The yearslong battle over the Jordan Cove Energy Project is heating up as the federal agency overseeing the proposed $10 billion pipeline and terminal pushes to complete a final environmental review.

The Federal Energy Regulatory Commission is working quickly to finish the final environmental impact statement for the project this fall. Federal agencies and other interested parties have submitted comments – some critical – to inform the impact statement.

FERC intends to issue the notice of availability for the final EIS on Oct. 11, and a final order on Jan. 9, 2020.

Meanwhile, more than 100 local residents and environmental activists last week filled a City Council meeting last week to debate a key request for land use approval needed to dredge in a Coos Bay estuary zone.

For Canadian corporation Pembina, the pipeline would provide a route to market for North America’s booming natural gas fields. The proposal has been the subject of debate for more than a decade – long enough for the planned terminal to go from an import terminal to an export terminal, as the business case shifted to sending liquefied natural gas to Asian markets.

The Pacific Connector Gas Pipeline would stretch approximately 229 miles beginning at an interconnector near Malin, in southeastern Oregon, across land owned by the Bureau of Land Management, Forest Service, Bureau of Reclamation and private landowners. But the debate is perhaps most pointed in Coos Bay, where massive ships would be loaded with liquefied natural gas for export abroad.

Pembina seeks permission to dredge in the bay, which would require a zoning change. The bay is dredged regularly to provide ocean access for the area’s commercial and recreational fishing fleets, but Pembina wants to dredge in a 3.3-acre estuary that is an important nursery for the South Coast’s crabbing industry.

A consultant hired by Coos Bay, the Lane Council of Governments, has recommended the City Council deny the land use change.

“It is almost impossible to overestimate the importance of this estuary as a nursery for Dungeness crabs,” said Michael Graybill, retired manager for the South Slough National Estuarine Research Reserve.

Graybill said he recently pulled up crab pots that were teeming with hundreds of juvenile crabs. “Dredging the channel margins will kill tens to hundreds of thousands of crabs,” he told the council at the Aug. 27 meeting.

Jody McCaffree, who leads a group called Citizens Against LNG, said the terminal could threaten the area’s thriving recreational fishing industry. The Coos Bay area hosted 31,560 recreational boating trips annually, mostly tied to crabbing and fishing.

“We have a thriving adventure coast here dependent on our natural resources,” she said.

Local residents whose land the pipeline would cross have also been among the opponents.

“Even though we received a decent offer for a settlement on our property, we refused to sell out to Pembina,” said Clarence Adams, a resident of Winston, south of Roseburg. “To us, it’s about quality of life.”

Trade unions have been among the project’s steadfast supporters. Union leaders, port officials and other local boosters point to the economic benefits the project would bring to the coastal community, which has struggled to replace timber jobs.

“This is a project that could be potentially huge for this whole area of Oregon,” Ken Messerle, a former state senator from the Coos Bay area, told the City Council.

According to Pembina, the project would create 6,000 construction jobs at its peak and generate property tax revenues of $60 million a year to southern Oregon counties and $50 million to the state.

The council chose not to make a decision at its Aug. 27 meeting so that it could consider oral and written testimony submitted recently. The council is scheduled to again take up the matter on Jan. 21, 2020.

A lawyer representing Pembina said the public comments were lacking in substance.

“There were a lot of heartfelt statements,” said Steve Pfeiffer, a partner and land use attorney at Perkins Coie in Portland. “There’s definitely a lot of passion. There’s a lot of conclusions. But there’s a limited amount of evidence to back them up.”

Pembina must address a complex tangle of local, state and federal regulatory approvals before any construction can begin on Jordan Cove. While federal regulators have largely welcomed the project, Pembina has encountered obstacles at state and local levels.

By all accounts, FERC is moving quickly to accelerate federal approval. The draft EIS was largely favorable, and Pembina is anticipating approval in January, a spokesman said.

In July, FERC announced it would open a new LNG division, with regulators based in Washington, D.C., and Houston, signaling the federal government is open for such business. There are also signs the Trump administration is pushing for the project. The Guardian reported emails suggested Interior Secretary David Bernhardt had met with a Jordan Cove lobbyist and expressed support for the project. Bernhardt’s former lobbying firm, Brownstein Hyatt Farber Schreck, had lobbied for Jordan Cove, the newspaper reported.

Other federal agencies are involved because it crosses their land. The Bureau of Land Management, in a July 3 letter, stated it would enforce seasonal and daily timing restrictions near marbled murrelet stands and breeding restrictions for the northern spotted owl.

The BLM recommended FERC reconsider its finding of no significant cumulative impact to cultural resources. The agency also urged FERC study the project’s impact on housing in the Coos Bay area.

At the state level, Jordan Cove has encountered roadblocks. The Oregon Department of Environmental Quality in May denied the project a needed water quality certificate. Jordan Cove is working with the agency to satisfy requirements in anticipation of reapplying for the water quality certificate this fall, Pembina spokesman Paul Vogel said.

The post Jordan Cove proposal still facing resistance appeared first on Daily Journal of Commerce.