emails pertaining to gateway pacific project for april 21

Emails pertaining to

Gateway Pacific Project

for April 21-27, 2012

From: "Scott Boettcher" <[email protected]>To: "'Dewell, Jane (ORA)'" <[email protected]>, "'Kelly, Alice (ECY)'" ...Date: 4/22/2012 1:21 PMSubject: RE: GPT

Jane, Alice and Tyler -- I am so sorry I missed this call. On Wednesdayafternoon I got pulled in to facilitate a Thursday afternoon workshop theGovernor's Office of Salmon Recovery was holding and as a result everythingkicked into high-gear and I totally overlooked the call (and the courtesy ofletting you all know I wouldn't be on the call). My apologies. How did thecall go?Scott

-----Original Appointment-----From: Dewell, Jane (ORA) [mailto:[email protected]] Sent: Thursday, April 19, 2012 10:27 AMTo: Dewell, Jane (ORA); Kelly, Alice (ECY); '[email protected]';Boettcher, ScottSubject: GPTWhen: Thursday, April 19, 2012 2:00 PM-3:00 PM (UTC-08:00) Pacific Time (US& Canada).Where: ORA Conf line 1-888-285-5785 PIN 6894884#

When: Thursday, April 19, 2012 2:00 PM-3:00 PM (GMT-08:00) Pacific Time (US& Canada).Where: ORA Conf line 1-888-285-5785 PIN 6894884# Note: The GMT offset above does not reflect daylight saving timeadjustments. *~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~* Added the conference line. We'll discuss:

* Critical Path Tracking* ORA SEPA assist* Other ORA-GPT-SEPA related issues

Thanks.

From: "Scott Boettcher" <[email protected]>To: <[email protected]>, <[email protected]>, <[email protected]: <[email protected]>, <[email protected]>, <[email protected]: 4/22/2012 7:02 PMSubject: GPT MAP Team Weekly Update #68

Hi All.

This week's Weekly Update (#68) has now been posted tohttps://secureaccess.wa.gov/ofm/iprmt24/DesktopModules/Articles/ArticlesView.aspx?tabID=0<https://secureaccess.wa.gov/ofm/iprmt24/DesktopModules/Articles/ArticlesView.aspx?tabID=0&alias=1357&ItemID=190&mid=38796&wversion=Staging>&alias=1357&ItemID=190&mid=38796&wversion=Staging.

Highlights include:

* Co-lead agencies continue to complete contract negotiations forthird party contractor to assist with SEPA/NEPA environmental review.

* MAP Team tracking tools have been updated and decisions posted.

Please contact either Jane or Scott with any questions or issues.

Thanks.

Jane and Scott

_____________________________

Scott Boettcher

SBGH-Partners, LLC

219 - 20th Ave SE

Olympia, WA 98501-2924

360/480-6600

<mailto:[email protected]> [email protected]

From: Wain HarrisonTo: Tyler SchroederDate: 4/23/2012 8:08 AMSubject: Fwd: [COAL-EXPORT-FORUM] Fwd: ESSB 6406, §301; SEPA and coal portsAttachments: Fwd: [COAL-EXPORT-FORUM] Fwd: ESSB 6406, §301; SEPA and coal ports

Forwarded. WH

From: Everybody's Store <[email protected]>To:Date: 4/18/2012 10:58 AMSubject: Fwd: [COAL-EXPORT-FORUM] Fwd: ESSB 6406, §301; SEPA and coal ports

Gentlemen,

I have been a close observer of the Gateway Pacific Terminal permitting process. I am concerned with the cumulative environmental impacts, the health impacts and the economic impacts of this proposed project. My concerns can be addressed by Governor Gregoire through ESSB 6406.

I chair the Whatcom County Bicycle Pedestrian Advisory committee which oversees active transportation as well as traffic safety and mobility. Our conversations with emergency management officials, business people and the citizenry display a concern for excessive impacts on emergency response, truck fleet interference and monumental highway and overpass development and consequent transformative impacts. Impacts on agricultural productivity, water quality, branding of Whatcom county as a destination are just a few other items which should broaden the threshold of concern for the State of Washington. ESSB 6406 provides Governor Gregoire with options to safeguard the vitality of Washington lands and people.

I have been a business person in Whatcom County for over 40 years. During this period I have been active in a multitude of civic activities and I consider myself well acquainted with the sentiments of citizens in this region. I have been a member of the Whatcom County Democratic Central Committee off and on throughout my life here. I am a past president of the Foothills Chamber of Commerce. I have helped nurture as a board member a multitude of cultural institutions from the Whatcom Symphony to the South Fork Valley Community Association, to Spark, the Museum of Electronic Discovery. I present these accomplishments to you and the governor as a representation of my commitment and desire for a wonderful Washington State. I know that Governor Gregoire can take my request to heart. I stand in solidarity with others who I am sure have expressed the following:

The governor could address these GPT concerns in two ways: veto Section 301; or issue a "signing statement" clarifying that Section 301 is not intended to limit the environmental review of coal export facilities (or other projects likely to exacerbate global warming).

The best solution would be for the governor to veto Section 301. While there are provisions in Section 301 that make good public policy sense, like requiring Ecology to update the SEPA rules, and to appoint an advisory committee, under the state constitution she cannot veto only parts of the section.

Governor Gregoire could also issue a signing statement with ESSB 6406. Signing statements are an indication of the governor's intent when vetoing or signing a bill. If she were to add that by her approval of ESSB 6406, "Section 301 does not include an intent to limit the environmental review of coal export facilities (or other projects likely to exacerbate global warming)", it would help remove the ambiguity about the operative effect of subsection (2)(c)(ii).

Yours truly,Jeff MargolisEverybody's Store Van Zandt, Deming WA

Begin forwarded message:

> From: Gayle Kiser <[email protected]>> Date: April 17, 2012 7:03:37 PM PDT> To: [email protected]> Subject: Re: [COAL-EXPORT-FORUM] Fwd: ESSB 6406, §301; SEPA and coal ports

> Reply-To: Gayle Kiser <[email protected]>> > I was just part of a telephone town hall for the 19th district and although I didn't make it on the phone, I was able to leave a message with Sen. Hatfield, and Reps. Takko and Blake concerning this bill, given that their constituents have so much riding on this. I'll let you know if I get positive feedback. Gayle> ----- Original Message -----> From: Llyn Doremus> To: [email protected]> Sent: Monday, April 16, 2012 5:53 PM> Subject: [COAL-EXPORT-FORUM] Fwd: ESSB 6406, §301; SEPA and coal ports> > This email provides a good explanation by my friend and colleague, attorney Toby Thaler, of the potential for recently passed legislation to impact the scope of the Environmental Impact Statements composed for the proposed coal export terminals in Washington. It includes a recommendation for commenting to the governor's staff that I recommend you consider acting on.> > Llyn Doremus> > ---------- Forwarded message ----------> From: Toby Thaler <[email protected]>> Date: Sat, Apr 14, 2012 at 2:58 PM> Subject: [ffconscaucus] ESSB 6406, §301; SEPA and coal ports> To: [email protected]> > > Dear Friends and Colleagues:> > I am writing to request that you send a message to Governor Gregoire asking her to veto Section 301 of ESSB 6406. The message should be sent to:> > Keith Phillips - Senior Policy Advisor> Marty Loesch - Chief of Staff> Office of the Governor> PO Box 40002> Olympia WA 98504-0002> > Their emails are:> [email protected]> [email protected]> > The deadline for comments to be considered by the governor in making her signing/signing statement/veto decisions on ESSB 6406 is Wednesday, April 18.> > Here is my analysis:> > I. Background--SEPA Threshold Process> > SEPA (State Environmental Policy Act--RCW Chapter 43.21C) is a foundational law requiring display to the public and consideration by agency/government decision makers of impacts "significantly affecting the quality of the environment" whenever a proposal action is being considered for permitting or approval. The Department of Ecology prepares rules (WAC Chapter 197-11) to implement SEPA, including a "threshold determination" process with an "environmental checklist" to determine whether or not a proposed action needs a full environmental impact statement.> > The scope of issues requiring review and scale of actions requiring a checklist and threshold determination have been controversial and the subject of intense debate for years. Ecology tried to

update the SEPA rules a decade ago but was not able to get to "yes" with the various constituencies (go to http://www.ecy.wa.gov/programs/sea/sepa/revision.htm and see, e.g., "Project Checklist (rulemaking discontinued)"). So, attention turned to the Legislature where pressure has become intense to "reform" SEPA.> > II. Content of ESSB 6406> > The argument over the appropriate level of SEPA exemptions, especially in light of other laws that address specific environmental issues, led to the passage this past week of a bill "modifying programs that provide for the protection of the state's natural resources." ESSB 6406. [The full text of the "Bill as Passed Legislature" on April 10 along with relevant Legislative records is at http://apps.leg.wa.gov/billinfo/summary.aspx?bill=6406&year=2011 ]> > As a result of the pressure to reduce the "burdens" SEPA places on development, ESSB 6406 raises the level of SEPA exemptions and takes other actions to reduce the scope of SEPA review. The environmental community was hard pressed to minimize the damage. They (primarily Futurewise and Washington Environmental Council) succeeded to a good extent, and ended up taking a "neutral" position on the final bill. However, I remain concerned about one specific provision that could seriously impact environmental review of coal export facilities in Washington State.> > The provision I am concerned about is in Section 301 of the bill:> > NEW SECTION. Sec. 301. (1) The legislature recognizes that the rule-based categorical exemption thresholds to chapter 43.21C RCW, found in WAC 197-11-800, have not been updated in recent years, and should be reviewed in light of the increased environmental protections in place under chapters 36.70A [Growth Management Act] and 90.58 RCW [Shoreline Management Act], and other laws. It is the intent of the legislature to direct the department of ecology to conduct two phases of rule making over the next two years to increase the thresholds for these categorical exemptions.> (2) By December 31, 2012, the department of ecology shall ... update the environmental checklist found in WAC 197-11-960.> ...> (c) In updating the environmental checklist found in WAC 197-11-960, the department of ecology shall:> (i) Improve efficiency of the environmental checklist; and> (ii) Not include any new subjects into the scope of the checklist, including climate change and greenhouse gases.> ...> > My concern is that the highlighted provision will be used by the proponents of coal export projects to restrict the scope of environmental review to exclude consideration of the impact of facilitating the emission of a huge quantity of GHGs into the atmosphere. The contrary argument is that the provision does not explicitly limit the scope of SEPA and the courts will not allow that scope to be limited by Section 301. However, my experience is that any argument that can be made to restrict environmental review will be made. Even if environmental appellants are ultimately successful in forcing consideration of GHG emissions, a degree of doubt is injected into the process, as well as increased time and attorney expense.> > Here's a recent example of a legal result similar to what I fear could happen under Section 301 (appellants represented by Dave Mann): Port Townsend Paper wants to expand the amount of woody biomass burned at its mill to generate power (steam and electricity). Using a 2008 provision in the state's energy statute:> > Except for purposes of reporting, emissions of carbon dioxide from industrial combustion of biomass in the form of fuel wood, wood waste, wood byproducts, and wood residuals shall not be considered a greenhouse gas as long as the region's silvicultural sequestration capacity is maintained or increased (RCW 70.235.020(3)),> > Thurston County Superior Court Judge McPhee ruled on March 29 that "the Legislature had spoken"

