community
Pipeline Safety a Concern
at Oregon LNG Meeting continued from front page
ment since 2004, would include an
LNG export terminal in Warrenton.
The project proposes taking natural
gas obtained from Canada through
the controversial method of hydrau-
lic fracturing or “fracking” and trans-
porting it across Washington through
an expanded Williams Northwest
Pipeline. The pipeline would cross
the Columbia River near Columbia
City, OR and Woodland, WA and then
traverse Columbia County in a thirty-
six inch pipeline. At the Warrenton
plant the natural gas would be con-
verted to liquefied natural gas in or-
der to be shipped to potential Asian
markets.
The pipeline crosses Rock
Creek, the water source for the City
of Vernonia, about four miles above
the city intake. It also crosses numer-
ous other rivers and streams including
the Nehalem River twice. It mostly
travels across sparsely populated ar-
eas owned by timber companies and
only directly affects five landowners
in Columbia County.
Opponents to the project
have previously raised concerns that
include: destruction of salmon habi-
tat in the Columbia River and the loss
of commercial fishing areas due to
exclusion zones around the terminal;
harm to the water quality of regional
rivers and streams that the pipeline
would cross; and threats to public
safety.
During the January 29 meet-
ing in Vernonia twenty-two citizens
signed up to ask formal questions,
which were followed by a more in-
formal discussion period.
Members of the audience
asked numerous questions concern-
ing the safety of the pipeline and
were repeatedly told that pipeline
safety does not fall under the purview
of any of the agencies on the panel,
but is instead the responsibility of
the US Department of Transporta-
tion. Several citizens mentioned re-
cent documented pipeline accidents
and concerns about how a potential
explosion could impact local timber-
land by causing forest fires and affect
local emergency response agencies.
In addition to safety issues,
citizens raised concerns about the
“public interest” of the project and
noted that since the project takes
natural gas from Canada and exports
it to Asia, there is little or no benefit
to local economies and communities
who take all the risk of being im-
pacted by a potential disaster. Ac-
cording to the Oregon LNG website,
during construction the project would
employ an average of 3,000 workers
for more than five years and directly
employ 150 people once the terminal
becomes operational.
Citizens also raised concerns
about the impact the project would
ment from 1957 given to the Army
Corps of Engineers to dump dredge
spoils on the site may supersede the
land lease. Oregon LNG has filed suit
against the US government to gain
access to the land.
Members of the panel rep-
resenting the Army Corps declined
to comment on the current litigation
during the meeting in Vernonia.
Despite those potential road-
blocks, Oregon LNG has continued
to pursue the permit process.
DEQ is responsible for re-
viewing a proposed project permit to
ensure that the Oregon LNG project
meets state water quality standards,
does not degrade water quality, and
maintains waterways for recreational
use and as aquatic habitat. DEQ has
the ability to grant or deny 401 water
quality certification.
DEQ is currently accepting
public comments on the project until
February 16, 2015. If DEQ proposes
to grant the permit it will be placed on
public notice and public hearings will
be held to accept formal comments.
When asked, Christensen and Purcell
said a public hearing on the pipeline
portion of the project would be held
in Vernonia.
The Army Corps of Engi-
neers is also responsible for the re-
view of the Clean Water Act Section
404 Permit and can deny the permit if
they determine that the project is not
in the public interest.
The project is also subject to
review by the Federal Energy Regu-
latory Commission (FERC), which
will issue a draft Environmental Im-
pact Statement (EIS) on the project.
Federal agencies cooperating in the
preparation of the EIS include the US
Department of Energy, US Depart-
ment of Transportation, US Fish and
Wildlife Service, US Coast Guard,
US Army Corps of Engineers, and
US Environmental Protection Agen-
cy.
Once the draft EIS has been
issued there will be a forty-five day
comment period as well as public
comment meetings before a final EIS
is issued.
have on global climate change.
They also questioned the cost
of filing permits and pointed out that
Oregon LNG only pays $100 to file
a permit with the Army Corps, indi-
cating American taxpayers pay for
the expense of the Army Corps to
evaluate the permit application, ac-
cept public comment and hold public
meetings. The DEQ representatives
noted that the cost of the DEQ per-
mits are commensurate with the work
needed to process them and usually
run in the tens of thousands of dol-
lars.
In addition to needing to
secure permits from the above men-
tioned regulatory agencies, Oregon
LNG currently faces several hurdles
that could kill the project.
