Emails pertaining to Gateway Pacific Project For June 9-15 ...

Emails pertaining to

Gateway Pacific Project

For June 9-15, 2012

From: "Kelly, Alice (ECY)" <[email protected]>To: Ari Steinberg <[email protected]>CC: "[email protected]" <[email protected]>, "Randel J NWSPe...Date: 6/15/2012 4:33 PMSubject: GPT - Date of submittal of reportsAttachments: Report Rev Schedule Feb 2012.docx

Ari,

As we transition into scoping for the EIS, I would like to check in with you regarding submittal of studies and reports to the co-lead agencies. Attached is the list of studies that PIT said would be submitted (this is a list ORA developed). Please let me know when the studies will be available. Can we expect them soon?

Thanks,

Alice KellyDepartment of EcologyNorthwest Regional [email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>

Report Title Draft Available

(Quarter)1, 2Subcommittee(s)

Traffic Discipline Report prior to scoping Land Transport

Avian Habitats and Presence Report prior to scoping Wetland & Stream, Marine Env

Stream and Fish Report prior to scoping Wetland & Stream, Marine Env

Marine Habitat Characterization Report prior to scoping Marine Env

Marine Biota Report prior to scoping Marine Env

Noise Impact (land) Report prior to scoping Land Transport

Hydrology (land) Report prior to scoping Hydrology

Marine Sediment, Tissue, and Water Quality

Report

prior to scoping Marine Env

Air Quality Impact Report prior to scoping Air Issues

Wetland Impacts and Mitigation Plan

(Conceptual)

prior to scoping Wetland & Stream

Stormwater Technical Information Report TBD Hydrology

Biological Evaluation TBD Wetland & Stream, Marine Env

Marine Geotechnical Report TBD Marine Env

Upland Geotechnical Report TBD Hydrology

Hydrography (Marine Wave and Current)

Report

TBD Marine Env

Herring Behavior Report TBD Marine Env

Vessel Traffic Analysis Report TBD Marine Vessel Traffic

Note: 1. Technical reports will be finalized and distributed to the MAP team prior to commencement of scoping. (SSA Marine, 11/29/2011)2. An updated schedule was provided as input to the County's RFP. (SSA Marine, 1/24/2012)

Update: Friday, February 03, 2012

Source: GPT MAP Team website:

https://secureaccess.wa.gov/ofm/iprmt24/site/alias__1357/22844/welcome.aspx

From: "Kalb, F E Skip" <[email protected]>To: "'[email protected]'" <[email protected]>, "'Jodi.Ketels...CC: "'[email protected]'" <[email protected]>, "'[email protected]: 6/15/2012 12:39 PMSubject: Re: GPT Kick-off Meeting - June 20th

Tyler,

Representing BNSF, it be myself, Walt Smith (Engineering), Pierre Bordenave (JLP), and Jim Lynch (KL Gates).

Two questions, please:

1) Mike Stanfill of our Environmental Dept has a conflict, but would like to participate via conference line.

2) We would like to alsoi bring Glen Gaz from our Seattle Engineering office.

Will this be okay?

Skip --------------------------Sent from my BlackBerry Wireless Handheld

----- Original Message -----From: Tyler Schroeder [mailto:[email protected]]Sent: Friday, June 15, 2012 02:16 PMTo: Kalb, F E Skip; [email protected] <[email protected]>; [email protected] <[email protected]>Cc: [email protected] <[email protected]>; [email protected] <[email protected]>Subject: RE: GPT Kick-off Meeting - June 20th

Ari,

Please see the following answers to your questions below.

Thanks,

Tyler

-----Original Message-----From: Ari Steinberg [mailto:[email protected]] Sent: Friday, June 15, 2012 10:59 AMTo: 'Tyler Schroeder'Cc: Ketelsen, Jodi/SEA; [email protected];[email protected]; [email protected]: RE: GPT Kick-off Meeting - June 20th

Thank you Tyler. We will plan a presentation per your agenda items. Acouple of off the top of my head questions (there may be more onMonday).

1. Who will be in attendance at the meeting?

There will be 11 consultants - ranging from Proj Mgr to lead economistand biologist.There will be 2 to 3 representatives from Whatcom County, Ecology andUSACE.

2. Can we presume everyone at the meeting is somewhat familiar withthe: (a) function of the proposed terminal, i.e. major components ofthe rail network, product receiving, storage, outloading, in-wateroperations, etc.,

NO - please provide a general walk through all of the above - as thoughyou were speaking to a high school student. We will have an structuraleng present and he may have some additional questions - but we need goodgeneral overview of operations.

(b) Project Information Document and the technical studies beingsupplied to the EIS team?

Yes - not at this meeting. The consultant team will be receiving that atthe next meeting.

3. How much time total are you planning for: (a) meeting at Ecology's office - is the hour meant to cover apresentation and Q&A?

YES - correct.

(b) the site visit - will this be a drive by visit or will therebe time to get out of the vans and have us point out features (similarto the MAPT site visit/tour)?

2 hours including driving from Fairhaven to the site - ideally we canstop 3 times, at least visiting a point at the BNSF Custer Spur, thesite and the beach/port pier, as a suggestion.

Thank you,

Ari

-----Original Message-----From: Tyler Schroeder [mailto:[email protected]] Sent: Friday, June 15, 2012 10:25 AMTo: [email protected]; Tyler Schroeder; Ari SteinbergCc: [email protected]; [email protected];[email protected]: Re: GPT Kick-off Meeting - June 20th

Ari and Skip,

I would like to add one more question to be incorporated into thepresentation;

Provide an understanding about the how this proposal relates or does not

relate to the previous approved site development proposal.

Thanks,

Tyler

Tyler R. SchroederPlanning ManagerPhone: (360) 676-6907 ext. 50202Fax: (360)738-2525Email: [email protected]: Whatcom County Planning and Development Services5280 Northwest Dr. Bellingham, WA 98225Tyler R. SchroederPlanning ManagerPhone: (360) 676-6907 ext. 50202Fax: (360)738-2525Email: [email protected] Address: Whatcom County Planning and Development Services5280 Northwest Dr. Bellingham, WA 98225>>> Tyler Schroeder 06/15/12 10:14 AM >>>Ari and Skip, The Agencies and the 3rd party consultant would like to request yourpresence at the initial kick-off meeting to provide the team with acommon understanding of the proposed application, field visit of thesite (both the uplands of the proposed dry bulk facility and the BNSFCuster Spur modification areas,) and an update of the studiesunderdevelopment. We request that you arrive at 1pm on Wednesday. The meeting will be atthe "Groucho" Conference room at the Bellingham Ecology Office, at 144010th Street. 3-4 people from your respective companies should work forthe meeting. We will provide up to 1 hour for your presentation of theproposal and an overview of what you’d like to show the team during thesite visit. We will have 2 vans to hold most of the attendants to visitthe site. We would like the tour points identified and the major pointsof interest defined at the meeting room prior to the visit. Please provide a presentation using the following eleme2. Presentation of the components of the proposal (PPT or handouts(20 copies)). The presentation should, to the extent possible, coverbasic details of the proposed application, construction overview, andoperations overview. Please provide any details that would be importantto the analysis – updates on the phased development, loads anticipated,trains, vessel movements, etc. Please provide information on anyconnected actions under consideration –additional property acquisitionor other possible rail improvements, etc.3. 20 sets of 11X17 of the aerials of the project drawing – asimplified drawing over an aerial for all pieces of the application(Spur, Dry bulk and port pier).4. Please provide a list of all studies currently under

development and a schedule for completion. Please incorporate answers to the following questions for the group:1. Why this site?2. What are the drivers for this project?3. What is the timeline for the proposed project – forconstruction, operational phases. Please let me know if you have any other questions on the meeting.

Thanks,

Tyler

Tyler R. SchroederPlanning ManagerPhone: (360) 676-6907 ext. 50202Fax: (360)738-2525Email: [email protected]: Whatcom County Planning and Development Services5280 Northwest Dr. Bellingham, WA 98225

From: Ari Steinberg <[email protected]>To: "Tyler Schroeder ([email protected])" <[email protected]: Tony Viola <[email protected]>Date: 6/15/2012 11:24 AMSubject: FW: Pacific International Terminals, Inc. EscrowAttachments: KYC Questionnaire (Client Information Form).xls

Tyler,

Attached is a questionnaire from the Bank of America they need completed for the escrow account (there are other requirements too as described e-mail below). If you can send the information back to me and Tony we will get the package to the bank.

Let us know if you have questions.

Thanks,

Ari

From: Tony ViolaSent: Friday, June 15, 2012 9:06 AMTo: Ari SteinbergCc: Bill HiraiSubject: FW: Pacific International Terminals, Inc. Escrow

Ari,

As discussed, please see below for the information required by Bank of America from Whatcom County. I will take care of completing the information required from Carrix. Please forward the KYC questionnaire to your contacts at the County and return the completed information to me.

Thanks,

Tony

From: Hanuka, Zahava [mailto:[email protected]]Sent: Thursday, June 14, 2012 3:21 PMTo: Tony Viola; Daher, Jill CCc: Bill Hirai; Mistretta, John RSubject: RE: Pacific International Terminals, Inc. Escrow

Hi Tony,

Thanks very much for providing a marked-up draft of the agreement for our review. Has a choice been made on the indicative pricing option per my previous e-mail? Please confirm the option chosen is the uninvested option, as reflected in the marked agreement.

As next steps we will need to obtain the bank's Know Your Customer (KYC) items from each of the legal entities (by relevant Tax ID) signing the agreement who are not current bank clients. I believe we will need these items for Whatcom County:

* Completed KYC Questionnaire (attached). Please note the separate tabs in bottom left corner of the Questionnaire for completion by entity.* Two forms of supporting documentation as identified in the Customer Verification section of the KYC Questionnaire, such as Articles of Incorporation, Certificate of Good Standing, etc.

Additionally, we will need signed and dated W-9s on the current rev December 2011 version of the form from each party to the agreement (both Pacific International Terminals, Inc. as well as Whatcom County). For convenience, I have included a link to the most recent form of W-9 here below:

http://www.irs.gov/pub/irs-pdf/fw9.pdf

At this time, I would like to introduce my product partner, John Mistretta, who is copied on this e-mail. He is going to help coordinate the negotiation of the agreement and onboarding/opening of the account.

Please let me know if you have any questions regarding this information, and we look forward to working with you.

Thanks again,Z

**PLEASE NOTE: My e-mail address has changed to [email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>.

Zahava HanukaVice President, Product Sales SpecialistGlobal Custody and Agency Services (GCAS)Bank of America Merrill Lynch135 S. LaSalle, IL4-135-14-01Chicago, IL 60603Phone: [email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>

________________________________This message w/attachments (message) is intended solely for the use of the intended recipient(s) and may contain information that is privileged, confidential or proprietary. If you are not an intended recipient, please notify the sender, and then please delete and destroy all copies and attachments, and be advised that any review or dissemination of, or the taking of any action in reliance on, the information contained in or attached to this message is prohibited.Unless specifically indicated, this message is not an offer to sell or a solicitation of any investment products or other financial product or service, an official confirmation of any transaction, or an official statement of Sender. Subject to applicable law, Sender may intercept, monitor, review and retain e-communications (EC) traveling through its networks/systems and may produce any such EC to regulators, law enforcement, in litigation and as required by law.The laws of the country of each sender/recipient may impact the handling of EC, and EC may be archived, supervised and produced in countries other than the country in which you are located. This message cannot be guaranteed to be secure or free of errors or viruses.

References to "Sender" are references to any subsidiary of Bank of America Corporation. Securities and Insurance Products: * Are Not FDIC Insured * Are Not Bank Guaranteed * May Lose Value * Are Not a Bank Deposit * Are Not a Condition to Any Banking Service or Activity * Are Not Insured by Any Federal Government Agency. Attachments that are part of this EC may have additional important disclosures and disclaimers, which you should read. This message is subject to terms available at the following link:http://www.bankofamerica.com/emaildisclaimer. By messaging with Sender you consent to the foregoing.

1 of

CUSTOMER IDENTIFICATION INFORMATION ‐ ENTITY

A. SELECT CUSTOMER TYPE:

LEGAL NAME OF ENTITY:

HEADQUARTER ADDRESS:Note: P.O. Box addresses are not sufficient

CONTACT ADDRESS IF DIFFERENT FROM HEADQUARTER ADDRESS:

PRIMARY PHONE NUMBER:

ENTITY’S LEGAL STRUCTURE:

Other – description:

DATE OF FORMATION/INCORPORATION:List parent Tax ID below, if applicable also provide other Taxpayer ID used.

TAXPAYER IDENTIFICATION # OR FOREIGN EQUIVALENT:

PROVIDE APPLICABLE W8/W9 TAX FORMCurrent versions of these tax forms can be located at: http://www.irs.gov/formspubs/index.html

B. DOES THIS ENTITY HAVE AN EXISTING ACTIVE ACCOUNT WITH THE SAME TAXPAYER/FOREIGN EQUIVALENT IDENTIFICATION NUMBER WITH ANOTHER BANK OF AMERICA, N.A. LINE OF BUSINESS OR AFFILIATE:If yes, please answer the questions below.

Existing Account Number:

Type of Existing Account:


Account Representative: IF ANSWERED YES PROCEED TO VERIFICATION SECTION

C. ENTITY LISTED ON NYSE, AMEX, NASDAQ or Foreign Exchange:

Name of exchange: Ticker Symbol:

D. FINANCIAL INSTITUTION ENTITY

If regulated, provide regulator:

E. If this entity is not listed on an approved exchange or is not regulated by an approved regulator list the full chain of ownership including shareholders, member, partners or beneficiaries controlling at least 25% of the entity until you reach the ultimate beneficial owner. For each “owner” list name, address, county and percentage of ownership and include an organizational chart. For individuals, include date of birth and identification number. (Additional owners can be added on bottom of this sheet)

OWNER OWNER OWNER OWNER

Entity/Individual Name:

Address:

Country of Domicile:

Date of Birth:

Tax ID (TIN) or Social Security (SSN)

Provide occupation:

% of ownership

F. ENTITY A HEDGE FUND

G. ENTITY A MONEY SERVICE BUSINESS (MSB)

CUSTOMER VERIFICATION

2 of

TWO OF THE FOLLOWING VERIFICATION METHODS ARE REQUIREDSelect documents provided.

ENTITY’S BUSINESS / INDUSTRY / GEOGRAPHY

A. NAICS Code Number (North American Industry Classification System).

http://www.census.gov/eos/www/naics/


B. List type of products / services / goods this entity sells / produces manufactures / distributes:

C. Entity is a Non‐U.S. entity or a Non‐U.S. Controlled Entity:

D. Please list any applicable Senior Political Figures with a significant position of control in the entity:

∙ current or former senior official in the executive, legislative, administrative, military, or judicial branch of a government (elected or not)

∙ a senior official of a major political party

∙ a senior executive of a government‐owned commercial enterprise, or any corporation, business or other entity formed by or for the benefit of a Senior Political Figure

∙ an immediate family member of any such individual, including, but not limited to spouses, partners, parents siblings, children and parents and siblings of spouses

∙ publicly known (or actually known by the relevant financial institution) to be a close personal or professional associate of any such individual and, in particular, is a person who is in a position to conduct substantial finanacial transactions on behalf of any of the above individuals. A joint account holder should be considered a close associate.

Respective Title Affiliation

VERIFICATION SECTION

First Name Last Name Title

PREPARED BY:

EMAIL:

PHONE:

DATE COMPLETED:

ADDITIONAL INFORMATION MAY BE REQUIRED

Articles of Association

Articles of Incorporation

Certificate of Good Standing

Certificate of Incorporation

Certificate of Registration

Extract from Company Registry

Audited Financial Statement / Annual Report

Government-Issued Business License

Letters Testamentary

Operating Agreement

Other Government-Issued Document

Partnership Agreement

Trust Agreement / Instrument

Private Placement Memorandum / Offering Memorandum

Subscription Agreement

of

CUSTOMER IDENTIFICATION INFORMATION ‐ INDIVIDUAL

A. US OR NON‐US CITIZEN:

FULL NAME (including middle initial):

ADDRESS:Note: P.O. Box addresses are not sufficient

DATE OF BIRTH:

PRIMARY PHONE NUMBER:

SOCIAL SECURITY # / TAXPAYER IDENTIFICATION #:

COUNTRY OF CITIZENSHIP:

COUNTRY OF RESIDENCY:

PROVIDE APPLICABLE W8/W9 TAX FORMCurrent versions of these tax forms can be located at: http://www.irs.gov/formspubs/index.html

B. DO YOU HAVE AN EXISTING ACTIVE ACCOUNT WITH THE SAME TAXPAYER/FOREIGN EQUIVALENT IDENTIFICATION NUMBER WITH ANOTHER BANK OF AMERICA, N.A. LINE OF BUSINESS OR AFFILIATE:If yes, please answer the questions below.

Existing Account Number:

Type of Existing Account:


Account Representative: IF ANSWERED YES PROCEED TO VERIFICATION SECTION

CUSTOMER VERIFICATION

C. TWO OF THE FOLLOWING VERIFICATION METHODS ARE REQUIREDSelect documents provided.

BUSINESS / INDUSTRY / GEOGRAPHY

D. EMPLOYMENT / OCCUPATION:

OCCUPATION DESCRIPTION:

SOURCE OF INCOME:

E. Please list pertinent information if the below definitions apply:

∙ A current or former senior official in the executive, legislative, administrative, military, or judicial branch of a government (elected or not)

∙ a senior official of a major political party∙ a senior executive of a government‐owned commercial enterprise, or any corporation, business or other entity formed by or for the benefit of a Senior Political Figure

∙ an immediate family member of any such individual, including, but not limited to spouses, partners, parents siblings, children and parents and siblings of spouses

∙ publicly known (or actually known by the relevant financial institution) to be a close personal or professional associate of any such individual and, in particular, is a person who is in a position to conduct substantial finanacial transactions on behalf of any of the above individuals. A joint accountholder should be considered a close associate.

Respective Title Affiliation

Driver's License (both front and back)

Copy of Passport

Military ID Card (both fron and back)

Consulate Card

Credit Bureau Report / Customer Reporting Agency Report

State ID Card (both front and back)

Alien Registration Card (both fron and back)

Other Government-Issued Document

of

VERIFICATION SECTION

First Name Last Name Title

PREPARED BY:

EMAIL:

PHONE:

DATE COMPLETED:

ADDITIONAL INFORMATION MAY BE REQUIRED

From: Greg SternTo: Schroeder, TylerDate: 6/15/2012 11:10 AMSubject: Re: GPT - Kick-off Meeting - June 20th

I'll be there. Thanks. Sent from my BlackBerry Greg Stern MD, Health Officer Whatcom County Health Department 509 Girard St Bellingham WA 98225 360-676-6707 ext 50800 -----Original Message----- From: Tyler Schroeder To: Stern, Greg <[email protected]> Sent: 6/15/2012 10:21:03 AM Subject: GPT - Kick-off Meeting - June 20th Greg, We are scheduling a Kick-off meeting for the GPT EIS preparation. This meeting will be with the co-lead agencies and the consultant. The purpose is to get to know everyone and to provide some up front direction on main point of the EIS. I would like to see if you are available for the morning of Wednesday, June 20th. I believe the meeting will be from 9 am to 1 and then there will be a site visit. Jodi and I think your participation will be helpful, especially when we break out in small groups (one topic will be the HIA). I will forward you on the agenda as soon as we finalize it. Please let me know you availability and I look forward to the meeting. Thanks, Tyler Tyler R. Schroeder Planning Manager Phone: (360) 676-6907 ext. 50202 Fax: (360)738-2525 Email: [email protected] Address: Whatcom County Planning and Development Services 5280 Northwest Dr. Bellingham, WA 98225

From: Shannon Wright <[email protected]>To: <[email protected]>Date: 6/14/2012 12:48 PMSubject: Communitywise Bellingham and key stakeholders

Hi Tyler,

I am writing to verify that Communitywise Bellingham is listed as a key stakeholders that the GPT EIS consultant will be working with under the terms of the contract.

