Update on Georgia Strait Pipeline

The Georgia Strait Crossing (GSX) project has been slowly moving through bureaucratic processes in both Canada and the U.S. for over three years. Every three to four months there seems to be some new decision, that appears to either halt or give the green light to GSX. Given so many conflicting decisions, many citizens don’t know that they can still plug into the process and have an effect. You can—this is the time.

GSX is a project designed to carry natural gas from a Canadian interconnect, near Sumas, to Vancouver Island, via a new pipeline that will go through U.S. land and waters. In Whatcom County, the pipeline will pass near Lynden, Ferndale and Birch Bay and will enter the water at Cherry Point, a proposed aquatic reserve.

At its inception, GSX was controversial. U.S. residents pointed out that the project offered no benefit to them, yet would cross their lands, degrade the environment and be potentially dangerous. Landowners have mostly been silenced as Williams Pipeline officials, the U.S. proponent for GSX, have bought out their lands. Environmentalists have been discouraged by the seemingly one-sided decisions by the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission (FERC), and the constant seesaw of other decisions.

Of note, are two recent developments. The Department of Ecology, dissatisfied with the completeness of FERC’s environmental impact statement (EIS), completed a supplementary EIS. And in Whatcom County, the County Council decided to file an amicus brief with the nonprofit environmental group, Fuel Safe Washington, opposing the jurisdiction of FERC, an interstate regulatory body, over GSX.

In addition to approval from the Department of Ecology, GSX also needs permits from Whatcom and San Juan County. These permits could be denied because the shoreline programs for both counties state that uses in aquatic and shoreline areas should be water-dependent or water-related.

Additionally, the pipeline neither falls under the designation of “preferred use” by the state, nor does large scale dredging appear permissible under the Whatcom County program. Although county decisions cannot override state decisions, they likely will influence Ecology’s final decision.

To get approval from FERC, “public convenience and necessity” for the project must be shown. This requirement has not been met, as briefly outlined below.

•The project is designed to transport natural gas to and from Canada; therefore this obviates the question of U.S. need.

•The power plant that the GSX pipeline was originally said to serve has been rejected by the Canadian government.

•Additional natural gas could be supplied to Vancouver Island via several all-Canadian routes, one of which simply involves twinning the overland portion, and increasing the pressure of the underwater portion of an existing pipeline.

•Energy needs at Vancouver Island do not necessarily need to be satisfied by natural gas; proposals exist to upgrade existing electrical cables or to employ cogeneration at existing mill sites.

FERC, in contrast to the above reasoning, determined that there was a need for GSX since the transmission of gas to Vancouver Island could result in a greater supply to U.S. citizens, via displacement and movement of natural gas in adjacent sections of the pipeline.

Adverse environmental impacts will accompany the GSX project. There will be impacts to forested lands, wetlands, streams, nearshore and aquatic habitats. The pipeline will fragment forested lands and wetlands, rendering these areas poorer habitat, less resilient to invasive species and possibly altered hydrologically. In the U.S., 83 waterbodies will be crossed, 24 of which contain salmon or are sensitive spawning or rearing habitats.

At water crossings, impacts from clearing and construction include the loss of shade, potential erosion and altered hydrology, and the release of sediment into the water. In the marine environment, the greatest impact will occur just 2,000 feet offshore of Cherry Point. The pipeline exit hole or “glory hole” will be clamshell dredged, disturbing two acres of the seafloor. The excavated hole will not return to “normal” conditions for one to two years.

This disruption will adversely impact benthic communities including invertebrates, crabs, and bottomfish, and the animals that rely on them. The FERC EIS concluded that there would be “limited adverse environmental impacts.” The Department of Ecology came to a different opinion than FERC, and stated in its supplementary EIS that GSX “is likely to have a significant impact on the environment.”

The Department of Ecology will make its final decision by May 28. Although Ecology is on the record stating that this project is likely to have a significant environmental impact, this does not mean they won’t approve the project. They could give the go-ahead to the project and require whatever mitigatory measures they think sufficient. Please contact the following officials and ask them to deny GSX.

•Ray Hellwig, Ecology Northwest Regional Director, (425) 649-7010, rhel@ecy.wa.gov.

•Susan Hoffman, Ecology Interim Director, (360) 407-7001, lhof461@ecy.wa.gov.

For more information on Whatcom County: contact the Department of Planning and Land Use, 360-676-6907. Also, watch for a possible public hearing. Governor Gary Locke, 360-902-4111. §