and Port Townsend Paper does not need to conduct an evaluation of the potential impacts of burning more wood on GHG emissions as part of the SEPA threshold process. In other words, language in a non-SEPA statute was determined to preclude consideration of a potential environmental impact under SEPA.> > III. Section 301 Is Bad Public Policy> > Aside from the likely additional costs and difficulties environmental appellants may face in appeals of coal export facilities, there are two major public policy reasons Section 301 is inappropriate:> > A. It is bad governance for the Legislature to be delving into the details of agency rule making. The common structure of administrative law is that the Legislature gives the executive agencies standards and guidelines, and the agencies implement them, and fill in details as needed. (The courts determine if agency details and interpretations are consistent with the Legislature's intent and guidelines.) Here, the Legislature is impinging in a very direct way with the prerogatives of the Executive.> > There was no public consideration of the intent, meaning, or implications of Section 301(2)(c)(ii). That's why the details of rule making should be left to the agencies. Here, the agency (Ecology) found itself unable to move (update the SEPA rules) due to the difficult political environment. That is no excuse to throw such complex decision making to the Legislature, where the sausage gets even less public consideration and provisions are added at the last minute of the Session with their intent known to few.> > The governor should veto Section 301 as improper interference of the Legislature with the details of executive agency rule making.> > B. It is contrary to the overwhelming weight of current knowledge to move away from consideration of "climate change and greenhouse gases" in the SEPA process. SEPA is intended to require consideration of projects' likely environmental impacts. It is clear to most people that facilitating the burning of more coal falls directly within the scope of "climate change and greenhouse gas" impacts. While it might be arguable that the language in Section 301(2)(c)(ii) would not restrict such consideration, it is at best ambiguous and indicates a Legislative intent to further a policy of "if you don't see the evil, you won't have to deal with it." This position is contrary to good governance and the health of Earth.> > IV. The Solution--Veto or Strong Signing Statement> > The governor could address these concerns in two ways: veto Section 301; or issue a "signing statement" clarifying that Section 301 is not intended to limit the environmental review of coal export facilities (or other projects likely to exacerbate global warming).> > The best solution would be for the governor to veto Section 301. While there are provisions in Section 301 that make good public policy sense, like requiring Ecology to update the SEPA rules, and to appoint an advisory committee, under the state constitution she cannot veto only parts of the section.> > Governor Gregoire could also issue a signing statement with ESSB 6406. Signing statements are an indication of the governor's intent when vetoing or signing a bill. If she were to add that by her approval of ESSB 6406, "Section 301 does not include an intent to limit the environmental review of coal export facilities (or other projects likely to exacerbate global warming)", it would help remove the ambiguity about the operative effect of subsection (2)(c)(ii).> > > Feel let me know if you have questions. If you do send a letter/email to the Governor's Office, please send copies to me as well.> > Thank you for your consideration.> > Toby Thaler

> Natural Resource Law & Policy> PO Box 1188> Seattle, WA 98111-1188> (206) 783-6443> cell 697-4043> [email protected]> > > > > > - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - To unsubscribe from the COAL-EXPORT-FORUM list, send any message to: [email protected] Check out our Listserv Lists support site for more information: http://www.sierraclub.org/lists/faq.asp To view the Sierra Club List Terms & Conditions, see: http://www.sierraclub.org/lists/terms.asp> - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - To unsubscribe from the COAL-EXPORT-FORUM list, send any message to: [email protected] Check out our Listserv Lists support site for more information: http://www.sierraclub.org/lists/faq.asp Sign up to receive Sierra Club Insider, the flagship e-newsletter. Sent out twice a month, it features the Club's latest news and activities. Subscribe and view recent editions at http://www.sierraclub.org/insider/

From: "Dewell, Jane (ORA)" <[email protected]>To: "Boettcher, Scott" <[email protected]>CC: "Kelly, Alice (ECY)" <[email protected]>, "[email protected]" <...Date: 4/23/2012 9:43 AMSubject: RE: GPT

Thanks Scott for follow-up. Tyler could not make it either so Alice and I talked, and I sent revised information to Tyler and Randel for review.Thanks, Jane

_____________________________________________From: Scott Boettcher [mailto:[email protected]]Sent: Sunday, April 22, 2012 1:22 PMTo: Dewell, Jane (ORA); Kelly, Alice (ECY); [email protected]: RE: GPT

Jane, Alice and Tyler -- I am so sorry I missed this call. On Wednesday afternoon I got pulled in to facilitate a Thursday afternoon workshop the Governor's Office of Salmon Recovery was holding and as a result everything kicked into high-gear and I totally overlooked the call (and the courtesy of letting you all know I wouldn't be on the call). My apologies. How did the call go?Scott

-----Original Appointment-----From: Dewell, Jane (ORA) [mailto:[email protected]]Sent: Thursday, April 19, 2012 10:27 AMTo: Dewell, Jane (ORA); Kelly, Alice (ECY); '[email protected]'; Boettcher, ScottSubject: GPTWhen: Thursday, April 19, 2012 2:00 PM-3:00 PM (UTC-08:00) Pacific Time (US & Canada).Where: ORA Conf line 1-888-285-5785 PIN 6894884#

When: Thursday, April 19, 2012 2:00 PM-3:00 PM (GMT-08:00) Pacific Time (US & Canada).Where: ORA Conf line 1-888-285-5785 PIN 6894884#

Note: The GMT offset above does not reflect daylight saving time adjustments.

*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*

Added the conference line.

We'll discuss:

* Critical Path Tracking* ORA SEPA assist* Other ORA-GPT-SEPA related issues

Thanks.

From: Amy KeenanTo: Wendy HarrisCC: Tyler SchroederDate: 4/24/2012 10:15 AMSubject: Re: Q regarding GPT variance.

Good Morning Wendy,

Yes, you acre correct. The applicant is contending that the placement of transfer tower 21 and 22 will need a variance to setbacks because the project has been designed to minimize impacts to wetland and wetland buffers and streams and stream buffers. For more details regarding the wetlands or streams, please review the 2008 Wetland Final Report ( http://www.whatcomcounty.us/pds/plan/current/gpt-ssa/pdf/20120319-permit-submittal-attachment-2008-wetland-final-report.pdf ) for more details regarding critical areas.

Sincerely,

Amy Keenan, AICP Senior PlannerWhatcom CountyPlanning and Development ServicesNorthwest Annex, Suite B5280 Northwest Drive(360) 676-6907

>>> "Wendy Harris" <[email protected]> 4/23/2012 8:00 PM >>>Hi Amy, I am still waiting for a reply regarding the County's application of the provisions for Habitat Conservation Areas in the CAO with regard to this project.

Wendy Harris

----- Original Message ----- From: "Amy Keenan" <[email protected]>To: "Wendy Harris" <[email protected]>Cc: "Tyler Schroeder" <[email protected]>Sent: Thursday, April 19, 2012 3:55 PMSubject: Re: Q regarding GPT variance.

Good Afternoon Wendy,

Thank you for your comments regarding the Gateway Pacific Terminal Notice of Application. Your name has been added to the parties of record list and you will be notified of future notices. Your comments will be added to the file, forwarded to the Whatcom County Hearing Examiner and reviewed throughout the SEPA/NEPA process, including scoping.

With regard to the "transfer towers" question these are considered "structures" because they require a building permit pursuant to Whatcom County Code. As such they are required to meet the setbacks required of a

structure and therefore are requesting a variance to those setbacks. For more detail regarding the function of a transfer tower, please refer to page 4-7 of the Revised Project Information Document available on our website. The applicant is referencing wetland buffer in the request.

Sincerely,

Amy Keenan, AICPSenior PlannerWhatcom CountyPlanning and Development ServicesNorthwest Annex, Suite B5280 Northwest Drive(360) 676-6907

>>> "Wendy Harris" <[email protected]> 4/16/2012 10:52 PM >>>I wish to receive notice of hearings and decisions with regard to the totality of Gateway Pacific Terminal project permits.

With regard to the variance permit, I do not understand what "transfer towers" are, or how they are used. Can you provide me with more information on this matter? For example, the application refers to these items as equipment, rather than structures, but the use of the term "tower" indicates a building structure. The application references a critical area buffer, but fails to indicate where and what kind of critical area is being protected? I assume that this would be critical areas for wetlands and Habitat Conservation Areas?

Wendy Harris

From: Eric Tremblay <[email protected]>To: <[email protected]>Date: 4/24/2012 10:47 AMSubject: RE: Coal

Yes, do. I thought that was clear. Eric

> Date: Thu, 19 Apr 2012 13:33:43 -0700> From: [email protected]> To: [email protected]> Subject: Re: Coal> > Eric,> > Please clarify your email. Would you like me to add you email to our Gateway Pacific Terminal party of record list. > > Thanks,> > Tyler> > Tyler R. Schroeder> Planning Manager> Phone: (360) 676-6907 ext. 50202> Fax: (360)738-2525> Email: [email protected] > Address: > Whatcom County Planning and Development Services> 5280 Northwest Dr. > Bellingham, WA 98225> > > >>> Eric Tremblay <[email protected]> 4/5/2012 8:01 AM >>>> > Eric Tremblay1092 Koenig Ln. Coupeville Wa. 98239> Add my name >

From: Everybody's Store <[email protected]>To: ed kramer <[email protected]>, Joe Knight <[email protected]>,...CC: John Stark <[email protected]>, <[email protected]>, ...Date: 4/24/2012 11:05 AMSubject: Fwd: [COAL-EXPORT-FORUM] WA Dept of Natural Resources letter on Port of MorrowAttachments: 033012_USACE comment letter.pdf; Part.002

DNR insists on any and all cumulative rail impacts.Jeff MargolisSafeguard the South Fork

Begin forwarded message:

From: Suzanne MildnerTo: Tyler SchroederCC: gpt_archiveDate: 4/24/2012 2:14 PMSubject: Updated Whatcom Docs ltr re GPTAttachments: GPT project Whatcom Docs ltr 041612.pdf

Hi Tyler, Attached is correspondence received today from the Whatcom Docs group. Thanks, SuzanneSuzanne MildnerAdministrative Secretary/Grants CoordinatorWhatcom County Executive Department311 Grand Avenue, Suite 108Bellingham, WA 98225(360) 676-6717 [email protected]

From: "Wendy Harris" <[email protected]>To: "Amy Keenan" <[email protected]>CC: "Tyler Schroeder" <[email protected]>Date: 4/24/2012 2:20 PMSubject: HCA consideration in GPT

This does not answer my question. Is the County going to include Habitat Conservation Areas as an additional consideration in the variance request? HCA is entitled to separate consideration, apart from wetlands. They are both separate provisions in the CAO, and mitigating for wetlands does not necessarily mitigate for HCA.

