage could occur, then NorthernStar needs to demonstrate that damage to an LNG vessel cannot occur.

Statement: The draft said a major spill of bunker oil would potentially result in major economic impacts. He wrote there had never been a spill of bunker oil from an LNG carrier. It would take the breach of both hulls of a double-hull carrier. Reality: LNG ships can carry bunker oil. A double-hulled vessel (the Limburg, an oil carrier) had its double hull intentionally penetrated by terrorists. Again, the demonstration of proof belongs squarely with the developer.

Statement: The draft said all other vessels would be expected to move outside the 500-foot security exclusion zone for 15 minutes or more before resuming their position. Commercial fishermen might face longer delays. "This is not true," was his written response. He said "exclusion zones" don't exist.

Reality: "Exclusion zones" do exist, but they exist around LNG terminals. However, the report apparently called them "security exclusion zones," which accurately describes what does exist around LNG vessels, "safety and security zones," which exclude other vessels from the LNG carrier and its transit path. Also surrounding LNG vessels are "zones of concern." While not excluding anything, these are hazard zones extending 2.2 miles around LNG vessels, and include the following hazards to the public and property: freezing, burning, asphyxiation and explosion.

NorthernStar appears to embrace low standards of veracity when communicating with the public. Alarm bells should be ringing loudly in regulators' and the public's ears.

Robert Godfrey
Eastport, Maine