Thank you for the information.

Best regards,

Shannon Wright---Shannon WrightExecutive DirectorCommunitywise BellinghamInforming the conversation.

CommunitywiseBellingham.orgFollow us on Facebook and Twitter.

From: Linda NielsenTo: PublicRecordsOfficerCC: Stephanie Drake; Tyler SchroederDate: 6/14/2012 12:38 PMSubject: Fwd: Re: PDR2012-122 & PDR2012-123Place: PublicRecordsOfficerAttachments: Re: PDR2012-122 & PDR2012-123

Hi Mark, This is PDS's reply to PDR2012-122. With this email PDS will be closing this PDR. Thanks,Linda

From: Tyler SchroederTo: Linda NielsenCC: Stephanie DrakeDate: 6/14/2012 11:48 AMSubject: Re: PDR2012-122 & PDR2012-123

Linda,

PDS has no documents evidencing communications with BNSF regarding the Custer Spur expansion or Gateway Pacific Terminal. The only documents that PDS have with BNSF are in regards to the contracts for reimbursement.

Thanks,

Tyler

Tyler R. SchroederPlanning ManagerPhone: (360) 676-6907 ext. 50202Fax: (360)738-2525Email: [email protected] Address: Whatcom County Planning and Development Services5280 Northwest Dr. Bellingham, WA 98225

From: Linda NielsenTo: PublicRecordsOfficerCC: Stephanie Drake; Tyler SchroederDate: 6/14/2012 12:37 PMSubject: Fwd: Re: PDR2012-122 & PDR2012-123Place: PublicRecordsOfficerAttachments: Re: PDR2012-122 & PDR2012-123

Hi Mark, Here is PDS's reply to PDR2012-123. With this email PDS will be closing this PDR. Thanks,Linda

From: Tyler SchroederTo: Linda NielsenCC: Stephanie DrakeDate: 6/14/2012 11:43 AMSubject: Re: PDR2012-122 & PDR2012-123Attachments: FW: GPT sediment sampling Right of Entry; Re: GPT Code Enforcement Action;

GPT - Heads up on some activity next week; RE: GPT Code Enforcement Action; RE: GPT Code Enforcement Action

Linda,

Attached are the documents, in response to PDR2012-00123, that PDS has since the County issued the retroactive LDP in September 2011.

Thanks,

Tyler


>>> Linda Nielsen 6/12/2012 3:01 PM >>>Hi Tyler, I've attached PDR2012-122 - Custer Spur expansion or Gateway Pacific Terminal and PDR2012-123 - Pacific International Terminals or their agents done any further work on any Gatway Pactific Terminal site. These are the Public Disclosure Requests for GP. We will need to respond to these PDR's as soon as possible. Thanks,Linda

From: "Strong, Cliff" <[email protected]>To: [email protected]: 11/3/2011 12:35 PMSubject: FW: GPT sediment sampling Right of Entry

Tyler, please see the request below, asking for your approval to do some more marine sediment testing under the existing Shoreline Permit.

Thanks,

Cliff StrongSenior Land Use/Environmental Plannerand Office Sustainability Coordinatoremail: [email protected]

Direct: 425.368.0952Cell: 360.631.7918Office: 425.368.1000Fax: 425.368.1001

AMEC Earth & Environmental, Inc.11810 North Creek Parkway NBothell, WA 98011

website: www.amec.com/earthandenvironmentalBe more sustainable - think before you print.Business sustainability starts here... AMEC is committed to reducing its carbon footprint.Business sustainability starts here... AMEC is a signatory to the UN Global Compact.Business sustainability starts here... AMEC supports SOS Children

-----Original Message-----From: Gray, MelindaSent: Thursday, November 03, 2011 12:27 PMTo: Strong, CliffSubject: RE: Fwd: sediment sampling Right of Entry

Hi Cliff,

We are requesting a Right of Entry from Whatcom County for the marine geotechnical work similar to what we requested for the sediment investigation. We would like to conduct the work under the existing shoreline permit like we did last time. Can you make this happen?

We need Tyler to e-mail Terry Carten at DNR, and say that we can conduct the marine geotechnical investigation under the existing shoreline permit. I pasted the request from DNR below:

Has a Whatcom County shoreline permit been issued for the geotech work? This is likely the final permit that DNR will need to consider issuing a ROE for the geotech work......

Thanks!

-----Original Message-----From: Strong, CliffSent: Wednesday, June 29, 2011 4:29 PMTo: Gray, MelindaSubject: Fwd: Fwd: sediment sampling Right of Entry

FYI

Cliff,

Thanks for forwarding on the email. It helps layout what DNR isrequesting. We are going to continuing trying to get in touch withTerry and will respond in morning.

Thanks,

Tyler

Tyler R. SchroederCurrent Planning SupervisorPhone: (360) 676-6907 ext. 50202Fax: (360)738-2525Email: [email protected]:Whatcom County Planning and Development Services5280 Northwest Dr.Bellingham, WA 98225

>>> "Strong, Cliff" <[email protected]> 6/29/2011 4:18 PM >>>Here's the email from DNR.

Terry CARTEN is our contact.

Begin forwarded message:

From: "CARTEN, TERRY (DNR)"<[email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>>Date: June 28, 2011 9:27:02 AM PDTTo: Al Jeroue<[email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>>Cc: "Dunkin, Kristie A"<[email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>>, AriSteinberg<[email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>>,"Gray, Melinda" <[email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>>,"GUSTAFSON, JOANN (DNR)"<[email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>>,"Clark, Dennis (DNR)"<[email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>>Subject: RE: sediment sampling Right of Entry

Hi Al,

The Right of Entry (ROE) for the sediment sampling has been overnightmailed this morning to Ari’s attention. Please have the documentssigned by Bob Watters ASAP and either overnighted or hand delivered tothe person/address in Olympia provided in the transmittal letter that isaccompanying the documents. The documents, signed by SSA, should be in

to our office in Olympia no later than Thursday morning if the sedimentsampling is to begin on Friday. Until the ROE documents have been fullyexecuted, SSA/AMEC does not have permission to conduct the samplingactivities on state-owned aquatic lands. Once the documents have beensigned by DNR and fully executed, I will contact Melinda Gray at AMECand let her know that the sampling can begin.

The transmittal letter also outlines that DNR is still in need of aletter of permission or permit from the US Army Corps of Engineers, aletter or email, etc. from Whatcom County that they will allow thesediment sampling to occur under the existing Shoreline SubstantialDevelopment Permit issued in 1997 (SHS 92-0020) and a check for the ROEfee of $1,015.56. All of these items are necessary for DNR to executethe ROE. Melinda Gray is aware of the permitting needs and has assuredme that they will be provided in a timely manner to complete thisauthorization process.

Please let me know if you have any questions or need additionalinformation.

Thanks,Terry

Terry CartenLand Manager, San Juan/Whatcom County & AnacortesDNR Aquatics ProgramOrca-Straits District360-854-2846From: Al Jeroue [mailto:[email protected]]Sent: Friday, June 17, 2011 3:34 PMTo: CARTEN, TERRY (DNR)Cc: Dunkin, Kristie A; Ari SteinbergSubject: RE: sediment sampling Right of Entry

Hi Terry,

Please send the ROE to the attention of Ari Steinberg/SSA at theKlickitat Way address. He will marshal it through SSA and get thesignatures and the authorization back to you ASAP.

Thanks for all the help.

ASJ

From: CARTEN, TERRY (DNR) [mailto:[email protected]]Sent: Friday, June 17, 2011 2:29 PMTo: Al JeroueCc: Dunkin, Kristie ASubject: sediment sampling Right of Entry

Hi Al,

I have been working on the Right of Entry for SSA/AMEC to conductsediment sampling at the proposed PIT GPT site. I am hoping to have thisgo out to your organization for signature early next week.

Should I be addressing it to your attention? To the Klickitat Wayaddress?

It is imperative that this authorization gets signed and returned to meASAP if you wish to conduct the sampling during your limited July 1-15timeframe. PIT will not be authorized to collect samples fromstate-owned aquatic lands until you have been informed that theauthorization has been fully executed.

The permit or permit waiver document from the Army Corps of Engineerswill also be required prior to execution of the authorization. KristieDunkin at AMEC is aware of this and has indicated that she will provideme with this documentation as soon as she receives it.

Let me know if you have any questions.

Thanks,

Terry

The information contained in this e-mail is intended only for the individual or entity to whom it is addressed.Its contents (including any attachments) may contain confidential and/or privileged information.If you are not an intended recipient you must not use, disclose, disseminate, copy or print its contents.If you receive this e-mail in error, please notify the sender by reply e-mail and delete and destroy the message.

From: Bryan SehmelTo: Cliff StrongCC: Tyler SchroederDate: 10/27/2011 9:37 AMSubject: Re: GPT Code Enforcement Action

Cliff,

Since the LDP has been issued and the replanting will be handled thru the mitigation case, I can't think of anything else. It appears that I should be able to close the enforcement case.

Looking to the future, is there any remaining work on site that still hasn't been done? Have the plants been installed yet?

Kind regards,Bryan

Bryan Sehmel Code Enforcement & ShorelinesWhatcom County PDS5280 Northwest Drive, Suite BBellingham, WA 98226‐9097Ph: (360) 676‐6907 x50206FAX: (360) 738‐2525

>>> "Strong, Cliff" <[email protected]> 10/27/2011 8:52 AM >>>Hey Bryan, now that the LDP has been issued, is there anything remaining that needs to be taken care of regarding the violations?

Thanks,




website: www.amec.com/earthandenvironmental Be more sustainable ‐ think before you print.Business sustainability starts here... AMEC is committed to reducing its carbon footprint.Business sustainability starts here... AMEC is a signatory to the UN Global Compact.Business sustainability starts here... AMEC supports SOS Children

‐‐‐‐‐Original Message‐‐‐‐‐From: Nicholas Smith [mailto:[email protected]] Sent: Thursday, October 27, 2011 8:36 AMTo: Strong, CliffCc: Bryan Sehmel; Tyler SchroederSubject: RE: GPT LDP2011‐00054, signed copy

Cliff‐

The county land disturbance application is now valid. I have verified this with Tyler who will discuss the validity with Bryan.

Nick

>>> "Strong, Cliff" <[email protected]> 10/26/2011 1:57 PM >>>So it's now valid? (Not that we can act on it until the other agencies have issued theirs). No more follow through with your dept? And is Bryan Sehmel aware that it's been issued, or do I need to let him know?

Thanks,





‐‐‐‐‐Original Message‐‐‐‐‐From: Nicholas Smith [mailto:[email protected]] Sent: Wednesday, October 26, 2011 1:51 PMTo: Strong, CliffCc: Tyler SchroederSubject: Re: GPT LDP2011‐00054, signed copy

Thanks Cliff, I only needed to have the applicant (Skip) sign it.

Nick

>>> "Strong, Cliff" <[email protected]> 10/26/2011 1:45 PM >>>Nick, please find attached a signed copy of the GPT Geotech Investigation LDP. I believe you said you now need to sign it, too?

Thanks,





‐‐‐‐‐Original Message‐‐‐‐‐From: Nicholas Smith [mailto:[email protected]] Sent: Friday, October 14, 2011 12:06 PMTo: [email protected] Subject: LDP2011‐00054

Cliff‐

Please see the attached LDP permit. Please have the applicant sign and return the document.

Regards,

Nick Smith

The information contained in this e‐mail is intended only for the individual or entity to whom it is addressed.Its contents (including any attachments) may contain confidential and/or privileged information.If you are not an intended recipient you must not use, disclose, disseminate, copy or print its contents.If you receive this e‐mail in error, please notify the sender by reply e‐mail and delete and destroy the message.

From: "Strong, Cliff" <[email protected]>To: [email protected]: [email protected]: 2/17/2012 10:48 AMSubject: GPT - Heads up on some activity next week

Tyler, just a heads up that people will be on the water to retrieve the Acoustic Doppler Current Profiler from Cherry Point next Wednesday. They will motor a research vessel to the GPS coordinates where they dropped this instrument package, ping it with a sonar code to release the onboard submerged buoy and pick up the float with the attached instrument. There will be no disturbance of any land or vegetation.

Just wanted you to know in case anyone reported activity.

Thanks,

Cliff StrongSenior Land Use/Environmental Plannerand Office Sustainability Coordinatoremail: [email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>


AMEC Environment & Infrastructure, Inc.11810 North Creek Parkway NBothell, WA 98011Be more sustainable - think before you print.Business sustainability starts here... AMEC is committed to reducing its carbon footprint.Business sustainability starts here... AMEC is a signatory to the UN Global Compact.Business sustainability starts here... AMEC supports SOS Children<http://www.soschildrensvillages.org.uk>Disclaimer:The materials transmitted by this electronic mail are confidential, are only for the use of the intended recipient, and may also be subject to applicable privileges. Any dissemination, distribution, or copying of this communication is strictly prohibited. If you have received this communication in error, please notify the sender. Please also remove this message from your hard drive, diskette, and any other storage device.

________________________________The information contained in this e-mail is intended only for the individual or entity to whom it is addressed.Its contents (including any attachments) may contain confidential and/or privileged information.If you are not an intended recipient you must not use, disclose, disseminate, copy or print its contents.If you receive this e-mail in error, please notify the sender by reply e-mail and delete and destroy the message.

From: "Strong, Cliff" <[email protected]>To: [email protected]: 11/2/2011 3:41 PMSubject: RE: GPT Code Enforcement Action

All the TESC has been done, but not the completion of the geotech investigation or restoration work; we still are awaiting our DOE and USACE permits.

Thanks,





-----Original Message-----From: Bryan Sehmel [mailto:[email protected]]Sent: Thursday, October 27, 2011 9:37 AMTo: Strong, CliffCc: Tyler SchroederSubject: Re: GPT Code Enforcement Action

Cliff,



Kind regards,Bryan

Bryan SehmelCode Enforcement & ShorelinesWhatcom County PDS5280 Northwest Drive, Suite BBellingham, WA 98226-9097Ph: (360) 676-6907 x50206FAX: (360) 738-2525


Thanks,





-----Original Message-----From: Nicholas Smith [mailto:[email protected]]Sent: Thursday, October 27, 2011 8:36 AMTo: Strong, CliffCc: Bryan Sehmel; Tyler SchroederSubject: RE: GPT LDP2011-00054, signed copy

Cliff-


Nick


Thanks,





-----Original Message-----From: Nicholas Smith [mailto:[email protected]]Sent: Wednesday, October 26, 2011 1:51 PMTo: Strong, CliffCc: Tyler SchroederSubject: Re: GPT LDP2011-00054, signed copy


Nick


Thanks,





-----Original Message-----

From: Nicholas Smith [mailto:[email protected]]Sent: Friday, October 14, 2011 12:06 PMTo: [email protected]: LDP2011-00054

Cliff-


Regards,

Nick Smith





From: Bryan SehmelTo: Cliff StrongCC: GPTtoWebDate: 11/2/2011 3:44 PMSubject: RE: GPT Code Enforcement Action

Thank you.

Bryan


>>> "Strong, Cliff" <[email protected]> 11/2/2011 3:39 PM >>>All the TESC has been done, but not the completion of the geotech investigation or restoration work; we still are awaiting our DOE and USACE permits.

Thanks,





‐‐‐‐‐Original Message‐‐‐‐‐From: Bryan Sehmel [mailto:[email protected]] Sent: Thursday, October 27, 2011 9:37 AMTo: Strong, CliffCc: Tyler SchroederSubject: Re: GPT Code Enforcement Action

Cliff,



Kind regards,Bryan

Bryan SehmelCode Enforcement & ShorelinesWhatcom County PDS5280 Northwest Drive, Suite BBellingham, WA 98226‐9097Ph: (360) 676‐6907 x50206FAX: (360) 738‐2525


Thanks,





‐‐‐‐‐Original Message‐‐‐‐‐From: Nicholas Smith [mailto:[email protected]] Sent: Thursday, October 27, 2011 8:36 AMTo: Strong, CliffCc: Bryan Sehmel; Tyler Schroeder

Subject: RE: GPT LDP2011‐00054, signed copy

Cliff‐


Nick


Thanks,







Nick

>>> "Strong, Cliff" <[email protected]> 10/26/2011 1:45 PM >>>Nick, please find attached a signed copy of the GPT Geotech Investigation LDP. I believe you said you now need to

sign it, too?

Thanks,






Cliff‐


Regards,

Nick Smith



From: Bryan SehmelTo: Tyler SchroederDate: 6/14/2012 11:38 AMSubject: Fwd: RE: GPT Code Enforcement ActionAttachments: RE: GPT Code Enforcement Action; RE: GPT Code Enforcement Action

Bryan Sehmel Code Enforcement & ShorelinesWhatcom County PDS5280 Northwest Drive, Suite BBellingham, WA 98226‐9097Ph: (360) 676‐6907 x50206FAX: (360) 738‐[email protected] NOTE: Incoming and outgoing emails are subject to public disclosure and records retention.

From: "Strong, Cliff" <[email protected]>To: Bryan Sehmel <[email protected]>Date: 11/2/2011 3:41 PMSubject: RE: GPT Code Enforcement Action


Thanks,






Cliff,



Kind regards,Bryan



Thanks,






Cliff-


Nick


Thanks,







Nick


Thanks,







Cliff-


Regards,

Nick Smith






Thank you.

Bryan



Thanks,






Cliff,



Kind regards,Bryan



Thanks,







Cliff‐


Nick


Thanks,







Nick


sign it, too?

Thanks,






Cliff‐


Regards,

Nick Smith



From: Stephanie DrakeTo: Amy Keenan; Chad Yunge; Darla Smith; Dave Hower; Greg Stern; Harrie...CC: Arden Landry; Sam RyanDate: 6/14/2012 10:48 AMSubject: Start tracking GPT Hours as of June 12thAttachments: procedure-gpteis-tracking-wc-hours-june2012.pdf

Hello All,

Attached is the finalized procedure on tracking hours. You are receiving this email because:1, You may be involved with EIS preparation, and the direct county costs shall be reimbursed by Pacific International Terminals, Inc. If you have any questions, please work with Tyler Schroeder to determine what constitutes applicable hours. 2. You are administrative support staff that will assist to be sure that this procedure gets followed and that all hours are being accounted for appropriately on time sheets and in the Excel spreadsheet.

Please let me know if you have any questions about the procedure.

Thank you,Stephanie

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~Stephanie DrakeWhatcom County Planning & Development [email protected](360) 676-6907 Ext. 50201

Procedure – Reimbursable Staff Hours for GPT EIS Effective June 12, 2012

WHATCOM COUNTY J.E. “Sam” Ryan Planning & Development Services Director 5280 Northwest Drive, Bellingham, WA 98226-9097 360-676-6907, TTY 800-833-6384 360-738-2525 Fax

Gateway Pacific Terminal Project EIS Tracking of Whatcom County Staff Hours

________________ ________________ ________________ ________________ _________

This procedure outlines the process and the specifics for tracking Whatcom County Staff time spent on the EIS preparation for the Gateway Pacific Terminals Project.

The staff listed below is the group we anticipate to be involved in the Gateway Pacific Terminal EIS review (“EIS Review Group”).

Health – Jeff Hegedus, Greg Stern, John Wolpers Parks – Rod Lamb, Mike McFarlane PDS – Wayne Fitch, Amy Keenan, Lyn Morgan-Hill, Tyler Schroeder, Chad Yunge PW-Road – Mike Donahue, Dave Hower, Roger McCarthy, Sandy Petersen, Rodney Vanersypen

This “EIS Review Group” will work under the direction of Tyler Schroeder to determine what tasks are chargeable, and what are not.