Wendy

----- Original Message ----- From: "Amy Keenan" <[email protected]>To: "Wendy Harris" <[email protected]>Cc: "Tyler Schroeder" <[email protected]>Sent: Tuesday, April 24, 2012 10:15 AMSubject: Re: Q regarding GPT variance.

Good Morning Wendy,


Sincerely,


>>> "Wendy Harris" <[email protected]> 4/23/2012 8:00 PM >>>Hi Amy, I am still waiting for a reply regarding the County's application ofthe provisions for Habitat Conservation Areas in the CAO with regard to thisproject.

Wendy Harris

----- Original Message ----- From: "Amy Keenan" <[email protected]>To: "Wendy Harris" <[email protected]>

Cc: "Tyler Schroeder" <[email protected]>Sent: Thursday, April 19, 2012 3:55 PMSubject: Re: Q regarding GPT variance.


Thank you for your comments regarding the Gateway Pacific Terminal Notice ofApplication. Your name has been added to the parties of record list and youwill be notified of future notices. Your comments will be added to thefile, forwarded to the Whatcom County Hearing Examiner and reviewedthroughout the SEPA/NEPA process, including scoping.

With regard to the "transfer towers" question these are considered"structures" because they require a building permit pursuant to WhatcomCounty Code. As such they are required to meet the setbacks required of astructure and therefore are requesting a variance to those setbacks. Formore detail regarding the function of a transfer tower, please refer to page4-7 of the Revised Project Information Document available on our website.The applicant is referencing wetland buffer in the request.

Sincerely,


>>> "Wendy Harris" <[email protected]> 4/16/2012 10:52 PM >>>I wish to receive notice of hearings and decisions with regard to thetotality of Gateway Pacific Terminal project permits.

With regard to the variance permit, I do not understand what "transfertowers" are, or how they are used. Can you provide me with more informationon this matter? For example, the application refers to these items asequipment, rather than structures, but the use of the term "tower" indicatesa building structure. The application references a critical area buffer,but fails to indicate where and what kind of critical area is beingprotected? I assume that this would be critical areas for wetlands andHabitat Conservation Areas?

Wendy Harris

From: "Dewell, Jane (ORA)" <[email protected]>To: "'[email protected]'" <[email protected]>Date: 4/26/2012 10:13 AMSubject: Re: Reminder - please review

Thanks very much

----- Original Message -----From: Tyler Schroeder [mailto:[email protected]]Sent: Thursday, April 26, 2012 09:55 AMTo: Dewell, Jane (ORA); Randel J NWS Perry <[email protected]>Cc: Kelly, Alice (ECY); Boettcher, ScottSubject: Re: Reminder - please review

Jane,

I have reviewed these documents and I am comfortable with information that is presented.

Thanks,

Tyler

Tyler R. SchroederPlanning ManagerPhone: (360) 676-6907 ext. 50202Fax: (360)738-2525Email: [email protected] Address: Whatcom County Planning and Development Services5280 Northwest Dr. Bellingham, WA 98225

>>> "Dewell, Jane (ORA)" <[email protected]> 4/24/2012 3:56 PM >>>Tyler & Randel,

I would like to get your OK or comments on the attached (e-mails attached) before the check-in call this Thursday. Please let me know if any questions. Wednesday I'm in Olympia so can be reached at 425-577-8445.

Thanks, Jane

**********************************Jane Dewell, Regional LeadGovernor's Office of Regulatory Assistance3190 160th Ave SEBellevue, WA 98008-5452(425) 649-7124 or (425) 577-8445

From: Jessica Giasullo <[email protected]>To: <[email protected]>Date: 4/26/2012 12:41 PMSubject: re the Gateway Terminal Project

Dear Mr. Schroeder:My husband, James R. Scheib, and I live on Orcas Island. We are writing to you as key staff for the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, Whatcom County, and the Washington Department of Ecology, the three agencies that are leading the NEPA/SEPA environmental review for the Gateway Terminal Project. We request that scoping meetings be held on Orcas Island, Lopez Island, and San Juan Island, the three most populated islands in San Juan County.

As noted by the San Juan County supervisors and the San Juan County Marine Resources Committee in letters of February 28, 2012, due to increased shipping traffic around our county from the proposed Gateway Pacific Terminal Project, our concerns include but are not limited to the increased risk of oil spills and spills of other environmentally harmful materials and the increased impact on the foraging behaviors of species as listed in the Endangered Species Act. We are also concerned about the size and number of the fleet of bulk carriers, and associated noise and waterway congestion.

Our quality and standard of life are at stake. As citizens, we respectfully ask for representation for the majority of citizens of San Juan County by holding scoping meetings on each of the three larger islands serviced by the Washington State Ferry system. Thank you for considering our request.

Sincerely,Jessica GiasulloRetired Major James R. ScheibPOB 217Orcas, WA 98280

360 376-6916

From: Stephanie DrakeTo: Tyler SchroederDate: 4/27/2012 4:45 PMSubject: Re: Fwd: Gateway Pacific Terminal - Whatcom County

Yes sir

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~Stephanie DrakeWhatcom County Planning & Development [email protected](360) 676-6907 Ext. 50201

>>> Tyler Schroeder 4/27/2012 4:41 PM >>>Is this online?


>>> "Tavernor, Bernadette (ECY)" <[email protected]> 4/19/2012 4:21 PM >>>April 19, 2012

Good Afternoon, Executive Constantine:On behalf of Ted Sturdevant, Director of the Washington State Department of Ecology, submitting his response to your letter of January 31, 2012, regarding the Gateway Pacific Terminal in Whatcom County.Hard copy to follow only to you.Wishing you an enjoyable afternoon.

Bernadette TavernorAdministrative AssistantEcology Director's [email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>

From: PDSTo: Amy KeenanDate: 4/23/2012 7:21 AMSubject: Fwd: Gateway Interested Party

Included as party of record.

>>> Kim Howard <[email protected]> 4/21/2012 9:28 AM >>>

I am writing in response to your Notice of Application for the Gateway Pacific Terminal permits dated April 16, 2012. Please register me as an "interested party" and email me a copy of the SEPA/NEPA DS and scoping notices for this project. Kim [email protected]

From: PDSTo: Amy KeenanDate: 4/23/2012 7:23 AMSubject: Fwd: GPT Comments For Public Record

>>> John Watts <[email protected]> 4/22/2012 1:54 PM >>>PDS: As a GPT Subscriber List member, I am hereby submitting the following information for the public record:

Here are the URLs for 33 Blogs concerning coal I have written from March 27, 2011 through now on HamsterTalk at http://bellinghamstertalk.blogspot.com/Please incorporate these into the public record as part of my comments.If this is not the time to submit information, please advise -clearly- when that time begins and ends.So far, I have found the instructions promulgated by PDS to be confusing at best!

Also, please contact me at <[email protected]> to confirm your timely receipt of this e-mail. If any problem is encountered in accessing these comments, including embedded links, I will make thecorrections necessary.My full address and contact information is shown at the bottom this e-mail.

Thank you,John Watts

1. Those Thrilling Days of Yesteryear... ( http://bellinghamstertalk.blogspot.com/2011/03/those-thrilling-days-of-yesteryear.html )Sunday, March 27, 2011

2. Coal Terminal: Mayor's Listening Session ( http://bellinghamstertalk.blogspot.com/2011/06/coal-terminal-mayors-listening-session.html )Wednesday, June 1, 2011

3. Good Mornin' America, How Are Ya? ( http://bellinghamstertalk.blogspot.com/2011/06/good-mornin-america-how-are-ya.html )Wednesday, June 8, 2011

4. Climatology: Natural Science or Political Science? ( http://bellinghamstertalk.blogspot.com/2011/07/climatology-natural-science-or.html )Saturday, July 9, 2011

5. Making Tracks To Where? ( http://bellinghamstertalk.blogspot.com/2011/07/making-tracks-to-where.html )Friday, July 15, 2011

6. Coal Terminal: A Pit & Pendulum Exercise? ( http://bellinghamstertalk.blogspot.com/2011/07/coal-terminal-pit-pendulum-exercise.html )Thursday, July 21, 2011

7. Coal Terminal: Trains & Infrastructure ( http://bellinghamstertalk.blogspot.com/2011/07/coal-terminal-trains-infrastructure.html )Saturday, July 30, 2011

8. Coal Terminal: Bulk Carriers & Kayaks ( http://bellinghamstertalk.blogspot.com/2011/07/coal-terminal-bulk-carriers-kayaks.html )Sunday, July 31, 2011

9. Coal Terminal: Update on Developments ( http://bellinghamstertalk.blogspot.com/2011/08/coal-terminal-update-on-developments.html )Monday, August 1, 2011

10. Coal Terminal: Another Update ( http://bellinghamstertalk.blogspot.com/2011/08/coal-terminal-another-update.html )Tuesday, August 2, 2011

11. Coal Terminal: Playing Defense ( http://bellinghamstertalk.blogspot.com/2011/08/coal-terminal-playing-defense.html )Wednesday, August 3, 2011

12. Coal Terminal:Whatcom Watch Remembers Cherry Point Agreement ( http://bellinghamstertalk.blogspot.com/2011/08/coal-terminalwhatcom-watch-remembers.html )Thursday, August 4, 2011

13. Coal: A Global Perspective ( http://bellinghamstertalk.blogspot.com/2011/09/coal-global-perspective.html )Thursday, September 1, 2011

14. Coal: Floyd McKay's Latest Crosscut Article ( http://bellinghamstertalk.blogspot.com/2011/09/coal-floyd-mckays-latest-crosscut.html )Wednesday, September 28, 2011

15. Coal: Green versus Gold? ( http://bellinghamstertalk.blogspot.com/2011/10/coal-green-versus-gold.html )Wednesday, October 19, 2011

16. Coal: The Role of Politics ( http://bellinghamstertalk.blogspot.com/2011/10/coal-role-of-politics.html )Wednesday, October 19, 2011

17. Coal: National Geographic Article ( http://bellinghamstertalk.blogspot.com/2011/10/coal-national-geographic-article.html )Friday, October 21, 2011

18. Coal: NPR Weighs In With Two Articles ( http://bellinghamstertalk.blogspot.com/2011/10/coal-npr-weighs-in-with-two-articles.html )Thursday, October 27, 2011

19. Big Coal meets Cherry Point's tiny herring ( http://bellinghamstertalk.blogspot.com/2011/10/big-coal-meets-cherry-points-tiny.html )Friday, October 28, 2011

20. Coal: Where Does Bellingham Really Stand? ( http://bellinghamstertalk.blogspot.com/2011/10/coal-where-does-bellingham-really-stand.html )Sunday, October 30, 2011

