The majority appeared to speak out against the massive energy project that would affect a broad swath of the state.
If allowed by state and federal regulators, the LNG project would be one of the largest infrastructure projects ever undertaken in the state. The Canadian energy company backing the project now says it would involve a $10 billion investment, a figure that seems to grow with each passing year.
Recognizing the widespread interest, the
“We wanted to make it as easy as possible to comment on this project,” said
Some opponents of the projects suggested that the agency had received 45,000 comments or more, though DSL has yet to produce a final tally. Just as agency officials heard in five public meetings held in January to solicit public comment, the majority of written comments posted on the agency’s website urged the agency to deny the permit.
Many expressed similar sentiment to
“Just don’t do it,” she wrote. “Think about our future in the long term. Our quality of life, our economy, our water health, and our people’s health depend on a future that is built on sustainable solutions. This pipeline would be a huge setback. Look at all the comments in opposition to this project — the choice is clear. Just deny this permit as you have before.”
At the other end of the spectrum was
In the final analysis, the numbers don’t really matter, and many of the comments will be disregarded because they don’t address the two specific questions the agency is tasked with considering:
1) Is the project consistent with the protection, conservation and best use of the state’s water resources?
2) Would it unreasonably interfere with the use of state water and wetlands for fishing, navigation or public recreation?
The agency’s technical review will scrutinize the impact of running the pipeline across some 485 waterways, including horizontal drilling under the Coos, Rogue and Klamath Rivers, as well as dredging in the Haynes Inlet and
“Our authority only extends to that activity,”
Under state statute, the lands department has 120 days to consider Jordan Cove’s application. Based on its application date, that deadline is
A removal fill permit would a key milestone for the project, but it is far from the only permit pending for the project. The
Federal regulators rejected Jordan Cove’s previous application because backers failed to demonstrate sufficient demand and public need for the project to balance against the negative impacts the pipeline would have had on landowners. Pembina, the Calgary-based company that now owns Jordan Cove after a merger with the previous backer, hopes it will get a different answer from an energy commission that has been remade under the
(c)2019 The Oregonian (Portland, Ore.)
Visit The Oregonian (Portland, Ore.) at www.oregonian.com
Distributed by Tribune Content Agency, LLC.