The Administrative Support Staff who will help oversee that this process goes smooth

are:

Health – Sandi Hughes-McMillan, Harriet Bouwman Parks – Darla Smith PDS – Stephanie Drake, Pam Brown PW-Road – Shonda Shipman, Linda Marley

Cost Centers to charge staff hours to:

Health - 656261 Parks - 6011 PDS - 2526 PW-Road – GP1201

Revenue Account #s to deposit payments to:

Health – 656261.4345.81 40 Parks – 6011.4345.8140 PDS – 2526.4345.8140 PW-Road – GP1201.4345.81 40

Procedure – Reimbursable Staff Hours for GPT EIS Effective June 12, 2012

Procedure:

o Each week, staff members of the EIS Review Group (listed above) input any chargeable hours to the appropriate cost center (listed above) on their time sheet.

o Simultaneously, staff members of the EIS Review Group open the Excel spreadsheet “GPT EIS Description of Hour s Worked” which is located on the J: Drive, under folder name “County GPT EIS Hours.”

Each person has a tab ready to enter their information. Keep a running tally (ie – don’t write over previous entries, just input

them below your last week’s entries) For that week, enter the date, hours worked, and general description

of what was done for each day. Be sure that the hours that you are reporting on this spreadsheet are

exactly the same as what you submitted on your time sheet. o At the close of each month, PDS will work from the information on the Excel

spreadsheet to calculate the amount that the Applicant will be charged for Whatcom County Time.

Health, Parks, PDS & PW have provided PDS with hourly composite rates to use for each staff member in the EIS Review Group.

o PDS will send a request for invoice to Jennifer Morgan in Finance, which will show the exact amounts that will be deposited into each department’s revenue account (see Revenue Account #s above)

o Jennifer Morgan will send the invoice to: Pacific International Terminals, Inc. Attn: Ari Steinberg 1131 SW Klickitat Way Seattle, WA 98134

o Per contract, PIT, Inc. has 10 days to comment on the invoice, with 20 days total to submit payment to:

Whatcom County Attn: Jennifer Morgan, Finance 311 Grand Ave., Suite 503 Bellingham, WA 98225

o If there are comments or concerns from PIT, Inc., Tyler will work directly with the EIS Review Group staff and/or the Administrative Support Staff to clarify things or update any new amounts that will be charged. The purpose of this communication is to assist each department in being sure that all the time reported will actually be reimbursed.

o If there are any changes to an invoice, PDS will notify Jennifer in Finance so she can adjust the invoice.

o Finance will deposit the payment upon receipt.

From: "Kalb, F E Skip" <[email protected]>To: 'Ari Steinberg' <[email protected]>, Tyler Schroeder <tschroed...CC: "<[email protected]>" <[email protected]>, "<[email protected]>" <ji...Date: 6/14/2012 8:13 AMSubject: RE: Custer Spur Project EIS Contractor

Tyler,

I'll give you a call later today, but our attendees will be myself,Pierre Bordenave of JLP, Jim Lynch, and someone from our Engineering Department(either Walt Smith or Glen Gaz).

Mike Stanfill of our Environmental Group is unavailable, but could participate via phone for the kick-off meeting, if that is acceptable.

Skip Kalb

-----Original Message-----From: Ari Steinberg [mailto:[email protected]] Sent: Tuesday, June 12, 2012 7:07 PMTo: Tyler SchroederCc: Kalb, F E Skip; <[email protected]>; <[email protected]>Subject: Re: Custer Spur Project EIS Contractor

Thank you Tyler.

SSA participants will be able to attend the kick-off meeting next Wednesday. Once we know the specifics including the number of attendees we can bring, I'll let you know who we will have at the meeting.

Ari

On Jun 12, 2012, at 4:51 PM, Tyler Schroeder wrote:

> Skip:> > Thanks for the letter as discussed earlier today. > > Ari:> > I am still awaiting the letter from PIT.> > All:> > After discussing it with the parties, June 20th is a date that works for the Agencies and CH2MHILL for the first kick-off meeting (Bellingham and GPT site). This meeting will be with a select group from CH2MHILL, Agencies, and your companies. I will be working to finalize details tomorrow and plan on providing additional information to you by Thursday. I apologize if the short notice is hard to accomplish and please schedule accordingly or let me know if this date will not work. Further, we will be having a another kick-off meeting (Bellevue) with the larger group of consultants and agencies in the coming weeks. I will ensure that there is more notice for the second meeting date. > > Please let me know if you have any questions.> > Thanks,> > Tyler

> > Tyler R. Schroeder> Planning Manager> Phone: (360) 676-6907 ext. 50202> Fax: (360)738-2525> Email: [email protected] > Address: > Whatcom County Planning and Development Services> 5280 Northwest Dr. > Bellingham, WA 98225>>>> "Kalb, F E Skip" <[email protected]> 06/12/12 3:20 PM >>>> Tyler,> > Attached is BNSF's letter regarding the Amended Reimbursement Contract for the Custer Spur Project.> > I am on the road, but will get this in the overnight mail tomorrow.> > Please feel free to contact me if you have any questions.> > > Skip Kalb> Director Strategic Development> BNSF Railway Company> Cell: 817-271-3057> >

From: Stephanie DrakeTo: Tyler SchroederDate: 6/13/2012 2:04 PMSubject: Re: Fwd: Phillips letter re EIS for Gateway

Yes, it has been up since the end of May


>>> Tyler Schroeder 6/13/2012 11:00 AM >>>Is this on the website?


>>> Suzanne Mildner 5/29/2012 3:19 PM >>>Please note attached correspondence received today from Larry Phillips, Councilmember from King County. Thanks, SuzanneSuzanne MildnerAdministrative Secretary/Grants CoordinatorWhatcom County Executive Department311 Grand Avenue, Suite 108Bellingham, WA 98225(360) 676-6717 [email protected]

From: <[email protected]>To: Tyler Schroeder <[email protected]>Date: 6/13/2012 11:42 AMSubject: Re: GPT EIS Process

Thank you!

Terry J. Wechsler 360-656-6180 (r), 541-913-5976 (c)

----- Original Message -----From: "Tyler Schroeder" <[email protected]> To: [email protected] Sent: Wednesday, June 13, 2012 11:21:15 AM Subject: Re: GPT EIS Process

Terry,

I will be working with the agencies and the consultant to determine the "stakeholders" for participation in the scoping process. I will make sure to include you and you organization in those discussions.

Thanks for your interest and participation in the process.

Tyler

Tyler R. Schroeder Planning Manager Phone: (360) 676-6907 ext. 50202 Fax: (360)738-2525 Email: [email protected] Address: Whatcom County Planning and Development Services 5280 Northwest Dr. Bellingham, WA 98225

>>> <[email protected]> 6/6/2012 9:36 AM >>>

Tyler,

How does one become a "stakeholder"?

Thank you.

Terry


From: Ari Steinberg <[email protected]>To: Tyler Schroeder <[email protected]>CC: "<[email protected]>" <[email protected]>, "<[email protected]>" <[email protected]: 6/12/2012 5:07 PMSubject: Re: Custer Spur Project EIS Contractor

Thank you Tyler.


Ari


> Skip:> > Thanks for the letter as discussed earlier today. > > Ari:> > I am still awaiting the letter from PIT.> > All:> > After discussing it with the parties, June 20th is a date that works for the Agencies and CH2MHILL for the first kick-off meeting (Bellingham and GPT site). This meeting will be with a select group from CH2MHILL, Agencies, and your companies. I will be working to finalize details tomorrow and plan on providing additional information to you by Thursday. I apologize if the short notice is hard to accomplish and please schedule accordingly or let me know if this date will not work. Further, we will be having a another kick-off meeting (Bellevue) with the larger group of consultants and agencies in the coming weeks. I will ensure that there is more notice for the second meeting date. > > Please let me know if you have any questions.> > Thanks,> > Tyler > > Tyler R. Schroeder> Planning Manager> Phone: (360) 676-6907 ext. 50202> Fax: (360)738-2525> Email: [email protected] > Address: > Whatcom County Planning and Development Services> 5280 Northwest Dr. > Bellingham, WA 98225>>>> "Kalb, F E Skip" <[email protected]> 06/12/12 3:20 PM >>>> Tyler,> > Attached is BNSF's letter regarding the Amended Reimbursement Contract for the Custer Spur Project.> > I am on the road, but will get this in the overnight mail tomorrow.>

> Please feel free to contact me if you have any questions.> > > Skip Kalb> Director Strategic Development> BNSF Railway Company> Cell: 817-271-3057> >

From: Ari Steinberg <[email protected]>To: Tyler Schroeder <[email protected]>CC: "Bill Lynn, ([email protected])" <[email protected]>, Jim Lynch <jim.lyn...Date: 6/12/2012 4:51 PMSubject: GPT Reimbursement Agreement LetterAttachments: 20120612 EIS Reimbursement Contract ltr to Tyler.pdf

Tyler,

Attached is the letter for the Reimbursement Agreement as we discussed. If you have any questions let me know.

Thank you,

Ari

1131 SW Klickitat Way

800/422-3505 tel

206/623-0179 fax

www.ssamarine.com

June 12, 2012

Mr. Tyler Schroeder Planning Manger Whatcom County Planning & Development Services 5280 Northwest Drive Bellingham, Washington 98225-‐9097 RE: Reimbursement Agreement for Gateway Pacific Terminal Project – Amendment to

Exhibit A

Dear Mr. Schroeder, We have received and reviewed the contract between CH2M Hill and Whatcom County for preparation of the Gateway Pacific Terminal Environmental Impact Statement, including amendments made by the County Council at the June 5, 2012 meeting. That agreement is incorporated by reference as Exhibit A to the agreement between the County and Pacific International Terminals, Inc. for reimbursement of EIS costs and fees. This letter will confirm that Pacific International Terminals, Inc. agrees to the substitution of this amended Exhibit A for the Exhibit A previously attached to the reimbursement agreement. One of the amendments requires an extended scoping period of 120 days. Since WAC 197-‐11-‐410(4) establishes a 30-‐day scoping period unless there is an agreement with the applicant otherwise, we specifically consent to that amendment.

We are pleased the EIS contracts are being executed and look forward to moving into the EIS process for the GPT Project. If you have questions or comments please let me know. Sincerely,

Ari Steinberg, P.E. Project Manager SSA Marine

From: Arden LandryTo: Mark Burnfield; Tyler SchroederCC: Linda KasperDate: 6/12/2012 4:28 PMSubject: Fwd: Notice of Public Records Request #2012-123Attachments: PDR 2012-123.pdf

Mark, Tyler:

The Executive's office would not have any records that are relevant to this PDR. This one would be Tyler's. We have evidence here that PIT, SSA or any of their agents or contractors have done any further work since issuance of the additional conditions on the LDP.

Arden

>>> PublicRecordsOfficer 6/12/2012 1:42 PM >>>

The attached public records request was received on June 11, 2012. Your department may have records responsive to this request. Please review and let me know by June 18, 2012 if you do have such records and provide a reasonable estimate of how long it will take to produce them. Whatcom County needs to respond to the requester with the records or an estimate of the time to produce the records by June 19, 2012. If this request requires clarification, please call me at extension 50106 so we can contact the requester. If you anticipate that responsive records may require legal review or redaction, please let me know so I can coordinate with the Prosecuting Attorney's Office. Please be aware that once a public record request is received any potentially responsive records may not be destroyed or erased until the request is resolved. Thank you for your time and effort locating records and assisting with the County's response to this request. Mark BurnfieldPublic Records OfficerWhatcom County311 Grand Ave., Suite B-04

Bellingham, WA 98225360-676-7694

From: Stephanie DrakeTo: [email protected]; Tyler SchroederCC: Amy Keenan; [email protected]: 6/12/2012 3:35 PMSubject: Re: Missing Documents from County Website

Tom,I believe your question (1) got answered. As far as question (2), you have to go back to older documents to see the original 1999 settlement agreement. You can do this from our main GPT page. For quicker reference, here is the link: http://www.whatcomcounty.us/pds/plan/current/gpt-ssa/pdf/1999-settlementagreement.pdf . I believe that Appendix G starts at page 95.

Please let me know if this completes both of your requests.

Thank you,Stephanie


>>> "Tom Ehrlichman" <[email protected]> 6/12/2012 2:48 PM >>>Tyler,

My apologies for seeming to hound you all today. But I was trying to readthrough the SSA permit submittals on your website and could not find thefollowing:

1. The new March 2012 PID document. Its referred to several times inthe application materials you do have, but I couldn't seem to find the 2012version. Would you or your staff kindly send me the link or the documentvia email?

2. I also was reading through the posted Memorandum approved bycouncil on June 5 (June 7), amending the settlement agreement. It referredto an attached scope of work, amending Appendix G to the settlementagreement, but I don't believe the website posted the attachment. Could youalso please send me the appropriate link or the document via email?

I got a call today from your public records staff about the earlierrequests, which are voluminous I realize. I will call them back tomorrow.In the mean time, I would greatly appreciate being able to review the two

documents mentioned here.

Thanks,

Tom

Tom Ehrlichman

Salish Law, PLLC

909 Harris Avenue, Suite 201h

Bellingham, WA 98225

(425) 268-5553

From: "Kalb, F E Skip" <[email protected]>To: Tyler Schroeder <[email protected]>CC: Jim Lynch <[email protected]>, Ari Steinberg <[email protected]: 6/12/2012 3:20 PMSubject: Custer Spur Project EIS ContractorAttachments: sk.6.12.12.pdf

Tyler,

Attached is BNSF's letter regarding the Amended Reimbursement Contract for the Custer Spur Project.

I am on the road, but will get this in the overnight mail tomorrow.

Please feel free to contact me if you have any questions.

Skip KalbDirector Strategic DevelopmentBNSF Railway CompanyCell: 817-271-3057

From: Linda NielsenTo: Tyler SchroederCC: PublicRecordsOfficerDate: 6/12/2012 3:01 PMSubject: PDR2012-122 & PDR2012-123Attachments: PDR 2012-122.pdf; PDR 2012-123.pdf

Hi Tyler, I've attached PDR2012-122 - Custer Spur expansion or Gateway Pacific Terminal and PDR2012-123 - Pacific International Terminals or their agents done any further work on any Gatway Pactific Terminal site. These are the Public Disclosure Requests for GP. We will need to respond to these PDR's as soon as possible. Thanks,Linda

From: "Tom Ehrlichman" <[email protected]>To: <[email protected]>CC: <[email protected]>Date: 6/12/2012 2:55 PMSubject: request for records

Tyler,

The email I sent to you earlier, requesting public records, is attachedbelow. In the latter part of the email, I made the following request.Thank you for your response at your earliest possible.

Tom

"On other matters, we have three additional requests.

1. Land Disturbance Permit. Can you please clarify in writing whetheryour Notice of Application and completeness determination (April 2, 2012)were intended to cover any Land Disturbance Permit for the Gateway PacificTerminal or its pier? The submittal materials we reviewed seemed toindicate they were applying for such a permit, but your letter and noticeseemed unclear to us on that point.

2. BNSF Communications. I look forward to receiving copies ofdocuments of any kind evidencing communications between the County andBurlington Northern Santa Fe Railroad of any kind during the years 2011 and2012. Please consider this to be a public records request pursuant to RCWch. 42.56 and consider the request as extending to documents held by theCounty Council, County Executive, and their respective staff or agents. Wewill pay reasonable copying charges and would prefer to receive yourresponse in the form of a digital record on "CD." We are requesting threeidentical sets of the CD or CD's.

3. Ground Disturbance. Please forward copies of documents ofany kind evidencing ground disturbing activities of any kind on the PacificInternational Terminals ownership within the Cherry Point Urban Growth Area,following the issuance of the County's retroactive land disturbance permitin October 2012. Please consider this to be a public records requestpursuant to RCW ch. 42.56 and consider the request as extending to documentsheld by the County Council, County Executive, and their respective staff oragents. We will pay reasonable copying charges and would prefer to receiveyour response in the form of a digital record on "CD." We are requestingthree identical sets of the CD or CD's."

From: Tom Ehrlichman [mailto:[email protected]] Sent: Tuesday, May 15, 2012 5:00 PMTo: '[email protected]'Cc: [email protected]; Kelly, Alice (ECY) <[email protected]>([email protected]); Perry, Randel J NWS ([email protected]);'[email protected]'; Royce Buckingham ([email protected])Subject: Notice of Application

Dear Tyler,

Thank you for your Notice of Application concerning the Gateway PacificTerminal, a proposed pier and facility to export up to 54 million U.S. tonsof coal within the Cherry Point Aquatic Reserve. As discussed below, webelieve there are several areas where PDS should revisit the application anddetermine more information is needed for purposes of permit processing,prior to any further review and prior to any SEPA Threshold Determiantion.

As a preliminary matter, please place the following names and addresses onyour list of "interested parties" or "parties of record" for review ofapplications for County approvals, including but not limited to permits,variances, administrative approvals, street vacations, or legislativeamendments, submitted to Whatcom County by Pacific International Terminals,SSA Marine, Inc. or any other person or entity concerning properties withinthe Cherry Point Urban Growth Area. We request copies of all notices anddecisions.

This request includes but is not limited to requests for County approvals ofany kind concerning the properties described in your Notice of Applicationdated April 16, 2012 for the Gateway Pacific Terminal.

This request also includes but is not limited to any environmental reviewconducted by the County, solely or in conjunction with other agencies,including any threshold determinations, notices or comment periods relatedto any of the above.

Please place the following names on the requested lists:

Tom Ehrlichman, individually.

Barbara Dykes, individually.

Salish Law, PLLC.

These names can be contacted at: [email protected]; [email protected];and at 909 Harris Avenue, Suite 201h, Bellingham, WA.

We of course reserve the right to comment upon any proposals related to theabove at any time prior to the close of the public record. We also reservethe right to comment upon whether or not the applications were complete forpurposes of issuing a SEPA or NEPA Threshold Determination. It does notappear the applications contained sufficient information on listed orendangered species on the site, on stormwater plans, or the amount of filland dredging involved necessary to commence meaningful environmental reviewof the proposals.

It has been our longstanding view that an applicant should not be able towithhold basic information on the impacts of their proposal until review isalready underway. In a project of this magnitude of such high publicprofile, it is adverse to the public interest to allow an applicant topresent a shifting target during environmental review. The applicant shouldbe required to identify in their application affected listed and threatenedspecies, provide baseline information on their stormwater impacts andquantify the amount of fill and dredge material, so that the EIS preparercan measure and quantify impacts and the public, Tribes, and agencies canevaluate the proposal in a meaningful manner.

We understand the SEPA Rules allow commencement of SEPA review at theearliest time a proposal is known, but in this case the applicant and theCounty have known, through their participation in the MAP Team exercise forwell over a year, of the specifics of the proposal and the applicant shouldbe required to identify those specifics. For example, the applicant'srecent applications apparently disregarded completely the County's commentsduring the MAP team process in Spring 2011, pointing out flaws in thedescriptor for the application. PDS' comment was as follows:

STORMWATER MANAGEMENT SYSTEMS

Additional information needed:

1. Further discussion and explanation detailing the stormwater facilities.

2. How the different components (sediment-trapping basins, bioswales, waterquality mitigation pond) of the stormwater system function.

3. Discuss some of the unique problems and mitigation for stormwater indealing with the bulk commodities proposed on this site (coal and grain).

The applications were deemed incomplete in June 2011. That informationappears to be missing still from the March 2012 applications, one yearlater. It is hard to imagine how the County staff found the proposal to betoo vague in Spring 2011 on these points, but would now determine it to besufficiently specific, even when the requested information still is notbeing provided on the stormwater concept. In the public interest, we askthat the County reassess this with respect to these specific issues prior toissuing any threshold determination.

On other matters, we have three additional requests.