21. Coal: Location, Location, Location - For Whom? ( http://bellinghamstertalk.blogspot.com/2011/10/coal-location-location-location-for.html )Monday, October 31, 2011

22. Coal: What Does Lake Whatcom, Waterfront Redevelopement & The Olympic Pipe Line Have to Do With It? ( http://bellinghamstertalk.blogspot.com/2011/11/coal-what-does-lake-whatcom-waterfront.html )Thursday, November 3, 2011

23. Coal: Possible Good News? ( http://bellinghamstertalk.blogspot.com/2011/11/coal-possible-good-news.html )Thursday, November 10, 2011

24. Energy: Update On Coal, Oil & Other Fossil Fuel Projects (

http://bellinghamstertalk.blogspot.com/2011/11/energy-update-on-coal-oil-other-fossil.html )Wednesday, November 16, 2011

25. Impacts: Coal Versus Oil Sands ( http://bellinghamstertalk.blogspot.com/2011/11/imapacts-coal-versus-oil-sands.html )Thursday, November 17, 2011

26. Trains: 'Here's Mud In Your Eye' ( http://bellinghamstertalk.blogspot.com/2011/12/trains-heres-mud-in-your-eye.html )Thursday, December 15, 2011

27. Coal: Why Can't We Citizens Have A Strong Voice? ( http://bellinghamstertalk.blogspot.com/2011/12/coal-why-cant-we-citizens-have-strong.html )Friday, December 30, 2011

28. Coal: Specific Actions Bellingham Must Take ( http://bellinghamstertalk.blogspot.com/2012/01/coal-specific-actions-bellingham-must.html )Sunday, January 1, 2012

29. Coal & Climate ( http://bellinghamstertalk.blogspot.com/2012/01/coal-climate.html )Friday, January 27, 2012

30. Constitution, Corporations & Coal ( http://bellinghamstertalk.blogspot.com/2012/02/constitution-corporations-coal.html )Wednesday, February 22, 2012

31. Coal: HamsterTalk Blogs from March 27 thru December 31, 2011 ( http://bellinghamstertalk.blogspot.com/2011/12/coal-hamstertalk-blogs-from-march-27.html )Saturday, December 31, 2011

32. Coal: History Has A Way Of Repeating Itself. ( http://bellinghamstertalk.blogspot.com/2012/03/coal-history-has-way-of-repeating.html )Friday, March 23, 2012

33. Coal: Updating Public Concerns ( http://bellinghamstertalk.blogspot.com/2012/03/coal-updating-public-concerns.html )Thursday, March 29, 2012

John Watts 1015 W Toledo StBellingham, WA 98229360 [email protected]

From: PDSTo: Amy KeenanDate: 4/23/2012 7:24 AMSubject: Fwd: SVHerald article regarding coal terminal


>>> Judy Bishop <[email protected]> 4/22/2012 8:51 AM >>>To: Whom-it-may-concern,

Due to the confusion that has been created by newspaper articles and your own April 16, 2012 Notice of Application for the Gateway Pacific Terminal, we are requesting that you formally register us as a "party of record" or "interested party" for all proceedings and all permits. We are requesting the following concerning the permits described in your notice and all other permits or authorizations related to the terminals:

· Notice of all hearings by mail and by email if possible;· Notice of the filing of any other applications or requests for approvals from any division of Whatcom County government, and any completeness determinations related to these, including notice of appeal periods and appeal rights;· Notice and a copy of any past or present administrative or permit decision by any division of Whatcom County government, concerning any aspect of the Gateway Pacific Terminals, including notice of any applicable appeal periods and procedures;. A copy of the SEPA/NEPA DS and scoping notice anticipated for the project; and. That you formally register us as a “parties of record” or “interested parties” for the environmental review.

We also request that any public comments you receive by May 16, 2012 as described in the Notice of Application announcement be accepted as official comments for scoping, since there is a very real possibility that many comments will be sent in good faith to meet the May 16 deadline.

We are concerned that portions of the application are not complete, yet were deemed to be complete:

Please clarify that the completeness determination on April 2, 2012 applies to only the Major Project Permit, the Zoning Variance and the Shoreline Substantial Development Permit listed in the Subject Line, but no other permit applications.

The Notice of Application seems to indicate that the Land Disturbance Permit application was “not included in this application.” Please clarify whether the Land Disturbance Permit application submitted with the application was determined to be incomplete.

With regard to the application, we observe the following:Page 2 of the Endangered Species Checklist does not provide the requested information. Specifically, the checklist lacks the required description of ESA species and habitat currently present on the project site, as opposed to those known to exist in the Georgia Strait vicinity. The applicant says they completed the checklist (Page 7 of 10 of the main application, item (1)(p)), but that is not the case according to the answer provided at this section on Page 2 of the checklist itself. PDS’ determination of completeness appears to be incorrect. Please clarify how a completeness determination was issued with this missing information.

Page 2 of 3 of the Preliminary Stormwater Proposal does not contain the requested Impervious Areas Summary. Note that Page 3 of the Endangered Species Act checklist also states that impervious surface

area is “unknown.” The applicant’s Major Project Permit Checklist says the applicant completed the Preliminary Stormwater Proposal (Page 6 of 10 of the main application, item (1)(k)), but that is not the case according to the answer provided at this section on Page 2 of the Stormwater Proposal itself. PDS’ determination of completeness appears to be incorrect. Please clarify how a completeness determination was issued with this missing information.

This process is of utmost importance and must be conducted with the highest standards for thoroughness, transparency, and integrity in full view of the public. Your pre-scoping hearing, held in Bellingham on March 21 was appreciated, and yet nothing during that information session to the public was said about a general public comment period for 30 days like the one that was announced on April 16, 2012 with the May 16, 2012 deadline. Therefore, all those who have previously submitted their names to Whatcom Planning and Development Services should absolutely be considered parties of record for purposes of receiving notices of hearings and decisions, and not be simply placed on a courtesy notice list. Please assure us that this will be the case.

Sincerely, Judy and Lyall Bishop



>>> Irene <[email protected]> 4/21/2012 10:14 PM >>>

I am writing in response to your Notice of Application for the Gateway Pacific Terminals permits, date April 16,2012. I am requesting that you formally register me as a “party of record” or “interested party” for all proceedings and all permits. I am requesting the following concerning the permits described in your notice and all other permits or authorizations related to the terminals:Notice of all hearings by mail and by email if possible. Notice of the filing of any other applications or requests for approvals from any division of Whatcom County government, and any completeness determinations related to these, including notice of appeal periods and appeal rights. Notice and a copy of any past of present administrative or permit decision by any division of Whatcom County government, concerning any aspect of the Gateway Pacific Terminals, including notice of any applicable appeal periods and procedures, A copy of the SEPA/NEPA DS and scoping notice anticipated for the project and that you formally register me as “party of record” or “interested party” for that environmental review. My mailing address is: 2233 Viewmont Way WestSeattle, WA 98199206 283 6532

Sincerely,Irene DerosierConcerned Washington Citizen

From: PDSTo: Amy KeenanDate: 4/23/2012 7:41 AMSubject: Fwd: GPT Subscriber List


>>> "Walker, Scott" <[email protected]> 4/20/2012 12:23 PM >>>

Thanks for signing me up Scott WalkerTransportation PlannerCity-County Planning DepartmentBillings/Yellowstone County MPO510 N. Broadway, 4th FloorBillings, MT 59101 Phone-406-247-8661Fax-406-657-8327 [email protected]



>>> Marc and Kelli Grotle <[email protected]> 4/21/2012 1:15 PM >>>

I am writing in response to your Notice of Application for the Gateway Pacific Terminal permits dated April 16, 2012. Please register me as an "interested party" and email me a copy of the SEPA/NEPA DS and scoping notices for this project.

Marc and Kelli Grotle

[email protected]

From: PDSTo: Amy KeenanDate: 4/23/2012 7:44 AMSubject: Fwd:


>>> "Sandy Playa" <[email protected]> 4/21/2012 6:40 PM >>>To Whom It May Concern,

I am writing in response to your Notice of Application for the GatewayPacific Terminalpermits dated April 16, 2012. Please register me as an "interested party"and emailme a copy of the SEPA/NEPA DS and scoping notices for this project.

Thank you.

Sandy PlayaPOB 97Olga WA [email protected]

From: "Wendy Harris" <[email protected]>To: "Amy Keenan" <[email protected]>Date: 4/23/2012 8:00 PMSubject: Re: Q regarding GPT variance.

Hi Amy, I am still waiting for a reply regarding the County's application of the provisions for Habitat Conservation Areas in the CAO with regard to this project.

Wendy Harris




With regard to the "transfer towers" question these are considered "structures" because they require a building permit pursuant to Whatcom County Code. As such they are required to meet the setbacks required of a structure and therefore are requesting a variance to those setbacks. For more detail regarding the function of a transfer tower, please refer to page 4-7 of the Revised Project Information Document available on our website. The applicant is referencing wetland buffer in the request.

Sincerely,



With regard to the variance permit, I do not understand what "transfer towers" are, or how they are used. Can you provide me with more information on this matter? For example, the application refers to these items as equipment, rather than structures, but the use of the term "tower" indicates

a building structure. The application references a critical area buffer, but fails to indicate where and what kind of critical area is being protected? I assume that this would be critical areas for wetlands and Habitat Conservation Areas?

Wendy Harris

From: PDSTo: Amy KeenanDate: 4/24/2012 7:34 AMSubject: Fwd: Gateway Pacific Terminals Major Project Permit, Zoning Variance and Shoreline Substantial Development PermitAttachments: Gateway Pacific Terminals Major Project Permit, Zoning Variance and Shoreli

ne Substantial Development Permit

Included as party of record "Friends of the San Juans".

From: "Kyle Loring" <[email protected]>To: <[email protected]>Date: 4/23/2012 4:07 PMSubject: Gateway Pacific Terminals Major Project Permit, Zoning Variance and Shoreline Substantial Development Permit

Dear Whatcom County Planning and Development Services,

I am writing in response to your Notice of Application for the GatewayPacific Terminals permits, dated April 16, 2012 (including Major ProjectPermit, Zoning Variance, and Shoreline Substantial Development Permit). Iam requesting that you formally register me, as a representative of Friendsof the San Juans, as a party of record or interested party for allproceedings and all permits related to the Terminals.

In addition, I am writing to request the following concerning the permitsdescribed in your notice and all other permits or authorizations related tothe Gateway Pacific Terminals:

. Notice of all hearings by mail and by email;

. Notice of the filing of any other applications or requests forapprovals with any division of Whatcom County government, and anycompleteness determinations related to these applications or requests forapprovals, including notice of appeal periods and appeal rights;

. Notice and a copy of any past or present administrative or permitdecision by any division of Whatcom County government, concerning any aspectof the Gateway Pacific Terminals, including notice of any applicable appealperiods and procedures; and

. A copy of any SEPA/NEPA documents and determinations associatedwith the Gateway Pacific Terminals.

