The proverbial light at the end of the tunnel that is the Vancouver Energy oil terminal evaluation process keeps slipping further and further away.
The Washington state Energy Facility Site Evaluation Council pushed back its recommendation deadline for the project to Aug. 31. This is the sixth extension to date since the agency began examining it in 2013, but it’s not guaranteed to be the last time the council punts.
Even if they do get their recommendation to Gov. Jay Inslee by Aug. 31, he will have another 60 days to decide the project’s ultimate fate.
If Vancouver Energy’s terminal is constructed, it would be capable of handling an average of 360,000 barrels of crude oil a day, making it the largest rail-to-marine transfer terminal in the U.S. Oil would be shipped by an average of four trains per day, each pulling about 120 cars from the Bakken oil fields in North Dakota to the Port of Vancouver. The oil would then be loaded onto marine vessels bound for refineries along the West Coast.
While Vancouver Energy officials and their opponents rarely find common ground on the project, both sides say the examination process timeline has exceeded their expectations.
“It’s frustrating that this is dragging out for so long when Vancouver and people along the rail lines need to move forward,” said Dan Serres, conservation director of the Columbia Riverkeeper.
In an email, Jeff Hymas, spokesman for Vancouver Energy, said while the project itself is relatively simple the analysis has been extensive. He referred to an earlier statement made by the company in regard to the evaluation timeline.
“The continued absence of a defined schedule has escalated concern amongst stakeholders and perpetuates uncertainty of the duration of the review process for the applicant and future applicants.”
The evaluation process for large energy projects can be daunting, but the council’s process is meant to keep politicking to a minimum to allow a balanced, thorough and timely consideration of major energy projects. The state law behind the evaluation process requires it to be completed within a year, but, obviously, there is room for extensions.
Several elements of the approval process are being completed at the same time, including the final environmental impact statement, the adjudication order that focuses on last summer’s hearings, and the completion of a handful of permits the project needs.
It’s worth noting that the Vancouver Energy terminal would be the nation’s largest and is also the first project of its kind the council has considered.
Anna Gill, spokeswoman for the evaluation council, said last summer’s quasi-judicial adjudication hearings on the terminal generated a lot of information the agency has to address as part of its recommendation to the governor.
“The primary reason this has taken so long are the five weeks of hearings that included 1,000 exhibits, 100 witnesses and 275,000 comments (evaluation council staff) had to go through and address” in its adjudication order, Gill said. “(The evaluation council) is a very small agency.”
Stormwater permit
The next big step in the process is the approval of a draft industrial stormwater permit. After the draft is approved, there will be a 30-day public comment period and another public hearing in the near future.
“Ideally before Aug. 31,” Gill said.
When the council makes its recommendation to the governor it’ll provide him with a package of information that includes the adjudication order that focuses on last summer’s hearings, the final environmental impact statement of the terminal, and all of the permits the project needs. All of that will be topped off with the council’s recommendation to either deny the project, approve the project with conditions or approve it outright.
Beyond the Vancouver Energy project, legislators on both sides of the political aisle have called on agencies to speed up evaluation processes for proposed developments.
In May, Inslee signed into law House Bill 1086, which created a 24-month “shot clock” to encourage faster completion of state environmental impact statements under the State Environmental Policy Act. However, the law lacks an enforcement mechanism, and lead agencies won’t be penalized for being late.
“This is clearly a recognition on the part of our elected officials that all review processes need to be conducted in a timely manner because it impacts all stakeholders — regardless of their views on individual projects,” Hymas said.