3. Ground Disturbance. Please forward copies of documents ofany kind evidencing ground disturbing activities of any kind on the PacificInternational Terminals ownership within the Cherry Point Urban Growth Area,following the issuance of the County's retroactive land disturbance permitin October 2012. Please consider this to be a public records requestpursuant to RCW ch. 42.56 and consider the request as extending to documentsheld by the County Council, County Executive, and their respective staff oragents. We will pay reasonable copying charges and would prefer to receiveyour response in the form of a digital record on "CD." We are requestingthree identical sets of the CD or CD's.

As always, thank you for your consideration.

Tom Ehrlichman

Salish Law, PLLC



(425) 268-5553

From: "Tom Ehrlichman" <[email protected]>To: <[email protected]>CC: <[email protected]>Date: 6/12/2012 2:53 PMSubject: RE: Missing Documents from County Website

Please disregard item 1, below. I found it. I did not find item 2.

Also, the prior document request was contained in my email to you dated May15. I will forward that email again, without waiving any of the timelinesinvolved in responding to these public records requests.

Thanks Tyler.

Tom

From: Tom Ehrlichman [mailto:[email protected]] Sent: Tuesday, June 12, 2012 2:48 PMTo: Tyler Schroeder ([email protected]) ([email protected])Cc: [email protected]: Missing Documents from County Website

Tyler,




I got a call today from your public records staff about the earlierrequests, which are voluminous I realize. I will call them back tomorrow.In the mean time, I would greatly appreciate being able to review the twodocuments mentioned here.

Thanks,

Tom

Tom Ehrlichman

Salish Law, PLLC



(425) 268-5553

From: "Tom Ehrlichman" <[email protected]>To: <[email protected]>CC: <[email protected]>Date: 6/12/2012 2:48 PMSubject: Missing Documents from County Website

Tyler,





Thanks,

Tom

Tom Ehrlichman

Salish Law, PLLC



(425) 268-5553

From: Stephanie DrakeTo: [email protected]: [email protected]; [email protected]; Tyler SchroederDate: 6/12/2012 1:08 PMSubject: Notice to Proceed & Executed ContractAttachments: ch2mhill-notice-to-proceed-and-contract-20120612.pdf

Hi Jodi,

Attached is the notice to proceed with the signed & executed contract. I will put the original in the mail tomorrow morning.

Please send me the W9 Tax information we spoke about yesterday whenever you can.

Thank you,Stephanie


From: Amy KeenanTo: Tyler SchroederDate: 6/12/2012 10:07 AMSubject: Fwd: GPT Subscriber ListAttachments: Fwd: GPT Subscriber List

Amy Keenan, AICP Senior PlannerWhatcom CountyPlanning and Development ServicesNorthwest Annex, Suite B5280 Northwest Drive(360) 676-6907

From: PDSTo: Amy KeenanDate: 6/12/2012 9:55 AMSubject: Fwd: GPT Subscriber ListAttachments: GPT Subscriber List

Included as party of record.

From: "Drewel, Katie" <[email protected]>To: "[email protected]" <[email protected]>Date: 6/11/2012 4:37 PMSubject: GPT Subscriber List

[email protected]

Katie Drewel Legislative Assistant to Rep. Kristine Lytton Serving San Juan, Skagit and Whatcom Counties phone 360.676.2105 legislative hotline 1.800.562.6000 e-mail [email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>

Click here<http://apps.leg.wa.gov/subscriptions/member.aspx?chamber=h&member=lytton> to sign up for our email updates or copy and paste the link below: http://apps.leg.wa.gov/subscriptions/member.aspx?chamber=h&member=lytton <http://apps.leg.wa.gov/subscriptions/member.aspx?chamber=h&member=lytton%20%20>

From: Stephanie DrakeTo: Arden Landry; Jack Louws; Tyler SchroederCC: Royce BuckinghamDate: 6/12/2012 9:50 AMSubject: Re: Fwd: GPT Contracts

Arden,How/when can I come get the 2nd copy of all 3?

Stephanie


>>> Jack Louws 6/12/2012 9:44 AM >>>I signed them..........................

>>> Tyler Schroeder 6/12/2012 8:43 AM >>>Jack,

PIT and BNSF have verbally agreed to the changes as proposed by the Council. The WAC required the applicant to agree to the scoping period change. Both companies will be sending in letters of agreement today for the record. Also, I had a conference call yesterday with the agencies and they are both in agreement with the changes now that we have the companies agreement.

I indicated to them that the contracts will be signed today, June 12th. Please let Stephanie or myself know if we can help in any way. One of the details is that the second signed copy need to get back out here so we can scan them and get the final signed copy back to the parties.

Thanks,

Tyler


>>> Tyler Schroeder 6/11/2012 1:43 PM >>>Arden,

I have the GPT contracts at Royce's office and he will be getting them down to you by tomorrow morning. I will be finalizing agreement with the companies on the changes tomorrow at 9am. The contracts need to be signed tomorrow. I will get in touch with you as soon as I can after my 9 am call.

The contracts that Royce will be getting to you take the place of the CH2MHILL contracts that you currently have. There are no changes to the Companies contracts. Finally, the Communication Protocol is ready to be signed as well.

Call Stephanie or I if you have any questions.

Thanks,

Tyler


From: Arden LandryTo: Tyler SchroederDate: 6/12/2012 9:37 AMSubject: Re: Fwd: GPT Contracts

These are signed and will be back over to you shortly.




Thanks,

Tyler






Thanks,

Tyler

Tyler R. SchroederPlanning Manager

Phone: (360) 676-6907 ext. 50202Fax: (360)738-2525Email: [email protected] Address: Whatcom County Planning and Development Services5280 Northwest Dr. Bellingham, WA 98225

From: "Tom Ehrlichman" <[email protected]>To: "'Kelly, Alice (ECY)'" <[email protected]>CC: "Jan Hasselman" <[email protected]>, <[email protected]>, <...Date: 6/12/2012 8:53 AMSubject: Stormwater Management Plan and DOE Permit Review Gateway Pacific and BNSF Custer SpurAttachments: Whatcom County Comments 2011-project-info-doc-pds-comments.pdf; Ecology Apr

il 2011 Comments on PID re Gateway Pacific Terminal Memo March 2011 Final.pdf

Thank you, Alice. Sorry to bug you, but related to the question of whetherpermit applications are active at Ecology . . . . .

Request for Information. Could you please inquire and tell us whether SSAMarine/PIT and BNSF have ever submitted stormwater management plans and aprocessed-water discharge plans to DOE for their Cherry Point Coal terminaland related Custer Spur work at any time? If so, could you please forwardus copies?

Additional Request. If not, we offer the following for yourconsideration, although I'm sure DOE has given this substantial thought.The issue is meaningful environmental review and the information needed byagencies, Tribes and the public during scoping.

The Problem. As we understand it, SSA/PIT is proposing todischarge at least some of their surface waters into streams that rundirectly into the Salish Sea. Similarly, runoff from coal trains on theBNSF track will discharge to state waters. To our knowledge, neitherapplicant has defined a "cap" or levels of discharges associated with theirplanned activities. From a public process standpoint, that seems odd to us,given the enormity of potential water quality impacts from these projects onthe sensitive waters of the Cherry Point Aquatic Reserve.

The Request. If they have not been submitted yet, we strongly urgeyou to request - prior to the end of scoping -- a stormwater management planand processed-water discharge plan from the Gateway applicant and BNSF thatspeaks to the permitting requirements under federal, state and local laws.This information is necessary now so that agencies, Tribes, and the publichave the opportunity to comment on the shape of the EIS and its review ofwater quality related to runoff and pollution discharges.

Disclosure Has Been Requested by Ecology and Whatcom County.Disclosure of these discharge plans by the applicants now, prior to EISreview, is consistent with comments by Ecology and Whatcom County to theapplicant last year. Disclosure is important to agencies as well as thepublic, because the applicant's plans will also necessarily disclose their

proposed maximum discharge levels to state waters, at the outset ofenvironmental review related to permitting.

Last year, Whatcom County expressed the following concern about this lack ofstormwater management information, in the County's MAP Team comments on theGateway proposal (attached):






In its comments on the proposal on April 7, 2011 to the MAP Team, at Page 7,Ecology similarly noted the lack of stormwater and pollution dischargeinformation necessary to evaluate environmental impacts associated withNPDES compliance (attached):

The PID does not identify proposed discharge points for stormwater. Anydischarge points to surface or marine surface waters need to be plainlyidentified. Depending upon the location and nature of the proposeddischarge, a mixing zone study may need to be completed (and wind data, asspecified above would be needed).

Page 4-32 of the PID states:

The stormwater management system would be an integral part of the civil andgeotechnical design of the Terminal, and would be developed pursuant torequirements of the Stormwater Manual for Western Washington (Ecology 2005).A feasibility study and conceptual design for a stormwater management systemhave been completed. A preliminary conceptual stormwater plan is presentedin Figure 4-15. The final design and specifications for the stormwatermanagement system would be completed as part of the facility design,environmental review, and NPDES permitting processes.

Page 4-44 states:

"Final design criteria will be established during the design andenvironmental review process."

Ecology needs this information early on to help guide the applicant throughthe permitting process.

Ecology went on to say that water sprayed from misters to control fugitivecoal dust would be regulated separately, as pollution discharge rather thanstormwater runoff, through a separate NPDES permit:

The PID does not reference disposal plans for any process water generatedduring unloading or maintenance activities. This may include water sprayedfrom misters used to control fugitive dust. Process water must be managedseparately from stormwater. Process water must be treated and discharged inaccordance with a State Waste Discharge Permit unless treated and dischargedto surface water. An NPDES Permit would be required for a surface waterdischarge.

Thus, the SEPA co-leads last year were requesting details from SSA/PIT abouthow much and what type of stormwater and processed water will be treated anddischarged in compliance with state law.

Missing Information was not Provided In SSA/PIT/s March 2012 Resubmittal. Toour knowledge, this lack of information was not addressed in the new SSA/PITapplication submittal in March 2012. The application checklist included"Endnote ix" which deferred further detail to the EIS process!

"ix Stormwater information is included in the Revised PID at 4.3.6. Moredetailed stormwater design

information will be based upon information and conditions developed throughthe EIS process."

[Note: The referenced "Revised PID at 4.3.6" did not include any newinformation compared to the original PID presented in February 2011 to theORA MAP Team.]

Page 2-2 of the revised PID (March 2012) does not even list a pollutiondischarge permit as one of the necessary permits from Ecology. The revisedPID cites Figure 4-15, which is a site plan showing what appears to bedischarges to the Salish Sea through culverts, but provides not informationon volumes or treatment, stating that those details will be determinedlater, during permitting. That is insufficient, in our view for purposes ofyour environmental review.

Lack of Disclosure Undermines the Integrity of the EIS and its Purpose.This raises the question of how you can proceed with meaningfulenvironmental review in the absence of any documentation as to thequantities and types of discharges proposed for the construction andoperation of the coal terminal and the BNSF Custer Spur. Of equal concernis how agencies can proceed with NEPA/SEPA review in the absence of thisinformation when the risk to sensitive state waters is so high.

Authority to Require the Missing Disclosures. We believe you(and the County) have clear authority under your SEPA Rules to requestadditional information necessary for the review. DOE has the authority (asdoes the County) to request that information, under WAC 197-11-100(3), whichstates:

(3) Environmental impact statements. The responsible official may require anapplicant to provide relevant information that is not in the possession ofthe lead agency.

It also seems clear under WAC 197-11-080 that DOE has a duty to obtain thatinformation since it is relevant and it is also essential to making areasoned choice among alternatives. The cost of obtaining the informationis not "exorbitant" in light of the total cost of the EIS, the relevance ofthe information to federal, state and local permitting and the degree ofpossible harm to state waters.

As an aside, I believe section 2.8c of the settlement agreement (10 yearsago!) called for a stormwater management plan to be prepared by theapplicant, although my question is not about compliance with the settlementagreement. It is about whether DOE has received stormwater management andpollution discharge details from the applicants, prior to commencing thiscurrent EIS.

A Request for Information, not a Scoping Comment Letter. Thiscomment email is not a scoping comment letter. It is a request forinformation from Ecology, prior to commencing scoping. We are copyingother concerned citizen groups on this email, as we know it has been amatter of broad public concern in the Bellingham community.

Conclusion:

To summarize, this request for information and action is independent of anypermit submittals to Ecology, the settlement agreement, or scoping. Werequest the following:

1. Inform us as to whether stormwater management plans andprocessed-water discharge plans have been provided to DOE at any; time bySSA/PIT and BNSF, related to the proposed Cherry Point Terminal and relatedCuster Spur work (other than the preliminary materials submitted to the ORAMap Team, which we've seen).

2. If so, please provide us with copies.

3. If not, we would appreciate your earliest possible response to theabove request that Ecology take the lead in asking the applicants disclosetheir proposed levels of discharges. We urge you to make this request now,at the outset of environmental review. We request that Ecology, the Countyand the Corps require submittal of missing stormwater and pollutiondischarge management plans.

Thank you for your consideration!

Tom

Tom Ehrlichman

Salish Law, PLLC



(425) 268-5553

Cc: League of Women Voters

Earth Justice

Re-Sources

Sierra Club

From: Kelly, Alice (ECY) [mailto:[email protected]] Sent: Monday, June 11, 2012 1:55 PMTo: [email protected]

Subject: RE: DOE Permit Review Gateway Pacific and BNSF Custer Spur

I'll email Loree' and ask for an update. Thanks for the reminder

Alice

From: Tom Ehrlichman [mailto:[email protected]] Sent: Monday, June 11, 2012 12:43 PMTo: Kelly, Alice (ECY)Cc: Summerhays, Jeannie (ECY); [email protected]; [email protected]: DOE Permit Review Gateway Pacific and BNSF Custer Spur

Hi Alice,

Just a friendly reminder. You were going to get back to me withconfirmation as to whether BNSF and SSA Marine/PIT have any activeapplications on file with DOE for any 401 Water Quality Certification, CZMAconsistency determination, or NPDES permits (other than the grounddisturbance last summer).

Thank you for your earliest possible response. If they do have any activeapplications on file with DOE, could you please forward me copies of theapplications and let me know what the public process is for review of these?Also, could you kindly post that information on the DOE website for Gateway?

My question does not relate to DOE's ongoing SEPA review. It is specific toDOE permit review.

Thank you.

Tom Ehrlichman

Gateway Pacific Terminal Preliminary Information Document Comments

The following preliminary comments are based on our review of the Project Information Document dated February 28, 2011. Whatcom County is provided these comments for the ORA MAP team to provide project specific guidance for the applicant. Whatcom County reserves the right to provide additional comments in the future.

ROADWAY and RAILROAD TRANSPORTATION Additional/revis ed information needed:

1. Train crossing impact to intersection of Main St. and Portal Way (Custer, WA).

2. Traffic impact analysis for the intersections of Grandview Rd./Vista Dr. and Birch Bay Lynden/Kickervil le Rd.

3. Intersection #7 on fig. 5-13 is now a completed and functioning roundabout.

4. Provide a drawing with the existing and proposed railroad crossing control systems at all county public roads within the Whatcom County road system.

5. It appears that the project site overlay portions of Lonseth Rd. and Powder Plant Rd. Are there plans to pursue vacation of these roads from the County?

Impact mitigation discussion:

1. No new trains during the AM or PM peak hour of adjacent public roads. 2. Add railroad signal/crossing gates to county road crossings that are

missing these systems. 3. Creation of Quiet Zone at specific railroad crossings with public county

roads. 4. County roads may be blocked by train crossings 2 or more hours on a

daily basis. Explore the use of intelligent advance warning systems to inform the traveling public of delays at railroad crossings.

5. Improve the crossing surface between the rail tracks with concrete aprons.

WHATCOM COUNTY Planning & Development Services 5280 Northwest Drive Bellingham, WA 98226-9097 360-676-6907, TTY 800-833-6384 360-738-2525 Fax

J.E. “Sam ” R yan Director

The following section and page number refer to the document’s numbering system. Section 4.3.5 Rail Access First bullet: Where would the new receive/departur e tracks be located in

order to accommodate a train that is 8500 ft. long and not block an existing county road/RR crossing?

Section 5.6.1.2, page 5-104 Fourth paragraph: “Table 5-20” should be “Table 5-21”. Last paragraph: “Table 5-21” should be “Table 5-22”. Section 5.6.2.2, page 5-113 Second to last paragraph: “Table 5-20” should be “Table 5-21”. Last paragraph: Intersection 7 in now a roundabout and reference to it

should be removed from this sentence. Section 5.6.2.2, page 5-129 First paragraph: “Table 5-21” should be “Table 5-22”. STORMWATER MANAGEMENT SYSTEMS Additional information needed:


2. How the different components (sediment-trappi ng basins, bioswales, water quality mitigation pond) of the stormwater system function.

3. Discuss some of the unique problems and mitigation for stormwater in dealing with the bulk commodities proposed on this site (coal and grain).

NATURAL RESOURCE COMMENTS

Project does not appear to conform to WCC16.16.260( A) mitigation sequence. Several instances where wetland fill can be avoided or amount of fill area could be reduced such as job shack in wetland, configuration of silo storage area, location of silage storage area, stormwater ponds. More information needs to be submitted to validate alternatives analysis.

Has wetland ratings been verified by Army Corp and/or Department of Ecology?

Significant amount of additional mitigation required for wetland fill and wetland/stream buffer impacts. Please review WCC16.16.680 for additional information on County mitigation ratios and requirements.

The proposed Stormwater pond may not be considered for mitigation credit. Elimination of emergent wetland for the creation of a stormwater pond is an impact and could not be used for mitigation credit. Please provide additional information on the specifics of the storm water pond.

Can train tracks be elevated on a trestle to eliminate a large amount of wetland fill? This would help to reduce the nearly 3 million cu yd of fill and grade activity proposed.

Presumed and historic fish usage of Stream 1 and 2 which County code require 100’ buffers from such features .

Some of the wetland creation areas seem to be disconnected from a water and habitat prospective (see wetland creation areas B, C, H, L.F). Off-site or in-lieu mitigation may provide better mitigation oppurtunities.

Is creek coming out of proposed stormwater pond to be restored? As a first priority for off-site mitigation, consider meeting additional

wetland, stream, and buffer mitigation on neighboring properties located within the project’s watershed.

Consider meeting additional wetland, stream, and buffer mitigation needs in the Birch Bay/Terrell Creek watershed.

Select mitigation sites based on the recommendations in Chapter 7 of the "Birch Bay Watershed Characterization and Planning Pilot Study," ESA Adolfson 2007. Of particular interest for restoration is the Terrell Creek Lower Tributaries (http://www.co.whatcom.wa.us/pds/ naturalresources/specialprojects/pdf/Terrell_Ck_Lower_Trib_portfo lio.pdf).

Whatcom County has a GIS inventory of wetland and stream restoration potential that is a result of the Pilot Study. Contact Peter Gill for more information: [email protected] .wa.us.

Use the Birch Bay Watershed Habitat Mitigation Fund (pay fee-in-lieu-of mitigation) for buffer mitigation needs when it comes online in 2011.

Consider establishing a certified in-lieu-fee mitigation program for remaining impacts that cannot be mitigated onsite or in the Birch Bay Watershed.

A link to the Pilot Study and more information on the Habitat Mitigation Fund can be found here:

http://www.co.whatcom.wa.us/pds/ naturalresources/specialprojects/birchbaywatershed- actionplan.jsp

April 7, 2011

TO: Pacific International Terminals, Inc. MAP Team

FROM: Department of Ecology MAP Team members

RE: Ecology’s comments on Project Information Document and Preliminary Conceptual

Compensatory Mitigation Plan for Gateway Pacific Terminal submitted by Pacific

International Terminals, Inc. on February 28, 2011

Pacific International Terminals, Inc. submitted the “Project Information Document” (PID) to the

multi ‐agency permit (MAP) team on February 28, 2011. The following comments by Ecology staff are

in response to the PID and the Preliminary Conceptual Compensatory Mitigation Plan (Mitigation

Plan), and are not intended to be complete comments on the project. Ecology will submit more

extensive comments during the scoping phase of the SEPA/NEPA process and after review of the

Draft Supplemental EIS. In the meantime, these comments are provided to the project proponent as

early agency input.

