Citizens: Investigate potential LNG security pact liabilities

Tread carefully.

That's the message a group of citizens gave the Wahkiakum County board of commissioners for their negotiation of a security services agreement with NorthernStar Natural Gas LLC.

The Texas-based company has proposed construction of a facility across the Columbia from Puget Island to receive as many as two or three tanker loads of liquefied natural gas (LNG) a week. The company would re-gasify the gas and insert it into a pipeline that could take it to markets up and down the west coast.

The company has been negotiating a contract with the county to provide shore and marine based security escorts for the tankers. Many of the details regarding the security force procedures are classified and not released to the public.

In response to citizen requests to learn about and comment on the agreement, county commissioners scheduled the public meeting and invited NorthernStar officials, including Chief Executive Officer William "Si" Garrett to attend.

Garrett tried to assure the crowd and county officials that NorthernStar would cover the county's costs of providing security and other public safety needs.

After just over an hour of discussion, commissioners said they would follow up on some suggestions from the public, including considering a suggestion to consult a lawyer who specializes in marine law.

Garrett said that when the project was first proposed over four years ago, NorthernStar officials realized Wahkiakum County, the closest neighbor to the proposed site at Bradwood, Ore., would receive no direct benefit from it. They began talks with county officials to provide the security services.

The company pledges to pay 100 percent of costs associated with the security operations, he said. It would provide money to equip county fire departments and emergency responders, and it would fund new patrol cars and marine patrol boats. It would cover the employment costs of the officers, who would be part of the Wahkiakum County Sheriff's Department, he said.

Overall, at least eight security jobs would be created, and those jobs and continued community program/emergency responder funding through the Wahkiakum Community Foundation could generate over $1 million annually for the county's economy.

He estimated the security officers would spend25 percent or less of their time on LNG patrol; the rest of the time they would be able to work on citizens' needs.

However, citizens commented that the duty may be one which the county doesn't want to assume.

Cathlamet Council Member Steve McNicholas suggested the county might be assuming unexpected liabilities under marine law.

"We'll pay all the insurance costs that are necessary," Garrett responded. "We'll also pay the legal fees to set up the agreements."

Island resident Terry Kriesel suggested the commissioners consider how much liability they are assuming for the county and its residents, who ultimately could be responsible for paying damages related to the LNG operations.

"You're putting me in jeopardy, the county, me, and my family," he said.

Island resident Mike Lewis pointed out that the shipping operations are under federal jurisdiction, such as the Jones Act.

Garrett responded that the proposed agreement is modeled after the agreement used at the Cove Point, Maryland, LNG plant, and he felt the issues which Lewis presented would be addressed.

"You're creating serious liability for a few jobs," Lewis responded.

Cathlamet resident George Wehrfritz asked commissioners if the agreement would be transferable to a successive owner if NorthernStar should sell the plant.

Commissioners said they haven't seen the proposed agreement, for Sheriff Dan Bardsley had led the negotiations, but, Commissioner Blair Brady said, "It's my belief that we're asking for something on that."

Commissioner Lisa Marslya added that she wanted the county to have a clause allowing it to withdraw from the agreement if the service becomes burdensome.

Island resident George Exum asked if the public would be able to review the proposed agreement prior to the commissioners voting on it.

Commissioners and Garrett agreed the public could examine the agreement, with classified sections blacked out.

In response to a question, Garrett said the facility is licensed as a receiving facility and would not be retrofitted to export natural gas. "We've offered to sign a letter that we'll not do that," he said.

At times, the discussion veered into the pros and cons of the proposed plant, with supporters citing the jobs and economic impact it could have and opponents pointing to the unknown liabilities it would bring with it.

Commissioners said they are keeping neutral on the issue of siting the plant, but they want to negotiate as many benefits for the county as possible, should the plant be constructed.

Wehrfritz suggested that the commissioners don't really know how the public feels about the issue and asked if it could be put up for a vote. County Elections Officer Diane Tischer said it could, but it would cost $7,000 or more.

Commissioner Marsyla commented that she feels the potential of 8-10 jobs is "huge."

"I truly will be really sad if this plant goes in and those 10 jobs end up in Columbia County and there are none here," she said. "I agree we need to look at the contract."

Commissioners said they would investigate issues raised in the discussion, and look at arrangements in other areas.