In addition, although the April 16, 2012 notice established a commentdeadline of May 16, 2012, the notice did not state just what the commentsshould address. Due to the broad scope and substantial scale of theenvironmental impacts that the Terminals will likely cause, and the absenceof an environmental impact statement to help identify and address thoseimpacts, project comments appear to be premature. Thus, please let me knowthe grounds for which you seek public comment at this nascent stage in thereview process.

Thank you very much for your time and careful review of the Terminalsproject.

Sincerely,

Kyle A. Loring

Staff Attorney

Friends of the San Juans

P.O. Box 1344

Friday Harbor, WA 98250

(: 360-378-2319

Fax: 360-378-2324

* : <mailto:[email protected]> [email protected]

Web: <http://www.sanjuans.org/> www.sanjuans.org

Protecting the San Juans, preserving our quality of life, for more than 30years

------------------------------------------------------------------

This electronic message contains information from Friends of the San Juans.The contents may be privileged and confidential, and are intended for theuse of the intended addressee(s) only. If you are not an intendedaddressee, please be advised that any dissemination, distribution or copyingof this e-mail is prohibited. If you receive this communication in error,please contact me at <mailto:[email protected]> [email protected].

From: PDSTo: Amy KeenanDate: 4/24/2012 7:35 AMSubject: Fwd: coal terminalAttachments: coal terminal

Previously included as party of record.

From: Diane and Glenn Kaufman <[email protected]>To: <[email protected]>Date: 4/23/2012 5:38 PMSubject: coal terminal


Thank you.Diane KaufmanFriday Harbor

From: PDSTo: Amy KeenanDate: 4/24/2012 7:35 AMSubject: Fwd: Gateway Interested PartyAttachments: Gateway Interested Party


From: Loren Dickey <[email protected]>To: <[email protected]>Date: 4/23/2012 10:47 PMSubject: Gateway Interested Party

*I am writing in response to your Notice of Application for the GatewayPacific Terminal permits dated April 16, 2012. Please register me as an"interested party" and email me a copy of the SEPA/NEPA DS and scopingnotices for this project.****thank you,****Loren*

From: PDSTo: Amy KeenanDate: 4/24/2012 12:10 PMSubject: Fwd: Interested party, coalAttachments: Interested party, coal


From: "Jack Hart" <[email protected]>To: <[email protected]>Date: 4/24/2012 11:29 AMSubject: Interested party, coal

I am writing in response to the Notice of Application for the Gateway Pacific Teminal permits dated 4/16/12. Please register me as an "interested party" and email me a copy of the SEPA/NEPA DS and scoping notices for this project. Thank you. Jack Hart, Obstruction Island, PO Box 111, Olga, WA 98279, 360-376-2991, [email protected]

From: "Wendy Harris" <[email protected]>To: "Amy Keenan" <[email protected]>CC: "Tyler Schroeder" <[email protected]>Date: 4/24/2012 2:20 PMSubject: HCA consideration in GPT

This does not answer my question. Is the County going to include Habitat Conservation Areas as an additional consideration in the variance request? HCA is entitled to separate consideration, apart from wetlands. They are both separate provisions in the CAO, and mitigating for wetlands does not necessarily mitigate for HCA.

Wendy


Good Morning Wendy,


Sincerely,



Wendy Harris

----- Original Message ----- From: "Amy Keenan" <[email protected]>To: "Wendy Harris" <[email protected]>

Cc: "Tyler Schroeder" <[email protected]>Sent: Thursday, April 19, 2012 3:55 PMSubject: Re: Q regarding GPT variance.




Sincerely,




Wendy Harris

From: PDSTo: Amy KeenanDate: 4/25/2012 1:15 PMSubject: Fwd: Gateway Interested PartyAttachments: Gateway Interested Party


From: Barbara Rosenkotter <[email protected]>To: <[email protected]>Date: 4/25/2012 12:41 PMSubject: Gateway Interested Party

*I am writing in response to your Notice of Application for the GatewayPacific Terminal permits dated April 16, 2012. Please register me as an"interested party" and email me a copy of the SEPA/NEPA DS and scopingnotices for this project. *

From: PDSTo: Amy KeenanDate: 4/25/2012 1:17 PMSubject: Fwd: Gateway Pacific Terminal - CommentsAttachments: Gateway Pacific Terminal - Comments


From: "Steve Novak" <[email protected]>To: <[email protected]>, <[email protected]>, <[email protected]: 4/25/2012 12:37 PMSubject: Gateway Pacific Terminal - Comments

To All It May Concern:

Add my wife and I to the long list of Whatcom County taxpayers who aretotally opposed to the development of Gateway Pacific Terminal. Any benefitthat might be gained by such a facility are far outweighed by the long, longlist of negatives.

Certain Environmental Damage - Land & Water

Traffic is already an issue with lack of overpasses over the rail line

Property Values

The list goes on and on.

Forget the fact that we shouldn't be selling coal to Asia only to have theensuing air pollution drift our way. If we can't stop it entirely, thensomeone have some common sense and build the port somewhere down near theColumbia which is where the coal trains would be coming from anyway.

Please don't allow our county to be subjected to such a travesty.

Respectfully,

Stephen and Dana Novak

9085 Chickadee Way

Blaine, WA 98230

From: Tyler SchroederTo: Stephanie DrakeDate: 4/26/2012 1:55 PMSubject: Fwd: re the Gateway Terminal Project

Please add to party of record list.

Thanks,

Tyler


>>> Jessica Giasullo <[email protected]> 4/26/2012 12:39 PM >>>Dear Mr. Schroeder:My husband, James R. Scheib, and I live on Orcas Island. We are writing to you as key staff for the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, Whatcom County, and the Washington Department of Ecology, the three agencies that are leading the NEPA/SEPA environmental review for the Gateway Terminal Project. We request that scoping meetings be held on Orcas Island, Lopez Island, and San Juan Island, the three most populated islands in San Juan County.



Sincerely,Jessica GiasulloRetired Major James R. ScheibPOB 217Orcas, WA 98280

360 376-6916

From: PDSTo: Stephanie DrakeDate: 4/26/2012 3:26 PMSubject: Fwd: Gateway Interested Party


>>> Anna Marie Ross <[email protected]> 4/26/2012 1:37 PM >>>Please be sure I am on your list for all updates and notifications regarding Gateway Pacific Terminal.

From: Jack LouwsTo: Tyler SchroederDate: 4/26/2012 4:47 PMSubject: Fwd: Gateway Pacific Terminal - CommentsAttachments: Gateway Pacific Terminal - Comments

For the record.

From: PDSTo: Stephanie DrakeDate: 4/26/2012 7:31 AMSubject: Fwd: Requesting notification of all decisions and hearings pertaining tothe GPT


>>> <[email protected]> 4/25/2012 9:52 PM >>>

I request notification of all decisions and hearings pertaining to the proposed Gateway Pacific Terminal and I request a copy of all decisions pertaining to the proposed Gateway Pacific Terminal. I am an interested party since the GPT would directly, significantly and adversely affect me and my property.Thank-you,Paula Rotondi






Property Values




Respectfully,


9085 Chickadee Way

Blaine, WA 98230

From: PDSTo: Stephanie DrakeDate: 4/27/2012 7:11 AMSubject: Fwd: Cherry Point Coal TerminalAttachments: Cherry Point Coal Terminal


From: "James C. Harvey" <[email protected]>To: <[email protected]>CC: <[email protected]>Date: 4/26/2012 8:49 PMSubject: Cherry Point Coal Terminal

Think of the jobs and money it will create; Buy it and you'll like it. Twosayings that always seem to pop up during a sales pitch. Puts me in mind ofseveral other sayings; Putting the cart before the horse. Counting yourchickens before they hatch. Hook, line & sinker.This is all in reference to the Cherry Point coal trains. And what happensafter this goes through? Or as those who look past the initialgratification, would call a ''consequence''.Who REALLY has gained the most?Who has netted the largest part of the promised profit? What about the negative impact to the inhabitants and lands in the affectedarea? Who gets stuck with the repair bill? Profit over human interest. Quantity over quality and sustainability.Sayings and phrases. Here is one more: History is a great teacher if wechoose to learn. And yet, so often, the lesson goes unlearned. Sonia HarveyBurlington

From: "Rolf Nedelmann" <[email protected]>To: <[email protected]>, <[email protected]>, <[email protected]: 4/27/2012 8:54 PMSubject: Gateway Terminal ProjectAttachments: Gateway Terminal Letter.doc

Please see the attached letter with a request. Thank you.

Rolf C. Nedelmann P.O. Box 1090

Eastsound, WA 98245 Phone: 360-376-3953 Fax: 360-375-6151 Mobile: 360-317-6666 E-mail: [email protected]

04-27-2012

Mr. Randel Perry, Project Manager Ms. Alice Kelly, PlannerUS Army Corp of Engineers WA Department of Ecology, NWRO1440 10th Street, Suite 102 3190 160th Avenue SEBellingham, WA 98225 Bellevue, WA 98008Email: [email protected] Email: [email protected]

Mr. Tyler Schroeder, Planning SupervisorWhatcom County Planning and Development Services5280 Northwest DriveBellingham, WA 98226Email: [email protected]

Dear Mr. Perry, Ms. Kelly, and Mr. Schroeder,

My wife and I live on Orcas Island. We are writing to you in your capacity as key staff for the US Army Corps of Engineers, Whatcom County, and Washington Department of Ecology, the three agencies that are leading the NEPA/SEPA environmental review for the Gateway Terminal Project. We ask that scoping meetings be held on Orcas Island, as well as Lopez and San Juan Islands, the three most populated islands in San Juan County.

As noted by the San Juan County Supervisors and the San Juan County Marine Resources Committee (letters of February 28, 2012), due to increased shipping traffic around our county from the proposed Gateway Pacific Terminal Project, our concerns include the increased risk of spills of oil and possibly other environmentally harmful materials and the increased impacts on the foraging behaviors of species listed in the Endangered Species Act. We are also concerned about the size and number of the fleet of bulk carriers, and their impact on waterway congestion.

The quality and standard of our life is at stake. We respectfully ask for representation of the majority of citizens of San Juan County by holding scoping meetings on each of the three larger islands serviced by the Washington State Ferry.

Thank you for consideration of this request.

Yours sincerely,

Rolf C. NedelmannRuth Nedelmann

From: Suzanne MildnerTo: Tyler SchroederCC: gpt_archiveDate: 4/24/2012 2:14 PMSubject: Updated Whatcom Docs ltr re GPTAttachments: GPT project Whatcom Docs ltr 041612.pdf

Hi Tyler, Attached is correspondence received today from the Whatcom Docs group. Thanks, SuzanneSuzanne MildnerAdministrative Secretary/Grants CoordinatorWhatcom County Executive Department311 Grand Avenue, Suite 108Bellingham, WA 98225(360) 676-6717 [email protected]

From: Jack LouwsTo: Tyler SchroederDate: 4/26/2012 4:47 PMSubject: Fwd: Gateway Pacific Terminal - CommentsAttachments: Gateway Pacific Terminal - Comments

For the record.