The PID and Mitigation Plan reflect the great deal of time and energy Pacific International Terminals

has spent researching the various environmental elements, planning the project layout, and

deciphering mitigation options for the numerous potential natural resource impacts. We are

impressed with the level of effort put forth to date, but as part of the MAP Team, we are providing

you with our detailed feedback regarding wetlands, stormwater/water quality , and other issues so

that you can move forward more effectively with Ecology’s concerns in mind.

WETLANDS – Comments from Susan Meyer

Avoidance is always the first step in the sequencing process for mitigation. The project

proponent should consider all measures to avoid direct wetland impacts. There are several

options that could be considered, such as the cut and fill that is proposed to make the eastern

loop level. Instead of filling in the southern portion of the loop, please discuss whether the cut

material could be hauled offsite and an elevated trestle built at the south end. This would

eliminate a significant amount of direct fill. A second option would be to investigate whether the

small build ing shown in Wetland 10A could be moved to the south or to the other side of the

conveyor trestle. These are just examples that Pacific International Terminals should consider to

avoid impacts to wetlands; we are confident that other options exist.

It is unclear whether segments of wetlands located inside of the rail loops that are not proposed

for filling are part of the impacts calculation. Even though those remaining wetland segments

may not be directly impacted by fill, they will incur immediate indirect effects and probable

direct effects over time. All wetlands inside the rail loops must be included in the fill calculations

(that is, counted as an impact) so that their loss of functions can be adequately compensated.

Many of the proposed wetland creation areas are located in native upland (nonwetland) forests.

Ecology does not support this approach, and generally does not approve wetland creation in

native woody habitats regardless of the seral stage or species composition. Few if any wetland

creation projects have been approved by Ecology in native upland forested habitats. From a

habitat perspective, the forested wetland would not provide the functional lift to warrant

destruction of decades of growth of an upland forest. In fact, many of the forest habitats on the

project site are dominated by facultative species that can occur in wetlands and uplands. It does

not make ecological sense to cut the trees, excavate, and replant the same or similar species just

to get wetland mitigation credit.

Wetland mitigation must be sited in areas where a significant lift in most functions would occur.

This includes areas previously degraded through agricultural practices, dominated by non‐native

species , or areas that are hydrologically manipulated through ditching, draining, etc. Using a

watershed approach, one would evaluate the ecological processes in the basin, determine the

extent to which the processes have been altered (or in this case, will be altered), and identifying

where these processes can be restored or protected. In the end, the site or sites must be

sustainable without long term maintenance. More detailed guidance is available at Selecting

Wetland Mitigati on Sites Using a Watershed Approach , available at

http://www.ecy.wa.gov/biblio/090 6032.html . If sufficient adequate mitigation cannot be found

on Pacific International Terminal ’s property, then you will need to look off‐site within the basin

first, then off‐site out of basin.

We recommend you consider restoration of the ecological processes of Wetlands 12 and 13 as

functioning coastal lagoons. This area alone is not enough mitigation for the current proposed

impacts, but a fair amount of credit could be attained in this area.

Page 52 of the Mitigation Plan explains that the northwest portion of the site is in the Birch Bay

watershed, and that Wetland 1 is a headwater to a tributary to Terrell Creek. Stormwater runoff

from approximately 22 acres of this area would be diverted to the Gateway Pacific Terminal

watershed, and 7.37 acres of Wetland 1 is proposed for fill. Ecology recommends that wetland

mitigation options be pursued in the Terrell Creek watershed to offset the direct wetland impacts

and the diversion of water away from this watershed.

On Page 5 of the Mitigation Plan, it is explained that buffers are not shown or discussed in the

plan because there will be future revisions, and they will be addressed at that time. However,

this is a problematic approach when calculating mitigation acreage, since mitigation credit is not

given to buffers. Once the buffers are added to each mitigation area, the acreages available for

mitigation credit will change significantly. Therefore, the current acreage proposed for wetland

creation and enhancement is not accurate.

Wetland Creation is being proposed between the East and West Loops in the area of a new

alignment for Stream 1. This area will be surrounded by development including a rail line and

therefore would not provide the habitat protection needed. Also, all mitigation areas will be

required to be protected with a conservation easement and will not be available for future

development encroachment.

Approximately 305 acres of wetland are proposed for preservation credits on‐site. Many of

these areas are part of the avoidance measures required in the mitigation sequencing process, so

preservation credit does not apply to them. However, there may be some areas in the

watershed, both wetland and upland, that are important for maintaining watershed processes

that could be considered. This can be a topic for future discussion.

An In‐Lieu Fee program can be a good way to supplement on‐site and i n‐basin mitigation for a

project of this size. Since the County does not have a proposal to initiate this process currently,

you may want to have some discussions with them about planned but unfunded restoration

projects in the vicinity of your project. There are certain criteria to be met before this approach

could move forward, but it has been done in the past, and yielded a significant benefit to the

environment. When the time is right, we will be available to discuss this with you, the County

and other agencies.

Page 5‐74 of the PID discusses some types of temporary impacts associated with the project.

One such temporary impact is the trenching and placement of utility lines through wetlands.

The report states that once the lines are in place, soil will be replaced, and the corridor replanted

with trees and shrubs. In our experience, replanting woody vegetation in utility corridors is not

allowed or is strongly discouraged due to the possibility of root growth interfering with or

damaging the utility casing. Please provide written confirmation from the utility company that

replanting is possible in these areas. Also, the utility lines may need periodic maintenance

requiring vegetation removal.

Trenching through wetlands for utility placement can also disturb the natural flowpath of

groundwater within the soil column in the wetland, which can in turn, cut off the water to other

downslope wetlands. Since many of the on‐site wetlands appear to be slope wetlands, this is

especially important to acknowledge. Often, a utility company will place a bed of gravel in the

bottom of the trench, which acts as a French drain, dewatering areas both above and below the

trench. Trench plugs can often prevent the wetland draining, but they need to be placed at

regular intervals, and designed appropriately. We recommend that the utility trenches be

designed to avoid the potential dewatering/drain ing of wetlands.

The amphibian study referenced in the Mitigation Plan was completed about 17 years ago. Since

vegetation characteristics have likely changed in the forested areas, a new amphibian study is

likely warranted.

Please provide a figure on 11x17 paper (minimum) showing the wetlands and their numbers, a

clear depiction of the development footprint, and all of the mitigation areas proposed.

WETLANDS/STORMWAT ER – comments from Susan Meyer

Although there are no specifics in the Mitigation Plan, it appears that the large stormwater pond

proposed inside of the eastern loop would be excavated within Wetland 3, and that it is part of

the wetland mitigation proposal. This approach to mitigation is not appropriate for the following

reasons:

Most stormwater ponds need to be maintained on a regular basis, which requires excavating soil

and accumulated bottom sediments and thus, much of the vegetation growing in it. In addition,

these ponds, especially those used for treatment, receive pollutants via stormwater runoff,

which can overwhelm the wetland’s ability to perform certain functions. As a result, Ecology

considers stormwater ponds in wetlands to be direct wetland impacts and they do not receive

mitigation credit. In some circumstances, ponds with multiple cells have been given partial credit

as part of a comprehensive mitigation package where only one of the cells is maintained and the

primary functional loss was water quality. A 36‐acre pond as the one proposed is more of an

open water lake and would not likely receive mitigation credit. The acreage of the pond inside

the wetland boundaries will need to be added to the wetland impact calculation.

Several of the wetland creation areas shown on Figure 7 in the Mitigation Plan are directly

adjacent to the proposed rail line or other development. The Mitigation Plan says that these

areas were chosen, in part, to receive stormwater from the large pond in the Eastern Loop for

final treatment. This is not appropriate for the following reasons:

1. These areas need buffers adjacent to the development footprint. There appears to be no

room for buffers since some of the mitigation areas are so small.

2. The proximity to the development footprint reduces the habitat value of the mitigation

significantly, which is one of the primary functions being lost by the project wetlands,

according to the functions description in the Mitigation Plan (pages 33, 34, and 38).

3. The proximity of these mitigation areas to the rail tracks, which will contain uncovered

coal train cars, poses a risk of impacting the mitigation wetlands by continual coating of

coal dust. Not only can this affect the vegetation growth, but the overall water quality in

the wetland.

4. The stormwater plan must fully address the treatment and source control of all runoff

being generated by the project. Although wetland mitigation areas can receive treated

and detained stormwater, it must meet state water quality standards before being

conveyed to any wetland areas, so that the beneficial uses of these wetlands will not be

degraded, as stated in the Antidegradation Policy (WAC 173 ‐201A ‐070) . Also, the

Stormwater Manual for Western Washington (Ecology 2005) , Vo lume I, Appendix D, Page

D‐10 instructs the user that if a wetland is to be used for detention or treatment, it must

be mitigated.

The explanation in the Mitigation Plan that the filtration capacity of the site after mitigation will

improve water quality isn’t supported. Although there is currently some degree of pollutant

runoff from grazing cattle, there is little need for increased filtration absent future pollutants

generated by the project.

The Credit/Debit tool for assessing mitigation needs has been drafted and is out for a year of

testing. Trainings for this method are starting to be scheduled, and we will apply it to this

project in the near future.

STORMWATER/WATER QUALITY – Comments from Steve Hood

No proposed contours are shown on Figures 4‐1 and 4‐4, but the text indicates the loops will be

built on level ground. In some places the text indicates fill only (page 4‐4 “engineered

embankment”), and other places (page 4‐63 “cut and fill are balanced”) it indicates balanced cut

and fill. Regardless , the east loop has a difference in elevation of 180 feet at the junction to 96

feet at the lowest point. Given that there cannot be a 42‐foot cut at the junction, it is difficult to

determine how either balance cut or fill only can be accommodated on the site. Similarly , the

west loop has a low point of 76 feet and is 110 feet where it clears the east loop. Proposed

contours showing fill and cut catch points are necessary to evaluate the extent of ground

disturbance.

The proposed stormwater drainage plan in Figure 4‐15 does not reflect major ground surface

changes necessary to create the level tracks described in the text. In addition, the figure does

not show the 36‐acre pond mentioned in the text, which is a significant feature of the

stormwater plan.

Detention of 10 acre‐feet of water for the 36‐acre stormwater pond, as discussed on Page 4‐43,

will require communication with Dam Safety in Ecology’s Water Resources Program to determine

if a permit is needed .

Figure 1‐2 does not appear to show full construction. “Operational Phasing” is discussed briefly

on Page 4‐49 , and indicates that additional tracks around both loops are planned.

There is an indication on Pages 4‐46 and 5‐176 for a large On‐Site Septic System. This will require

coordination with State Department of Health. There is no discussion about whether there is the

possibility to enter into an agreement with Birch Bay Water and Sewer District, similar to the way

BP operates, to provide sewage service.

On Page 4‐64, there is no discussion regarding corrosion protection or anti fouling for the pilings

under the wharf and trestle. Therefore, these impacts cannot be evaluated.

On Page 5‐67 cattle grazing in ditches is mentioned. These ditches are waters of the state, and if

cattle have permanent access to water in ditches, a water quality violation is likely occurring. We

depend on the Whatcom County Critical Areas Ordinance to ensure cows do not have

unrestricted access to flowing water. Regardless of this project’s status, grazing animals must be

fenced away from any flowing water a sufficient distance to ensure that stormwater will not

carry manure into it.

Page 5‐136 – Please provide wind data and metadata. The data published by NOAA at buoy

station CHYW1 shows different patterns. These data will be significant if a marine discharge is

planned so that a mixing zone can be modeled.

STORMWATER/PERMI TTING –Comments from Kurt Baumgarten

Section 4.3.6 of the PID‐ Stormwater Management Systems ‐ Construction and Industrial

stormwater will have to be managed via Section 402 of the Federal Clean Water Act under the State NPDES Permitting system. This will involve the following Permits:

1. An NPDES Construction Stormwater General Permit with additional sampling requirements

OR an NPDES Construction Stormwater Individual Permit with effluent limits.

2. An NPDES Industrial Stormwater General Permit with additional sampling requirements OR

an NPDES Industrial Stormwater Individual Permit with effluent limits.

The current PID lacks sufficient information to make a final determination at this time regarding

the exact NPDES Stormwater Permits required for both the construction and industrial stormwater discharges proposed. If individual Permits are required , the associated Best

Management Practices would have to be designed to meet any numeric effluent limits assigned

by the Permits. For example:

The PID does not identify proposed discharge points for stormwater. Any discharge points to surface or marine surface waters need to be plainly identified. Depending upon the location and nature of the proposed discharge, a mixing zone study may need to be completed (and wind

data, as specified above would be needed) .

Page 4‐32 of the PID states: The stormwater management system would be an integral part of the civil and geotechnical

design of the Terminal, and would be developed pursuant to requirements of the Stormwater Manual for Western Washington (Ecology 2005). A feasibility study and conceptual design for a

stormwater management system have been completed. A preliminary conceptual stormwater plan is presented in Figure 4‐15. The final design and specifications for the stormwate r management system would be completed as part of the facility design, environmental review,

and NPDES permitting processes.

Page 4 ‐44 states: “Final design criteria will be established during the design and environmental review process.”

Ecology needs this information early on to help guide the applicant through the permitting process.

The PID does not reference disposal plans for any process water generated during unloading or maintenance activities. This may include water sprayed from misters used to control fugitive

dust. Process water must be managed separately from stormwater. Process water must be treated and discharged in accordance with a State Waste Discharge Permit unless treated and

discharged to surface water. An NPDES Permit would be required for a surface water discharge. WATER QUALITY/PERMITTI NG – Comments from Loree’ Randall

PID Page Location Issue or Concern Fix, Comment orQuestion

2‐2 Table 2‐1 line 12

& 13

General NPDES Permits vs

Individual

The timing of the 401 and/or CZM

decision could be affected if

Ecology determines that the

Terminal Project requires an

individual NPDES permit. Ecology

cannot issue the 401 until the

individual permit is issued.

2‐2 Table 2‐1 line 11 For CZM only list Wharf &

Trestle

Need to change to “All

components”.

2‐3 3rd paragraph Refers to the wharf and

trestle configuration that was

permitted.

Will other configurations be looked

at during the NEPA/SEPA process?

If so what are they?

2‐4 2.1.2 last Implies that the JARPA that Need to make sure that it is clear

sentence of 2nd

paragraph

was filed with the Corps and

other agencies for action.

that while Ecology and other

agencies received the JARPA to

review, it does not trigger the

permit process for Ecology.

2‐4 2.1.2 2nd to the

last paragraph

Just want to clarify on what the role

of the MAP Team will be with

regards to the BNSF Custer Spur

improvements, and how much of

the environmental analysis will be

included in this document and

other studies regarding the Custer

Spur.

Page Location Issue or Concern Fix, Comment orQuestion

2‐6 2.1.5 first bullet. Again, to make it clear what the

project is. I would suggest “Address

environmental regulatory and

permit issues specific to the

Terminal project”. May want to

consider adding “Terminal”

throughout the document if the

Custer Spur is going to be included.

2‐6 2.1.5 fifth bullet. Not sure what this bullet means?

4‐4 4.3.1.1 Not a lot of details in this

document about how things

are going to be constructed

maintained and/or operated.

Maybe it is in another document,

but we will need to know:

1. How deep the dumper pit will

be?

2. How will the dumper pit be

constructed?

3. Are there concerns with

ground water?

4. When will the second

unloading station be built in the

east loop?

5. What does it entail to modify

the unloading station?

4‐8 4.3.2 Not a lot of details in this

document about how things

are going to be constructed,

maintained and/or operated.

Same as above, plus:

How will the conveyors be cleaned

out?

4‐21 4.3.4.1 When will the third enclosed

conveyor line be construction and

full build ‐out be considered?

Figure

No. 4‐7

Drawing has a water

treatment plant.

What is the water treatment plant

for?

Figure

No. 4‐9

Drawing shows an area to be

excavated.

Where is the excavation in relation

to the water and/or bluff?

4‐31 4.3.5 If the Custer Spur is relying on these

documents we need more detailed

information.


4‐32 4.3.6 last

paragraph,

second sentence

Feasibility study and

conceptual design for a

stormwater management

system have been completed.

Is this available for the MAP Team

somewhere?

4‐45 4.3.6.4 last

sentence

Untreated stormwater from

the trestle and wharf could

contain pollutants

What are the areas that would

drain into the water? Any idea of

the volume. If small why not just

send it to the treatment system to

ensure that no pollutants get

discharged.

4‐46 4.3.8.1 Size of the septic fields What is the expect amount of

waste that will be discharged to the

septic fields? This is needed to

determine who will be permitting ‐

Local Health, State Health, or

Ecology.

4‐46 4.3.8.1 How will sanitary sewage from the

washroom on the wharf be

treated?

4‐46 How will the waste from the vessels

be handled while they are docked?

4‐61 4.5.7 Ecology will need to see a

conceptual emergency response

plan prior to issuing the 401 and/or

CZM .

4‐61 & 4‐

62

4.5.7.1 Ecology will need to see a

conceptual SPCC Plan prior to

issuing the 401 and/or CZM .

4‐63 4.6.2 Refers to the use of concrete

pumps and booms.

How much fresh concrete is going

to be required? Where is the

concrete coming from? How is it

getting to the site?

4‐65 4.6.4 Ecology will need to see the

conceptual erosion and sediment

control plan prior to issuing the401

and/or CZM .

5‐55 5.3.4.6 Ecology will need to see a

conceptual Operations plan prior to

issuing the401 and/or CZM .


5‐57 5.4.1.2 Any physical changes (culverts,

rerouting) to Stream 1 and/or

Stream 2 need to be identified

along with what and how work in

those locations will occur.

5‐71 Table 5‐14 Table is nice but may needmore

information on how things are

going to be constructed and

maintained.

5‐176 5.13.1.3 Where will the treated sewage for

the wharf be hauled off to?

SEPA / GREENHOUSE GASES – Comments from Alice Kelly

Section 5.7.2.3, Energy and Climate Change:

Timing of emissions analysis : The project proponent states their intention to track emissions of

greenhouse gases on an annual basis as part of the company’s commitment to sustainable business

practices, and that the emissions estimate will be prepared following final design and permitting.

Ecology and other agencies will need emissions estimates to be provided to decision makers during

the SEPA/NEPA environmental review process, not after permitting is complete. SEPA requires

disclosure of impacts to the environment during the environmental review phase so that agencies

and decision makers have a complete accounting of the impacts before decisions are made.

Additionally, an accurate estimate is needed so that appropriate mitigation, if needed, can be

identified .

Scope of Emissions Analysis : The project proponent states its intention to limit the emissions analysis

to scope 1 and 2 emissions within the project boundaries. However, SEPA regulations require that a

lead agency consider all impacts, not just those within its jurisdiction, including local or state

boundaries (WAC 197 ‐11‐060(4)(b). Impacts to be analyzed include direct, indirect, and cumulative,

as well as short ‐term and long‐term. In addition to scope 1 and 2 emissions, the analysis should

include scope 3 emissions that are caused by the project, regardless of whether those emissions

occur within project boundaries. For example, the transportation impacts analysis should include

scope 3 emissions emitted during transportation of commodities to and from the terminal to the

extent that those emissions are new (i.e., not previously in exi stence).

SHORELINES / OTHER – Comments from Barry Wenger

Project Area Ownership – It appears the area east of Powder Plant Road and inland from Gulf Road

containing wetlands 13A ‐G will be used for mitigation. A description of exactly what this area will be

used for should be included.

