Oregonian Op-Ed by Nick Engelfried slams the legislature’s “fast-track” bill that would result in an abbreviated permit process for the Palomar Pipeline.

February 03, 2010, 7:05AM

By Nick Engelfried

Suppose you had one month to address Oregon’s biggest challenges, from raising education standards to maintaining our competitiveness in the increasingly crowded green economy. This month the Oregon Legislature has just such a chance before it, as lawmakers meet in a special  session.

Given the stakes, you’d hope legislators would use the limited time of the special session to make concrete deliverables in the realms of education, economic vitality and environmental safeguards. You might not want your elected officials devoting the session to a resurrected version of a bill that failed to pass in 2009, and which redefines the language in relatively obscure land-use codes.

But then, you probably haven’t given thousands of dollars’ worth of campaign contributions to your legislators. You’re not Northwest Natural Gas.

Last year, House Bill 3058 failed in the Oregon Senate, but managed to make a name for several legislators as allies of the controversial liquefied natural gas industry. Dubbed the LNG fast-track bill by environmentalists and landowners, it would have speeded up the process by which LNG companies and other corporations apply for permits to begin environmentally destructive work on private land.

HB 3058 went down in flames, but not before The Oregonian published an investigation of the gas industry’s power in politics, reporting that Northwest Natural donated $210,000 to political candidates since the beginning of 2008. With the Legislature poised to take up a new version of the LNG fast-track Bill this month, it’s time to ask just how long the gas industry will be allowed to guide Oregon politics.

-Like last year’s fast-track bill, this month’s Senate Bill 1020 has been presented as unrelated to LNG. Yet the truth is SB 1020 is a windfall to the LNG industry and would directly benefit Northwest Natural. Along with out-of-state energy giant TransCanada, Northwest Natural is backing the controversial Palomar LNG pipeline through Oregon. With environmental and land- rights activists opposed to the project, the future of Palomar is far from certain. SB 1020 could give it a shot of adrenaline. With big money sitting on the outcome, the gas industry has set its sights on passing an LNG fast-track bill.

As a member of the steering committee for the Northwest Natural Accountability Project, I’m  concerned about the company’s undue influence in politics. Through the project’s “Hey! NW Natural” campaign, environmentalists, landowners, students and stakeholders are pushing Northwest Natural to protect the interests of its customers, who are adversely affected when a corporate lobby decides which bills the Legislature takes seriously. In the wake of a U.S. Supreme Court ruling that corporations can give unlimited funds directly to political candidates, this cause has become all the more important.

So as lawmakers assemble for the special session, take a moment to ask yourself who your elected officials are representing. They should be serving you and the countless other Oregonians who voted them into office. Anyone got $210,000?

Nick Engelfried lives in Hillsboro.

Link to article: http://www.oregonlive.com/opinion/index.ssf/2010/02/high_stakes_lng_and_the_legisl.html

This Tuesday an important decision-maker in charge of permitting all new LNG and pipeline projects will be visiting Portland. Jon Wellinghoff, the chair of the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission is the key-note speaker at the Green Professionals Conference at the Lloyd Center.  Wellinghoff voted to oppose Bradwood LNG and Jordon Cove LNG, and we want to say Thank You. We will also urge Wellinghoff to move FERC towards including a greenhouse gas emissions and needs analysis in FERC’s environmental review process.This federal commission needs to know that we want climate change to be considered when deciding whether or not to approve new energy projects.

If you’d like to join us, meet on Tuesday morning at 8AM on NE 11th & Holladay (right across from the LloydCenter MAX). If you would like to listen to the speeches by Jon Wellinghoff and Bill Bradbury in the conference, you can register for free here: http://www.green-professional.com/component/chronocontact/?chronoformname=FreeReg

To find out how much money your legislator has taken from NW Natural click here.

Within the next few weeks your State Senator and Representative may vote on the reintroduced LNG Fast Track Bill. This bill would undermine landowners’ rights and streamline the permitting process for companies like NW Natural to build LNG-related pipelines in Oregon.

