A decision is expected by March on whether a state environmental review will be required at the ALA Energy Ferndale Terminal, after appeals were filed re 33 proposed projects.
By March, a hearing examiner will decide whether a state environmental review will be required at the ALA Energy Ferndale Terminal, after several environmental activism groups submitted an appeal against Whatcom County Planning and Development Services’ decision that proposed expansion projects have no “significant environmental impacts” in September. The review begins at the end of the month.
The terminal was built in the 1970s and, according to Earthjustice Senior Attorney Jan Hasselman, has always been a point of environmental interest.
“The Washington Environmental Council and the State Department of Fish and Wildlife (said), ‘Boy, we really should have an environmental study of this thing that’s being built on the top of Cherry Point herring spawning ground’,” Hasselman said.
Hasselman said Petrogas West, a Whatcom chemical plant, purchased the terminal in 2014, seeing the potential to turn it into a major export terminal.
“Starting almost immediately, they undertook a set of improvements to start shifting the business model and moving a lot more stuff in there,” he said.
RE Sources Co-Executive Director Ander Russell wrote in an email that there may be a misconception that AltaGas was not involved prior to the purchase.
Russell said that in fact, AltaGas — aka ALA Energy — partially owned Petrogas before becoming the official owner of the terminal in 2022.
Since then, AltaGas has implemented a new management staff, which Russelll said seemed less attentive to the aquatic reserve management plan.”
Moratorium, ban — and settlement
From 2016 to 2021, Whatcom County had a moratorium on expansion of fossil fuel infrastructure.
In 2021, Whatcom County became the first in the country with oil refineries to permanently ban new refineries, piers and transshipment facilities, and to put limits on existing ones out of concern for public health, safety and ecological sustainability.
These ordinances became known as the “Cherry Point Amendments.”
Hasselman said projects at Cherry Point continued during the moratorium.
“They were just tweaking the pipes, adding a rail rack here, adding a pump there, and in each case saying, ‘this doesn’t have any effect on anything’,” he said.
The Northwest Clean Air Agency served Petrogas with a notice of violation in 2021 for evading permits and disclosure requirements.
Shortly thereafter in 2022, AltaGas acquired Petrogas and all its holdings.
The company paid a $4 million fine and reached an agreement with Whatcom County in 2022 to undergo a full environmental review and conditional use permitting process for 31 previously completed projects.
This is the largest penalty settlement collected by NWCAA since the agency formed in 1967.
Full environmental assessment
In 2023, Whatcom County announced that a full environmental impact statement would be produced.
According to a press release from Whatcom County, the statement would evaluate “facility modifications and changes in the amount of throughput since the last State Environmental Policy Act — SEPA — evaluation for the plant was completed in 2016.”
On Sept. 3, the county announced that the environmental impacts at the terminal from completed and proposed projects are insignificant, and an environmental impact statement is not required.
The county also issued a Mitigated Decision of NonSignificance — MDNS — for the 33 projects.
Jed Holmes, Whatcom County public affairs and strategic manager, said he is unable to comment while the issue is ongoing.
Following the decision in September, an appeal was submitted on Sept. 29 by six environmental groups — Friends of the San Juans, Evergreen Islands, RE Sources, the Sierra Club, Washington Conservation Action and Whatcom Environmental Council — submitted an appeal on Sept. 29.
“We agreed to take on this case about the terminal because it’s a lot bigger than it first appears,” Hasselman said. “This is a major project that has ambitions to become a leading player in the global liquid petroleum gas trade.”
He said AltaGas, and before them, Petrogas, has been “stealthily expanding” for the last decade, and there hasn’t been a public effort like this one to question the effects of those efforts.
The coalition says an environmental impact statement should still be required because of significant and harmful consequences of propane and butane expansion at the terminal. A press release states an Environmental Impact Statement would “allow full scrutiny of the safety and environmental impacts of expanding fossil fuel transportation at Cherry Point.
Hasselman said the coalition does not believe the projects have had no effect on terminal capacity.
“The number of trains has gone from essentially zero to thousands a month,” he said.“The number of vessels has doubled from around 16 or 17 a month to 32 a month.”
Environmental effects
Lovel Pratt, marine protection and policy director for Friends of the San Juans, said on Nov. 21 that she’s been monitoring projects at the terminal since the violation report from the Northwest Clean Air Agency.
Along with the rest of the coalition, Friends submitted a comment letter in 2024 that was quoted in the appeal.
Friends of the San Juans is concerned with protecting the entire Salish Sea, with a specific interest in Southern Resident killer whales.
“Southern Resident killer whales are incredibly well-studied and [it is] well-documented what the impacts are to that species and what’s impacting their ability to recover and thrive,” Pratt said.
Underwater noise, presence of vessels, ship strikes and pollution from scrubber discharges are among the list of concerns for whales.
Among other local wildlife at risk is the Cherry Point herring; Hasselman said the population has collapsed in the last several years.
Russell echoed this concern, saying the disappearance has a strong correlation with pier takeover, reconstruction projects and more ships going to and from the pier.
“The county did not meaningfully consider how the pier modification could have impacted fish spawning habitat.”
“We have these processes in Washington state, they work, Hasselman said. “You know that when people fully understand the environmental effects of their decisions, they make better decisions”
“All we’re asking is, ‘let’s have a full environmental analysis of the pros and cons of this.”
AltaGas: ‘no significant adverse impacts’
AltaGas Media and Communications Director Bryn Lukowiak wrote in an email that open communication and environmental responsibility is a key goal for the company.
“We continue to work with Whatcom County and local stakeholders to ensure the ALA Energy Terminal project reflects community values and priorities,” Lukowiak said.
Lukowiak said over the past two and a half years, independent third-party experts have completed environmental analyses, who “confirmed there are no significant adverse impacts.”
A hearing examiner will begin considering the SEPA appeal on Jan. 28, and Hasselman said the examiner will have about 60 days to decide whether to require an environmental review or to issue a conditional use permit. The process will include opportunity for public comment.
The coalition will file their testimony before the hearing starts.
“(It will) lay out the case, about what went sideways here, and that will be an opportunity in advance of the hearing to really get a better understanding of what’s going on.”
— By Libby Williams
Also read in Salish Current:
• “More Canada crude is coming, but trade war could hamper flow,” Jan. 3, 2025
• “Local border waters are on the cusp of a major rise in oil tanker traffic,” April 29, 2024
• “Green hydrogen plans take shape for former Alcoa site at Cherry Point,” Jan. 24, 2024
• “Amendments ban new coal or oil industries, new shipping terminals at Cherry Point,” July 29, 2021
• “Unlikely partners’ compromise will halt new fossil-fuel development at Cherry Point,” Nov. 29, 2020