Table 2‐1 should list a Shoreline Substantial Development Permit Revision for proposed changes to

the project. Section 2.1.1.3 states that “No changes to the Shoreline Substantial Development

Permit for the wharf and trestle are required”; however, this issue has not been resolved by the

Settlement Agreement parties. Until it is resolved, this sentence needs to be deleted.

Section 2.1.1.2 should describe the existing adjacent Cherry Point Industrial Park project, including

pier and trestle that has an existing, approved shoreline permit modified by a Settlement Agreement.

Section 4.3.5 Rail Access – This section states, “No interdependent projects have been identified on

the BNSF Railway’s mainline—Bellingham Subdivi sion, or any other portion of BNSF Rail’s

infrastructure.” Due to the potential impacts to the communities of Bellingham and Ferndale, and to

passenger rail traffic along the coast route from Mt. Vernon to Vancouver, B.C., an alternative freight

rail route should be evaluated following State Highway 9 around the north edge of Lynden to the

Custer RR.

Section 4.3.6 Stormwater Management Systems – The 36‐acre pond described in this section may

qualify as a “shoreline of the state” under the jurisdiction of the Shoreline Management Act

depending on the design and environmental functions. The proposed 100 ‐ft buffer around the pond

appears consistent with the county’s Shoreline Master Program if the pond is determined to be an

SMA “lake” over 20 surface acres.

Section 4.3.6.4 Stormwater Management Systems – Access Trestle and Wharf – This section states,

“It is anticipated that stormwater from other portions of the access trestle and wharf that are not

exposed to potential pollutants could be drained to the adjacent upland or into the water.” Areas

that are proposed to drain untreated stormwater to the marine water need to be specifically

identified.

Section 4.5.5.2 Dust Control at Conveyors and Transfer Points – It is not clear from Figure 4‐18

exactly how the return water from the fogging system is collected, treated and re‐used, if that is the

proposal for the trestle/wharf. A short description of the fate of the used dust‐suppression water

and any anti‐ leakage mechanisms is needed. In addition, a discussion of methods to control

uncovered rail car generated dust, such as from coal, needs to be included.

Section 5, Table 5‐1 lists “Geotechnical (Marine and Upland)” and “Hydrology” but it isn’t specifically

addressing groundwater movement. Due to the potential importance of groundwater influences on

the nearshore environment, groundwater flow characteristics need to be determined, proposed

alterations identified, and potential groundwater pollution prevention measures established.

Section 5.3.1.4 State Priority Habitats and Species – This section incorrectly states, “Pacific herring at

Cherry Point (Cherry Point herring) spawn from April to mid ‐June, with peak spawning activity during

the first or second weeks of May.” Established long‐term WDFW records document that the Cherry

Point herring usually start spawning near the end of March and finish in mid ‐June, with the peak

season from about April 10 to May 20. Although this section identifies hake and seals as primary

predators on this herring stock, it should also be noted that herring comprise approximately 60

percent of the Chinook salmon diet, an ESA ‐threatened species in the Nooksack River.

Section 5.3.3.1 Marine Physical Processes and Bathymetry – With the latest frequency and size of

vesse ls projected to be berthed at the wharf after full build‐out, an updated analysis and description

of wave attenuation with all berths occupied (worst case scenario) should be provided in addition to

the currently‐described “piling ‐only” evaluation (best case scenario). We note that the out‐dated

FEIS does contain some information on this subject.

Section 5.3.3.2 Marine Biological Communities – The shading study that was conducted in 1992 ‐3

was based on the current N/S pier orientation. If the ultimate build ‐out of three conveyors within an

enclosed structure on the pier is proposed to be different than what was evaluated in the original

layout, an updated shade study will need to be prepared. In any case, a clear depiction of the

ultimate build ‐out conveyor enclosure structure needs to be provided.

Section 5.3.4 Proposed Design Features Intended to Reduce Impacts – Mitigation being referenced

and relied upon in the shoreline Settlement Agreement should be identified by topic and clearly

described.

5.3.4.4 Marine Biological Communities ‐ This section states, “As compensation for wetland impacts

and general impacts to the backshore community, a coastal lagoon habitat would be constructed

east of Gulf Road, adjacent to the existing coastal lagoon.” The details of this positive approach

should be provided especially the culvert design connecting the east and west wetlands straddling

Powder Point Road. The water access across the beach and up the road at this location is an

important long‐term barge off‐ loading site for oversized refinery and other very large heavy,

industrial equipment. Removal of the old beach conveyor structure is claime d to reduce 870 square

feet of shading, however, it is not demonstrated that the high, metal beam structure actually creates

that amount of shading. A more accurate assessment should be provided.

5.6.2.3 Potential Effects on Rail Transportation – The rail transportation effects during operation (full

build ‐out) need to include the effects of the 18 trains a day on the surface transportation systems of

nearby Ferndale and Bellingham. The cumulative effect of the added freight rail traffic should also be

analyzed in conjunction with the existing and projected other freight and passenger rail service.

5.9.4.2 Commercial Fishing and Tourism ‐ This section states as a mitigation measure, “Schedule

construction to avoid herring spawning activities (limit construction to spring)”. This appears to be

an error as the spring is the herring spawning season for the Cherry Point stock.

5.15.1 Noise ‐ This section states, “Operation‐related noise impacts would occur from trucks at the

terminal, railroad traffic, ships, conveyors, and material loading and handling. These noise impacts

would also be audible to surrounding industrial and agricultural users but not residences. Additional

rail traffic on the rail main line would increase the frequency of train noise i n the vicinity (Whatcom

County 1996)”. Although there are relatively few residences adjacent to the project site, the

residences in Ferndale and Bellingham will be significant ly affected by the sound of the increased

train traffic (18 trains a day) and the attendant horn blasts. A discussion of this effect should be

included with potential mitigation concepts.

5.15.3 Aesthetics ‐ This section states, ”The trestle, wharf, and ships accessing the wharf would be

visible from the water to a distance of approximately 1 mile”. This statement appears not to be

based on factual information such as a comparison to the visibility of the existing industrial piers

which are considerably smaller. A more realistic description based on a visual analysis should be

provided.

From: Arden LandryTo: Tyler SchroederDate: 6/12/2012 8:49 AMSubject: Re: Fwd: GPT Contracts

Tyler,These are on Jack's desk and will be signed today.




Thanks,

Tyler






Thanks,

Tyler

Tyler R. Schroeder

Planning ManagerPhone: (360) 676-6907 ext. 50202Fax: (360)738-2525Email: [email protected] Address: Whatcom County Planning and Development Services5280 Northwest Dr. Bellingham, WA 98225

From: Stephanie DrakeTo: Tyler SchroederDate: 6/12/2012 8:42 AMSubject: Notice to ProceedAttachments: notice-to-proceed-ch2mhill.docx

I would figure once you edit & sign, I can scan & email this with a scanned copy of the contract (once we get that from Arden/Jack). I will then put both in the mail to them.

S


WHATCOM COUNTY J.E. “Sam” RyanPlanning & Development Services Director5280 Northwest Drive Bellingham, WA 98226-9097 360-676-6907, TTY 800-833-6384 360-738-2525 Fax

June 12, 2012

Mr. Dave SturtevantMs. Jodi KetelsenCH2M HILL1100 112th Ave. NE, Suite 400Bellevue, WA 98004

RE: Notice to Proceed (Contract No. 201205028): Contract between Whatcom County and CH2M Hill for preparation of an EIS Development to comply with NEPA and SEPA regarding the Gateway Pacific Terminal and BNSF Custer Spur Modification Project.

Dear Dave Sturtevant and Jodi Ketelsen:

Attached please find one fully executed original contract for the above-referenced project. This letter serves as your Notice to Proceed. We will be mailing you these documents as well.

Please call me at (360) 676-6907 if you have any questions or concerns regarding the attached contracts.

Sincerely,

Tyler SchroederCurrent Planning Manager/SEPA Official

From: Ari Steinberg <[email protected]>To: "Tyler Schroeder ([email protected])" <[email protected]: 6/12/2012Time: 8:00 AM - 8:30 AMSubject: PIT Reimbursement ContractPlace: Call-in Number: 1-866-692-4538, Passcode: 2892921#Attachments: rfc2445.ics

Conference call being shifted to 8:00 am tomorrow. Skip and I will brief those who cannot attend due to the last minute change.

From: "Kalb, F E Skip" <[email protected]>To: "'[email protected]'" <[email protected]>, "'[email protected]: "'[email protected]'" <[email protected]>Date: 6/11/2012 5:41 PMSubject: Re: GPT Reimbursement Contract Call

I'm good for 8am Pacific tomorrow.--------------------------Sent from my BlackBerry Wireless Handheld

----- Original Message -----From: Tyler Schroeder [mailto:[email protected]]Sent: Monday, June 11, 2012 06:16 PMTo: Kalb, F E Skip; BillLynn <[email protected]>; Jim Lynch <[email protected]>; Ari Steinberg <[email protected]>Cc: Royce Buckingham <[email protected]>Subject: Re: GPT Reimbursement Contract Call

8 am works best for me. I am busy from 10:30 to noon. Please confirm the time when decided.

Thanks,

Tyler


>>> Ari Steinberg <[email protected]> 6/11/2012 3:35 PM >>>Would it be possible to change the time of tomorrow's conference call from 9:00 am to another time? 8:00 am, and any time after 10:00 work for me. I apologize for the last minute request.

Ari

From: "Kalb, F E Skip" <[email protected]>To: Tyler Schroeder <[email protected]>Date: 6/11/2012 4:16 PMSubject: Out of Office: GPT Reimbursement Contract Call

I will be out of the office until June 18th.If you have an urgent matter, please feel free to call my cell @(817)271-3057.

From: Mark BurnfieldTo: Linda Nielsen; Tyler SchroederCC: Royce Buckingham; Sam RyanDate: 6/11/2012 3:42 PMSubject: Re: Fwd: Public Records Request

Tyler, It would be useful to see the original email requesting the documents. Mark

>>> Tyler Schroeder 6/11/2012 1:50 PM >>>Mark and Linda,

Do I need Mr. Ehrlichman to fill out a PDR form? Should I handle this request or should I forward it on to you? Please call to discuss at 50202 or email back.

Thanks,

Tyler



Thanks for your message acknowledging no response to my email requestingBNSF and SSA/PIT documentation.

I asked for two things:

1. All documents evidencing communications of any kind between theCounty and BNSF regarding the Custer Spur expansion or Gateway PacificTerminal during the past two years. Official minutes from the MAP Teamcoordinators can be excluded. I am requesting County notes of meetings,conversations, etc., as part of this request.

2. All documents evidencing whether Pacific International Terminals,SSA Marine or any of their agents or contractors have done any further workof any kind on any of the Gateway Pacific Terminal site, since the Countyissued its additional conditions on the retroactive Land Disturbance Permitin September 2011, prohibiting further work until archeological agreementsand inventories on the 9 acre disturbance were finalized. In short, havethey done any new grading or boring since the September 2011 County lettermodifying the conditions to the retroactive Land Disturbance Permit? If so,please provide copies of the documentation.

Note, I wasn't aware and don't believe the Public Records Act requires me touse a form.

Thank you for your response in the next five business days as required. Iwill then be hiring legal counsel to represent me or to make these requestsand to pursue them vigorously. After my original email and severalvoicemails and emails, I don't have any more time to wait for these.

Thank you.

Tom Ehrlchman

From: Ari Steinberg <[email protected]>To: "Tyler Schroeder ([email protected])" <[email protected]: 6/11/2012 3:38 PMSubject: GPT Reimbursement Contract Call

Would it be possible to change the time of tomorrow's conference call from 9:00 am to another time? 8:00 am, and any time after 10:00 work for me. I apologize for the last minute request.

Ari

From: Arden LandryTo: [email protected]: 6/11/2012 1:43 PMSubject: Re: GPT Contracts (Out of Office - June 11)

Hello,

I will be out of the office on Monday, June 11. If you need assistance please contact Linda Kasper at 360 676 6717 x 50119 or [email protected].

Otherwise, I'll respond to your email on Tuesday. Best wishes,

Arden Landry>>> Tschroed 06/11/12 13:43 >>>

Arden,




Thanks,

Tyler


From: Amy KeenanTo: Tyler SchroederDate: 6/11/2012 1:26 PMSubject: Fwd: Gateway Pacific Terminal EIS/ScopingAttachments: Fwd: Gateway Pacific Terminal EIS/Scoping

Amy Keenan, AICP Senior PlannerWhatcom CountyPlanning and Development ServicesNorthwest Annex, Suite B5280 Northwest Drive(360) 676-6907

From: PDSTo: Amy KeenanDate: 6/11/2012 1:07 PMSubject: Fwd: Gateway Pacific Terminal EIS/ScopingAttachments: Gateway Pacific Terminal EIS/Scoping

Included as party of record.

From: Kimberly Lehmberg <[email protected]>To: "[email protected]" <[email protected]>, "[email protected]" <[email protected]: Rachael Markle <[email protected]>Date: 6/11/2012 10:14 AMSubject: Gateway Pacific Terminal EIS/Scoping

Hello;

As a jurisdiction that will be affected by the train traffic associated with the Gateway Pacific Terminal project, the City of Shoreline would like to be notified when the EIS scoping and public comment period begins. I will be the initial point of contact. Thank you.

Regards,

Kim LehmbergAssociate Planner17500 Midvale Ave NShoreline, WA 98133206-801-2552

please help us to save resources and print only when necessary

From: "Tom Ehrlichman" <[email protected]>To: <[email protected]>CC: "Royce Buckingham" <[email protected]>, <[email protected]: 6/11/2012 12:35 PMSubject: Public Records Request

Tyler,




2. All documents evidencing whether Pacific International Terminals,SSA Marine or any of their agents or contractors have done any further workof any kind on any of the Gateway Pacific Terminal site, since the Countyissued its additional conditions on the retroactive Land Disturbance Permitin September 2011, prohibiting further work until archeological agreementsand inventories on the 9 acre disturbance were finalized. In short, havethey done any new grading or boring since the September 2011 County lettermodifying the conditions to the retroactive Land Disturbance Permit? If so,please provide copies of the documentation.



Thank you.

Tom Ehrlchman

From: Tyler SchroederTo: [email protected]: [email protected]: 6/15/2012 2:49 PMSubject: Re: Key stakeholder group for Pacific International Terminals' GatewayPacific Terminal (GPT) EIS process

Matt,

Thank you for the request and we will be in touch in the near future on the "stakeholder" list.

Tyler -----Original Message----- From: Matt Krogh <[email protected]> To: Schroeder, Tyler <[email protected]> Cc: Hoyer, Crina <[email protected]> Cc: First, Lee <[email protected]> Cc: Taylor, Lindsay <[email protected]> Cc: Steffensen, Wendy <[email protected]> Sent: 6/15/2012 2:36:26 PM Subject: Key stakeholder group for Pacific International Terminals' GatewayPacific Terminal (GPT) EIS process Dear Mr. Schroeder, I am writing to you on behalf of RE Sources' thousands of members and participants in North Sound Baykeeper programs to request participation in any and all stakeholder groups for the GPT permitting process as identified in the EIS scoping contract with CH2M Hill, as well as in any other contracts and programs related to the proposed development of PIT's proposed new bulk commodity export terminal at Cherry Point. Further, I respectfully request that we be added to any notification lists coordinated by Whatcom County, Whatcom County PDS, and the other agencies (including but not limited to Washington Department of Ecology and the US Army Corps of Engineers) associated with the GPT project. Specific to the Scope of Work for CH2M Hill's contract with Whatcom County (#201205029), I request that RE Sources by identified as a "key stakeholder" as defined under section 2.2 Public and Agency Involvement Strategy. As you know, RE Sources and our members have been active in efforts to protect the Cherry Point reach since before the establishment of the Aquatic Reserve. As an educational nonprofit, we have participated in the public advisory group that advised the Department of Natural Resources on creation of the Cherry Point Aquatic Reserve management plan. We also work to improve pollution controls from existing industries at Cherry Point under the National Pollution Discharge Elimination System. It is in the context of this work to protect Cherry Point that RE Sources has been actively involved in ensuring that the environmental impact assessment expected to be performed for the GPT proposal. We have worked to ensure that the public is informed about critical decision making points, public involvement opportunities, and training opportunities to ensure that democratic processes are utilized as guaranteed under both our state and

national constitutions. Thank you for your ongoing efforts to ensure that environmental impact assessment of the GPT proposal is as open, transparent, and accessible to the public as possible. Regards, Matt Krogh -- Matt Krogh, North Sound Baykeeper RE Sources for Sustainable Communities 2309 Meridian St. Bellingham, WA 98225 http://www.re-sources.org 360 733-8307 (office) 360 820-2938 (cell) Check out the North Sound Baykeeper team blog<http://northsoundbaykeeper.blogspot.com> Or join us on Facebook<http://www.facebook.com/pages/North-Sound-Baykeeper/145605798786607>

From: Tyler SchroederTo: [email protected],[email protected],[email protected]: [email protected],[email protected],[email protected]: 6/15/2012 10:24 AMSubject: Re: GPT Kick-off Meeting - June 20th

Ari and Skip,

I would like to add one more question to be incorporated into the presentation;

Provide an understanding about the how this proposal relates or does not relate to the previous approved site development proposal.

Thanks,

Tyler

Tyler R. SchroederPlanning ManagerPhone: (360) 676-6907 ext. 50202Fax: (360)738-2525Email: [email protected] Address: Whatcom County Planning and Development Services5280 Northwest Dr. Bellingham, WA 98225>>> Tyler Schroeder 06/15/12 10:14 AM >>>Ari and Skip, The Agencies and the 3rd party consultant would like to request your presence at the initial kick-off meeting to provide the team with a common understanding of the proposed application, field visit of the site (both the uplands of the proposed dry bulk facility and the BNSF Custer Spur modification areas,) and an update of the studies underdevelopment. We request that you arrive at 1pm on Wednesday. The meeting will be at the "Groucho" Conference room at the Bellingham Ecology Office, at 1440 10th Street. 3-4 people from your respective companies should work for the meeting. We will provide up to 1 hour for your presentation of the proposal and an overview of what you’d like to show the team during the site visit. We will have 2 vans to hold most of the attendants to visit the site. We would like the tour points identified and the major points of interest defined at the meeting room prior to the visit. Please provide a presentation using the following elements:1. Large aerial map outlining the property (north up) to scale. Ideally, 3X4 foot or larger.2. Presentation of the components of the proposal (PPT or handouts (20 copies)). The presentation should, to the extent possible, cover basic details of the proposed application, construction overview, and operations overview. Please provide any details that would be important to the analysis – updates on the phased development, loads anticipated, trains, vessel movements, etc. Please provide information on any connected actions under consideration –additional property acquisition or other possible rail improvements, etc.3. 20 sets of 11X17 of the aerials of the project drawing – a simplified drawing over an aerial for all pieces of the application (Spur, Dry bulk and port pier).4. Please provide a list of all studies currently under development and a schedule for completion. Please incorporate answers to the following questions for the group:1. Why this site?2. What are the drivers for this project?

3. What is the timeline for the proposed project – for construction, operational phases. Please let me know if you have any other questions on the meeting.

Thanks,

Tyler


From: Tyler SchroederTo: [email protected]: 6/15/2012 10:21 AMSubject: GPT - Kick-off Meeting - June 20th

Greg,

We are scheduling a Kick-off meeting for the GPT EIS preparation. This meeting will be with the co-lead agencies and the consultant. The purpose is to get to know everyone and to provide some up front direction on main point of the EIS.

I would like to see if you are available for the morning of Wednesday, June 20th. I believe the meeting will be from 9 am to 1 and then there will be a site visit. Jodi and I think your participation will be helpful, especially when we break out in small groups (one topic will be the HIA).

