Local News
Bradwood letter may spell doom for Oregon LNG
Bradwood LLC and Oregon LNG have traded barbs in the past, with Oregon LNG recently coming out against Bradwood in protesting Clatsop County Commissioner’s decision in allowing the variance on Clifton Road and even protesting LNG tankers passing Astoria “within the blast zone.” Now, it appears the shoe may be on the other foot as Bradwood’s William “Sy” Garrett writes in a letter to the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission (FERC)on June 12th, asking that the agency suspend all processing of the Oregon LNG application until the corporation is able to demonstrate that it has control of its Skipanon Peninsula site.
“Several years ago,” writes Garrett, “Bradwood’s developers, while looking at potential site locations, had opportunity to visit the Project Site. During this visit it was readily apparent that there was a road providing access through what is now known as the Project Site and to the beach. Our inquiries at the time revealed that that the road was frequented by local residents for recreation and other uses. Further research revealed that it was a city and county road, and a copy of the Deed of Dedication which created the road was obtained. A copy of the Deed of Dedication is attached hereto.”
The deed, dated June 1, 1967,states that Clatsop County Board of County Commissioners directs the execution of a deed of dedication of certain property take place. The deed stipulates that the deeded land be used expressly for “street purposes” for public use. “TO HAVE AND TO HOLD the above described premises unto the public forever.” The deed contained a description of the property that Garrett’s letter claims is the road that goes directly through Oregon LNG’s proposed site for its development for an LNG receiving terminal and holding facility.
County Manager Scott Derickson and Warrenton City Manager Bob Maxfield both stated that staff are currently researching the matter and they will not have a statement to make until they have all the facts surrounding ownership and right-of-way.
Garrett states, “One of the essential prerequisites for submission of an LNG terminal project to FERC is demonstrable site control.” Furthermore, Garrett goes on to write in his letter that Oregon LNG, “did not identify the existence of this public road nor disclose the material impact on its application and control of the Project Site as evidenced by the attached deed.”
Without site control, asserted Charles Deister, Bradwood Landing spokesperson in a telephone interview, Oregon LNG will have no choice except to withdraw its application for the project from FERC. Similarly, Sound Energy Solutions, a Mitsubishi Corp. and ConocoPhillips subsidiary, a Long Beach California LNG company, recently withdrew its application from FERC stating that it did not have site control.
Local Media
Police Blotter
Articles Elsewhere
Recent Comments
Notice: No cry for foreign LNG and …
By T. Boone Pickens Says: from the article Discussion on Land Use Law in Clatsop County.LOL, yes, Patrick I know the phrase. …
By Rick Balkins from the article Where are you getting 4-131 info?.On Sep 5, 6:31 PM, Rick Balkins …
By Patrick McGee from the article Where are you getting 4-131 info?.Who’s truths or lies are you believing …
By Rick Balkins from the article Where are you getting 4-131 info?.I get mine from “Clatsop County”, “The …
By Patrick McGee from the article Where are you getting 4-131 info?.Patrick McGee wrote on LNG Referendum 4-131 …
By Rick Balkins from the article Where are you getting 4-131 info?.An advice not a threat. BTW: your …
By Rick Balkins from the article LNG referendum 4-131 Campaign - Fraud or Fact?.You, Pat Mcgee bad mouth people to …
By anon and love it from the article LNG referendum 4-131 Campaign - Fraud or Fact?.
20 Comments
On Jun 19, 9:30 AM, Patrick McGee wrote:
Garrett running scared Carrie?
Truth is, if there were ever the perfect, logistical location for one of those LNG monsters, Ths Skipinan would be the place.
Easy in, easy out.
Add to that a ridiculus lease of, what it it, $39,000 big one a year concocted by a bunch of boobs at Port of Astoria for 90, some, acres of land?
Except for putting a bunch of people at extreme risk, it’s perfect.
On Jun 19, 9:49 AM, carmel wrote:
Me thinks its the county manager that’s runnin scared! He’s always wanted the facility at Warrenton, his old stompin grounds. He never wanted it up river. Why do you think county staff tried to discourage land use alterations. Puppets don’t play without the puppeteer!
On Jun 19, 9:56 AM, Patrick McGee wrote:
A graduate of “The Gramson School Of Small Town Governments” that boy and I wouldn’t argue your point at all.