In the last legislative session this bill was stopped in the Senate amidst a swarm of controversy, including NW Natural’s massive campaign contributions to Oregon’s elected officials. But, NW Natural has a vested interest in the passage of this bill to fast-track their proposed Palomar Pipeline and they are using their political sway to push the bill forward in the special session.

According to the Oregonian,

Since the beginning of last year’s election cycle, LNG supporters have marinated lawmakers with cash contributions…To ensure the company [NW Natural] is heard in the Legislature, it spent about $210,000 on campaign contributions since the beginning of 2008.

NW Natural should not be able to influence legislation and wield their economic power in Oregon state politics at the expense of Oregon farmers, foresters, and even their own customers. Follow the link below to find out how much money your legislator has taken from NW Natural, and then demand your legislators represent the best interest of the Oregon public when they vote on this bill.

Send a message to Salem leadership reminding them to represent you and other Oregonians, not the special interests of the powerful gas lobby.

Even if your private property isn’t affected by the Palomar pipeline, your public lands, watersheds and forests are impacted, and should have a say in NW Natural’s activities. As one NW Natural customer commented,

Regardless of how you stand on the LNG issue, the fact that jumped out at me is a monopoly utility (NW Natural) is using my ratepayer money to lobby my state legislator on issues potentially against my interests. And I have absolutely no say because I need to use natural gas in my home and I have no other choice but to use NW Natural.

You can have a say. Don’t allow this special session to be commandeered by NW Natural’s self-serving agenda. Send a message to your legislators now.

If the link does not work for you, copy and paste this link into your address bar: http://salsa.democracyinaction.org/o/1810/t/10427/campaign.jsp?campaign_KEY=28168

While landowners along the proposed pipeline routes in Oregon have been working to protect their crops from pipeline development, some politicians are selling them out. The LNG fast-track bill, which was defeated last year, has now reemerged and would provide pipeline companies with rights to private lands, without landowners consent. Here is the scoop from Oregon Citizens Against the Pipeline:

In the last legislative session the No-LNG movement worked hard to successfully defeat House Bill 3058, the LNG Fast-track bill. That bill that would have undermined property rights and threatened natural resources by allowing pipeline and utility companies to get permits to fill wetlands on private lands without landowner permission, thereby hastening the permitting process for LNG-related pipelines. Now, Senator Metsger is proposing the same bill for the February Special Session.

Click here to send a message to your legislator.

The passage of this bill would provide Palomar (NW Natural), Oregon LNG, NorthernStar, and the Pacific Connector Pipeline a shortcut in the permitting process, further threatening landowners already facing eminent domain for these speculative energy projects. The bill is currently listed under the title LC 85 and will be considered during a work session next week in the Senate Business and Transportation Committee on Wednesday, January 13th @ 1pm in Hearing Room F at the State Capitol.

What you can do:
Please contact the legislators listed below and your own State Senator and Representative to voice your opposition to this bill. Or, click here to be redirected to a page where you can send an automatic message to your legislators.

We must impress upon the legislature that this is a controversial bill that shouldn’t be considered in a special session designed to remedy the budget crisis in Oregon. We also need to tell them that it is wrong to treat private LNG speculation in the same manner as public projects like roads and sewer lines. Contacting the legislators below is absolutely critical to our success in defeating this bill again.

When you contact these decision makers, tell them:
1) You oppose any bill that would fast-track the permitting process for LNG-related pipelines.
2) LC 85 would be a controversial bill that did not pass in the 2009 session, as HB 3058, and shouldn’t be considered during the special session.
3) At the very least, Senator Metsger’s transportation bill, LC 85, needs to be amended to exclude projects by private corporations. If the permitting for public roadways needs to be facilitated, it can be done without also facilitating private projects as well. It is unacceptable for the state legislature to facilitate the degradation of property rights for the sake of speculative private projects, particularly ones like LNG that Oregon Dept. of Energy says we don’t need.