Property Values




Respectfully,


9085 Chickadee Way

Blaine, WA 98230

From: <[email protected]>To: <[email protected]>Date: 4/21/2012 12:50 AMSubject: Your neat new Port of Anacortes,Port of Everett, and the grandestof them all Cherry point

We hope you great success on your new Super Coal Ports We hope you work together also with Port of Anacortes and Port of Everett mostly it would great help in BNSF coal train capicity in track in your area and to double the amount of Coal that all three ports Together can ship in a year Thus also double your new Cherry point room to ship .and all with one train going to both Port of Anacortes Port of Everett to the normal public in bellingham it will seem to them that the total trains to all three ports terminals will not seem like much, Thus to the port of Bellingham the people who dont wish to see so many trains ,.will now maybe support your neat.neat proposal thus also with all three ports you can now have our super neat port with all three ports working together and SO CLOSE to Asia your new ports terminal would be a great compition to the port of Vancouver in shipping of Containiers also, they are now shipping Corn and Grains in Containiers now!!!!!!{ There was a neat article about these new Containiers shipments in last months Trains magazine Your friend s south of you .as we enjoy visiting bellingham every weekend (we went to College in Bellingham Brad,mary, Stephannie, Alise Megan, Margarent

Sent from my Verizon Wireless Device

From: Larry Blanchard <[email protected]>To: <[email protected]>Date: 4/22/2012 3:13 PMSubject: Proposed SSA Marine Coal Terminal

*I am a concerned citizen regarding the following proposed SSA Marine coalterminal threats to my pristine environment at Sandy Point:*

**

*Fugitive coal dust during windy conditions.*

*Proposed thousands of mercury vapor lights illuminating the night sky atSandy Point, Point Whitehorn, Birch Bay and Semiahmoo.*

*Diesel particulate from cape size coal ships, locomotives and trucks.*

*Lung ailments caused by fugitive coal dust.*

*A lack of sufficient industrial water supply for operations for wettingdown coal dust at Cherry Point.*

*Black tide caused by coal dust and diesel particulate on the water atCherry Point.*

*Stagnant seashore due to the flow of current being impeded by the terminalcauseways.*

*Beach erosion at Sandy Point caused by terminal causeways.*

*Impacts to fishing and crabbing activities at Cherry Point.*

*The dumping of bilge and ballast water in waters off Cherry Pointinjecting unwanted marine creatures from the worlds oceans into localwaters.*

*Impacts to public access.*

*Noise from coal loading machinery and container ships*

*The hollow banging of empty coal cars being shunted.*

*Storm water runoff.*

*The danger to local herring population.*

*Impacts from associated transportation.*

*Potential long delays for emergency fire and police response due to 18 ormore additional trains per day. (18 additional trains per day + 15 currenttrains @ 10 min per train = 5 1/2 hours back up time per day perintersection)*

*Mercury levels in Lake Whatcom. (Recent Study)*

*Impacts of coal on climate change and greenhouse gases.*

*Increased tanker/bulk carrier collision potential due to proposed increasein Canadian shale oil oil tanker traffic.*

*Potential catastrophic spills or major accidents involving bulk carrierships. Older bulk carriers are not double hulled, do not have sidethrusters, are single screw, do not require tug escorts like oil tankersand are considered the most dangerous ships in the world. (Reference: google bulk carrier aground on youtube).*

*Why speed the end of mankind on the planet? **To pretend thatheat-trapping gases can be waved away with a nod and a smirk is politicalfairytale. There is a large and growing **body of<http://www.ipcc.ch/>**evidenceagainst coal and against fossil fuels. The way nature works applies thesame to Republican and Democrat legislators. *

*The millennium’s first decade was thewarmest<http://www.noaanews.noaa.gov/stories2010/20100728_stateoftheclimate.html> on record and included nine of the 10hottest<http://www.wmo.int/pages/mediacentre/press_releases/pr_943_en.html>years.Greenhouse gas levels are at their highest in 800,000 years<http://www.nature.com/nature/journal/v453/n7193/full/453291a.html>.Less heat is escaping the top of the atmosphere in thewavelengths<http://www.skeptica/> of greenhouse gases. For the first time, scientists have recorded bothhemispheres arewarming<http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2011/10/111021074532.htm> – and the global temperature spike can’t be linked to an astronomicaltrigger <http://epa.gov/climatechange/science/pastcc.html>, such as solarvariability. Great Lakes peak ice has seen a 71 percentdrop<http://journals.ametsoc.org/doi/abs/10.1175> since 1973. Winters areshorter<http://www.seascapemodeling.org/seascape_projects/2012/01/is-winter-getting-shorter.html>. Lakes melt earlier<http://www.climateandfarming.org/pdfs/FactSheets/I.2Indicators.pdf>.Plants are movingnorth<http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2012-01-25/usda-plant-hardiness-map-shifts-temperature-zones-north-1-.html>.*

*Worldwide, 95% of land-based glaciers are losingmass<http://www.wunderground.com/climate/Glaciers.asp>.September Arctic sea ice has lost 10percent<http://www.climatewatch.noaa.gov/image/2011/summer-heat-unravels-arctics-icy-blanket> of its area every decade. Sea levels arerising<http://www.nature.com/climate/2010/1004/full/climate.2010.29.html>.Oceans are 30 percent moreacidic<http://www.bloomberg.com/slideshow/2011-12-12/don-t-panic-earth-s-nine-threats-to-humanity.html%22%20%5Cl%20%22slide3>.Flooding and extreme storms are spiking in frequency andintensity<http://www.nature.com/nature/journal/v470/n7334/full/nature09763.html>.Last winter was the 4th warmest <http://www.ncdc.noaa.gov/sotc/national/> onrecord, despite the cooling influence of a LaNina<http://www.elnino.noaa.gov/lanina.html> phase in the Pacific.*

*Extremes are becoming more extreme <http://ipcc-wg2.gov/SREX/>. *

*Let’s not trash our beautiful Cherry Point environment. Let’s not ship ahalf billion tons of coal to Asia over the next ten years which wouldensure a fugitive coal dust cloud over Sandy Pt., Birch Bay, Pt Whitehorn,Semiahmoo and parts of Ferndale. Lets not watch our health decline andmercury levels in Whatcom County lakes accelerate. Let’s say no to SSAMarine, BN, Peabody Coal, Arch Coal and Goldman Sachs.***

**

*Respectfully,*

**

*Larry Blanchard*

*4131 Salt Spring Dr*

*Ferndale, WA 98248*

From: Amy KeenanTo: [email protected]: 4/23/2012 8:23 AMSubject: Re: Fwd: Gateway Interested Party

To Whom It May Concern,

Thank you for your comments regarding the Gateway Pacific Terminal Notice of Application. Your name has been added to the parties of record list and you will be notified of future notices. Your comments will be added to the file, forwarded to the Whatcom County Hearing Examiner and reviewed throughout the SEPA/NEPA process, including scoping. If you would like to review the application in more detail please refer to our website at http://www.whatcomcounty.us/pds/plan/current/gpt-ssa/index.jsp.

Sincerely,


>>> Terri Lewis <[email protected]> 4/19/2012 4:14 PM >>>

Sent from my iPad

I am writing in response to your Notice of Application for the Gateway Pacific Terminal permits dated April 16, 2012. Please register me as an "interested party" and email me a copy of the SEPA/NEPA DS and scoping notices for this project.Regards,Terri Lewis


Dear Ms. Mueller,


Sincerely,


>>> Gretchen Mueller <[email protected]> 4/19/2012 5:51 PM >>>

I am writing in response to your Notice of Application for the Gateway Pacific Terminal permits dated April 16, 2012. Please register me as an "interested party" and email both me and my husband (cc'd above) a copy of the SEPA/NEPA DS and scoping notices for this project.

Thank you!

Gretchen Mueller

************************************Gretchen K. MuellerBrand Explorations888-828-2874www.brandexplorations.com

From: Amy KeenanTo: [email protected]: 4/23/2012 8:35 AMSubject: Re: Fwd: Coal train comment

Dear Mr. Phillips,


Sincerely,


>>> Dick Phillips <[email protected]> 4/20/2012 11:43 AM >>>Can we not require the coal train cars to be covered to eliminate or at least reduce the coal dust that is spread all along the train's route? Trucks are required to cover their loads if it is likely they will have parts of their load blow out in route to their destination. Seems to me that is the same situation with these train cars and in all the photos I've seen of the current coal trains, the cars have no covers.

That wouldn't help the issue of long delays on city streets as the trains pass through my town (Mount Vernon.) This is something the locals would probably learn to drive around but perhaps there is some way to require at least some help from the railroads to pay for grade crossing improvements that would allow traffic to go over or under the tracks in at least a few places in the various towns those trains will pass through.

Dick PhillipsMount Vernon, [email protected]


Dear Ms. Howard,


Sincerely,


>>> Kim Howard <[email protected]> 4/21/2012 9:28 AM >>>

I am writing in response to your Notice of Application for the Gateway Pacific Terminal permits dated April 16, 2012. Please register me as an "interested party" and email me a copy of the SEPA/NEPA DS and scoping notices for this project. Kim [email protected]

From: Amy KeenanTo: [email protected]: 4/23/2012 8:41 AMSubject: Re: Fwd: GPT Comments For Public Record

Dear Mr. Watts,


Sincerely,


>>> John Watts <[email protected]> 4/22/2012 1:54 PM >>>PDS: As a GPT Subscriber List member, I am hereby submitting the following information for the public record:

Here are the URLs for 33 Blogs concerning coal I have written from March 27, 2011 through now on HamsterTalk at http://bellinghamstertalk.blogspot.com/Please incorporate these into the public record as part of my comments.If this is not the time to submit information, please advise -clearly- when that time begins and ends.So far, I have found the instructions promulgated by PDS to be confusing at best!

Also, please contact me at <[email protected]> to confirm your timely receipt of this e-mail. If any problem is encountered in accessing these comments, including embedded links, I will make thecorrections necessary.My full address and contact information is shown at the bottom this e-mail.

