Seizing on a provision in the new federal Energy Policy Act, the California Energy Commission (CEC) staff Wednesday released a 38-page “Safety Advisory Report” on the liquefied natural gas (LNG) receiving terminal proposed by Sound Energy Solutions (SES) in the Port of Long Beach. An official joint environmental impact report by FERC and the port is due for release later this month. Under the new federal energy act, FERC is obligated to address any safety issues raised by the CEC staff document.

The report cites as a “threshold question” whether an LNG terminal should be sited in a populated area, meaning FERC should address this in the draft environmental report.

The CEC staff report acknowledges that the joint draft environmental report is imminent, but to date sufficient safety analysis has not been done on the proposed Long Beach LNG site. “Placement of such a facility in a densely populated high-impact area must not occur until a comprehensive risk, economic and fiscal impact assessment is complete,” the CEC report concluded, going on to list seven areas that must be addressed by FERC and the port.

One of the seven areas is to develop what the CEC staff called “reasonable worst-case scenarios using risk and hazard analyses, including terrorist attacks.” The report goes over more safety issues and concerns related to the existing and projected demographics in and around the busy Port of Long Beach location.

Numerous LNG safety studies and reports are cited, including the recent federal Department of Energy (DOE) study done by Sandia National Laboratories in New Mexico, which recommends that “risk identification and risk management should be conducted in cooperation with appropriate stakeholders, including public safety officials and elected officials.”

One of the seven stipulated steps in a “minimum assessment” outlined by the report would be for final safety criteria for any terminal to include the recommendations of the Long Beach city fire and police departments, which are establishing recommendations for mitigating against any negative incidents at the proposed LNG facility.

“In light of [Sandia’s report], a threshold question that needs to be addressed in reviewing the SES proposal is whether or not an LNG facility should be located in an area of high population density, and, if so, how close to a highly populated area [it] should be, and what mitigation measures are required to diminish any dangers to the local population in the event of a catastrophe at the facility.”

Among the “disadvantages” to a proposed port siting in the report are both “catastrophic accident potential” and the threat of being a “terrorist target.”

Among the local and state government bodies helping the CEC staff prepare this report are: California Air Resources Board (CARB), California Coastal Commission (CCC), California Public Utilities Commission (CPUC), California State Lands Commission, Division of Oil, Gas and Geothermal Resources, and the City and Port of Long Beach.

“As such, this report presents a comprehensive state and local agency perspective on the project, as directed 2005 Energy Policy Act,” the report said, noting that each agency, however, may be offering additional information in the review of the formal joint draft environmental report.

Under the provisions of the new federal energy act, state governors could name a lead agency (California’s governor named the CEC) to provide a safety advisory to FERC within 30 days of the new law becoming effective, which was last Aug. 9.

©Copyright 2005Intelligence Press Inc. All rights reserved. The preceding news reportmay not be republished or redistributed, in whole or in part, in anyform, without prior written consent of Intelligence Press, Inc.