Read the pull story from Seattle PI here.

No coal trains, no export ports, say Northwest Indian tribes

Seattle PI, Tuesday, May 21,  2013

Fossil fuels should not be transported through the Pacific Northwest and exported out of ports in Washington and Oregon, according to a resolution adopted late last week by the Affiliated Tribes of Northwest Indians, representing 57 Native American groups in the region.

The Affiliated Tribes, in a statement Monday, said they will take the resolution to this Thursday shareholder meeting of Goldman Sachs:  The New York financial giant owns 51 percent of the holding company that includes SSA Marine, which wants to build a coal export terminal at Cherry Point north of Bellingham.

Several individual tribes — notably the Tulalips, the Swinomish and the Lummis, all on the route to the proposed Pacific Gateway Terminal — have already taken a stand against the coal export project. They have made common cause with such critics as State Rep. Reuven Carlyle and several mayors of cities along the rail route to Cherry Point.

“We view the energy export issue facing the Pacific Northwest not as a question of ‘jobs versus the environment’, as it is popularly described, but as a clear choice about our Northwest quality of life and the health of our salmon, upon which our lives and so many of our local jobs depend,” said Brian Cladoosby, the influential Swinomish chairman.

“The choice is about the type of life we want for all our grandchildren for generations to come,” Cladoosby added.

The bringing of Northwest concerns to the seats of corporate power is not without precedent in the region’s environmental battles.

During the 1960′s, Kennecott Copper proposed locating a half-mile-wide open pit copper mine in the middle of the Glacier Peak Wilderness Area.  The 1872 Mining Law would have allowed it access to a holding in the middle of the half-million-acre federal wilderness area.

A Mt. Vernon family physician, Dr. Fred Darvill, bought a share of Kennecott stock, and stood up at the meeting holding a picture of Image Lake and Glacier Peak, one of the great beauty spots of the North Cascades and next door to the mine site.  The Sierra Club ran a full-page New York Times ad proclaiming, “An Open Pit Visible from the Moon.” U.S. Supreme Court Justice William O. Douglas led a protest hike.

The project was stopped.

Whatcom County, the state of Washington and the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers are scoping out an environmental study of the proposed Gateway Pacific project.  Gov. John Kitzhaber of Oregon and Jay Inslee of Washington have asked the White House Council on Environmental Quality to get involved, and look at the impact of energy exports on the West’s environment as well as climate change.

Native American groups have become players in Washington politics, notably the 2000 defeat of Republican Sen. Slade Gorton and the state’s last three gubernatorial elections, all tight contests won by Democrats.

Tim Ballew II, chairman of the Lummi Indians — whose reservation is just south of Cherry Point — said of the Affiliated Tribes’ stand:  “The passing of this resolution is good not only for Indian country but for the great Salish Sea.”

###

Several long-term studies are pointing to the significant impacts from coal-fired pollutants in our air and the associated instances of profound birth defects.

See the Business Week article summarizing these findings here:
http://www.businessweek.com/articles/2013-03-28/air-pollution-birth-defects-and-the-risk-in-china-and-beyond#p1

Coal project proponents should welcome close scrutiny

This week Gov. Jay Inslee asked the federal government to undertake a “thorough examination” of Washington’s proposed coal-export facilities, as reported in The Seattle Times. I have noticed that each time an elected official, citizen group, tribal council, physicians group or other calls for close study of the proposed coal export terminals, the companies and individuals positioned to benefit financially from the projects issue dire warning: “It will cost us!” “This is a bad precedent for business!”

I think most Washingtonians see through this and are left wondering what coal-port cheerleaders have to hide. If the Gateway Pacific Terminal and other coal-export projects are such a good idea for our communities, then project proponents should welcome — rather than attempt to thwart — close scrutiny by the public and decision-makers.

–Shannon Wright, executive director, Communitywise Bellingham

http://blogs.seattletimes.com/northwestvoices/?from=stnv2

This news underscores the need for the public, media and decision-makers to evaluate this project based on facts rather than promises or suggestions by GPT proponents. This development is also critical for the EIS process–we can expect high volume coal train and tanker traffic through our region if GPT is built. Full impacts and costs to local taxpayers must be evaluated.

Read Business Wire’s coverage and Cloud Peak’s release below: 

Cloud Peak Energy Announces Option Agreement with SSA Marine for Capacity at Future Cape Size Export Terminal in Pacific Northwest

GILLETTE, Wyo.–(BUSINESS WIRE)– Cloud Peak Energy Inc.(NYSE:CLD), one of the largest U.S. coal producers and the only pure-play Powder River Basin (PRB) coal company, today announced a throughput option agreement with SSA Marine that provides Cloud Peak Energy (CLD) with an option for up to 16 million tonnes of capacity per year through the planned dry bulk cargo Gateway Pacific Terminal atCherry Point in the State of Washington. The terminal would accommodate cape size vessels. Cloud Peak Energys option is exercisable following future permit completion for the terminal.