On December 17, 2014, the
Oregon Court of Appeals upheld the
Clatsop County Board of Commis-
sioners decision to deny the pipeline
due to land use rules.
Oregon LNG is also
facing current litigation which
Send written comments to
indicates they don’t have ac-
DEQ:
cess to the land where they in-
401 Public Comments
tend to construct the export ter-
minal. Oregon LNG subleased DEQ Northwest Region Office
2020 SW 4 th Ave.
the land from the Port of As-
Portland, OR 970201
toria, but a pre-existing ease-
or Email:
401publiccomments@deq.stateor.us
Comments due by 5:00 PM Monday,
February 16, 2015
503-229-5379
Fax: 503-229-6957
To stay informed:
Please visit us on Facebook at Vernonia’s BIGGEST Class
Reunion. We are searching for address/contact informa-
tion for Friends/Alumni of Vernonia Schools.
To be added to our mailing list please email us:
Vernoniareunion@hotmail.com, private message us on
Facebook or mail to: Vernonia’s Biggest Reunion
c/o Ronda Lennen, 1000 Missouri Ave. Vernonia, OR 97064
Subscribe to FERC’s eSubscription at
http://www.ferc.gov/doc-fillings/
esubscription.asp
and register to follow docket numbers:
CP09-6, CP09-7, CP13-507, PF12-18
and PF12-20
For assistance contact FERC at
1-866-208-3676 TTY 202-502-8659
eComment does not require registration
on the FERC website.
https://www.ferc.gov/docs-filing/
ecomment.asp
february5
2015
7
Are Pipelines Safe?
One of the major concerns raised by
local residents is the safety of the proposed
Oregon Pipeline project, which would transport
natural gas through a 36 inch high pressure
pipeline across Columbia County on mostly
private timberlands to an export facility, Oregon
LNG, in Warrenton, OR. The pipeline would
cross Rock Creek about four miles above
the intake for Vernonia’s Water plant. Local
residents have raised concerns about the impact
a pipeline accident could have locally, including
the potential for a forest fire in the event of an
explosion and water quality degradation if there
was a leak.
Local residents’ fears have only
increased. In January 2015 alone there have
been four pipeline accidents in the United States:
• On January 26 a natural gas pipeline in Brooke
County, West Virginia exploded in a ball of flames.
No one was injured but flames melted the siding
off one home and damaged a power line.
• On January 22 three million gallons of saltwater
drilling waste spilled from a North Dakota pipeline.
• On January 17 a pipeline dumped up to 50,000
gallons of crude oil into the Yellowstone River,
leaving thousands of Montanans without drinking
water.
• On January 14 a gas pipeline in Mississippi
exploded, rattling residents’ windows and causing
a massive smoke plume.
A wikipedia search for “List of pipeline
accidents in the United States since the year
2000” produces fifteen pages of results.
According to FracDallas.org, a website
devoted to exploring the facts, truths and myths
about natural gas exploration and production,
since 2001 gas pipeline explosions and other
accidents have resulted in the loss of at least
forty-five lives and many more serious injuries.
Pipeline safety is regulated by the Federal
Pipeline Hazardous Materials and Pipeline
Safety Administration (PHMSA), a division of the
US Department of Transportation. According to
FracDallas.org PHMSA only has funding for 137
safety inspectors and often employs less.
A recent report by the National
Transportation Safety Board (NTSB) found that
gas companies failed to conduct inspections
or tests that could have found weaknesses
that caused several major accidents and that
improvements are needed. According to the
report the US is crisscrossed by nearly 300,000
miles of gas transmission pipelines, more
than half of which were installed before 1970.
FracDallas.org reports the nations total energy
pipeline network exceeds 2.5 million miles,
operated by 3,000 separate companies. The
NTSB report does say the pre-1970 pipelines
have a significantly higher failure rate because
they have been exposed to environmental forces
longer and newer pipelines have been made with
improved safety technology.
The list of pipeline accidents is immense.
But one recent accident stands out.
On March 31, 2014 a twelve inch
pipeline at the Williams Northwest LNG facility in
Plymouth, WA exploded, injuring five employees,
one seriously, and forcing the evacuation of
1,000 residents. Williams Northwest will own the
proposed pipeline expansion that will connect to
the Oregon Pipeline in Woodland, WA. The LNG
plant where the explosion occurred is a smaller
version of the LNG storage terminal that the
Oregon Pipeline will connect to in Warrenton.
