Press Release

NEWS RELEASE

*For immediate release*:

Contact:

Stephen Miller, Executive Director
207-734-6907 / iitsmill@gmail.com

Steve Hinchman, Project Attorney
207-837-8637 / stevehinchman@gmail.com

*
_________________________________________________________________________________________
*

* *

*NATIONAL SAFETY AND SECURITY EXPERT RECOMMENDS DENYING PERMITS FOR
SEARSPORT LPG TERMINAL*

* *

*Richard A. Clarke to Testify to the Searsport Planning Board Weds. Jan 16
at 6 pm.*

* *

Islesboro, Maine—Today the Islesboro Islands Trust released the much
anticipated, independent “*All Hazards Risk Assessment*” of the highly controversial
Liquefied Petroleum Gas (LPG) terminal proposed for Mack Point in Searsport at the head of Maine’s spectacular Penobscot
Bay.  The report was conducted by Richard A. Clarke’s consulting firm, Good
Harbor Techmark (GHT).

Clarke, a counter-terrorism advisor to three Presidents of the United
States, recommended “*not* proceeding with the project as currently
proposed” and concludes that the Searsport Planning Board must deny the LPG
permit applications submitted by DCP Searsport, LLC. Richard A. Clarke and
the GHT research team will present their report to the Searsport Planning
Board on Wednesday, January 16, beginning at 6 p.m. in the Searsport
District High School on Mortland Road.

The Islesboro Islands Trust (IIT)—an intervenor in the regulatory review
process*—*engaged Good Harbor last summer to conduct an independent and
unbiased assessment to identify the risks, hazard zones, and the emergency
response costs posed by the proposed LPG Terminal. The Good Harbor team
identified high risks and significant vulnerabilities in the proposed
project design, and found that “both landside and maritime emergency
response resources are currently inadequate to support major LPG incident
management activities.”

Significant findings support GHT’s recommendation to deny the permits:

·       An independent blast analysis, which found that under a variety of
accident scenarios, an explosion or leak at the terminal would cause lethal
and devastating impacts to nearby homes and businesses, and to travelers on
Route One;

·       The lack of a cost sharing plan, which would transfer significant
project costs from the LPG developer to local communities;

·       Gaps in current regulations, which leave citizens and businesses
unprotected; and

·       Insufficient depths in the Searsport harbor and at the existing
pier, which will require expensive and environmentally damaging dredging
before ocean going LPG ships can safely access the port.

Clarke also cautioned regulators to look carefully at dramatic recent
changes in global energy prices, which are leading industry to convert
import terminals into export facilities.

IIT praised the thorough and independent analysis by the Good Harbor
team.  “The
GHT report is exceptionally well done and provides a first ever look at the
real costs and dangers associated with the proposed LPG Terminal.” said
Stephen Miller, IIT Executive Director. “Based on this analysis, the
Terminal should not go forward.  The risks are too great and the costs too
high.”

“The LPG Terminal project should be stopped in its tracks,” added Steve
Hinchman, counsel for IIT and Thanks But No Tank, a concerned citizens
group opposed to the project. “The Good Harbor report confirms that
Searsport and Pen Bay lack the resources or available space to safely host
such a hazardous facility.  This project would put too many people at
risk.”

* *

*Overview of GHT’s hazard analysis findings*:

·       *Wide-reaching effects of an accident*: The blast analysis done by
GHT’s subcontractor found that under a number of accidental and terrorism
scenarios, the lethal hazard zone for a fire or explosive vapor cloud
extends *far* *beyond* the property boundaries, and will place nearby
residents, business owners and travelers at risk;

·       *Inconsistent review of LPG and LNG*: GHT, the US Coast Guard and
Congressional reports all conclude that the safety and security risks for
propane (LPG) and methane (LNG) are very similar.  Yet the review process
and permitting requirements are much more stringent for LNG. Based on all
blast analyses, GHT found that Searsport site would not meet minimum
federal siting criteria for LNG and should not be permitted for LPG for the
same reasons.

·       *Threats to maritime safety*: There is insufficient water depth in
both the harbor and at the pier for the intended deep-draft LPG import
vessels; dredging must be completed to ensure under-keel clearance
requirements;

·       *Lack of public safety resources and capacity*: Regional public
safety and security resources are not currently sufficient to address a
significant land-based or maritime incident; essential plans to address
potential fires and explosions do not exist;

·       *Lack of risk management planning*: To date, regulators have not
accounted for the full impact of necessary risk mitigation measures, nor do
permits require implementation of hazard plans or cost sharing. GHT states
“the absence of a cost sharing plan results in disproportionate levels of
cost and responsibility being shifted from the facility operator (DCP
Searsport LLC) to municipal, state and federal response organizations.
These organizations will be faced with providing funding for any additional
training, manpower, equipment… or choosing to forego important risk
mitigation measures.”

·       *Possibility of future conversion from LPG importing to exporting**:
* GHT warns that because of the current over-abundance of propane gas in
the U.S., nearly all plans to develop gas import facilities such as the
proposed Searsport terminal have been abandoned or converted to plans for *
exporting* gas. GHT questions whether, once built, the project developer
will convert to a gas *exporting* operation, which would bring
substantially changed and greater risks to the area.

*Background:* DCP Searsport is owned by DCP Midstream Partners, LP, which
is, in turn, a wholly owned subsidiary of Phillips 66 and Spectra Energy.
The proposed $40 million, 48-acre LPG terminal would be among largest ever
built on the East Coast. It would include a deepwater pier and unloading
facility capable of receiving ocean-going LPG tankers, a mile-long pipeline
to a 22.7 million gallon cryogenic LPG storage tank and a 90,000 gallon
pressurized LPG storage tank, and a vast array of industrial components.  It
would be the largest LPG marine terminal on the East Coast and one of the
largest in the world.

*To download the full Good Harbor Techmark All Hazards Assessment or
separate sections, including the Executive Summary, follow this
**link: http://www.penbaylpg.org/
*.*

Islesboro Islands Trust is a non-profit land trust serving the community of
Islesboro and the Penobscot Bay region of Maine. IIT’s mission is to
enhance the quality of residents' lives through the preservation of open
space, educate all residents as to the value of the islands' natural
ecosystems, and act as an environmental advocate on behalf of Islesboro and
the surrounding Penobscot Bay region.

See Richard Clarke bio at http://www.richardaclarke.net/bio.php.

*For more information, email or call*:

Steve Miller, Executive Director, Islesboro Islands Trust, 207-734-6907
iitsmill@gmail.com;  

or

Steve Hinchman, Project Attorney, 207-837-8637  stevehinchman@gmail.com .

Comments are closed.