The Gateway Pacific Terminal is intended to be capable of exporting up to 54 million tonnes of commodities, including 48 million tonnes of coal, annually. Cloud Peak Energys potential share of capacity will depend upon the ultimate capacity of the terminal. Subsequent to receiving the required permits, SSA Marine anticipates approximately two years for construction. Commercial operation is currently estimated to commence in 2018.

With up to 16 million tonnes of potential capacity at SSA Marines cape size terminal, we are pleased to have completed the next step in furthering our export strategy, said Colin Marshall, Cloud Peak Energys President and Chief Executive Officer. In addition to our Spring Creekmine in the Northern PRB, our Youngs Creek acquisition last year and recently announced option and exploration agreements with the Crow Tribe provide us multiple, long-term development options to meet anticipated Asian demand for our low sulfur coal. Development of theGateway Pacific Terminal will bring substantial revenues to federal, state and local governments, high paying jobs and will also help with the U.S. balance of trade.

We are very pleased to have Cloud Peak Energy as one of our base customers. Cloud Peak Energy has a strong record for safe operations and environmental stewardship. They have won national awards for their environment restoration programs and work diligently to share those programs and techniques with agencies such as U. S. Fish and Wildlife, the Bureau of Land Management, the Natural Resource Conservation Service and the Wyoming Department of Environmental Quality, stated Bob Watters, Senior Vice President of SSA Marine.

About Cloud Peak Energy ^®

Cloud Peak Energy Inc. (NYSE:CLD) is headquartered in Wyoming and is one of the largest U.S. coal producers and the only pure-play PRB coal company. As one of the safest coal producers in the nation, Cloud Peak Energy specializes in the production of low sulfur, subbituminous coal. The company owns and operates three surface coal mines in the PRB, the lowest cost major coal producing region in the nation. The Antelope and Cordero Rojo mines are located in Wyoming and the Spring Creekmine is located near Decker, Montana. Cloud Peak Energy also owns rights to substantial undeveloped coal and complimentary surface assets in the Northern PRB, further building the companys long-term position to serve Asian export and domestic customers. With approximately 1,700 employees, the company is widely recognized for its exemplary performance in its safety and environmental programs. Cloud Peak Energy is a sustainable fuel supplier for approximately 4% of the nations electricity.

Cautionary Note Regarding Forward-Looking Statements

This release contains “forward-looking statements” within the meaning of the safe harbor provisions of Section 27A of the Securities Act of 1933 and Section 21E of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934. Forward-looking statements are not statements of historical facts and often contain words such as “may,” “will,” “expect,” “believe,” “anticipate,” “plan,” “estimate,” “seek,” “could,” “should,” “intend,” “potential,” or words of similar meaning. Forward-looking statements are based on our management’s current expectations or beliefs as well as assumptions and estimates regarding our company, industry, economic conditions, government regulations and energy policies and other factors. Forward-looking statements may include, for example, (1) future permitting, construction and development of the Gateway Pacific Terminal, estimated timing for commercial operation and estimated throughput capacity, (2) our exercise of options for capacity at the terminal and the amount of capacity subject to any exercise, (3) potential future benefits of the option agreement, (4) anticipated future growth in Asian thermal coal demand, (5) our business development and growth initiatives and strategies, (6) the potential development of our Youngs Creek or other Northern PRB assets, and (7) other statements regarding the option agreement, the Gateway Pacific Terminal and our plans, strategies, prospects and expectations concerning our business, industry, economic conditions, operating results, financial condition and other matters that do not relate strictly to historical facts. These statements are subject to significant risks, uncertainties, and assumptions that are difficult to predict and could cause actual results to differ materially from those expressed or implied in the forward-looking statements, including the risks that (i) the Gateway Pacific Terminal is not developed in a timely manner or at all, or is developed at a smaller throughput capacity than planned, (ii) the terms and conditions of the option agreement are not satisfied, the option agreement is terminated or we are otherwise unable to finalize and enter into a definitive throughput agreement that would govern our potential future capacity at the terminal, (iii) we do not exercise some or all of the option for capacity at the terminal, (iv) Asian export demand weakens, or (v) anticipated benefits of the option agreement are not achieved. For a discussion of some of the additional factors that could adversely affect our future results or the anticipated benefits of the option agreement, refer to the risk factors described from time to time in the reports and registration statements we file with the Securities and Exchange Commission (“SEC"), including those in Item 1A – Risk Factors in our most recent Form 10-K and any updates thereto in our Forms 10-Q and current reports on Forms 8-K. There may be other risks and uncertainties that are not currently known to us or that we currently believe are not material. We make forward-looking statements based on currently available information, and we assume no obligation to, and expressly disclaim any obligation to, update or revise publicly any forward-looking statements made in this release, whether as a result of new information, future events or otherwise, except as required by law.

