While the proposal for the nation’s largest oil terminal drags on through the state permitting process, opponents of the Port of Vancouver project brought the terminal’s lease before the state Supreme Court on Thursday.
Columbia Riverkeeper and the Northwest Environmental Defense Center made oral arguments before the court that the port broke state law when it approved a lease for the Vancouver Energy terminal three years ago.
“The port has violated the prohibition on limiting its alternatives” by signing the lease before completing a full environmental review, argued attorney Brian Knutsen. “Our position is that they need to retain that discretion … as to whether or not this project will go forward.”
The justices asked several questions of Knutsen throughout his argument, with Justice Susan Owens saying: “Your argument is a political argument with the port commissioners, not with the process. Your argument seems very circular to me.”
The question of limiting alternatives is based on state environmental law, which in this case is seen as conflicting. The Energy Facility Site Locations Act was found by a state appeals court to trump the State Environmental Protection Act in this case.
Anna Joyce, the lawyer for the port and its three commissioners, asked the court to uphold the lower court’s ruling and furthered the port’s argument on Thursday afternoon.
“Because of the many contingencies built into the final lease … you only limit the choice of reasonable alternatives if you coerce a final outcome. The port simply doesn’t have the power to make that happen.”
Joyce also was questioned by justices throughout her argument asking her to clarify her position.
“Have you reserved the right to have a no-project outcome?” Chief Justice Barbara Madsen asked, getting to the heart of one of the issues Riverkeeper and the NEDC brought up.
Joyce answered there is a provision in the lease that requires a safety plan both sides must agree upon following permitting. She said if the port deems the project too dangerous, it can get out of the lease, though that may leave the port open to a lawsuit from Vancouver Energy.
Each side had 15 minutes to present its case and five minutes to rebut its opponent’s case.
There is no timetable for the justices to issue an opinion. A spokeswoman with the court said it varies widely case by case, though six months may be a fair guess.
Vancouver Energy, a joint venture between Tesoro Corp. and Savage Cos., proposes building a 360,000-barrel-per-day rail-to-marine oil terminal at the port. The project is currently under state Energy Facility Site Evaluation Council review, which will eventually lead to a recommendation for the governor, who has final say over the project’s approval. As part of that review, a five-week adjudication hearing starts Monday in Vancouver.