I will forward you on the agenda as soon as we finalize it. Please let me know you availability and I look forward to the meeting.

Thanks,

Tyler


From: Tyler SchroederTo: [email protected],[email protected]: [email protected],[email protected],[email protected]: 6/15/2012 10:14 AMSubject: GPT Kick-off Meeting - June 20th

Ari and Skip, The Agencies and the 3rd party consultant would like to request your presence at the initial kick-off meeting to provide the team with a common understanding of the proposed application, field visit of the site (both the uplands of the proposed dry bulk facility and the BNSF Custer Spur modification areas,) and an update of the studies underdevelopment. We request that you arrive at 1pm on Wednesday. The meeting will be at the "Groucho" Conference room at the Bellingham Ecology Office, at 1440 10th Street. 3-4 people from your respective companies should work for the meeting. We will provide up to 1 hour for your presentation of the proposal and an overview of what you’d like to show the team during the site visit. We will have 2 vans to hold most of the attendants to visit the site. We would like the tour points identified and the major points of interest defined at the meeting room prior to the visit. Please provide a presentation using the following elements:1. Large aerial map outlining the property (north up) to scale. Ideally, 3X4 foot or larger.2. Presentation of the components of the proposal (PPT or handouts (20 copies)). The presentation should, to the extent possible, cover basic details of the proposed application, construction overview, and operations overview. Please provide any details that would be important to the analysis – updates on the phased development, loads anticipated, trains, vessel movements, etc. Please provide information on any connected actions under consideration –additional property acquisition or other possible rail improvements, etc.3. 20 sets of 11X17 of the aerials of the project drawing – a simplified drawing over an aerial for all pieces of the application (Spur, Dry bulk and port pier).4. Please provide a list of all studies currently under development and a schedule for completion. Please incorporate answers to the following questions for the group:1. Why this site?2. What are the drivers for this project?3. What is the timeline for the proposed project – for construction, operational phases. Please let me know if you have any other questions on the meeting.

Thanks,

Tyler


From: Tyler SchroederTo: Linda NielsenCC: Stephanie DrakeDate: 6/14/2012 11:48 AMSubject: Re: PDR2012-122 & PDR2012-123

Linda,

PDS has no documents evidencing communications with BNSF regarding the Custer Spur expansion or Gateway Pacific Terminal. The only documents that PDS have with BNSF are in regards to the contracts for reimbursement.

Thanks,

Tyler


From: Tyler SchroederTo: Linda NielsenCC: Stephanie DrakeDate: 6/14/2012 11:43 AMSubject: Re: PDR2012-122 & PDR2012-123Attachments: FW: GPT sediment sampling Right of Entry; Re: GPT Code Enforcement Action;

GPT - Heads up on some activity next week; RE: GPT Code Enforcement Action; RE: GPT Code Enforcement Action

Linda,

Attached are the documents, in response to PDR2012-00123, that PDS has since the County issued the retroactive LDP in September 2011.

Thanks,

Tyler



From: "Strong, Cliff" <[email protected]>To: [email protected]: 11/3/2011 12:35 PMSubject: FW: GPT sediment sampling Right of Entry

Tyler, please see the request below, asking for your approval to do some more marine sediment testing under the existing Shoreline Permit.

Thanks,





-----Original Message-----From: Gray, MelindaSent: Thursday, November 03, 2011 12:27 PMTo: Strong, CliffSubject: RE: Fwd: sediment sampling Right of Entry

Hi Cliff,

We are requesting a Right of Entry from Whatcom County for the marine geotechnical work similar to what we requested for the sediment investigation. We would like to conduct the work under the existing shoreline permit like we did last time. Can you make this happen?

We need Tyler to e-mail Terry Carten at DNR, and say that we can conduct the marine geotechnical investigation under the existing shoreline permit. I pasted the request from DNR below:

Has a Whatcom County shoreline permit been issued for the geotech work? This is likely the final permit that DNR will need to consider issuing a ROE for the geotech work......

Thanks!

-----Original Message-----From: Strong, CliffSent: Wednesday, June 29, 2011 4:29 PMTo: Gray, MelindaSubject: Fwd: Fwd: sediment sampling Right of Entry

FYI

Cliff,

Thanks for forwarding on the email. It helps layout what DNR isrequesting. We are going to continuing trying to get in touch withTerry and will respond in morning.

Thanks,

Tyler

Tyler R. SchroederCurrent Planning SupervisorPhone: (360) 676-6907 ext. 50202Fax: (360)738-2525Email: [email protected]:Whatcom County Planning and Development Services5280 Northwest Dr.Bellingham, WA 98225

>>> "Strong, Cliff" <[email protected]> 6/29/2011 4:18 PM >>>Here's the email from DNR.

Terry CARTEN is our contact.

Begin forwarded message:

From: "CARTEN, TERRY (DNR)"<[email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>>Date: June 28, 2011 9:27:02 AM PDTTo: Al Jeroue<[email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>>Cc: "Dunkin, Kristie A"<[email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>>, AriSteinberg<[email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>>,"Gray, Melinda" <[email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>>,"GUSTAFSON, JOANN (DNR)"<[email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>>,"Clark, Dennis (DNR)"<[email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>>Subject: RE: sediment sampling Right of Entry

Hi Al,

The Right of Entry (ROE) for the sediment sampling has been overnightmailed this morning to Ari’s attention. Please have the documentssigned by Bob Watters ASAP and either overnighted or hand delivered tothe person/address in Olympia provided in the transmittal letter that isaccompanying the documents. The documents, signed by SSA, should be in

to our office in Olympia no later than Thursday morning if the sedimentsampling is to begin on Friday. Until the ROE documents have been fullyexecuted, SSA/AMEC does not have permission to conduct the samplingactivities on state-owned aquatic lands. Once the documents have beensigned by DNR and fully executed, I will contact Melinda Gray at AMECand let her know that the sampling can begin.

The transmittal letter also outlines that DNR is still in need of aletter of permission or permit from the US Army Corps of Engineers, aletter or email, etc. from Whatcom County that they will allow thesediment sampling to occur under the existing Shoreline SubstantialDevelopment Permit issued in 1997 (SHS 92-0020) and a check for the ROEfee of $1,015.56. All of these items are necessary for DNR to executethe ROE. Melinda Gray is aware of the permitting needs and has assuredme that they will be provided in a timely manner to complete thisauthorization process.

Please let me know if you have any questions or need additionalinformation.

Thanks,Terry

Terry CartenLand Manager, San Juan/Whatcom County & AnacortesDNR Aquatics ProgramOrca-Straits District360-854-2846From: Al Jeroue [mailto:[email protected]]Sent: Friday, June 17, 2011 3:34 PMTo: CARTEN, TERRY (DNR)Cc: Dunkin, Kristie A; Ari SteinbergSubject: RE: sediment sampling Right of Entry

Hi Terry,

Please send the ROE to the attention of Ari Steinberg/SSA at theKlickitat Way address. He will marshal it through SSA and get thesignatures and the authorization back to you ASAP.

Thanks for all the help.

ASJ

From: CARTEN, TERRY (DNR) [mailto:[email protected]]Sent: Friday, June 17, 2011 2:29 PMTo: Al JeroueCc: Dunkin, Kristie ASubject: sediment sampling Right of Entry

Hi Al,

I have been working on the Right of Entry for SSA/AMEC to conductsediment sampling at the proposed PIT GPT site. I am hoping to have thisgo out to your organization for signature early next week.

Should I be addressing it to your attention? To the Klickitat Wayaddress?

It is imperative that this authorization gets signed and returned to meASAP if you wish to conduct the sampling during your limited July 1-15timeframe. PIT will not be authorized to collect samples fromstate-owned aquatic lands until you have been informed that theauthorization has been fully executed.

The permit or permit waiver document from the Army Corps of Engineerswill also be required prior to execution of the authorization. KristieDunkin at AMEC is aware of this and has indicated that she will provideme with this documentation as soon as she receives it.

Let me know if you have any questions.

Thanks,

Terry


From: Bryan SehmelTo: Cliff StrongCC: Tyler SchroederDate: 10/27/2011 9:37 AMSubject: Re: GPT Code Enforcement Action

Cliff,



Kind regards,Bryan



Thanks,





‐‐‐‐‐Original Message‐‐‐‐‐From: Nicholas Smith [mailto:[email protected]] Sent: Thursday, October 27, 2011 8:36 AMTo: Strong, CliffCc: Bryan Sehmel; Tyler SchroederSubject: RE: GPT LDP2011‐00054, signed copy

Cliff‐


Nick


Thanks,







Nick


Thanks,






Cliff‐


Regards,

Nick Smith


From: "Strong, Cliff" <[email protected]>To: [email protected]: [email protected]: 2/17/2012 10:48 AMSubject: GPT - Heads up on some activity next week

Tyler, just a heads up that people will be on the water to retrieve the Acoustic Doppler Current Profiler from Cherry Point next Wednesday. They will motor a research vessel to the GPS coordinates where they dropped this instrument package, ping it with a sonar code to release the onboard submerged buoy and pick up the float with the attached instrument. There will be no disturbance of any land or vegetation.

Just wanted you to know in case anyone reported activity.

Thanks,

Cliff StrongSenior Land Use/Environmental Plannerand Office Sustainability Coordinatoremail: [email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>


AMEC Environment & Infrastructure, Inc.11810 North Creek Parkway NBothell, WA 98011Be more sustainable - think before you print.Business sustainability starts here... AMEC is committed to reducing its carbon footprint.Business sustainability starts here... AMEC is a signatory to the UN Global Compact.Business sustainability starts here... AMEC supports SOS Children<http://www.soschildrensvillages.org.uk>Disclaimer:The materials transmitted by this electronic mail are confidential, are only for the use of the intended recipient, and may also be subject to applicable privileges. Any dissemination, distribution, or copying of this communication is strictly prohibited. If you have received this communication in error, please notify the sender. Please also remove this message from your hard drive, diskette, and any other storage device.

________________________________The information contained in this e-mail is intended only for the individual or entity to whom it is addressed.Its contents (including any attachments) may contain confidential and/or privileged information.If you are not an intended recipient you must not use, disclose, disseminate, copy or print its contents.If you receive this e-mail in error, please notify the sender by reply e-mail and delete and destroy the message.

From: "Strong, Cliff" <[email protected]>To: [email protected]: 11/2/2011 3:41 PMSubject: RE: GPT Code Enforcement Action


Thanks,






Cliff,



Kind regards,Bryan



Thanks,






Cliff-


Nick


Thanks,







Nick


Thanks,







Cliff-


Regards,

Nick Smith






Thank you.

Bryan



Thanks,






Cliff,



Kind regards,Bryan



Thanks,







Cliff‐


Nick


Thanks,







Nick


sign it, too?

Thanks,






Cliff‐


Regards,

Nick Smith



From: Tyler SchroederTo: Bryan SehmelDate: 6/14/2012 8:52 AMSubject: Fwd: PDR2012-122 & PDR2012-123Attachments: PDR 2012-122.pdf; PDR 2012-123.pdf

Could you look at the second PDR (123) and come discuss with me.

Thanks,

Tyler



From: Tyler SchroederTo: [email protected]: Alice (ECY) Kelly; Randel J NWS PerryDate: 6/14/2012 8:15 AMSubject: Fwd: RE: Custer Spur Project EIS Contractor

FYI, here is the response from BNSF on the attendees for the Kick-off meeting.


>>> "Kalb, F E Skip" <[email protected]> 6/14/2012 8:13 AM >>>Tyler,

I'll give you a call later today, but our attendees will be myself,Pierre Bordenave of JLP, Jim Lynch, and someone from our Engineering Department(either Walt Smith or Glen Gaz).

Mike Stanfill of our Environmental Group is unavailable, but could participate via phone for the kick-off meeting, if that is acceptable.

Skip Kalb

-----Original Message-----From: Ari Steinberg [mailto:[email protected]] Sent: Tuesday, June 12, 2012 7:07 PMTo: Tyler SchroederCc: Kalb, F E Skip; <[email protected]>; <[email protected]>Subject: Re: Custer Spur Project EIS Contractor

Thank you Tyler.


Ari


> Skip:> > Thanks for the letter as discussed earlier today. > > Ari:

> > I am still awaiting the letter from PIT.> > All:> > After discussing it with the parties, June 20th is a date that works for the Agencies and CH2MHILL for the first kick-off meeting (Bellingham and GPT site). This meeting will be with a select group from CH2MHILL, Agencies, and your companies. I will be working to finalize details tomorrow and plan on providing additional information to you by Thursday. I apologize if the short notice is hard to accomplish and please schedule accordingly or let me know if this date will not work. Further, we will be having a another kick-off meeting (Bellevue) with the larger group of consultants and agencies in the coming weeks. I will ensure that there is more notice for the second meeting date. > > Please let me know if you have any questions.> > Thanks,> > Tyler > > Tyler R. Schroeder> Planning Manager> Phone: (360) 676-6907 ext. 50202> Fax: (360)738-2525> Email: [email protected] > Address: > Whatcom County Planning and Development Services> 5280 Northwest Dr. > Bellingham, WA 98225>>>> "Kalb, F E Skip" <[email protected]> 06/12/12 3:20 PM >>>> Tyler,> > Attached is BNSF's letter regarding the Amended Reimbursement Contract for the Custer Spur Project.> > I am on the road, but will get this in the overnight mail tomorrow.> > Please feel free to contact me if you have any questions.> > > Skip Kalb> Director Strategic Development> BNSF Railway Company> Cell: 817-271-3057> >

From: Tyler SchroederTo: Greg SummersCC: Alice (ECY) Kelly; Randel J NWS PerryDate: 6/13/2012 11:32 AMSubject: RE: GPT Consultant Selection Update

Greg,

Randel and I have time on Friday, June 22nd, to have a debreifing meeting. Does 11 am work?

Thanks,

Tyler


>>> "Summers, Greg" <[email protected]> 6/7/2012 9:21 AM >>>Hello Tyler,

What is the process for obtaining a debrief on this process? We would like to schedule one quickly so everyone's memory is still relatively fresh. Thanks!

Greg Summers

-----Original Message-----From: Tyler Schroeder [mailto:[email protected]] Sent: Wednesday, May 30, 2012 3:09 PMTo: Summers, GregSubject: Re: GPT Consultant Selection Update

Greg,

I want to provide an update to the GPT Consultant Selection process.Environmental consulting company CH2M Hill has been selected by Whatcom County, the Washington Department of Ecology and the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers to help prepare the required environmental impact statement (EIS). County Executive Louws will be seeking Whatcom County Council's endorsement of the contract during the Whatcom County Council meeting on June 5th, 2012.

Again, thank you for your firm's proposal and your patience on hearing the final selection.

Tyler


>>> Tyler Schroeder 3/30/2012 9:45 AM >>>Greg,

I want to update you and your firm on the status of the consultantselection process for the GPT project. At this time, the County, incoordination with DOE and the Corps, have made a preliminary selectionfor the most qualified consultant. This selection is based off of thereview of the proposal and the interview process. The County is nowworking through the contracting process with the preliminarily selectedfirm. If the situation arises that the contract negotiations are notfinalized, the County will be re-reviewing the firms that wereinterviewed for possible selection.

Thank you for your firm's proposal and we will be formally noticing youof the selected firm once the contracting process is final.

Tyler

Tyler R. SchroederCurrent Planning SupervisorPhone: (360) 676-6907 ext. 50202Fax: (360)738-2525Email: [email protected] Address: Whatcom County Planning and Development Services5280 Northwest Dr. Bellingham, WA 98225

From: Tyler SchroederTo: [email protected]: 6/13/2012 11:21 AMSubject: Re: GPT EIS Process

Terry,

I will be working with the agencies and the consultant to determine the "stakeholders" for participation in the scoping process. I will make sure to include you and you organization in those discussions.

Thanks for your interest and participation in the process.

Tyler


>>> <[email protected]> 6/6/2012 9:36 AM >>>

Tyler,

How does one become a "stakeholder"?

Thank you.

Terry


From: Tyler SchroederTo: Stephanie DrakeDate: 6/13/2012 11:00 AMSubject: Fwd: Phillips letter re EIS for GatewayAttachments: Phillips King County ltr 052412.pdf

Is this on the website?


>>> Suzanne Mildner 5/29/2012 3:19 PM >>>Please note attached correspondence received today from Larry Phillips, Councilmember from King County. Thanks, SuzanneSuzanne MildnerAdministrative Secretary/Grants CoordinatorWhatcom County Executive Department311 Grand Avenue, Suite 108Bellingham, WA 98225(360) 676-6717 [email protected]

From: Tyler SchroederTo: Alice (ECY) Kelly; Randel J NWS PerryDate: 6/13/2012 10:27 AMSubject: Fwd: Custer Spur Project EIS ContractorAttachments: sk.6.12.12.pdf

Please see the attached letter from BNSF on the contract changes.

Thanks,

Tyler


>>> "Kalb, F E Skip" <[email protected]> 6/12/2012 3:19 PM >>>Tyler,





From: Tyler SchroederTo: Alice (ECY) Kelly; Randel J NWS PerryDate: 6/13/2012 10:24 AMSubject: Fwd: GPT Reimbursement Agreement LetterAttachments: 20120612 EIS Reimbursement Contract ltr to Tyler.pdf

FYI - please see the letter of agreement to the contract changes and the expanded scoping period.

Thanks,

Tyler


>>> Ari Steinberg <[email protected]> 6/12/2012 4:44 PM >>>Tyler,


Thank you,

Ari


800/422-3505 tel

206/623-0179 fax

www.ssamarine.com

June 12, 2012


Exhibit A




From: Tyler SchroederTo: [email protected]: 6/12/2012 5:13 PMSubject: Fwd: Re: Custer Spur Project EIS ContractorAttachments: Re: Custer Spur Project EIS Contractor

FYI


From: Ari Steinberg <[email protected]>To: Tyler Schroeder <[email protected]>CC: "<[email protected]>" <[email protected]>, "<[email protected]>" <[email protected]: 6/12/2012 5:07 PMSubject: Re: Custer Spur Project EIS Contractor

Thank you Tyler.


Ari


> Skip:> > Thanks for the letter as discussed earlier today. > > Ari:> > I am still awaiting the letter from PIT.> > All:> > After discussing it with the parties, June 20th is a date that works for the Agencies and CH2MHILL for the first kick-off meeting (Bellingham and GPT site). This meeting will be with a select group from CH2MHILL, Agencies, and your companies. I will be working to finalize details tomorrow and plan on providing additional information to you by Thursday. I apologize if the short notice is hard to accomplish and please schedule accordingly or let me know if this date will not work. Further, we will be having a another kick-off meeting (Bellevue) with the larger group of consultants and agencies in the coming weeks. I will ensure that there is more notice for the second meeting date. > > Please let me know if you have any questions.> > Thanks,> > Tyler > > Tyler R. Schroeder> Planning Manager> Phone: (360) 676-6907 ext. 50202> Fax: (360)738-2525> Email: [email protected] > Address: > Whatcom County Planning and Development Services> 5280 Northwest Dr. > Bellingham, WA 98225>>>> "Kalb, F E Skip" <[email protected]> 06/12/12 3:20 PM >>>> Tyler,> > Attached is BNSF's letter regarding the Amended Reimbursement Contract for the Custer Spur Project.> > I am on the road, but will get this in the overnight mail tomorrow.>

> Please feel free to contact me if you have any questions.> > > Skip Kalb> Director Strategic Development> BNSF Railway Company> Cell: 817-271-3057> >

From: Tyler SchroederTo: [email protected]: [email protected],[email protected],[email protected]: 6/12/2012 4:55 PMSubject: Re: GPT Reimbursement Agreement Letter

Thanks Ari

Tyler R. SchroederPlanning ManagerPhone: (360) 676-6907 ext. 50202Fax: (360)738-2525Email: [email protected] Address: Whatcom County Planning and Development Services5280 Northwest Dr. Bellingham, WA 98225>>> Ari Steinberg <[email protected]> 06/12/12 4:51 PM >>>Tyler,


Thank you,

Ari

From: Tyler SchroederTo: [email protected]: 6/12/2012 4:55 PMSubject: Fwd: GPT Reimbursement Agreement LetterAttachments: GPT Reimbursement Agreement Letter

Stephanie,

Attached is the letter from PIT.