Cloud Peak Energy Inc.
Karla Kimrey, 720-566-2932
Vice President, Investor Relations

Source: Cloud Peak Energy Inc.

Copyright Business Wire 2013

1. EIS Must Include New Train Idling Track in Bellingham. 

Summary – click here for press release on submission:Requests study of alternatives for increasing rail capacity through Whatcom County such as a new waterfront track in Bellingham, its impacts, mitigation measures and costs, and financially responsible parties. Notes under County Code WCC 20.88.130 (6) the Terminal’s developer must prove that this major project, “will not impose uncompensated requirements for public expenditures…” Read full submission: click here.

2. Train Impacts a Direct Result of GPT Development.

Summary:

High-volume train traffic through Whatcom County will be ensured with GPT, not with speculative coal exports through BC. Documents coal export capacity in British Columbia. Calls for GPT coal train impacts along the rail corridor to be included in the EIS, and for GPT train-related mitigation to be covered by the project sponsors rather than local taxpayers. Read full submission: click here.

3. Economic Impact Analysis Needed.

Summary:

Identifies increased train traffic’s likely negative economic impact on waterfront business and redevelopment, Whatcom’s “brand,” tourism, property values, and the local fishing industry. Calls for a comprehensive, economic cost-benefit analysis of GPT for Whatcom County and beyond, looking at the project’s potential impact on communities along rail and vessel corridors. Read full submission: click here.

4. EIS Requires a Fact-based Assessment of Baseline Train Traffic Data.

Summary:

Analyzes project proponent’s false claims that coal train have always come through Whatcom, that GPT train traffic will be just like high peaks of the past, and that high volume coal traffic is “coming anyway” even if GPT is not built. Calls for the EIS to include a fact-based assessment of the baseline railroad and coal shipping conditions. Read full submission: click here.

5. Need to Analyze the Big Picture on Railroad Traffic and PRB Coal’s Move West.

Summary:

GPT will more than double railroad traffic through Bellingham from a level that took 40 to 50 years to evolve. The rapid building of terminals in the region for PRB coal will require massive railroad changes and leave communities with little time or funding to mitigate impacts. All factors pointing to the need for a cumulative impact approach/PEIS. Read full submission: click here.

6. Evaluate Reducing Harmful Emissions.

Summary:

Diesel particulate matter known cause severe health conditions including cardiopulmonary disease and cancer. Tier 4 locomotives reduce emissions by up to 9O%. Supports call of Whatcom Docs for assessment of diesel impacts. Asks for evaluation of health benefits of requiring Tier 4 locomotives for all GPT train traffic. Read full submission: click here.

7. Railroad Capacity Questions Need to be Resolved to Avoid Delays and Legal Challenges.

Summary:

Calls for all rail infrastructure required for GPT to operate—such as new active rail sidings in Whatcom County—to be added to the permit application now so to avoid EIS delays and/or legal challenges later. Read full submission: click here.

8. Analyze Options to Reduce Leachates and Coal Dust; Proposal for SSA Marine to Assume Full Impact Risk.

Summary:

Requests examination of all aspects of coal dust and leachates including toxicology and containment management.  Also requests a study of SSA Marine’s proposition that they can achieve a zero coal dust problem for the terminal site. Should include an enforceable means for developers to assume the risks, not the public. Read full submission: click here.

Watch the short presentations online. Then make a Scoping comment today–only 1 week remaining in the GPT Public Comment period.

View presentations here.

Seattle Times editorial writer Lance Dickie attended that meeting and has written thoughtful comments about it in todays paper.
Decemeber 21, 2012 editorial Here.

Crosscut’s Bellingham based reporter Floyd McKay has been following the GPT project for some two years. He also attended 5 of the 7 statewide Scoping Hearings that were sponsored by the “Agencies” (Whatcom County, Corps of Engineers, Department of Ecology). For those who did not get that opportunity this is a very informative article from the perspective of a professional journalist, your own “virtual tour”. It includes information on how the process will proceed. The lead paragraph refers to the  Agency staffers who sat through all 7 meetings:

“They sat patiently and listened, sometimes writing notes to themselves, never talking back as several hundred speakers and audiences totaling over 8,000 people railed about railroads, jabbered about jobs, castigated coal, fretted about fish and calculated climate-change effects on future generations of Washingtonians.”

Read the complete article  HERE.