On Jun 19, 8:02 PM, AnotherAstorian wrote:
Oh boy...McGee
“Garrett running scared Carrie?”
You’ve GOT to be kidding. Northern Star points out a major problem in Oregon LNG’s permit and you think they’re running scared? I don’t think so. Oregon LNG doesn’t hold a candle to Northern Star as far as experience...or location.
Did you miss the part in the story where they said they had looked at that site first and determined it wasn’t a good one? First, it’s more succeptible to a tsunami if we ever have one...and second, the entire site is SAND...for hundreds of feet down. They’ve drilled down hundreds of feet and haven’t hit bedrock.
Which means if there is ever an earthquake, the entire site will dissolve into the water and fall into the bay. I certainly wouldn’t want to be a few miles across the water if that were to happen.
On Jun 19, 8:32 PM, Patrick McGee wrote:
And “AA”, you actually believe a little thing like a dedicated street right of way is actually going to be a weapon for Garrett and Bradwood Landing/NSNG to assure Oregon LNG/Pipeline won’t get any traction?
You seem to forget what little municipality has been in lockstep with Enron Clone/Calpine Energy Group, now, Oregon LNG/Pipeline since day one on Skipnanon Peninsula, now state owned land if it wasn’t then and a 65 year, $39,000 a year is it, ridiculous lease concocted by Port of Astoria.
What do you think will happen to Bradwood in an earthquake? will it not suffer the same damage? Wasn’t there a local geologist that said so?
And pray to God some major shipper’s vessel does not lose power or some other mishap on that bottleneck in the river at bradwood’s site. That ought to be a pretty site and pray as well they are not in the middle of offloading.
On Jun 19, 8:49 PM, Mildred Johansen wrote:
On Jun 19, 7:32 PM, Patrick McGee wrote:
And pray to God some major shipper’s vessel does not lose power or some other mishap on that bottleneck in the river at bradwood’s site. That ought to be a pretty site and pray as well they are not in the middle of offloading.
Oh Yes! And please pray to God that even some minor shipper’s vessel does not lose power in that horrible treacherous bottleneck, Mr. McGee!!
Mr. McGee, would you please be so kind to provide with a prayer?
On Jun 19, 9:03 PM, Patrick McGee wrote:
You just witnessed the prayer as I said it.
Is there something you do not unsderstand?
On Jun 19, 9:08 PM, AnotherAstorian wrote:
Oh Patrick...you are so misguided.
Bradwood’s tanks on the site are going to be built to withstand a magnitude NINE quake...which tells me, that if the BIG one ever hits, the tanks at Bradwood will be all that is left standing…
See? Bradwood was actually able to find bedrock to anchor to....which Oregon LNG hasn’t been able to find yet.
Oregon LNG is a horrible location...it’s on a site which will just liquefy if we have a major earthquake here.
Still like the Skipanon site better Patrick?
On Jun 19, 9:57 PM, Bethany wrote:
It is a waste of time debating with a certain man. Discussions with him go nowhere, as it is soon learned. There is a reason he solely uses this online medium to “express” his current philosophical bent.
To many of us who oppose using more fossil fuels this is/b> the most advantageous time to reject any new production of them. The idea of offering these types of corporations a toe hold is anathema to us. It may hurt for a while and the government can chose to help by giving specific tax breaks and economic incentives to not only individuals but to organizations that are working towards responsible use of resources.
The biggest difficulty at this time appears to be some infighting, however, this is always true at the beginning of any new venture. It is hopeful that the “cream” will rise to the top and soon there will be a local group that will generate plans which <b>can be brought in front of the local governments. What we need are earnest people who are not stakeholders in previous power struggles. This applies to both sides of the equation.
On Jun 20, 2:23 PM, Rick Balkins wrote:
I’ll put it simple for you guys.
At either site (Skipinion or Bradwood), the foundation system would be built to withstand the lateral forces of even a Magnitude 15 if you spend enough money and establish maximum static stability.
You don’t have to be sitting on granite or basalt (in our locality) to survive an earthquake. There is methods of designing a structure so that it would actually float (pontoons). Since the projects are in the $700 Million range. The storage tank in themselves, structurally cost around $100-120 Million. So adding $10-20 Million towards foundations would be minor.
