Current status of KentuckDec 24, 2018• Has reverted to wetland• Alternatives designed to meet

the goal that avoid or minimize impacts to wetlands have not been adequately evaluated.

Dike separating Kentuck site from Kentuck Slough KENTUCK MITIGATION SITE

GAS PIPELINEBURIED

Location of the hole for the horizontal directional drilling (HDD) pipe to put the gas pipeline under the bay

HDD pipeon surface during drilling activities

Wetland will be disturbed by burying the gas pipeline

National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA)

Required for major Federal actions significantly affecting the quality of the human environment.To inform decision makers and the public of the proposed action, reasonable alternatives, and their environmental impacts.

The Federal Energy Regulatory Commissison (FERC) has prepare a Draft Environmental Impact Statement (DEIS) for the Jordan Cove project to fulfill the requirements of NEPA.

THE NEPA PROCESS

We have this

We have 90 days for commentsDue July 5There will be a public hearing in late June

This will happen in early 2020

The Key Elements of the Jordan Cove EIS (1120 pages)Introduction – Summary of Project and the Purpose and Need (both the terminal and pipeline)Description of the Proposed ActionAlternatives

No Action AlternativeReasonable AlternativesPreferred Alternative

Section 4 - Affected Environment - physical, biological , economic and social Resources

Air Quality and NoiseReliability and SafetyCumulative Effects

Conclusions and FERCs RecommendationsAppendices ~ 3800 pages

Addressing Alternatives Are there practical and feasible alternatives FERC did not include?If so, provide as much detail as possible

For example: “FERC failed to consider an alternative that would have routed the gas pipeline line near Coos Bay totally on terrestrial habitats, using the route of the existing rail line. Placing the gas line so that it goes north of the liquefaction facility would be practical because it would prevent the need for mitigation of the eelgrass impacts associated with the pipeline routed outlined on page 450 of the draft EIS and would prevent horizontal directional drilling under Coos Bay.

The Affected Environment• Effects can be ecological, aesthetic, cultural, economic, social, or health related.• The EIS should analyze long-term and short-term effects.• FERC should use "best available science"

For example: The assertion that the Kentuck project site is similar in character to adjacent open pasture areas located in the flat valley bottom land along Kentuck Slough, (Pg 843 of the DEIS), is not valid. The photos below show that the site has reverted to wetlands and that JCEP proposed activities at the site will result in fill of wetland areas. Alternative mitigation sites, such as removal of the dredge spoil islands in upper Coos Bay (map included) have not been considered.

Impacts to the Environment, Public Safety, etc…• Farms, fishing, and recreation businesses will suffer as the

project would cross waterways 485 times and damages sensitive salmon and steelhead habitat. Dredging in Coos Bay would harm vital fisheries, like the dungeness crab. Hurting existing jobs and businesses across southern Oregon.

• The drinking water supplies for more than 150,000 Oregonians could be contaminated by the chemicals used during construction of the pipeline.

• LNG leaks can be explosive and the terminal would be located in a tsunami zone. The pipeline would be located in wildfire-prone areas and over 16,000 people near the terminal would be in a “Hazardous Burn Zone.”

• Exporting LNG would raise prices for consumers here at home by 36-54%, according to the US Department of Energy.

• The export terminal and increased fracking would make climate change worse. The terminal alone would become the largest climate polluter in Oregon by 2020.

Horizontal Directional Drilling proposed for the Rogue, the Klamath, Coos Bay, Coos River, and Coos Bay Estuary…

Ohio EPA cleans up a “frac-out” from Horizontal Directional Drilling used for the Rover LNG pipeline.

Impacts to the Environment, Public Safety, etc…• Traditional tribal territories, cultural resources, and burial

grounds are threatened by the pipeline. The Klamath, Siletz, Karuk, Yurok, and Tolowa Dee-ni' Tribes have all come out in strong opposition to the pipeline.

• Farmer and landowner rights will be trampled. Hundreds of private landowners will be impacted along the pipeline route and many will be threatened with eminent domain if they do not settle for permanent use of their land.

• Nearly 1,800 temporary residents from outside our local communities will descend on coastal and pipeline route towns during the construction phase. This will impact housing availability in Southern Oregon.

• The LNG export terminal would be constructed in an area at risk for a high magnitude earthquake. The Coos Bay area is located near the Cascadia Subduction Zone off of the Oregon Coast. Scientists estimate that there is a 40 percent chance of a major earthquake in the Coos Bay region during the next 50 years.

