When state agencies require an environmental impact study for a crude-by-rail terminal, there are no guarantees that the sub-contractors doing the research will actually do a thorough and accurate job, particularly if they are retired executives from BNSF.
Last June, the state Energy Facility Site Evaluation Council (EFSEC) announced that the release of the draft EIS for the Tesoro-Savage oil terminal in Vancouver would be delayed until Nov. 24 because it failed to meet minimum standards and needed a major rewrite.
EFSEC members have regular day jobs with other responsibilities, and the draft exceeds 4,000 pages. What if the revised draft is still sub-par? What if EFSEC members don’t even have time to read it? Then it is up to the public to help make the final EIS better. That’s why we have public comment.
In 1982, Republican governor John Spellman defied his own party and President Reagan to reject a pipeline across the Cascades. He said, “There's no reason for us to spoil the state, and the people don't want it spoiled."
Tell EFSEC we still don’t want it spoiled, and we don’t want to be exposed to increased risk from oil trains and that, although the draft EIS is flawed, it contains plenty of justification for rejecting the Tesoro-Savage Oil Terminal. To submit your comment, Google “EFSEC Tesoro DEIS.”