noLNG

Feds launch query into ethics conflict

a small christmas gift from FERC via The Daily Astorian

Federal officials are worried about a potential conflict of interest for an environmental consulting group that's working on both the Bradwood Landing liquefied natural gas project and the Palomar Gas Transmission pipeline.

The two projects are linked by a segment of the Palomar line that's slated to serve the Bradwood LNG terminal, proposed for a site 20 miles east of Astoria.

According to a letter from the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, the Natural Resource Group, a company with several offices across the country focused on energy project permitting, has even assigned some of the same staff to work on both projects.

In a letter sent to NRG Thursday, FERC official Richard Hoffmann noted the relationship between the two projects as an ethical hurdle requiring "additional measures ... to assure the public that the work is being carried out in an impartial manner."

"NRG's work on the Palomar pipeline could appear to provide it with a financial interest in seeing that the Bradwood Landing LNG Project gets approved," he wrote.

complete story: Feds launch query into ethics conflict

While you are there, read the letters to the editor page, too. It will make you smile.
 

Legslative Alert! Proposal: States agreement to be required for siting LNG sites.

Legislation to Give States Final Decision on LNG Terminal Sites Has Been Introduced In Both The House and Senate!

House Bill - 2042  was sent to the House committee on Energy and Commerce last month, at the same time as Senate Bill 1174 was sent to the Senate's Energy and Natural Resources committee. The text of the bills seem to be the same, which always simplifies getting things passed.

Here's the relevant text of the bill:
 

       `(e) Siting, Construction, Expansion, and Operation of LNG Terminals-

            `(1) AUTHORITY-

                  `(A) IN GENERAL- Subject to subparagraph (B), the Commission shall approve or deny an application for the siting, construction, expansion, or operation of an LNG terminal.

                  `(B) STATE CONCURRENCE REQUIRED- The Commission shall not approve or deny an application under subparagraph (A) without the express concurrence of each State affected by the application.';

Please let our Federal Senators and Representatives know we support these bills - House Bill - 2042  / Senate Bill 1174

United States Congress

Senator Maria Cantwell (D)
via her web site 
717 Hart Senate Office Building
Washington, D.C. 20510
202-224-3441
202-228-0514 (fax)
  or
Marshall House
1313 Officer's Row
Vancouver, WA 98661
888-648-7328
360-696-7838
360-696-7844 (fax)

Senator Patty Murray (D)
via her web site 
US Senator
173 Russell Senate Office Building
Washington, D.C. 20510
202-224-2621
202-224-0238 (fax)
  or
Marshall House
1323 Officer's Row
Vancouver, WA  98661
360-696-7797
360-696-7798 (fax)

Representative Brian Baird (D - 3rd Cong. Dist)
via his web site   
1421 Longworth House Office Building
Washington D.C. 20515
202-225-3536
202-225-3478 (fax)
  or
O.O. Howard House
120 Union Ave., Ste 105
Olympia, WA 98501       
360-352-9768                
360-352-9241 (fax)
  or   
750 Anderson St. Ste. B
Vancouver, WA 98661            
360-695-6292
360-695-6197 (fax)

LNG meeting: 'smacks of federal conspiracy'

Interesting article in the Daily Astorian about recent meetings between FERC and Northern Star that were off-limits to other concerned parties.

A meeting between Bradwood Landing representatives and Federal Energy Regulatory Commission staff was apparently closed to some intervenors while others were invited to attend.

Astoria resident Peter Huhtala, one of 10 intervenors involved in a dispute over the meeting, said FERC unfairly excluded legitimate parties from the talk and "it smacks of federal conspiracy."

Huhtala joined with Columbia Riverkeeper and other groups in filing a complaint against FERC staff and Bradwood Landing developer Northern Star Natural Gas Co. Their complaint is the Dec. 14 meeting violates FERC rules on "ex parte" or exclusive communications with project applicants.

FERC is the federal agency that will ultimately approve or deny the Bradwood Landing application to build an LNG facility 20 miles east of Astoria on the Columbia River. Intervenors are parties that have a voice in the approval process.

FERC spokeswoman Tamara Young-Allen said her agency takes "ex parte" rules "very seriously" and the Commission could decide to reassign the Bradwood Landing case to different

FERC staff as a result of the complaint. FERC has specific rules on agency meetings with project applicants. In many cases, intervenors are required to be invited, and public notice must be given even if the meeting isn't public.

According to the complaint document, no public notice was given for the meeting and some intervenors were refused by FERC staff when they tried to attend.

By CASSANDRA PROFITA The Daily Astorian

Complete article: LNG meeting: 'smacks of federal conspiracy'.

