PORTLAND, Ore.  Thursday, April 22, 2010, the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission (FERC) held a meeting at City Hall, over the possible misconduct of a liquified natural gas company (LNG) in its project planning.

(Protestors outside Portland City Hall, on the day of the FERC hearing.  Photo:  Johnny Kilroy.)

It was the third communal meeting FERC held this week, the others in Forest Grove and Astoria, to try to mediate between conflicting parties.  Sworn testimonies were taken from affected Oregonian landowners as well as representatives of the company, Oregon LNG, in an official fact-finding procedure for docket AD10-6-000. 

Oregon LNG (which includes LNG Development Company, LLC & Oregon Pipeline) is planning to construct an importation terminal for liquified natural gas in Warrenton, and a 120-mile pipeline across the Coast Range mountains to Molalla. 

(Map of proposed pipeline route, as of September 2008.  More detailed segments at OR LNG site.  Image:  OR LNG.)

 

Many property owners who live on the proposed routes fear that the pipeline would permanently injure their lands’ productivity and value.  Richard Hanschu grows timber for a livelihood.  A pipeline through his property would devastate his business; it would bifercate his property, preventing access to harvest his timber, and it would reduce his crop due to limitations on planting near the pipeline. 

They are resisting the company’s efforts to gain right-of-way. 

FERC Judge Bobbie McCartney presided over Thursday’s gathering, calling it a “non-adversarial, hybrid process,” a mix of town hall meeting and courtroom deposition.  It was an effort to gather firm evidence, pursuant to a January 22 order from the Commission Chairman to

hold a series of town hall meetings regarding the Oregon Pipeline Project to permit interested parties and Oregon Pipeline Company (Oregon Pipeline) to express their views and concerns over Oregon Pipeline’s conduct with landowners during the environmental review process pertaining to its application in Docket No. CP09-7-000

In three and a half hours, Judge McCartney heard from 7 opponents and 3 representatives of LNG.  She had already taken 12 hours of testimony from 36 witnesses, and this was the first opportunity that Oregon LNG had had to speak for itself.  Those testifying were asked to submit Notices of Intent to Participate beforehand, and to prepare their evidence for submission.

Judge McCartney was quick to keep the testimonies on topic, as she could only use information “under the scope of the docket.”  On several occasions, though, she did acknowledge the validity of the landowners’ sentiments.

“I’m seeing a lot of common themes,” she said.

The company complained that it couldn’t cross-examine the LNG opponents giving testimony, in the “non-adversarial” hearing.

Landowners have complained about a lack of public information and involvement in the LNG planning process, feelings of intimidation, and a sense of imbalance and powerlessness.  Kathleen Carl, of Salem, said she often feels as though

“FERC and Oregon LNG are on one side and you’re on the other.” 

(Photo:  ColumbiaRiverkeeper.org.)

Apparently, Oregon LNG equested to cancel the hearings in a filing to FERC, February 5, to halt Judge McCartney from her fact-finding.

Brett VandenHeuvel, the Executive Director of Columbia Riverkeeper, said that this effort to stop the hearings and to criticize them shows Oregon LNG’s desire to keep FERC from getting the whole story.

“Mistrust was betrayed by Oregon LNG,” said VandenHeuvel, referring to occasions when already suspicious landowners felt violated in what trust they did extend.

Many letters and calls were made by the company, seeking to gain permission from landowners to traverse their properties, view them, and assess their potential for pipeline siting.  There could be risks not seen on maps, like wells or wetlands.  By doing this inventory, surveyors could gain useful information on whether or not it is even feasible to build across a certain tract.  This permission to enter constitutes no waiver of any of the landowner’s rights.

In one instance, Ann Berblinger, of , allowed Oregon LNG personnel onto her property for the “limited purpose of visual observation.”  She gave them a written statement which “expressly prohibited” the recording of any information for any use. 

Bob Finnegan, a right-of-way agent for Universal Field Services, was on the team that went to Berblinger’s property.  He signed her request, acknowledged that he understood it, and soon thereafter proceeded to take a GPS waypoint at the location of a well. 

“In my opinion, this is trespass,” said VandenHeuvel in the hearing.  “This was just one incident of many.”

When challenged about the recorded information, Finnegan willingly erased it.  He later wrote a letter apologizing to Bertlinger.

“As right-of-way agents,” he told Judge McCartney, “communication is the key to what we try to accomplish.”

But landowners can get cagey when anyone wants to do any kind of business on their land.  With good reason, they view large industry and the government as one-in-the-same interest. 

For counterexample, look at the interstate system.  Ever notice how straight they are?  Oh, you have a dairy farm that you don’t want bisected by six lanes of highway?  Take it up with Eisenhower.

Individual landowners are in the way, of pipelines, powerlines, highways, reservoirs, all types of infrastructural projects that require rights-of-way to build.  The projects serve a greater public good, or so they are deemed to, and the landowners know it. 

Lurking in the back of the landowners’ minds are two dreaded words:  eminent domain. 

It’s an extremely controversial process, for obvious reasons.  Eminent domain is the process by which the American dream essentially means nothing.  If we need your land, we’re getting it.  Oh, but we’ll pay you and everything.

Peter Hansen, CEO of Oregon LNG, spoke at the meeting to address the landowners’ fears.  He said that his company wishes to resolve issues through collaboration so that they won’t have to resort to eminent domain.  He referred to meetings in which he’d worked with affected parties to “micro-site” a pipeline route with Google Earth, where, by his account, the company methodically sited each stretch of pipeline by consensus (of the people in the room).

He validated the concerns of land seizure and intimidation, saying it’s a “difficult and emotional process for everyone involved.”

Hansen himself grew up on a small dairy farm in Europe.  Speaking melodically in his Germanic accent, he told about his own traumatizing experiences back in the 1970s.  His family received a letter from NATO, informing them of the need to construct a jet fuel pipeline across their land.  It was not up for debate; the land would be taken by expropriation, and construction would begin in 3-4 months.

“We were not happy,” he lamented, “but what can you do?”

For today’s proceedings, said Hansen, and in his company’s greater ethos, landowners should come away saying this:  “I didn’t invite these folks in, but I can live with this.”

Thankfully, for these Americans, we do somewhat value personal property and environmental protection.  Hence the meeting, democracy in action.

(Photo:  Johnny Kilroy.)

 

Outside of City Hall, about 70 protestors gathered to oppose LNG.  Some of them were members of the grassroots group Oregon Citizens Against the Pipeline.  Shortly after the noon hour, their chants could be heard inside the council chambers where the hearing was held, and several times forced an interruption of the proceedings by Judge McCartney.  The meeting was running over its alloted time.  The disturbance was noted for the record, at the request of an Oregon LNG representative.

FERC is currently preparing a Draft Environmental Impact Statement (DEIS) for the projects, with help from the U.S. Coast Guard and Army Corps of Engineers.  In the meantime, Oregon LNG says it has been working with affected parties to make necessary collaborative changes to its initial plan.

 

An official transcript of the proceedings should be available at FERC by May 1, 2010.