The U.S. Army Corps of Engineers is halting its review of a proposed coal export terminal in Oregon, a decision that comes a month after the state rejected a permit needed for the project.
The Army Corps’ Portland office cited the Oregon Department of State Lands rejection of the permit requested by Australian firm Ambre Energy for its action. The firm needed to build a dock in Boardman, Ore. to load coal onto covered barges.
“Portland District Commander Col. Jose Aguilar has determined that continuing the District’s evaluation at this time is inappropriate, given that it is unknown whether required state authorization will be subsequently granted, and a substantial amount of work is still required for the Corps to process its application to a conclusion,” it said.
Ambre is appealing the state decision, and the outcome could have significant implications for whether U.S. coal gets exported from the West Coast to Asia. The only other coal export proposals on the Pacific Ocean are in Washington, but the state has what many consider to be a more stringent environmental review process.
John Thomas, vice president of legal with Ambre, said that it “worked with the Corps to arrive at this decision,” noting the company’s Morrow Pacific project requires both federal and state approval.
“Our focus is on the DSL appeal process where we will prove as we have before that the project meets Oregon’s environmental standards,” Thomas said.
While the Army Corps has halted its review, it is generally seen as more lenient than the states of Oregon and Washington. Oregon’s Democratic Gov. John Kitzhaber, who is running for re-election, had already publicly come out against the project.
The terminal would export 8.8 million tons of coal from the Powder River Basin in Montana and Wyoming each year. Ambre says it would add 2,100 construction and 1,000 operations jobs, providing $400 million of economic activity during construction and $300 million annually when operational.
The Oregon Department of State Lands said, however, that building the dock in Boardman — where coal would be loaded inside a covered warehouse before being sent via train down the Columbia River to Port Westward in St. Helens, Ore. — would disrupt fisheries vital for native tribes.
Environmental groups have pushed back against coal exports. Their main contention is that coal dust flying from trains would pollute the Columbia River and communities along the way, though concerns about facilitating climate change by sending more coal abroad also have been a factor.
“Ambre’s coal export proposal is dead in the water. Without federal and state permits, Ambre cannot start exporting U.S. coal on uncovered coal trains that will pollute land and water along the Columbia River,” said Brett VandenHeuvel, executive director of environmental group Columbia Riverkeeper, which has teamed up with the Sierra Club to form the Power Past Coalition that aims to nix coal use.