LNG veil of secrecy on security to be lifted 'early next year'

article from the Daily Astorian

 

A report detailing safety and security issues connected to the proposed Bradwood liquefied natural gas project will be released to the public, Clatsop County announced Thursday.

County Administrator Scott Derickson said the U.S. Coast Guard and Northern Star Natural Gas, the project developer, have agreed to make available the Coast Guard's review and response to the company's Waterway Suitability Assessment.

The assessment will address at least some safety and security issues, including tanker traffic, although it will also have information redacted for security purposes. It should be interesting to see what actually makes it through the review process.

But here's the thing I really love. Remember this article from last week? Shipping impacts left out of LNG report which said:

"...the company contended large vessel traffic on the Columbia River had already been assessed by other projects such as the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers' Channel Improvement Project, which considered the impacts of deepening the shipping channel for vessels traveling upriver. Northern Star did not feel the need to do another review based on the impacts of LNG vessels."

Reread that last sentence. Then read this quote from Gary Coppedge in today's article:

"All our studies show there will be no substantial impact, aside from another ship on the river..."

Ummm, Gary, what studies? Didn't you just say you didn't do any studies? Although to be fair, I guess if you didn't do any studies, it makes it awfully easy to say that the ones you did didn't show anything negative. Or something.

ADDENDUM:

Oh wait! There another thing. While perusing the Partner list at Northern Star's site, I noticed that the company listed as providing "river transit analysis" is Parsons Brinckerhoff. That would be the same Parsons Brinckerhoff that was the project manager on Boston's Big Dig project that collapsed last summer, killing Milena Del Valle. The same company that is now being sued for gross negligence and breach of contract and being investigated on criminal charges in relation to Del Valle's death.

This is a nice piece on the pending lawsuit in the Boston Herald:

State Attorney General Tom Reilly, whose term is up at the end of the year, said the lawsuit being filed in state court is based on the belief that the project managers knew early on about problems with the epoxy bolt system used to secure 4,500-pound cement ceiling panels but didn’t take steps to fix it.

"The clock was ticking. The fuse was lit. It was just a matter of time until this tragedy occurred," Reilly said.

    The lawsuit seeks unspecified damages for repairs, loss of tunnel use and toll revenue and other economic factors. ... A separate criminal investigation is ongoing. Evidence is now being presented to a grand jury that will decide whether criminal charges up to manslaughter will be brought, Reilly said.

    "I can tell you this: What I saw was a crime. ... It will be up to the grand jury to decide whether it is," Reilly said Monday in announcing the state lawsuit.

I don't know about you, but I'm feeling safer already.

Shipping impacts left out of LNG report

Again, from Cassandra Profita at the Daily Astorian:

"Federal officials are not satisfied with the biological impact report submitted by Northern Star Natural Gas Co. for its proposed Bradwood Landing liquefied natural gas terminal, according to a document recently filed with the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission.

The Bradwood Landing report left out the impact of LNG ships on the Columbia River and in the Pacific Ocean and key details are missing from its mitigation plans, according to the filing, the result of a phone conversation among multiple agencies' officials and the company's contracted engineer. Because of the company's outstanding data issues, FERC project manager Paul Friedman said his agency, which will ultimately approve or deny the terminal siting request, has not set a project review schedule for other officials to follow."

Northern Star contends that

"...large vessel traffic on the Columbia River had already been assessed by other projects such as the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers' Channel Improvement Project, which considered the impacts of deepening the shipping channel for vessels traveling upriver. Northern Star did not feel the need to do another review based on the impacts of LNG vessels.

Nice try guys, but the Coast Guard begs to differ.

"Jack Hug, a Coast Guard attorney, told the company LNG ships are different types of vessels than those considered in the channel deepening project, and the review for the Corps project did not consider terrorist acts. Dean Amundson of the Coast Guard said the company's project raises its own potential issues of vessel traffic and ship strikes off the coast.

Cathy Tortorici, chief of the Oregon Coast and Lower Columbia branch of National Marine Fisheries Service, said her agency looked at the impact of dredging for the Corps project, but the dredging project was designed for existing ships on the river, and a change in the type of vessels on the river was never considered.

Officials concluded the company should address the increase in ship traffic caused by the project, which is expected to bring in three or four LNG ships a week, as well as the fact that LNG ships are different types of vessels, and generally larger, than other ships using the river."

According to the article, other LNG projects discuss the impacts of ship traffic within a 200-nautical-mile zone of the coast, but Northern Star did not. There is also a list of other aspects of the project that Northern Star avoided addressing in their plan.

