A Superior Court judge on March 20 agreed to hear a case brought
by environmental groups that are challenging a recently signed contract enabling
Foss Maritime to lease terminal land at the Port of Seattle.
Under the terms of the lease, Foss is able to use the
premises specifically as a transportation facility in which quantities of goods
or container cargo are stored without undergoing any manufacturing process,
transferred to other carriers or stored outdoors in order to transfer them to
other locations.
But in her order granting a review of the case, Judge
Mariane Spearman wrote that the permitted uses under the terms of the lease
“seem to contradict the expected uses outlined in the Port of Seattle’s staff
briefing memo” and that the outlined usage activities “appear to be
qualitatively different” than those by Terminal 5’s previous tenant, Eagle
Marine Services.
On Feb. 9, the port signed the two-year lease with Foss
Maritime, giving Foss the right to short-term moorage and vessel operations
along 50 acres at the port’s 156-acre Terminal 5, which is currently undergoing
renovation.
On March 2 however, a coalition of five environmental groups
filed a challenge against the port’s lease on the grounds that the lease would
change the use of Terminal 5 by converting it into a homeport for Shell’s
Arctic drilling fleet.
The lawsuit was filed by Earthjustice in King County
Superior Court on behalf of Puget Soundkeeper Alliance, the Sierra Club, the
Washington Environmental Council and the Seattle Audubon Society.
It is the plaintiffs’ position that the port acted illegally
when it entered the lease because it relied on an exemption to bypass State
Environmental Policy Act (SEPA) review. The plaintiffs also said that they’re
concerned about toxic runoff from vessel repairs and maintenance as well as
water pollution from the vessels while at the port and during transit.
The lease, according to the plaintiffs, would allow Shell’s
drill ships to be housed at the port, including one, the Noble Discoverer, which the
plaintiffs claim was the subject of eight felony convictions in December 2014 and
more than $12 million in fines and community service, including for discharging
oil-contaminated water in violation of water pollution laws.
In her ruling, Judge Spearman ordered the plaintiffs and
defendants to begin negotiations on a resolution, which she would then review.
