LNG debate continues in Washington County

Liquefied natural gas is a hot topic Down East and faceless people at the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission in Washington D.C., are accepting volumes of documents that the authors hope will influence the commission’s decision.

The federal agency has authority over the siting of at least one and possibly two LNG facilities in Washington County. The documents are available online at FERC’s Web site.

Right now competing developers have their eyes and their pocketbooks fixed on Washington County – the Oklahoma-based Quoddy Bay LNG, which hopes to build a facility at Pleasant Point with a tank farm in Perry, and the Washington D.C.-based Downeast LNG, which hopes to build a terminal and tank farm at Mill Cove in Robbinston.

The two projects have an international impact because ships traveling to either port will travel through Canadian waters. So FERC’s Web site is filled with comments from individuals and organizations from both sides of the international border. The comments range from support to outright opposition to either or both projects.

FERC is in the process of putting together environmental impact statements that will address not only environmental concerns, but also socioeconomic and safety issues.

In its submission, the Maine State Planning Office offered a unique suggestion – the developers build a single send-out line.

“The Downeast LNG and Quoddy Bay projects have both designated preferred routes for the send-out pipeline that will interconnect with the natural gas pipeline licensed to Maritimes and Northeast Pipeline LLC. As both projects are seeking certification at essentially the same time, and there is a possibility that both projects may obtain approval from FERC for construction and operation of an LNG terminal, SPO suggests that FERC’s EIS for these projects evaluate a send-out pipeline that would accommodate the combined natural gas output of both projects to the Maritimes Pipeline,” the SPO said. “The evaluation should consider whether a common send-out pipeline would result in a reduced environmental impact, as well as a reduction in property and land disturbance.”

The National Park Service had its own concerns. The agency administers the St. Croix Island International Historic Site just off Route 1 in Red Beach where the French landed in 1604 and established a short-lived colony. It asked FERC to look at air quality, marine-coastal disturbances, visual and scenic impacts and safety including 24-hour operational and security lighting.

The Maine Department of Environmental Protection told FERC it doesn’t want to be left out of the permitting process. “As we look forward to assisting FERC in its EIS development process, we likewise look forward to your agency respecting Maine’s jurisdiction over certain aspects of the project and your encouragement of Quoddy Bay LNG, LLC, to immediately begin formal pursuit of the required state issued approvals,” the state environmental agency said.

The St. Croix International Waterway Commission, an independent international commission with ties to Maine and New Brunswick, is the watchdog agency for the St. Croix River. The commission filed its concerns on behalf of the Mill Cove project in Robbinston.

“The cove lies near the seismically active Oak Bay Fault, which runs the length of the St. Croix estuary. State and federal documents and anecdotal information identify a number of fish, shellfish, avian and marine mammal species that presently or historically occupy or migrate through the immediate area,” the commission said in its submission.

The waterway commission also wants the EIS to look at the cultural impacts of the project. “Historically, the Passamaquoddy [Tribe] harvested clams and gathered herring and other migrating fish in weirs at Mill Cove. Shoreland areas that would be disturbed by this development should undergo a thorough archeological survey to identify and catalog any artifacts that may remain,” the waterway commission said.

The Canadians also have filed with FERC. They were less complimentary and flat out don’t want either project.

“We strongly oppose the placement of LNG terminals on the bay and the inevitable industrialization of the area for reasons including harm to the preservation of cultural resources, the destruction of a strong and sustainable tourism industry, national sovereignty, safety, security, the environmental impact on ocean life,” the Fundy/Culture Museum Network group said in its submission.

The Charlotte County Fishing Industry, which represents fisheries groups from Grand Manan to Campobello Island, also is unhappy.

“We estimate that the fishing industry brings in over $200 million [Canadian] annually into the Charlotte County economy,” the group said in its submission. “It is the primary source of income for a large portion of our population with 225 lobster boats each employing three-four people, 1,000 jobs in the sardine industry [not including fishermen], the scallop, groundfish, sea urchin and clam fisheries, and the many spin-off jobs in fish buying, processing, transport and gear.”

To access the FERC Web site go to www.ferc.gov. The docket numbers are PF06-11 for the Quoddy Bay project and PF06-13 for the Downeast LNG project.