Clearcut on the Mountain Valley Pipeline Easement in Virginia

Pacific Connector Pipeline would require a 229-mile long, 95-ft permanent clearcut. 1,300 acres of public forests would be clearcut for the pipeline, 65% of which is in “protected” forests.

• Learn the hierarchy of the EIS.

• Focus on issues that you either have an expertise in, or are most interested in.• Use the “search” or “find” function in your PDF viewer to look for information

• Print out the glossary of acronyms

• Read the project summary, purpose and need, description of proposed action• Look at the alternatives

• NEPA is not a voting process• Five hundred identical form letters count as one

comment• FERC needs “substantive comments” so write about

what you know

TIPS FOR WORKING WITH THE EIS

• Identify who you are, your interest in the project (e.g. impacted landowner, small business owner, fisherman) whether you have any specific qualification that is relevant to the project (e.g. MS degree in water quality monitoring, recreational crabber, contractor, botanist etc.)

• Focus on cause and effect - If possible provide evidence.For example, "The EIS underestimated the effects of the loss of recreational opportunities for

crabbing in Coos Bay. My family launches our boat in Charleston and uses rings to catch crab in lower Coos Bay in the area adjacent the Federal Navigation channel during slack high tides. The vessel safety zone restriction will mean that we will have to move away from our crabbing area for at least 20 minutes when an LNG ship is entering or leaving the bay and we will not be able to tend our crab rings. The Oregon Department of Fish and Wildlife estimated that between 10,000 – 15,000 crabbing trips are made in Coos Bay from April to October each year. This provides significant financial impact to the Coos Bay area. The EIS does not account for these impacts.“• Don’t be intimidated – your voice counts!

How To Effectively Structure Comments on an EIS

1) Tell FERC to deny the “Certificate of Need” for Jordan Cove LNG with prejudice because:

a. The adverse environmental, public safety, and other impacts of these projects demonstrate that the project is not in the public interest.

b. There is no public need for this project.

1) Tell FERC their DEIS does not adequately address the impacts of Jordan Cove LNG to our communities

a. The DEIS fails to support its conclusions that the projects would have only some limited adverse environmental impacts.

b. Give as many specifics as possible

The goal of our comments are to:

Write your commentsIncluded: The DEIS is inadequate and FERC

should deny the project with predjudice

CUSTOMIZE: Get specific! Talk about the impacts

that concern YOU.

Use the comment writing guide!

I live in Coos Bay and ride my horse on the North Spit. The draft EIS does not effectively outline the potential for liquefaction of the Jordan Cove causeway road if an earthquake were to occur. It fails to answer how workers at the JC terminal and Roseburg Lumber, and those of us who recreate on the North Spit would evacuate in the event of a tsunami due to the causeway failure.

Submit your comments

By Mail:Kimberly D. Bose, Secretary, Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, 888 First Street NE, Room 1A, Washington, DC 20426

Online:On the FERC website! Use the instruction handouts (can be found online _____)

Other Opportunities to Comment

May 20, 2019: 7 pm North Bend Planning Commission Permit to authorize temporary dredge transport pipeline, dredge offloading facility, and permanent bridge and support structures associated with the disposal of dredge materials at APCO 1 & 2.The details and Jordan Cove’s application are here:https://www.northbendoregon.us/pc/page/planning-commission-meeting-49

Tuesday June 18 7pmPublic Hearing - City Council Meeting Coos Bay permit to dredge the Navigational Reliability Improvement No. 4The planning commission has posted comments at:http://coosbay.org/departments/community-development-department#planning-division

On the Agenda•The Coastal Zone Management Act and Oregon’s Coastal Management Program•Coastal Management, Planning and Decision Making•Coastal Issues: Planning and Decision Making•State and Federal Decisions and Actions•State Agency Authorities and Coordination•Round-Table Questions and Answers

Coastal Zone Management 101

CZM-101 A Primer for Local Officials, Planners, Tribes, Agency Staff & Involved Citizens May 14, 2019 - South Slough Visitors’ Center, Charleston

To Register: Call 541-888-5558, ext. 129, or email john.bragg@state.or.us

Included: Gov Brown should challenge the DEIS and deny state permits for

Jordan Cove LNG

Send a postcard to Governor Brown

Add a sentence or two about your concerns about

Jordan Cove LNG

Rogue Climate No Pipeline fellows Isabella & Kayla would really like you to fill out the postcards!