Now, take a look at the Astoria Megler Bridge. It used 60-ft piles. Particularly, friction piles. After a certain depth, (below water table), the sand/sediment is under extreme compression under weight. Much to the point of being like in solid concrete. So the pile is being held in place by friction. So even under condition of liquefaction, the issue is at the first 10-15 feet. So a structure with piles, driven at a depth of say 75-ft. to even 100-ft. would provide enough friction resistance to be stable even under liquefaction and earthquake shaking from a Magnitude 9 earthquake.
The LNG facility would not be impacted by the tsunami itself but what is called river seiche.
At Skipinon, they would likely need to go to 100-ft pilea. Which would be a minute issue considering a $700 Million project. So they might be $725 Million. Big deal. At Bradwood, they are more on land with basaltic bedrock at depths of around 40-60-ft. Therefore, a 75-ft pile would be typically sufficient.
So, if I were to “engineer” such sized structures, this would be the kinds of piles that I would use.
Skipinon site would involve more intensive foundation systems which the storage tanks would rest on but this would not be an issue to the developer since if they need to spend a few more million dollars - they can live with it and have the resources to get the necassary money to cover it.
You know darn skippy that these boys will make these structures as seismically safe as possible and would spend the money needed. Why? A failed facility would equal lost revinues and they want as much revinues as possible.
The solution would be resolved by use of pontoons and deeper piles - and some driven at an angle to provide static stability for the slab plate on top which would support the storage tanks themselves.
Although, I am not a registered engineer or architect but am a building designer. I am confident that something to sufficient effect on this line would be installed. Whether they will use pontoons is up in the air but definitely the pile depths would be driven to obtain necassary friction resistance to keep the structure safe even under liquefaction and high seismic shaking (including mag. 8-9 level after shocks and secondary earthquake main shocks.)
I don’t think there would be an issue too much with structural design for seismic events. Their engineers (which has to be Oregon registered engineers - civil and structural) has to be registered in Oregon or within 6 months of starting project(s). There is not any engineer in the northwest which doesn’t know about the Cascadia Subduction zone Earthquake concerns.
So from these areas of concerns, they would be addressing these right off the bat. No engineer worth their word would want work that they sign and stamp to be unreasonably unsafe under these worse case scenario. A certain factor of safety would be considered in the design.
Rather error on the side of caution then error otherwise.
That been said, we don’t need to be concern about the earthquake mattees too much or discuss it here too much.
Rick Balkins
Building Designer
On Jun 20, 2:54 PM, Ron wrote:
Thanks Mr. Balkins for an excellent discussion.
The attitude from some concerning these large earthquake’s and tsunamis is fine but the magnitude they allude to will no doubt destroy the entire area anyway and the Astoria column will be sitting under the destroyed bridge. I will catch crap for these remarks but so be it. It’s so surprising large bridges, buildings and dams are/have been built in some of the worlds most active earthquake zones (Japan and China) but the argument will be the people didn’t have a voice.
With the active discussion for a new 25-30 million dollar jail with expansion built in, more funds for the college, huge losses of timber revenue due to no cutting restrictions having been implemented and a new Peter De Fazio plan for the forests we need new sources of tax income that jobs beyond service positions will pay. Some common sense is needed but sorry to say the progress in this direction is lacking. But no hesitation for more and larger taxes increases are being proposed as you the common worked see your usable cash decreasing daily. Motel/gas/utility fees/ and the list goes on.
Is the valuation of you home decreasing? Yes: This is what I read or hear. If your home/business is worth less will the property taxes decrease???
Enough venting.
On Jun 21, 1:41 AM, Jude wrote:
Good points, Ron. We heard from those opposing the Aluminum plant 30 years ago, the promises that “other” industries would be encouraged to take its place. We were promised that we wouldn’t miss the revenue it would have generated. It was a lie. We missed it and watched as half of Warrenton, Astoria and Seaside disappeared. No industry came in. People like PM will say it was “leaderships” fault. BS! When you have groups of people bound and determined to keep Clatsop County as their private playground, throwing “leaders” who try to bring in industries out of office the other leaders get the message and lay low.
We are headed for a recession. We are headed into climate change the likes we have never seen in written history. Whether it is man-made, just a natural occurance of the planet or a combination of the two makes little difference at this point. We are headed there. We need LNG at this point. We need Bradwood.
How is it that those in the LNG businesses are cast as pirates and the word “speculators” is said with such disgust, yet those who “speculate” millions of dollars on a Solar Plant are considered “innovative” and this speculation is said as if it is a wonderful thing? Speculation is speculation. I, for one, am getting pretty tired of the double standards of a certain group and individuals.