Important legislators to contact:

-Senate President Peter Courtney, District 11, D: 503-986-1600, sen.petercourtney@state.or.us

-Senate Majority Leader Richard Devlin, District 19, D: 503-986-1719,sen.richarddevlin@state.or.us

-Senator Brian Boquist, District 12, R: 503-986-1712, sen.brianboquist@state.or.us

-Senator Ted Ferrioli, District 30, R: 503-986-1950 or 541-490-6528, sen.tedferrioli@state.or.us

-Senator Metsger, District 26, D: 503-986-1726, sen.rickmetsger@state.or.us

-Senator George, District 13, R: 503-986-1713, sen.larrygeorge@state.or.us

-Senator Schrader, District 20, D: 503-986-1720, sen.marthaschrader@state.or.us

-Senator Starr, District 15, R: 503-986-1715, sen.brucestarr@state.or.us

-Senator Verger, District 5, D: 503-986-1705, sen.joanneverger@state.or.us

-Your own State Senator and Representative: To find out who your own legislators are, you can find out by visiting http://www.leg.state.or.us/findlegsltr/home.htm and entering your physical address. Then send them a message too!

Update from Columbia Riverkeeper:

According to the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission (FERC), the Bradwood LNG project will be formally reviewed by the National Marine Fisheries Service (NMFS) in the coming months. LNG opponents are confident that the agencies will conclude that the Bradwood LNG terminal will harm protected salmon species.

Opponents of the Bradwood project contend that the project obviously harms endangered salmon because of massive dredging, pipeline construction, and other proposed pollution in critical salmon habitat.

Brett VandenHeuvel, Executive Director of Columbia Riverkeeper, asserts that FERC is pressing for a decision based on inadequate information.  “NMFS has repeatedly raised concerns about the project’s harm to salmon.  In 2007 and again in late 2009, NMFS asked for additional data on the project’s impacts, and FERC has refused to cooperate.  We are confident that FERC’s dismissive approach and this project violate the Endangered Species Act.”

In a December 29, 2009 letter to NMFS, FERC refused to provide the necessary information, stating, “certain other information cannot reasonably be developed or obtained during the scope of the consultation and therefore, will not be provided.”

Local residents near the Bradwood LNG terminal pointed to an uncertain future for the Bradwood project. George Exum, who lives close to the terminal site and acts as Chair of Wahkiakum Friends of the River, described the terminal’s harm to salmon.  “For years, we have argued that this project will destroy critical habitat and endanger protected salmon with massive dredging.  The tankers, alone, will kill thousands of endangered salmon by withdrawing millions of gallons for ballast and engine cooling.”

Added Exum, “FERC’s refusal to provide the needed data is bad news for Bradwood LNG.  This project is in serious trouble.”

Proposed in 2005, the Bradwood LNG project has failed to obtain key permits.  The project must comply with the Endangered Species Act in order to proceed.

#

Natural Oregon: http://www.naturaloregon.org/2009/12/08/video-hey-nw-natural-rallies-to-block-palomar-pipeline/

KGW: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=M7PRaU3MYhs

Monica Vaughan (541) 521-1832

NW Natural ratepayers opposing NW Natural’s plans for Mt. Hood National Forest will confront the gas utility on Tuesday, December 8th at noon in a press conference highlighting the impacts of NW Natural’s proposed LNG Palomar Pipeline to public lands. The pipeline threatens public lands – public lands owned by us.

This action follows a recent victory for Columbia Riverkeeper and landowners along the Palomar Pipeline route. Against NW Natural’s wishes, and ordered by federal court, a list of over 1500 impacted landowners threatened by the development of the Palomar Pipeline has now become public.

The Hey NW Natural campaign contends that everyone who enjoys the clean drinking water and clean air we rely on from Mt. Hood National Forest should be on the list of impacted landowners. – Over 400 people have added their names to the list of those impacted and oppose the pipeline.

“Oregonians who rely on the Mt. Hood watershed for drinking water and recreational users of our National and state forests are impacted by the Palomar pipeline,” says Monica Vaughan. “Worse yet, because LNG would increase Oregon’s greenhouse gas emissions, all of Oregon will be affected by the impacts of climate change”.

NW Natural’s proposed Palomar Pipeline would impact 1500 private properties, and clearcut through 2 state forests and Mt. Hood National Forest. The pipeline would devastate both private farms and public lands – public lands owned by us.