Thanks,

Tyler


From: Ari Steinberg <[email protected]>To: Tyler Schroeder <[email protected]>CC: "Bill Lynn, ([email protected])" <[email protected]>, Jim Lynch <jim.lyn...Date: 6/12/2012 4:51 PMSubject: GPT Reimbursement Agreement LetterAttachments: 20120612 EIS Reimbursement Contract ltr to Tyler.pdf

Tyler,


Thank you,

Ari


800/422-3505 tel

206/623-0179 fax

www.ssamarine.com

June 12, 2012


Exhibit A




From: Tyler SchroederTo: [email protected]: [email protected],[email protected],[email protected]: 6/12/2012 4:51 PMSubject: Re: Custer Spur Project EIS Contractor

Skip:

Thanks for the letter as discussed earlier today.

Ari:

I am still awaiting the letter from PIT.

All:

After discussing it with the parties, June 20th is a date that works for the Agencies and CH2MHILL for the first kick-off meeting (Bellingham and GPT site). This meeting will be with a select group from CH2MHILL, Agencies, and your companies. I will be working to finalize details tomorrow and plan on providing additional information to you by Thursday. I apologize if the short notice is hard to accomplish and please schedule accordingly or let me know if this date will not work. Further, we will be having a another kick-off meeting (Bellevue) with the larger group of consultants and agencies in the coming weeks. I will ensure that there is more notice for the second meeting date.

Please let me know if you have any questions.

Thanks,

Tyler

Tyler R. SchroederPlanning ManagerPhone: (360) 676-6907 ext. 50202Fax: (360)738-2525Email: [email protected] Address: Whatcom County Planning and Development Services5280 Northwest Dr. Bellingham, WA 98225>>> "Kalb, F E Skip" <[email protected]> 06/12/12 3:20 PM >>>Tyler,





From: Tyler SchroederTo: Drake, StephanieDate: 6/12/2012 3:29 PMSubject: Fw: Custer Spur Project EIS ContractorAttachments: Custer Spur Project EIS Contractor

Stephanie,

Please see the email below that has the letter of agreement from BNSF for the proposed Council contract changes. The hard copy will follow.

Thanks,

Tyler

From: "Kalb, F E Skip" <[email protected]>To: Tyler Schroeder <[email protected]>CC: Jim Lynch <[email protected]>, Ari Steinberg <[email protected]: 6/12/2012 3:20 PMSubject: Custer Spur Project EIS ContractorAttachments: sk.6.12.12.pdf

Tyler,





From: Tyler SchroederTo: Burnfield, Mark, Nielsen, LindaCC: Keenan, AmyDate: 6/12/2012 2:58 PMSubject: Fw: request for recordsAttachments: request for records

Mark,

Please see the PDR request in the email below. Please let me know if I can help in any way.

Thanks,

Tyler

From: "Tom Ehrlichman" <[email protected]>To: <[email protected]>CC: <[email protected]>Date: 6/12/2012 2:55 PMSubject: request for records

Tyler,

The email I sent to you earlier, requesting public records, is attachedbelow. In the latter part of the email, I made the following request.Thank you for your response at your earliest possible.

Tom

"On other matters, we have three additional requests.



3. Ground Disturbance. Please forward copies of documents ofany kind evidencing ground disturbing activities of any kind on the PacificInternational Terminals ownership within the Cherry Point Urban Growth Area,following the issuance of the County's retroactive land disturbance permitin October 2012. Please consider this to be a public records requestpursuant to RCW ch. 42.56 and consider the request as extending to documentsheld by the County Council, County Executive, and their respective staff oragents. We will pay reasonable copying charges and would prefer to receiveyour response in the form of a digital record on "CD." We are requestingthree identical sets of the CD or CD's."

From: Tom Ehrlichman [mailto:[email protected]] Sent: Tuesday, May 15, 2012 5:00 PMTo: '[email protected]'Cc: [email protected]; Kelly, Alice (ECY) <[email protected]>([email protected]); Perry, Randel J NWS ([email protected]);'[email protected]'; Royce Buckingham ([email protected])Subject: Notice of Application

Dear Tyler,








Salish Law, PLLC.

These names can be contacted at: [email protected]; [email protected];and at 909 Harris Avenue, Suite 201h, Bellingham, WA.









The applications were deemed incomplete in June 2011. That informationappears to be missing still from the March 2012 applications, one yearlater. It is hard to imagine how the County staff found the proposal to betoo vague in Spring 2011 on these points, but would now determine it to besufficiently specific, even when the requested information still is notbeing provided on the stormwater concept. In the public interest, we askthat the County reassess this with respect to these specific issues prior toissuing any threshold determination.






Tom Ehrlichman

Salish Law, PLLC



(425) 268-5553

From: Tyler SchroederTo: Keenan, AmyDate: 6/12/2012 2:54 PMSubject: Fw: Missing Documents from County WebsiteAttachments: RE: Missing Documents from County Website

FYI

From: "Tom Ehrlichman" <[email protected]>To: <[email protected]>CC: <[email protected]>Date: 6/12/2012 2:53 PMSubject: RE: Missing Documents from County Website

Please disregard item 1, below. I found it. I did not find item 2.

Also, the prior document request was contained in my email to you dated May15. I will forward that email again, without waiving any of the timelinesinvolved in responding to these public records requests.

Thanks Tyler.

Tom

From: Tom Ehrlichman [mailto:[email protected]] Sent: Tuesday, June 12, 2012 2:48 PMTo: Tyler Schroeder ([email protected]) ([email protected])Cc: [email protected]: Missing Documents from County Website

Tyler,





Thanks,

Tom

Tom Ehrlichman

Salish Law, PLLC



(425) 268-5553

From: Tyler SchroederTo: Keenan, AmyCC: Drake, StephanieDate: 6/12/2012 2:52 PMSubject: Fw: Missing Documents from County WebsiteAttachments: Missing Documents from County Website

Could you look into this. Stephanie might have some insight as well.

Thanks,

Tyler

From: "Tom Ehrlichman" <[email protected]>To: <[email protected]>CC: <[email protected]>Date: 6/12/2012 2:48 PMSubject: Missing Documents from County Website

Tyler,





Thanks,

Tom

Tom Ehrlichman

Salish Law, PLLC



(425) 268-5553

From: Tyler SchroederTo: Alice (ECY) Kelly; Randel J NWS PerryCC: Brenden (ECY) McFarland; Francis X NWS Eugenio; Jeannie (ECY) Summerha...Date: 6/12/2012 8:54 AMSubject: GPT Contract

Randel and Alice,

The companies (PIT and BNSF) gave a verbal agreement to the contract changes and more specifically to the expanded scoping of 120 days. I will be receiving letters of agreement (for contract purposes) for them today. The Executive will be signing the contract and the Notice of Proceed to CH2MHILL will be issued today.

Thanks for your work and patience on the County's contract process.

Tyler


From: Tyler SchroederTo: Arden Landry; Jack LouwsCC: Royce Buckingham; Stephanie DrakeDate: 6/12/2012 8:43 AMSubject: Fwd: GPT Contracts

Jack,



Thanks,

Tyler






Thanks,

Tyler

Tyler R. SchroederPlanning ManagerPhone: (360) 676-6907 ext. 50202Fax: (360)738-2525

Email: [email protected] Address: Whatcom County Planning and Development Services5280 Northwest Dr. Bellingham, WA 98225

From: "Tom Ehrlichman" <[email protected]>To: <[email protected]>CC: <[email protected]>, <[email protected]>, "Perry, Randel J NWS" <Ra...Date: 5/15/2012 4:59 PMSubject: Notice of Application

Dear Tyler,








Salish Law, PLLC.

These names can be contacted at: [email protected]; [email protected];

and at 909 Harris Avenue, Suite 201h, Bellingham, WA.









The applications were deemed incomplete in June 2011. That informationappears to be missing still from the March 2012 applications, one yearlater. It is hard to imagine how the County staff found the proposal to be

too vague in Spring 2011 on these points, but would now determine it to besufficiently specific, even when the requested information still is notbeing provided on the stormwater concept. In the public interest, we askthat the County reassess this with respect to these specific issues prior toissuing any threshold determination.






Tom Ehrlichman

Salish Law, PLLC



(425) 268-5553

From: Tyler SchroederTo: Ari Steinberg; BillLynn; Jim Lynch; Skip KalbCC: Royce BuckinghamDate: 6/11/2012 4:16 PMSubject: Re: GPT Reimbursement Contract Call

8 am works best for me. I am busy from 10:30 to noon. Please confirm the time when decided.

Thanks,

Tyler


>>> Ari Steinberg <[email protected]> 6/11/2012 3:35 PM >>>Would it be possible to change the time of tomorrow's conference call from 9:00 am to another time? 8:00 am, and any time after 10:00 work for me. I apologize for the last minute request.

Ari

From: Tyler SchroederTo: Linda Nielsen; Mark BurnfieldCC: Royce Buckingham; Sam RyanDate: 6/11/2012 1:50 PMSubject: Fwd: Public Records Request

Mark and Linda,

Do I need Mr. Ehrlichman to fill out a PDR form? Should I handle this request or should I forward it on to you? Please call to discuss at 50202 or email back.

Thanks,

Tyler






2. All documents evidencing whether Pacific International Terminals,SSA Marine or any of their agents or contractors have done any further workof any kind on any of the Gateway Pacific Terminal site, since the Countyissued its additional conditions on the retroactive Land Disturbance Permitin September 2011, prohibiting further work until archeological agreementsand inventories on the 9 acre disturbance were finalized. In short, havethey done any new grading or boring since the September 2011 County letter

modifying the conditions to the retroactive Land Disturbance Permit? If so,please provide copies of the documentation.



Thank you.

Tom Ehrlchman

From: Tyler SchroederTo: Arden Landry; Suzanne MildnerCC: Stephanie DrakeDate: 6/11/2012 1:43 PMSubject: GPT Contracts

Arden,




Thanks,

Tyler


From: Tyler SchroederTo: Royce BuckinghamDate: 6/11/2012 1:39 PMSubject: GPT Contract

Royce,

I dropped off the contracts with your front desk this morning, they are in a inter-office envelope. Could you review, sign and get down to the Exec's office this afternoon or tomorrow morning at the latest.

Thanks,

Tyler


From: CouncilTo: [email protected]: 6/14/2012 11:43 AMSubject: Fwd: EIS Agenda ItemAttachments: EIS Agenda Item

Please note: Emails are public records subject to public disclosure upon request.

From: <[email protected]>To: <[email protected]>, <[email protected]>, <[email protected]: 6/4/2012 9:14 AMSubject: EIS Agenda Item

TO: Mr. Jack Louws, Whatcom County Executive

Whatcom County Council

U.S. Army Corps of Engineers

WA State Dept. of Ecology

FROM: Charles R. Maliszewski

RE: EIS Contract/GPT/County Council vote

I am deeply concerned that the EIS contract for the Gateway Pacific Terminal project does not take the public interest into full and proper consideration. In a letter that each of you should have received, former Whatcom County Planner David Stalheim points out specific deficiencies in contract language and suggests appropriate revisions.

https://docs.google.com/file/d/0ByRbnb53t3dnMTdoeUZYMDVSeEU/edit?pli=1

I strongly urge you to amend the contract in a manner that effectively addresses the following:

• Allow120 days to comment on the scope of the EIS -- not the 60 days in the contract (due at end of July) • Scoping meetings need to be held throughout the state -- the contract doesn't commit to meetings outside Whatcom County • Remove one-sided conflict of interest provisions -- the Consultant works for the public, not the applicant. This ensures a fair environmental review process. • Ensure all records and meetings are accessible to the public -- the applicant isn't provided any privileges not afforded the public.

Thank you.

Charlie Maliszewski

760 Old Samish Rd.


Ph: 360-305-2871

From: CouncilTo: [email protected]: 6/14/2012 8:22 AMSubject: Fwd: Oppose Coal Terminal at Cherry Point to Save Whatcom CountyAttachments: Oppose Coal Terminal at Cherry Point to Save Whatcom County


From: "Pam Beason" <[email protected]>To: <[email protected]>Date: 6/13/2012 6:23 PMSubject: Oppose Coal Terminal at Cherry Point to Save Whatcom County

The jobs lost because of increased train traffic, noise, and pollution caused by transporting coal to a new terminal would be far more than any jobs gained. We have already lost much of the pleasant environment here with increased train traffic, especially in the Bellingham waterfront parks. Why would any tourist come to Bellingham or Birch Bay? Why would anyone retire to Whatcom County? Why would any business want to locate here? What will happen to the Bellingham development plans for the waterfront? With increased train traffic, noise, and pollution, any progress in business development or improvement in property values will be reversed.

Will every community between Cherry Point and the mine be sacrificed for the profit of the mining company and the port facility? There would never again be another article about Whatcom County being a good place to retire--instead, the articles will all be about how the once-beautiful environment was ruined by officials lacking the ability to make longterm plans for the good of the region. Many of us retired here for the trails, the bay, and the parks, and many of us own internet-based companies that could function anywhere. We would have absolutely no reason to stay if our quality of life is ruined by constant railroad traffic, noise, and pollution.

Please prevent that from happening. Insist on moving the tracks or veto the port facility.

Pamela Beason3301 Brandywine CtBellingham, WA 98226

From: CouncilTo: [email protected]: 6/12/2012 4:11 PMSubject: Fwd: coal hearingAttachments: coal hearing


From: DAVID <[email protected]>To: <[email protected]>, <[email protected]>, <[email protected]: 6/5/2012 8:09 AMSubject: coal hearing

Hello,

The County Council is set to act on hiring CH2M Hill--and the agreements do not protect the public. At minimum we should ask for 120 days scoping process, not the 60 in the contract.

Also, let's make sure the applicant doesn't have undue influence in the process; we can do that by making records and meetings subject to public review. In addition, we need to address the inappropriate conflict of interest provisions in the contract, and the bias towards the applicant. Finally, let's make sure the County is fully compensated for all costs.

Thank you,

David and Geri Turnoy

Eastsound, WA

From: CouncilTo: [email protected]: 6/12/2012 4:05 PMSubject: Fwd: Gateway and Contracts/AgreementsAttachments: Gateway and Contracts/Agreements


From: Leaf Schumann <[email protected]>To: <[email protected]>Date: 6/5/2012 8:17 AMSubject: Gateway and Contracts/Agreements

Dear Whatcom County Council,

I have growing concerns about the contracts and agreements regarding theGateway Pacific Terminal Project. As a voting senior citizen that standsto be greatly affected by this project, I am concerned that, from the verybeginning, it is skewed toward the applicant's interests.

I won't bother to go into the various issues, but I will say that I haveread the contract and agreements and am troubled by potential conflicts ofinterest, the potential lack of transparency and the obvious edge given tothe applicant.

This is somewhat understandable since I presume that it is difficult forpublic figures such as yourself to resist the influence of powerfulcorporate interests. Gateway has money and influence. I do not. And, forexactly that reason, I count on you to represent my concerns and give me avoice. I expect you to resist that power and influence and, in fact, alsorepresent the those of us on the other side of the Gateway issue.Specifically, those of us that want a thorough vetting, a comprehensive EISand an outcome that takes much, much more into account than simply theshort term benefits that can be provided by wealthy and powerful forceswhose interests are much more narrow than those of ordinary citizens inthis gorgeous piece of earth we call Whatcom County.

I would appreciate a response.

Thank you for your time.Leaf SchumannDeming

From: CouncilTo: [email protected]: 6/11/2012 10:39 AMSubject: Fwd: Re: salaryAttachments: Re: salary


From: Ken MannTo: [email protected],[email protected]: 6/10/2012 4:24 PMSubject: Re: salary

Ms. Davis,

What is ludicrous (your term) is that you are attacking your representatives for something you clearly know nothing about. Even the slightestGoogle effort on your part would have led you to information on our website, the Herald, etc, that explains that we, the County Council, are acting in a "quasi-judicial" role. That is a very specific term and, by definition, we are legally bound to stay uninformed until the full formal process has begun. And then, we are obligated to consider only the information entered into the public record. Believe me, it is eternally frustrating. But, as your elected officials, we have sworn to uphold the law, and in this case the law is clear.

When the issue comes to the Council, we will be able to read and research the entire record, and I'm confident we all will do so. We all work extremely hard.

Perhaps now you understand why I found your accusations of "burying our head in the sand", "cheating taxpayers", and "wasting salaries" insulting.

Ken

Ken Mann

Whatcom County Councilmember(360) 676-6690 (office)(360) 483-6020 (mobile)[email protected]://www.facebook.com/pages/Ken-Mann-Whatcom/77546362394

>>> mary j davis <[email protected]> 06/08/12 11:48 AM >>>Ken,

I do apologize for the font.

I have read tomes of information about the coal issue. Most of it is verydry, however, it is important to me to stay well informed on both sides ofthis issue. I do believe the e-mail that I quoted was correct as it comesfrom a well informed, albeit biased, source. I was not at the meetingbecause I was working. I do not think I was rude. I believe as a paidemployee, or public servant- your term, you owe your employers, the peoplewho voted you into office, i.e. me and the other taxpayers, the courtesy ofinforming yourself about issues that are important to us. I will make up mymind about the coal issue when all the information from both sides isavailable to me. I expect you to do the same.

To not stay informed about a subject that is important to your constituentsseems ludicrous to me and makes me angry. If this is true, and you are notallowed to research a subject, you are relying on biased sources from bothsides for your information. How can you stand for this? How can youpossibly think that this is less rude than my e-mail?

If you have no answer to this other than "try again". I wish the same toyou.

Cordially,

Mary Jane Davis

On Fri, Jun 8, 2012 at 10:22 AM, Ken Mann <[email protected]> wrote:

> Wow, Ms. Davis, that is a rude email. Do you always speak that way to> public servants when receiving partial information via email?>> Please try again.>> Ken>> Ken Mann>> Whatcom County Councilmember> (360) 676-6690 (office)> (360) 483-6020 (mobile)> [email protected]> http://www.facebook.com/pages/Ken-Mann-Whatcom/77546362394>>>> >>> mary j davis <[email protected]> 06/07/12 9:57 PM >>>> I just read the paragraph below in an e-mail and I am dumbfounded. How> is> this possible? How can you possibly become informed about a subject> without> reading about it? How can you represent the interests of Whatcom county> residents without knowing what they are? I cannot believe that I am> paying> you to do a job that is not possible to do unless you are informed about> the will of the people you are representing. This is a catastrophic> nightmare. Who imposed this nonsense on you? I feel terribly cheated by> you, and that my county taxes that pay> your salary are being wasted. Are> the people that imposed this on you paying your wages?>>>> “At this time our Whatcom County Council is legally sequestered from> reading, hearing, discussing anything about the coal debate. They have> been kept in the dark because of their “quasi judicial role” in this> drama. What was obvious last night, and by their own admission, is that> they are woefully ignorant of many coal related issues going on around> them. If they break this injunction, they may be forced to recuse> themselves when the actual scoping happens.”>>>> Please get your act in order. I am paying you to work, not ignore the

> facts> and bury your head in the sand.>> Sincerely,>> Mary Jane Davis>> Taxpayer, Whatcom County>>> --> Mary Jane Davis>>

-- Mary Jane Daviswww.remarkableart.com

Emails pertaining to Gateway Pacific Project For June 9-15 ...

Documents

Transcript of Emails pertaining to Gateway Pacific Project For June 9-15 ...