The U.S. Army Corps of Engineers will modify existing permits for the BP Cherry Point Marine Terminal in Ferndale, ending the almost two-decade saga of legal battles and environmental studies regarding the terminal’s north wing dock.
Future use of the dock will be limited, restricting the volume of crude oil handled at the terminal to 191 million barrels per year, and prohibiting use of the north wing to handle crude oil unless authorized by the federal government, according to an announcement from the Corps.
The initial permit, granted in 1996, will be restricted to comply with both the Endangered Species Act and the Magnuson Amendment, a 1970s-era amendment prohibiting new oil terminals or expansion of existing terminals in Puget Sound.
The 191 million barrels permitted today is the same as the crude oil handling capacity calculated for the terminal on Oct. 18, 1977, the same date the Magnuson Amendment took effect.
BP will also be required to report its vessel calls and crude oil volume each year.
“That is really the only way [the Corps] can ensure that the ESA and Magnuson Amendment restrictions are being followed,” Corps spokesperson Andrew Muñoz told the Northern Light earlier this week.
The dock, initially constructed in 2001, was blocked from use after environmental groups filed lawsuits. In 2005, the United States Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals commissioned an environmental impact statement, which was released in 2022.
The 700-plus page report, released by the Corps in August last year, concluded 15 years of studies and evaluations, and determined use of the north wing “could significantly affect the quality of the human environment.”
“Environmental risk was primarily measured in terms of vessel accidents and oil spills in the Puget Sound region,” according to a news release announcing the Corps decision. “The purpose of the EIS was to provide decision-makers and the public with information on the incremental environmental risk — principally from vessel traffic —related to operation of the North Wing dock at the BP Cherry Point Marine Terminal.”
The report evaluated three options regarding future use of the terminal, including revoking the permit, allowing the permit to continue as is, and modifying the permits to comply with legal requirements.
“This environmental impact statement is unusual in that it’s an after-the-fact,” Daniel Krenz, a regulatory project manager at the Corps, said last August. “The structure has already been constructed. Normally, we would go through this process of the EIS during the permit application review … but in this case, this was directed by the Ninth Circuit.”
