Advocates: 'We want to protect our ocean'

Ocean advocates used a public hearing on a proposal to build an offshore liquefied natural gas (LNG) facility to rally opposition to a project they have dubbed "Insanity Island."

"Just remember, everyone, that the corporations whose projects, products and byproducts can result in permanent damage to ecosystems and health problems of thousands perhaps are portraying themselves as our friends who are lowering your rates for natural gas," said Richard Lee, board director of the Surfers' Environmental Alliance, Jersey Shore chapter.

"Well, those of us who take nonviolent actions to oppose these projects are known as ecoterrorists, but we are not. We want to protect our ocean; it's not their ocean."

Wearing T-shirts bearing the slogan "Stop the Insanity" and chanting "No LNG," Lee and other environmentalists weighed in at a public hearing held by the U.S. Coast Guard and U.S. Maritime Administration (MARAD) on Jan. 27, as the agencies began the scoping process for an environmental impact statement as part of the official review of Atlantic Sea Island Group's (ASIG) proposal to build an LNG facility 19 miles off the coast of New Jersey.

Above: A rendering of the proposed Safe Harbor Energy "island." Inset: A plate of cookies served at an informational meeting broadcasts a message of opposition to the liquid natural gas facility. Before the public hearing got under way in the ballroom of the Sheraton Eatontown, Clean Ocean Action, a Sandy Hook-based coalition of ocean advocates, held an informational session in an adjoining room to raise awareness of the impacts of the proposal and to encourage residents, businesses, organizations and elected officials to attend the public meetings on the New York-based investment group's project.

ASIG submitted an application to the Coast Guard and MARAD in 2007 to build and operate Safe Harbor Energy, a 62.5-acre manmade island for LNG storage in the Atlantic Ocean.

Clean Ocean Action, which is spearheading opposition to Safe Harbor Energy, has dubbed the proposal "Insanity Island," inspiring the "Stop the Insanity" slogan on posters and Tshirts at the public hearing.

Mark Prescott, chief of the Deepwater Ports Standards Division with the U.S. Coast Guard, gave a brief overview of the Coast Guard's responsibilities in the process.

"I want to make it clear that the Coast Guard is not either a proponent or opponent of any of these projects," Prescott said. "I also want to emphasize that only after the environmental review process has been completed will any action be taken."

Yvette Fields, of MARAD'S Office of Deepwater Ports and Offshore Activities, said that the maritime administrator would take the public's concerns into consideration.

"At the end of the deep water process, the maritime administrator will have a decision to make whether to issue the license, reject the license, or issue it with certain changes," Fields said. "The decision to approve or disapprove the application will be reflected in our official record of decision document issued by the maritime administrator.

"A favorable decision would only be issued with the assurance that the application is financially responsible, that the applicant would be able to follow all laws and regulations and that the deep water facility will operate in the national interest and consistent with national security goals."

During the public hearing, David Byer, Clean Ocean Action's water policy attorney, pointed out discrepancies between the information presented in the two rooms.

"I had beautiful pictures and slides that they were allowed to use out there but I was not allowed to bring in here because they were not approved by the Coast Guard," Byer said. "What was approved by the Coast Guard is outdated information. They are saying that 32 percent of all of your natural gas will come from LNG by 2030; well, guess what, the latest information in 2009 says 3 percent."

U.S. Rep. Frank Pallone Jr. (D-6th District) was unable to attend the meeting but sent one of his aides to read a letter that was being sent the following day to the U.S. Coast Guard and the MARAD.

"The proposed facility would … devastate a premier fishing ground and endangered species habitat," the letter stated. "Specifically the Cholera Bank, an area that is protected under New Jersey's federally approved coastal management program, will be destroyed by the proposed facility. It will not only impede this historic fishing area, but will also severely undercut

the environmental integrity

of the coastal region."

Pallone's letter called for a 30-day extension for the public hearing so the 5,000-page application could be read more closely. He also stated that the project is contrary to current energy plans.

"This is also the wrong direction for U.S. energy policy," Pallone wrote. "ASIG's proposed facility would not promote U.S. energy independence and could hinder investments into renewable energy and the green jobs of tomorrow. Our nation's energy strategy should promote policies that include incentives for energy efficiencies, funding for renewable energy projects, and smart grid technology."

COA Executive Director Cindy Zipf said that she hoped the Coast Guard and the MaritimeAdministrationwould take a good look at what is at stake.

"It is important for our federal officials to understand that the Jersey Shore has been used and abused in the past," Zipf said. "It was the ocean dumping capital of the world when our beaches were covered with raw sewage, garbage, medical waste and dead and dying dolphins; we were the laughing stock of the nation."

She said that she did not want to see New Jersey go down that path again.

When the moderator attempted to stop Zipf from continuing her remarks as her threeminute comment period had ended, supporters in the crowd started to chant "No LNG" as order was restored in the meeting.

Consultants for ASIG have argued that LNG would provide a cheaper source of energy in New Jersey as well as help alleviate global warming and ensure adequate supplies of natural gas.

Another public hearing was held Jan. 29 in Long Beach, N.Y.

On Feb. 15, 2008, ASIG filed a lawsuit in U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia, seeking a preliminary injunction to stay a decision by MARAD giving New Jersey review power of the LNG proposal.

The decision by U.S. Maritime Administrator Sean T. Connaughton to uphold his designation of New Jersey as an adjacent coastal state under the Deep Water Port Act (DWPA) of 1974 was considered a victory for environmental activists.

According to a fact sheet from the Coast Guard, the LNG facilities "would be constructed on an artificial, purpose built island, designed specifically for the import, storage, regasification and distribution of natural gas."

"This island would be constructed on site in the federal waters 13.5 miles south of Long Beach, N.Y., and 25 miles east of Sandy Hook. The island would be constructed in 18 to 21 meter waters situated in federal waters between the Ambrose to Nantucket to Hudson Canyon to Ambrose international shipping lanes."

The next step after the public hearing will be a final environmental impact statement by the Coast Guard and Maritime Administration.