Gee, unanswered questions, ducking responsibility for the impact of their project, ignoring the concerns of both the federal licensing agency and the Coast Guard, which is tasked with keeping our river secure. I feel so much better about the proposed plant now. Don't you?

Read the entire article here.

Concerns about the estuary at the proposed Bradwood LNG site

This is an excerpt from a letter to The Daily Astorian, published today (11.24.06)

"...the zoning does not permit dredging of 55 acres of estuary used as prime salmon habitat. This has been a bone of contention for quite some time between Northern Star and Clatsop County. Kathleen Sellman, the Clatsop County Community Development director, stated in a letter to the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission on March 29, "Of particular concern is the proposed dredging activity within the AC-2 zone. Note: Dredging is not a permitted, conditional or review use in this zone. In other words, the site is not zoned appropriately for the proposed use."

Cheryl Johnson and Ted Messing
Estuary coordinators -- Columbia Riverkeeper

read the complete letter

A demonstrable FERC bias

The Center for Public Integrity has released an article detailing FERC collaboration with oil and gas companies, entitled:

Appealing to a Higher Authority
Federal energy regulators smooth the way for liquefied natural gas terminals

quote: "Over the past three years, FERC's current four commissioners have met privately at least 83 times with executives and lobbyists representing oil and gas companies  active in the LNG trade. In comparison, FERC has met privately only a handful of times with opponents of specific LNG projects."

Federal government agency contact information

The Coast Guard and the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission are apparently both still accepting public comments on the proposed LNG project at Bradwood. It's not clear exactly when they will cut off the comment period so we encourage you to write soon.

(for contact data, click the "continue reading..." link below)

Comments may be submitted via physical mail, email, or fax and should include your name and address as well as the appropriate docket number.

Coast Guard
Docket No. CGD13-05-017
Lt. Shadrack Scheirman, Commanding Officer
U.S. Coast Guard Sector Portland
6767 N. Basin Ave.
Portland, OR 97217
Email: Shadrack.L.Scheirman@uscg.mil
Fax: (503) 240-2586
Voice: (503) 247-4015

Federal Energy Regulatory Commission
Docket No.  CP06-365-000
Kimberly D. Bose, Secretary
Federal Energy Regulatory Commission
888 First St. NE, Room 1A
Washington DC 20426
File comments electronically

If you are mailing physical letters, label one copy of your comments for the attention of Gas Branch 3, PJ11.3

Important meeting in Cathlamet Oct 26

Don't let them do this to our river!

That's not a very pretty picture is it? Well, that's what we could all be looking at if the LNG transfer terminal is built at Bradwood. Those tanks are shown at about the right relative size--unlike some other images we've seen--and it gives you a bit of an idea how huge they would be.  And that's without the 300 yard  long ship--you'll just have to imagine a ship the length of three football fields and over a dozen stories tall floating next to it. Come to think of it, that's not too far from the size of those three tanks.

Well, if you don't like that picture much, here's your chance to talk about it with the people who are tasked with listening to our concerns before deciding on the suitability of putting this unsightly, and dangerous, heavy industrial development right on our front doorstep. You can discuss the proposed Liquefied Natural Gas facility that would be placed just across the river from Cathlamet and Puget Island at Bradwood. The Federal Energy Regulatory Commission (FERC) and the Coast Guard will be in Cathlamet to listen to your comments and answer your questions at 7 p.m. on Wednesday October 26th in the multi-purpose room at the Julius A. Wendt Elementary School.

The last Coast Guard/FERC meeting was in Oregon and, even though the ferry ran late so folks could attend, a number of Wahkiakum residents didn't get a chance to voice their concerns about the negative impact such a plant would have on our community. Fortunately, another meeting has finally been scheduled for this side of the river and we're hoping that everyone gets a chance to come and have their voices heard on this critical issue.

It is important that you come to this meeting—it is the only chance scheduled for residents of Wahkiakum County to be heard locally on the proposed LNG transfer terminal. If you are concerned about this potentially dangerous, heavy industrial development on the lower Columbia, and the impact on our way of life, please come and help us protect the river, and all the people who use it to work, fish, and play.

 A flyer about the meeting is available for download here. You are encouraged to print, post and distribute it (without any changes, please) to help make people aware of this meeting.

Hope to see you there!

Mark your calendars:
Coast Guard/FERC meeting with Wahkiakum County residents
7p.m. October 26th
multipurpose room
Julius A. Wendt Elementary School
265 South Third St.
Cathlamet, WA
map

I am NOT an LNG ‘acceptable risk.’