Thank you,John Watts

1. Those Thrilling Days of Yesteryear... ( http://bellinghamstertalk.blogspot.com/2011/03/those-thrilling-days-of-yesteryear.html )Sunday, March 27, 2011

2. Coal Terminal: Mayor's Listening Session ( http://bellinghamstertalk.blogspot.com/2011/06/coal-terminal-mayors-listening-session.html )Wednesday, June 1, 2011

3. Good Mornin' America, How Are Ya? ( http://bellinghamstertalk.blogspot.com/2011/06/good-mornin-america-how-are-ya.html )Wednesday, June 8, 2011

4. Climatology: Natural Science or Political Science? ( http://bellinghamstertalk.blogspot.com/2011/07/climatology-natural-science-or.html )Saturday, July 9, 2011

5. Making Tracks To Where? ( http://bellinghamstertalk.blogspot.com/2011/07/making-tracks-to-where.html )Friday, July 15, 2011

6. Coal Terminal: A Pit & Pendulum Exercise? ( http://bellinghamstertalk.blogspot.com/2011/07/coal-terminal-pit-pendulum-exercise.html )Thursday, July 21, 2011

7. Coal Terminal: Trains & Infrastructure ( http://bellinghamstertalk.blogspot.com/2011/07/coal-terminal-trains-infrastructure.html )Saturday, July 30, 2011

8. Coal Terminal: Bulk Carriers & Kayaks ( http://bellinghamstertalk.blogspot.com/2011/07/coal-terminal-bulk-carriers-kayaks.html )Sunday, July 31, 2011

9. Coal Terminal: Update on Developments ( http://bellinghamstertalk.blogspot.com/2011/08/coal-terminal-update-on-developments.html )Monday, August 1, 2011

10. Coal Terminal: Another Update ( http://bellinghamstertalk.blogspot.com/2011/08/coal-terminal-another-update.html )Tuesday, August 2, 2011

11. Coal Terminal: Playing Defense ( http://bellinghamstertalk.blogspot.com/2011/08/coal-terminal-playing-defense.html )Wednesday, August 3, 2011

12. Coal Terminal:Whatcom Watch Remembers Cherry Point Agreement ( http://bellinghamstertalk.blogspot.com/2011/08/coal-terminalwhatcom-watch-remembers.html )Thursday, August 4, 2011

13. Coal: A Global Perspective ( http://bellinghamstertalk.blogspot.com/2011/09/coal-global-perspective.html )Thursday, September 1, 2011

14. Coal: Floyd McKay's Latest Crosscut Article ( http://bellinghamstertalk.blogspot.com/2011/09/coal-floyd-mckays-latest-crosscut.html )Wednesday, September 28, 2011

15. Coal: Green versus Gold? ( http://bellinghamstertalk.blogspot.com/2011/10/coal-green-versus-gold.html )Wednesday, October 19, 2011

16. Coal: The Role of Politics ( http://bellinghamstertalk.blogspot.com/2011/10/coal-role-of-politics.html )Wednesday, October 19, 2011

17. Coal: National Geographic Article ( http://bellinghamstertalk.blogspot.com/2011/10/coal-national-geographic-article.html )Friday, October 21, 2011

18. Coal: NPR Weighs In With Two Articles ( http://bellinghamstertalk.blogspot.com/2011/10/coal-npr-weighs-in-with-two-articles.html )Thursday, October 27, 2011

19. Big Coal meets Cherry Point's tiny herring (

http://bellinghamstertalk.blogspot.com/2011/10/big-coal-meets-cherry-points-tiny.html )Friday, October 28, 2011

20. Coal: Where Does Bellingham Really Stand? ( http://bellinghamstertalk.blogspot.com/2011/10/coal-where-does-bellingham-really-stand.html )Sunday, October 30, 2011

21. Coal: Location, Location, Location - For Whom? ( http://bellinghamstertalk.blogspot.com/2011/10/coal-location-location-location-for.html )Monday, October 31, 2011

22. Coal: What Does Lake Whatcom, Waterfront Redevelopement & The Olympic Pipe Line Have to Do With It? ( http://bellinghamstertalk.blogspot.com/2011/11/coal-what-does-lake-whatcom-waterfront.html )Thursday, November 3, 2011

23. Coal: Possible Good News? ( http://bellinghamstertalk.blogspot.com/2011/11/coal-possible-good-news.html )Thursday, November 10, 2011

24. Energy: Update On Coal, Oil & Other Fossil Fuel Projects ( http://bellinghamstertalk.blogspot.com/2011/11/energy-update-on-coal-oil-other-fossil.html )Wednesday, November 16, 2011

25. Impacts: Coal Versus Oil Sands ( http://bellinghamstertalk.blogspot.com/2011/11/imapacts-coal-versus-oil-sands.html )Thursday, November 17, 2011

26. Trains: 'Here's Mud In Your Eye' ( http://bellinghamstertalk.blogspot.com/2011/12/trains-heres-mud-in-your-eye.html )Thursday, December 15, 2011

27. Coal: Why Can't We Citizens Have A Strong Voice? ( http://bellinghamstertalk.blogspot.com/2011/12/coal-why-cant-we-citizens-have-strong.html )Friday, December 30, 2011

28. Coal: Specific Actions Bellingham Must Take ( http://bellinghamstertalk.blogspot.com/2012/01/coal-specific-actions-bellingham-must.html )Sunday, January 1, 2012

29. Coal & Climate ( http://bellinghamstertalk.blogspot.com/2012/01/coal-climate.html )Friday, January 27, 2012

30. Constitution, Corporations & Coal ( http://bellinghamstertalk.blogspot.com/2012/02/constitution-corporations-coal.html )Wednesday, February 22, 2012

31. Coal: HamsterTalk Blogs from March 27 thru December 31, 2011 ( http://bellinghamstertalk.blogspot.com/2011/12/coal-hamstertalk-blogs-from-march-27.html )Saturday, December 31, 2011

32. Coal: History Has A Way Of Repeating Itself. ( http://bellinghamstertalk.blogspot.com/2012/03/coal-history-has-way-of-repeating.html )Friday, March 23, 2012

33. Coal: Updating Public Concerns ( http://bellinghamstertalk.blogspot.com/2012/03/coal-updating-public-concerns.html )Thursday, March 29, 2012

John Watts 1015 W Toledo StBellingham, WA 98229360 [email protected]

From: Amy KeenanTo: [email protected]: 4/23/2012 8:43 AMSubject: Re: Fwd: SVHerald article regarding coal terminal

Dear Ms. Bishop,


Sincerely,


>>> Judy Bishop <[email protected]> 4/22/2012 8:51 AM >>>To: Whom-it-may-concern,

Due to the confusion that has been created by newspaper articles and your own April 16, 2012 Notice of Application for the Gateway Pacific Terminal, we are requesting that you formally register us as a "party of record" or "interested party" for all proceedings and all permits. We are requesting the following concerning the permits described in your notice and all other permits or authorizations related to the terminals:

· Notice of all hearings by mail and by email if possible;· Notice of the filing of any other applications or requests for approvals from any division of Whatcom County government, and any completeness determinations related to these, including notice of appeal periods and appeal rights;· Notice and a copy of any past or present administrative or permit decision by any division of Whatcom County government, concerning any aspect of the Gateway Pacific Terminals, including notice of any applicable appeal periods and procedures;. A copy of the SEPA/NEPA DS and scoping notice anticipated for the project; and. That you formally register us as a "parties of record" or "interested parties" for the environmental review.

We also request that any public comments you receive by May 16, 2012 as described in the Notice of Application announcement be accepted as official comments for scoping, since there is a very real possibility that many comments will be sent in good faith to meet the May 16 deadline.

We are concerned that portions of the application are not complete, yet were deemed to be complete:

Please clarify that the completeness determination on April 2, 2012 applies to only the Major Project Permit, the Zoning Variance and the Shoreline Substantial Development Permit listed in the Subject Line,

but no other permit applications.

The Notice of Application seems to indicate that the Land Disturbance Permit application was "not included in this application." Please clarify whether the Land Disturbance Permit application submitted with the application was determined to be incomplete.

With regard to the application, we observe the following:Page 2 of the Endangered Species Checklist does not provide the requested information. Specifically, the checklist lacks the required description of ESA species and habitat currently present on the project site, as opposed to those known to exist in the Georgia Strait vicinity. The applicant says they completed the checklist (Page 7 of 10 of the main application, item (1)(p)), but that is not the case according to the answer provided at this section on Page 2 of the checklist itself. PDS' determination of completeness appears to be incorrect. Please clarify how a completeness determination was issued with this missing information.

Page 2 of 3 of the Preliminary Stormwater Proposal does not contain the requested Impervious Areas Summary. Note that Page 3 of the Endangered Species Act checklist also states that impervious surface area is "unknown." The applicant's Major Project Permit Checklist says the applicant completed the Preliminary Stormwater Proposal (Page 6 of 10 of the main application, item (1)(k)), but that is not the case according to the answer provided at this section on Page 2 of the Stormwater Proposal itself. PDS' determination of completeness appears to be incorrect. Please clarify how a completeness determination was issued with this missing information.

This process is of utmost importance and must be conducted with the highest standards for thoroughness, transparency, and integrity in full view of the public. Your pre-scoping hearing, held in Bellingham on March 21 was appreciated, and yet nothing during that information session to the public was said about a general public comment period for 30 days like the one that was announced on April 16, 2012 with the May 16, 2012 deadline. Therefore, all those who have previously submitted their names to Whatcom Planning and Development Services should absolutely be considered parties of record for purposes of receiving notices of hearings and decisions, and not be simply placed on a courtesy notice list. Please assure us that this will be the case.

Sincerely, Judy and Lyall Bishop


Dear Ms. Derosier,


Sincerely,


>>> Irene <[email protected]> 4/21/2012 10:14 PM >>>

I am writing in response to your Notice of Application for the Gateway Pacific Terminals permits, date April 16,2012. I am requesting that you formally register me as a "party of record" or "interested party" for all proceedings and all permits. I am requesting the following concerning the permits described in your notice and all other permits or authorizations related to the terminals:Notice of all hearings by mail and by email if possible. Notice of the filing of any other applications or requests for approvals from any division of Whatcom County government, and any completeness determinations related to these, including notice of appeal periods and appeal rights. Notice and a copy of any past of present administrative or permit decision by any division of Whatcom County government, concerning any aspect of the Gateway Pacific Terminals, including notice of any applicable appeal periods and procedures, A copy of the SEPA/NEPA DS and scoping notice anticipated for the project and that you formally register me as "party of record" or "interested party" for that environmental review. My mailing address is: 2233 Viewmont Way WestSeattle, WA 98199206 283 6532

Sincerely,Irene DerosierConcerned Washington Citizen


Dear Marc and Kelli,


Sincerely,


>>> Marc and Kelli Grotle <[email protected]> 4/21/2012 1:15 PM >>>


Marc and Kelli Grotle

[email protected]

From: Amy KeenanTo: [email protected]: 4/23/2012 8:52 AMSubject: Re: Fwd:

To Whom It May It Concern,


Sincerely,


>>> "Sandy Playa" <[email protected]> 4/21/2012 6:40 PM >>>To Whom It May Concern,

I am writing in response to your Notice of Application for the GatewayPacific Terminalpermits dated April 16, 2012. Please register me as an "interested party"and emailme a copy of the SEPA/NEPA DS and scoping notices for this project.

Thank you.

