Study Examines Potential Gateway Pacific Terminal Impacts

By Mark Edward Nero

There would be increases in train traffic, but also benefits to the region if the proposed Gateway Pacific Terminal coal handling facility is built in the region, according to a new report by the Puget Sound Regional Council.

The study, which was released July 24, found that the cities of Everett, Auburn, Algona, Pacific and Fife would be affected by more trains servicing the proposed terminal, but also pointed out that as the regional economy grows, demand for more freight and passenger rail service would increase, even if the proposed terminal isn’t built.

“If our trade-dependent economy is going to generate more family wage jobs and if we’re going to keep the jobs we have now, our state and the railroads need to invest in critical rail improvements,” said Port of Seattle Commissioner Bill Bryant, who sits on the Puget Sound Regional Council executive board.

SSA Marine subsidiary Pacific International Terminals has proposed the terminal, which would be a dry bulk commodity export-import facility at Cherry Point, Washington, about 100 miles north of Seattle. The terminal is expected to primarily transfer coal to ships for export.

The proposed terminal would result in an expected additional 18 trains per day, each about 1.6 miles long, between the Powder River Basin in Montana and Wyoming through Washington state.

The study found that most of the proposed terminal’s direct economic benefits would accrue to Whatcom County and that much of the direct costs to King, Pierce and Snohomish counties would be related to increased train traffic – traffic delays at rail crossings and infrastructure improvements. Other findings include:

• Gateway Pacific Terminal traffic impacts due to increased times for passing trains would vary on the BNSF Railway mainline by an increase of 41 percent in Steilacoom to 147 percent in Marysville, with a regional average 65 percent increase.
• The amount of additional time roads could be blocked by Gateway Pacific Terminal trains would range from 38 minutes to one hour and 26 minutes per day.
• Thirty-four of 101 rail crossings within the region could potentially benefit from mitigation related to Gateway Pacific Terminal impacts.
• Grade separation projects would likely cost between $50 million and $200 million each.
• The study also identified 21 crossings in the region where additional waits for trains could impact the delivery of emergency response service due to close proximity to fire stations or emergency medical facilities.

Go to http://www.psrc.org/transportation/gateway-pacific-terminal-economic-study for the full report.

Portland Commissioner Preparing Anti-Coal Resolution

Later this month, Portland, Oregon could become the latest city in the Pacific Northwest to officially oppose the possibility of new coal exports through the region.

Portland Commissioner Amanda Fritz says she’s preparing a resolution to oppose the prospect of more coal trains traveling through the city.

Fritz, who made the revelation during an anti-coal rally in front of the Portland office of the Army Corps of Engineers, said she expects to present the resolution during the Sept. 19 Portland City Council meeting.

“We’re looking at the strongest resolution we can get passed,” she said at the Aug. 28 rally, which attracted about 150 people.

About 20 other Pacific Northwest cities and counties have already passed resolutions either opposing coal exports outright or raising concerns about it, including Seattle, where the City Council unanimously passed an anti-coal resolution May 29.

Other municipalities that have also passed anti-coal measures include Hood River, Oregon and three Washington cities, Camas, Marysville and Washougal.

The backlash is in response to the proposed development of about half a dozen coal export terminals through the Pacific Northwest, where coal would be brought in from other parts of the county by rail, then shipped to Asia. Among the largest proposals is one at the Port of Longview, where Millennium Bulk Terminals has applied for permits to build a $600 million terminal in a bid to become one of the biggest coal exporters in North America.

Several of the other larger coal export related port expansions are also now undergoing the formal permitting process, including Gateway Pacific Terminal at Cherry Point in Washington state; Kinder Morgan Terminals at St. Helen’s, Oregon; and Coyote Island Terminal at the Port of Morrow.

Opponents of the proposed terminals have raised concerns about potential rail congestion and environmental damage, specifically the possibility of coal dust escaping from inbound trains and harming the local air quality.

Proponents however, have said that measures would be taken to ensure that dust would not escape, but that the terminals could bring hundreds of temporary and permanent jobs to the region.

Pacific Northwest Coal Terminals Would Cause Rail Congestion, Report Says

If several coal export terminal proposals in the planning stages throughout the Pacific Northwest come to fruition, they could lead to heavy congestion within the region’s rail system, according to a newly-released in-depth analysis.

The report, which was released July 11, was conducted by transportation experts Terry Whiteside and Gerald Fauth, III on behalf of conservation group Western Organization of Resource Councils.

Among the report’s key findings:

• The expected large coal volumes would result in several major choke points and bottlenecks and would likely cause rail congestion problems for the entire route. Some of the impacted railroad line segments, such as the line known as “The Funnel” from Sandpoint, Idaho to Spokane, Washington, already have significant rail capacity and congestion issues.
• The westbound movement of coal would likely disrupt the frequency and reliability of inbound and outbound shipments of containerized traffic, and that traffic would likely experience a diversion to California and Canadian ports where it will not be impacted by the congestion associated with the increased coal shipments to the Pacific Northwest.
• The two major cities that would be the most adversely affected in terms of the expected export coal trains per day are Spokane, Washington and Billings, Montana. Nearly every loaded and empty coal train would move through these two cities, with up to 63.2 trains per day traveling through Spokane and 57.6 trains per day going through Billings.

The report also states that the projected movement of 75 million tons per year by 2017 to 170 million tons per year by 2022 would equate to the movements of 27.86 to 63.15 loaded and empty coal trains per day.

Several of the larger coal export related port expansions are now in the formal permitting process, including Gateway Pacific Terminal at Cherry Point in Washington State and Millennium Bulk Logistics in Longview, Washington, Kinder Morgan Terminals at St. Helen’s, Oregon and Coyote Island Terminal at Port of Morrow.

The WORC’s full report can be seen at http://www.heavytrafficahead.org/pdf/Heavy-Traffic-Ahead-web.pdf .

Citizens Group Seeks Ban of Coal Trains

A political action committee opposed to a planned goods export terminal says it will release a proposed ordinance later this month that would ban the transport of coal through Bellingham, Washington via train or any other means.

Organizers of the No Coal! political action committee say the proposal is being released Jan. 26 in hopes that it will be adopted by the Bellingham City Council.

The proposed measure comes in response to plans by SSA Marine to build its Gateway Pacific Terminal. Gateway Pacific, which was announced in 2010, is a planned multi-commodity export-import facility that would sit on 1,092 acres in Bellingham, which is located in Whatcom County, Washington about 17 miles south of the Canadian border.

SSA Marine says the shipping, stevedoring and warehousing facility would be the largest on the US Cest Coast, and would move dry bulk commodities such as grain, potash and coal between the US and Asian markets.

It’s been estimated that the facility would handle an estimated 54 million tons of cargo – mostly coal – annually and result in an additional 15 to 20 coal trains passing through Bellingham daily, which alarms some residents and environmentalists.

But since the interstate rail system is regulated by the federal government and BNSF Railway has a legal right of way through the city, the political action committee faces an uphill battle as far as limiting the content of what trains carry through Bellingham.

City officials have also said they have no direct legal control over the trains that would pass through the city if the GPC is built.

The No Coal! Coalition, however, maintains it’s attempting to establish legal groundwork to place rights of communities and ecosystems on equal or greater footing with the rights of railroads and other corporations.

It says if the proposed measure isn’t adopted by the Council, it would likely launch a petition drive to place ordinance on a citywide ballot.

The building of the terminal, if it ever occurs, is still years away, however. The permitting process is still ongoing, and an environmental impact study, which could take years to complete, is not expected to begin until later this year at the earliest.