Martin Evans, who will speak at NW Natural at noon asserts, “Public lands belong to people, not corporations.” Evans can be seen with his family in a campaign video found here: www.youtube.com/HeyNwNatural.

The Hey NW Natural campaign is a new campaign uniting farmers with gas costumers to oppose NW Natural’s LNG Palomar Pipeline. The campaign seeks to hold the gas giant accountable by amplifying the concerns of NW Natural customers and neighbors.

Over the past several years, thousands of Oregonians have had their land targeted for pipeline development by multiple LNG and pipeline companies.  One of these projects, NW Natural’s Palomar pipeline, would connect to the Bradwood LNG terminal.  As the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission (FERC) conducted its review of this 223-mile pipeline, it became clear that this lead permitting agency was not notifying affected parties of key meetings.

At one meeting, I witnessed multiple landowners attend only because their neighbors or CRK organizers had informed them that FERC was holding a hearing, only to find that the pipeline went directly through their farms!  One landowner approached me and told me how incredibly frustrating this was because he was completely unprepared to testify about the impacts to his land.  After this happened on multiple occasions, at multiple hearings, we decided that it was time to take action.

Columbia Riverkeeper and Willamette Riverkeeper requested the address lists for the Palomar pipeline under the Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) because the company refused to publish the list (unlike Oregon LNG, which did publish its list), and many people complained to us that they did not receive notice from FERC about Palomar or other pipelines.  Our LNG coalition wanted the mailing lists to ensure that FERC was doing its job to notify people, and if they weren’t, we wanted to warn people.

Initially, FERC responded to our request by saying that there was no list of landowners.  This was an obvious and clumsy lie.  How then, we asked, did FERC do mailings to notify people of meetings?  After further consideration (and being ordered by federal court to be questioned by our attorneys), FERC then admitted to having a list, but refused to provide the list saying that they wanted to protect landowners’ privacy!  FERC blacked out all the names of individuals.

In 2009, in federal court, we successfully argued that, if FERC cared about privacy so much, then why does FERC share the list with Palomar?  After all, Palomar pipeline (a project of NW Natural gas and Transcanada) sends letters about eminent domain to landowners that they often find threatening.

Incidentally, after our request, NW Natural’s Palomar project wrote FERC a letter telling FERC not to release the lists to Riverkeeper. (attached) Clearly, the company was seeking to keep people in the dark.  They could have released the list at any time.

During the course of our case, we discovered that FERC had mishandled hundreds of FOIA requests over recent years.  Yet, FERC continued to refuse to release the list that should obviously have been public information.  This summer, a federal court ordered FERC to release the list to Columbia and Willamette Riverkeeper.

The Court stated that “FOIA’s purpose is to pierce the veil of administrative secrecy and … open agency action to the light of public scrutiny.”

FERC decided to appeal this decision to the 9^th Circuit Court of Appeals.  Over the ensuing months, they changed their minds and agreed to produce the list, which we recently received.  They agreed to withdraw their appeal and settle the case with CRK and WRK.

It is outrageous that our groups had to sue FERC to obtain this list.

It’s even more outrageous that so many meetings and hearings have already occurred where the public’s voice has been muffled by a secretive and botched process. At any time, either FERC or Palomar could have released the list and saved us all the time and effort.  Their refusal to do so indicates that they do not want an open, transparent process.

For Palomar, the more people learn about the impacts of the project – not just on family farms, forests, vineyards, and fishing grounds, but also on our public lands and rivers – the more resistance grows.  Beyond being a severe disruption to private landowners, the project will clearcut hundreds of acres across the Mt. Hood National Forest and harm hundreds streams and rivers, including the Columbia River at the Bradwood LNG terminal.

The list shows over 1500 names of families who will be impacted by the project, but the real story of the list is that there are millions of Oregonians who are also at risk of losing their public resources to this imported fossil fuel energy scheme.  It’s time for FERC to stop rubberstamping LNG projects, and for NW Natural gas to stop pushing LNG on Oregonians who neither need it nor want it.