Sandy PlayaPOB 97Olga WA [email protected]

From: Amy KeenanTo: Kyle LoringDate: 4/24/2012 9:10 AMSubject: Re: Gateway Pacific Terminals Major Project Permit, Zoning Variance and Shoreline Substantial Development Permit

Dear Mr. Loring,


Sincerely,


>>> "Kyle Loring" <[email protected]> 4/23/2012 4:06 PM >>>Dear Whatcom County Planning and Development Services,

I am writing in response to your Notice of Application for the GatewayPacific Terminals permits, dated April 16, 2012 (including Major ProjectPermit, Zoning Variance, and Shoreline Substantial Development Permit). Iam requesting that you formally register me, as a representative of Friendsof the San Juans, as a party of record or interested party for allproceedings and all permits related to the Terminals.

In addition, I am writing to request the following concerning the permitsdescribed in your notice and all other permits or authorizations related tothe Gateway Pacific Terminals:

. Notice of all hearings by mail and by email;

. Notice of the filing of any other applications or requests forapprovals with any division of Whatcom County government, and anycompleteness determinations related to these applications or requests forapprovals, including notice of appeal periods and appeal rights;

. Notice and a copy of any past or present administrative or permitdecision by any division of Whatcom County government, concerning any aspectof the Gateway Pacific Terminals, including notice of any applicable appealperiods and procedures; and

. A copy of any SEPA/NEPA documents and determinations associatedwith the Gateway Pacific Terminals.

In addition, although the April 16, 2012 notice established a commentdeadline of May 16, 2012, the notice did not state just what the commentsshould address. Due to the broad scope and substantial scale of theenvironmental impacts that the Terminals will likely cause, and the absenceof an environmental impact statement to help identify and address thoseimpacts, project comments appear to be premature. Thus, please let me knowthe grounds for which you seek public comment at this nascent stage in thereview process.

Thank you very much for your time and careful review of the Terminalsproject.

Sincerely,

Kyle A. Loring

Staff Attorney

Friends of the San Juans

P.O. Box 1344

Friday Harbor, WA 98250

(: 360-378-2319

Fax: 360-378-2324

* : <mailto:[email protected]> [email protected]

Web: <http://www.sanjuans.org/> www.sanjuans.org

Protecting the San Juans, preserving our quality of life, for more than 30years

------------------------------------------------------------------

This electronic message contains information from Friends of the San Juans.The contents may be privileged and confidential, and are intended for theuse of the intended addressee(s) only. If you are not an intendedaddressee, please be advised that any dissemination, distribution or copyingof this e-mail is prohibited. If you receive this communication in error,please contact me at <mailto:[email protected]> [email protected].

From: Amy KeenanTo: Diane and Glenn KaufmanDate: 4/24/2012 9:11 AMSubject: Re: coal terminal

Dear Ms. Kaufman,


Sincerely,


>>> Diane and Glenn Kaufman <[email protected]> 4/23/2012 5:37 PM >>>I am writing in response to your Notice of Application for the Gateway Pacific Terminal permits dated April 16, 2012. Please register me as an "interested party" and email me a copy of the SEPA/NEPA DS and scoping notices for this project.

Thank you.Diane KaufmanFriday Harbor

From: Amy KeenanTo: Loren DickeyDate: 4/24/2012 9:14 AMSubject: Re: Gateway Interested Party

To Whom It May Concern,


Sincerely,


>>> Loren Dickey <[email protected]> 4/23/2012 10:47 PM >>>*I am writing in response to your Notice of Application for the GatewayPacific Terminal permits dated April 16, 2012. Please register me as an"interested party" and email me a copy of the SEPA/NEPA DS and scopingnotices for this project.****thank you,****Loren*

From: Amy KeenanTo: Wendy HarrisCC: Tyler SchroederDate: 4/24/2012 10:15 AMSubject: Re: Q regarding GPT variance.

Good Morning Wendy,


Sincerely,


>>> "Wendy Harris" <[email protected]> 4/23/2012 8:00 PM >>>Hi Amy, I am still waiting for a reply regarding the County's application of the provisions for Habitat Conservation Areas in the CAO with regard to this project.

Wendy Harris




With regard to the "transfer towers" question these are considered "structures" because they require a building permit pursuant to Whatcom County Code. As such they are required to meet the setbacks required of a

structure and therefore are requesting a variance to those setbacks. For more detail regarding the function of a transfer tower, please refer to page 4-7 of the Revised Project Information Document available on our website. The applicant is referencing wetland buffer in the request.

Sincerely,



With regard to the variance permit, I do not understand what "transfer towers" are, or how they are used. Can you provide me with more information on this matter? For example, the application refers to these items as equipment, rather than structures, but the use of the term "tower" indicates a building structure. The application references a critical area buffer, but fails to indicate where and what kind of critical area is being protected? I assume that this would be critical areas for wetlands and Habitat Conservation Areas?

Wendy Harris

From: Amy KeenanTo: Wendy HarrisDate: 4/25/2012 8:35 AMSubject: Re: HCA consideration in GPT

Good Morning Wendy,

I am sorry for the confusion, but I will try to clarify. Pursuant to Article 7 of the Critical Areas Code (Title 16) streams are protected as Habitat Conservation Areas (HCAs), so Whatcom County will be reviewing the project in light of impacts and necessary mitigation to wetlands and HCA's.

The variance is specifically for front yard setback relief (from Henry Road). The applicant is contending two transfer towers will be closer to Henry Road than the required 110 feet as a result of the entire design of the east loop and the applicants desire to minimize impacts to wetlands and HCA's. The proposed variance is not asking for a reduction in wetland or HCA setbacks or buffers.

Please let me know if you have any additional questions.

Thanks,


>>> "Wendy Harris" <[email protected]> 4/24/2012 2:20 PM >>>This does not answer my question. Is the County going to include Habitat Conservation Areas as an additional consideration in the variance request? HCA is entitled to separate consideration, apart from wetlands. They are both separate provisions in the CAO, and mitigating for wetlands does not necessarily mitigate for HCA.

Wendy


Good Morning Wendy,

Yes, you acre correct. The applicant is contending that the placement of transfer tower 21 and 22 will need a variance to setbacks because the project has been designed to minimize impacts to wetland and wetland buffers

and streams and stream buffers. For more details regarding the wetlands or streams, please review the 2008 Wetland Final Report ( http://www.whatcomcounty.us/pds/plan/current/gpt-ssa/pdf/20120319-permit-submittal-attachment-2008-wetland-final-report.pdf ) for more details regarding critical areas.

Sincerely,



Wendy Harris





Sincerely,




Wendy Harris

From: Amy KeenanTo: Jack HartDate: 4/25/2012 9:18 AMSubject: Re: Interested party, coal

Dear Mr. Hart,


Sincerely,


>>> "Jack Hart" <[email protected]> 4/24/2012 11:29 AM >>>I am writing in response to the Notice of Application for the Gateway Pacific Teminal permits dated 4/16/12. Please register me as an "interested party" and email me a copy of the SEPA/NEPA DS and scoping notices for this project. Thank you. Jack Hart, Obstruction Island, PO Box 111, Olga, WA 98279, 360-376-2991, [email protected]

From: Amy KeenanTo: Stephan MichaelsDate: 4/25/2012 9:19 AMSubject: Re: “Gateway Interested Party”

Dear Mr. Michaels,


Sincerely,


>>> Stephan Michaels <[email protected]> 4/24/2012 5:48 PM >>>"I am writing in response to your Notice of Application for the Gateway Pacific Terminals permits, date April 16,2012. I am requesting that you formally register me as a "party of record" or "interested party" for all proceedings and all permits. I am requesting the following concerning the permits described in your notice and all other permits or authorizations related to the terminals:

Notice of all hearings by mail and by email if possible.Notice of the filing of any other applications or requests for approvals from any division of Whatcom County government, and any completeness determinations related to these, including notice of appeal periods and appeal rights.Notice and a copy of any past of present administrative or permit decision by any division of Whatcom County government, concerning any aspect of the Gateway Pacific Terminals, including notice of any applicable appeal periods and procedures,A copy of the SEPA/NEPA DS and scoping notice anticipated for the project and that you formally register me as "party of record" or "interested party" for that environmental review."Sincerely,

Stephan Michaels1100 21st streetBellingham, Wa98225

From: Amy KeenanTo: [email protected]: 4/25/2012 1:37 PMSubject: Re: Gateway Interested Party

Dear Ms. Rosenkotter,


Sincerely,


>>> Barbara Rosenkotter <[email protected]> 4/25/2012 12:41 PM >>>*I am writing in response to your Notice of Application for the GatewayPacific Terminal permits dated April 16, 2012. Please register me as an"interested party" and email me a copy of the SEPA/NEPA DS and scopingnotices for this project. *

From: Amy KeenanTo: Steve NovakDate: 4/25/2012 1:39 PMSubject: Re: Gateway Pacific Terminal - Comments

Dear Mr. Novak,


Sincerely,


>>> "Steve Novak" <[email protected]> 4/25/2012 12:37 PM >>>To All It May Concern:




Property Values




Respectfully,


9085 Chickadee Way

Blaine, WA 98230

From: Tyler SchroederTo: Jessica GiasulloDate: 4/26/2012 1:56 PMSubject: Re: re the Gateway Terminal Project

Dear Jessica and James,


Sincerely,





Sincerely,Jessica GiasulloRetired Major James R. ScheibPOB 217

Orcas, WA 98280

360 376-6916

From: Tyler SchroederTo: Jessica GiasulloDate: 4/26/2012 1:56 PMSubject: Re: re the Gateway Terminal Project

Dear Jessica and James,


Sincerely,





Sincerely,Jessica GiasulloRetired Major James R. ScheibPOB 217

Orcas, WA 98280

360 376-6916

From: Stephanie DrakeTo: [email protected]: 4/26/2012 3:31 PMSubject: Re: Gateway Interested Party

Dear Ms. Ross,


Sincerely,

Stephanie Drake


>>> Anna Marie Ross <[email protected]> 4/26/2012 1:37 PM >>>Please be sure I am on your list for all updates and notifications regarding Gateway Pacific Terminal.

From: Stephanie DrakeTo: James C. HarveyDate: 4/27/2012 9:59 AMSubject: Re: Cherry Point Coal Terminal

Dear Ms. Harvey,


Sincerely,

Stephanie Drake


>>> "James C. Harvey" <[email protected]> 4/26/2012 8:49 PM >>>Think of the jobs and money it will create; Buy it and you'll like it. Twosayings that always seem to pop up during a sales pitch. Puts me in mind ofseveral other sayings; Putting the cart before the horse. Counting yourchickens before they hatch. Hook, line & sinker.This is all in reference to the Cherry Point coal trains. And what happensafter this goes through? Or as those who look past the initialgratification, would call a ''consequence''.Who REALLY has gained the most?Who has netted the largest part of the promised profit? What about the negative impact to the inhabitants and lands in the affectedarea? Who gets stuck with the repair bill? Profit over human interest. Quantity over quality and sustainability.Sayings and phrases. Here is one more: History is a great teacher if wechoose to learn. And yet, so often, the lesson goes unlearned. Sonia HarveyBurlington

emails pertaining to gateway pacific project for april 21

Documents