The Marine Fisheries unit in the U.S. Department of Commerce clarified some earlier comments made about NorthernStar Natural Gas’s proposed Bradwood Landing liquefied natural gas (LNG) terminal along the Columbia River in Oregon that the agency and LNG proponents felt were misconstrued by some local news media. A letter was sent to the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers in Portland Friday to clarify comments that were misperceived as being against the LNG project.

Bradwood Landing has asked the Corps of Engineers for a permit to drede of the Columbia in and around its proposed docking site for LNG tankers.

Although written Dec. 17, a letter from the fisheries agency to the engineers corps surfaced in mid-January and spread doubt about NorthernStar’s plans for building the LNG terminal and it stirred local news coverage. However, the project backers said they aren’t concerned about it (see Power Market Today, Jan. 23).

“The purpose of our [Feb. 1] letter was to identify issues that we believe should be considered and addressed before the Corps of Engineers issues the requested permit,” Marine Fisheries Regional Administrator D. Robert Lohn wrote. “In effect, it was a recommendation for further information about certain issues before the Corps proceeds to decide on the [Bradwood Landing] permit request.”

He went on to say that in an earlier letter in December the fisheries agency request that the LNG proponent’s permit be denied was only “a procedural step and should not, in any way, be understood as a final determination by this agency [National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration’s (NOAA) Marine Fisheries Service] regarding the possible effects of the project or what our view might be after the additional, updated information is added to the application.”

Lohn zeroed in on three areas he labeled as being misinterpreted: (a) project fish recovery plan inconsistencies, (b) project description inconsistencies and (c) the perceived need (or lack thereof) for the project. NorthernStar’s executives indicated they were satisfied that the clarifications now have been made — the project proponents do, in fact, have a “salmon enhancement initiative,” there were no inconsistencies in the project description, and the comments in the December letter were not intended to make a determination on the project’s need.

NorthernStar’s CEO William “Si” Garrett said he was glad the agency provided the clarification. “Our consultations with NOAA and state agencies are continuing as we explain our plans to ensure our project will actually create a net ecological benefit for the Lower Columbia River.”

Although he characterized the earlier letter as “routine communication” to the engineers corps, Lohn said the news media nevertheless “characterized it as if it were a final decision or policy determination of this agency. It was not our intent.”

Therefore in Friday’s letter Lohn stated that Bradwood Landing’s backers have proposed a Salmon Enhancement Initiative, stated that his agency recognized that “the basic concept of this [LNG terminal] proposal has remained relatively unchanged,” but it could still be amended or supplemented, and finally he clarified that the fisheries unit was not concluding that the project was not needed in making comments aboiut the Corps of Engineers’ mandate to examine the need question in deciding on whether to grant a permit.

“We do not have special expertise regarding the need for energy and, by this comment, are simply requesting that the Corps confer with those agencies and individuals who are familiar with these issues and are competent to comment upon them,” Lohn said in his Feb. 1 letter.

©Copyright 2008Intelligence 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.