On Jun 25, 4:06 PM, Ned S wrote:
such as “denial” that PM can’t admit to, nor the double standards of “death throes” of an argument when his side of the issue used the “catch” words first?
On Jun 25, 6:42 PM, Patrick McGee wrote:
What a petty creature you are Ned S.
Get over it will you.
I don’t how many more ways one can explain these things to you and you still not comprehend what is being said.
These are “Catch Words” and they work cause they are causing you a bunch of grief and you still don’t get it and is this productive at all in the context of whatever the hell this conversation is about?
I forget and here’s Balkins out there with paragraph after paragraph, trying to be helpful and here you are intent on a pissing match.
On Jun 25, 9:03 PM, AnotherAstorian wrote:
Patrick - You seem to be the one that cannot understand that people are having a conversation here…
If someone says something you don’t agree with (or better yet, says something the proves you WRONG), you get pissy and change the subject.
You don’t like being proven wrong, do you? Well gee...maybe if you had the RIGHT INFORMATION in the beginning, you’d be informed!
Please stop trying to be such a NIMBY...nobody listens to you anymore, nobody respects your opinion anymore, even some of the antis! Get the facts Patrick, and then maybe we can have a genuine conversation.
On Jun 25, 9:24 PM, Ned S wrote:
I believe it valid to point out when someone’s double standards, emotionalism and penchant for name calling prevent them from rational thinking, reasonable dialog or progressive debate.
IMHO - Rick Balkins is not “trying to be helpful”. He is putting forth his argument in an adult manner, as a respectful, sane, rational debater. Detached and ready to receive information and CHANGE HIS MIND, or adjust his thinking, should the information received warrant it.
Maybe a disclaimer on a post: I am attached to what I am about to post and highly emotional. Please, do not challenge it. Or for those who are really studying and willing to SHARE their information <i> Have some viewpoints on this material. Will share mine if you share yours. Willing to change my mind if you are willing to change yours, if the argument justifies it. Otherwise, let’s agree to disagree without damning one another for all time.<i>
On Jun 25, 11:09 PM, Rick Balkins wrote:
Ned,
I am being both helpful as well as putting forth constructive argument. In this case, both you and Patrick is right in that aspect.
Ned, you do bring a good point. It should also be noted this is a “Comment” area and therefore by default to assume people are speaking their opinions. A disclaimer can help to prevent some ragging. Patrick is quite “reactive”. It is the way he is. Providing a disclaimer does present to some people a sense of humility and respectfulness. Not always as there are some folks that tries to poke at Patrick and vice versa. This is something that requires restraint on both sides of an issue. If we remember that we speak our views and opinion and respect each other’s views - we get along better.
On Jun 25, 11:15 PM, Mildred Johansen wrote:
On Jun 19, 8:03 PM, Patrick McGee wrote:
You just witnessed the prayer as I said it.
Halejulah! I done been a witnessed!
On Jun 26, 5:35 AM, Patrick McGee wrote:
On Jun 25, 8:03 PM, AnotherAstorian wrote:
Patrick - You seem to be the one that cannot understand that people are having a conversation here…
If someone says something you don’t agree with (or better yet, says something the proves you WRONG), you get pissy and change the subject.
You don’t like being proven wrong, do you? Well gee...maybe if you had the RIGHT INFORMATION in the beginning, you’d be informed!
Please stop trying to be such a NIMBY...nobody listens to you anymore, nobody respects your opinion anymore, even some of the antis! Get the facts Patrick, and then maybe we can have a genuine conversation.
Your response betrays the fact that you are obviously still listning to what I say and my opinions.
“Nobody” listens to anything I say, you say?
True and on this site especially as “Nobody” seems to be the prevailing contributor but, I will keep opining regarless.
And who’s facts is it I need to get now?
Yours?
You want to repeat those facts for us again?
And I thought for a moment “T” to the “H” was going to take a shot at legitimacy as a media outlet.
On Jun 26, 5:38 AM, Patrick McGee wrote:
,i.On Jun 25, 10:15 PM, Mildred Johansen wrote:
On Jun 19, 8:03 PM, Patrick McGee wrote:
You just witnessed the prayer as I said it.
Halejulah! I done been a witnessed!</i>
You Go Girl!!!!!!
Don’t you just feel better all over?