Opponents of the proposed LNG site at Bradwood wore their feelings on their bright red tshirts shirts last night at the Coast Guard/FERC meeting, and the message was clear:

I am NOT an LNG "acceptable risk"

According to the Daily Astorian, the Coast Guard says there were about 375 people attending the session at Knappa High School and it's easy to believe. The room was packed with a crowd that, unfortunately, started to trickle away as 11:00 and the final ferry run drew near. When questioned about the possibility of another meeting on the Washington side of the river so that all concerned citizens have a chance to comment, a representative of FERC said he would consider it saying, "I'm not saying yes and I'm not saying no."

Commentary from opponents was varied--a scientist drew a frighteningly plausible scenario for disaster in Astoria, fishers questioned the impact on their livelihood and safety, and residents of Puget Island cited numerous negative impacts of heavy industry on people, animals, a fragile ecosystem, and inevitably, the character of the river and their way of life. A common thread was that offshore siting should be considered, especially after it became clear that the LNG plant cited by Gary Coppedge of Northern Star as having survived a direct hit by one of the recent major Gulf hurricanes (Katrina and Rita) and a sideswipe by the other, was an offshore LNG facility.

As was noted by at least one person in a red tshirt, all but one of the speakers favoring the proposed siting were there representing a group that stood to profit from the project.

The Daily Astorian has a nice article titled "LNG foes give feds both barrels" with a number of good quotes from concerned citizens who spoke at the meeting. To quote:

Let us make no mistake and have no illusions,” said biologist and writer Robert Pyle of Grays River. “If this LNG facility goes ahead, the rural and natural setting of the lower Columbia will be changed radically and, for all practical purposes, forever.”

He added that although proponents tout the safety record of LNG, one word that is missing is “yet;” an accident worse than the pipeline explosion in Bellingham, Wash., could occur here. The facility and its construction would also have an effect on the nearby wetlands and the wildlife.

A sidebar points out that written comments are still being accepted by the Coast Guard and FERC. If you are interested in an additional meeting, you should also contact them--maybe if enough Washington residents request it, one will be scheduled. It would be nice if everyone got a chance to be heard on this huge decision.

Willamette Week story and meeting tonight

The Willamette Week Online's current cover story, Welcome to Gastoria! provides a look at all of the proposed LNG sites in the area, including Northern Star's desired site at Knappa.

Speaking of Knappa, don't forget the Coast Guard/FERC meeting tonight at the Knappa Hgh School (41535 Old Highway 30 Knappa, OR) at 7pm.

Important Upoming Meetings

Two public meetings have been scheduled for late September. The first addresses pipeline safety issues while the second is a joint Federal Energy Regulatory Commission (FERC) and Coast Guard event with a broader range of topics to be discussed.

The pipeline meeting will take place in Longvew, but details are not known yet. We will post them here as soon as they become available. (see article referenced later for more...or less...clarity on the time of the meeting)

The FERC-Coast Guard meeting in Knappa in on the 29th at the High School and provides an opportunity for people to express their concerns and raise issues regarding the proposed LNG site and related ship traffic. The Coast Guard will focus on identifying safety issues around ships during transit and while docking. FERC, on the other hand, has an open agenda where pretty much everything is on the table.

If you wish to testify at this meeting, you must notify either the Coast Guard or FERC by September 22nd. The agencies are combining their lists of peole who want to speak at the meeting, so you only have to notify one agency.

The Coast Guard will also accept written comments until October 6. Please make sure that any written comments include the Docket No. CGD13-05-017, as well as your name and address. Comments may be submitted via physical mail, email, or fax to:

Lt. Shadrack Scheirman, Commanding Officer
U.S. Coast Guard Sector Portland
6767 N. Basin Ave.
Portland, OR 97217
Email: Shadrack.L.Scheirman@uscg.mil
Fax: (503) 240-2586
Voice: (503) 247-4015

The Daily Astorian has an article about the meeting at Knappa here and another about two Northern Star open houses--one on the day of each of these meetings--here. The one in Longview is at 7 p.m. Sept. 28 at the Cowlitz P.U.D. Building, 961 12th Ave. in Longview, WA, whether this is actually the pipeline safety meeting, an open house given by Northern Star, or both is somewhat unclear. The Knappa meeting is at 5:00 M, immediately preceeding the Coast Guard-FERC meeting.

Mark these dates:

September 29th, 7:00 PM
FERC-Coast Guard
Knappa High School
41535 Old Highway 30.
Knappa, OR

September 28th
Pipeline Safety Meeting
Cowlitz County PUD
961 12th Ave
Longview, WA