-Dan Serres, Conservation Director Columbia Riverkeeper

NW Natural ratepayers opposing NW Natural’s plans for Mt. Hood National Forest will confront the gas utility at their headquarters (220 2nd Ave) on Tuesday, December 8th at noon in a press conference highlighting the impacts of NW Natural’s proposed LNG Palomar Pipeline to public lands. The pipeline threatens public lands – public lands owned by us.

This action follows a recent victory for Columbia Riverkeeper and landowners along the Palomar Pipeline route. Against NW Natural’s wishes, and ordered by federal court, a list of over 1500 impacted landowners threatened by the development of the Palomar Pipeline has now become public.

The Hey NW Natural campaign contends that everyone who enjoys the clean drinking water and clean air we rely on from Mt. Hood National Forest should be on the list of impacted landowners. – Over 400 people have added their names to the list of those impacted and oppose the pipeline.

“Oregonians who rely on the Mt. Hood watershed for drinking water and recreational users of our National and state forests are impacted by the Palomar pipeline,” says Monica Vaughan. “Worse yet, because LNG would increase Oregon’s greenhouse gas emissions, all of Oregon will be affected by the impacts of climate change”.

NW Natural’s proposed Palomar Pipeline would impact 1500 private properties, and clearcut through 2 state forests and Mt. Hood National Forest. The pipeline would devastate both private farms and public lands – public lands owned by us.

Martin Evans, who will speak at NW Natural at noon asserts, “Public lands belong to people, not corporations.” Evans can be seen with his family in a campaign video found here: www.youtube.com/HeyNwNatural.

Speakers include:

Carolyn & Martin Evans, NW Natural customers and shareholders, progressive Portland family and Bark volunteers. www.youtube.com/heynwnatural

Nick Engelfried, NW Natural customer, organizer with Cascade Climate Network. http://itsgettinghotinhere.org/author/nickengelfried/

Olivia Schmidt, NW Natural customer, Oregon Sierra Club.

Lola Goldberg, NW Natural customer, Bark volunteer and cherisher of wild lands.
****

The following are comments submitted by petition signers:

Nick Engelfried “I am 21 years old, and will have to deal with the impact that projects like the Palomar Pipeline are going to have on our planet. By opening the Oregon market to another imported, carbon-intensive fossil fuel, the Palomar project threatens or climate and national security. The Palomar pipeline will also damage Oregon’s river and forest ecosystems, making it harder for already pressured wildlife populations to deal with adapt to climate change. Please pull out of the Palomar Pipeline project right away!”

Trip Jennings         “As a National Geographic Explorer and film maker, I have the opportunity to travel places few people see and experience so it is with a very well researched background that I can say there are few places as special as Northwest forests. I have spent time following the route of the proposed pipeline and have seen the patches of old growth that it plows through. They are beautiful and there are very few of them left. The fact that the pipeline hits many of the remaining old growth patches adds insult to injury. As a NW Natural customer and affected landowner of US and Oregon public lands I am asking you to stop the Palomar Pipeline.”

Lola Goldberg         “We need to protect all remaining public lands. The health of the vital watersheds that run through these lands, and the animals that live there, depend on protection from further development. I frequently hike in the Mt. Hood National Forest and cherish all wild lands.”

Carolyn Evans         “I value Mt. Hood National Forest for hiking, mushroom hunting, swimming, and family picnics. We have already sacrificed enough of our forests to timber cutting and I don’t want to sacrifice any more of it for a natural gas pipeline.”

If you could send a message to NW Natural’s Board of Directors right now, what would you say about their LNG Palomar Pipeline plans?

Do you have anything to say about the company plans to clearcut through 47 miles of Mt. Hood National Forest?

Do you have an opinion about the powerful gas utility using eminent domain to rip through 1500 private properties, destroying irrigation systems and crops along the way?

Do you have an opinion about a gas utility who claims to be green planning to pipe imported Liquefied Natural Gas and through Oregon to the California market…with increased greenhouse gas emissions?

Tell NW Natural’s CEO Gregg Kantor, and his Board of Directors, what you really think. Take action here: http://salsa.democracyinaction.org/o/1810/t/10060/campaign.jsp?campaign_KEY=27896