Probe Broadens into Allegations of White House Pressure on EPA in Cabrillo Port Flip-Flop

•Internal Communications and Other Documents Requested as Key Licensing Hearings Are About to Begin•

BY HANS LAETZ

Rep. Henry Waxman has expanded his probe into alleged White House interference on behalf of BHP Billiton at the Environmental Protection Agency, and asked the company to turn over all letters and memos between it, the White House and EPA.

In a letter Friday, Waxman gave EPA just five days to turn over two documents that were requested earlier but not provided, as well a list of 12 additional e-mails, memos and notes that his investigators believe exist.

One of the documents is an EPA memo entitled “Talking Points, Proposed LNG Deep Water Port Offshore Ventura County, Calif.” Another is handwritten notes taken by White House appointee Jeff Holmstead during a conversation with a high-ranking EPA smog administrator in 2005.

In a second letter sent Friday, Waxman told BHP Billiton’s president he wants copies of all communications from within the Australian company, its Houston subsidiary and its agents “that reference the White House, White House officials or personnel, the EPA headquarters in Washington, or EPA personnel.”

Existing public files are full of scores of letters sent by BHPB to regional officials in San Francisco, but Waxman’s letter is asking for records about conversations the company and its agents had about EPA officials and the White House. Billiton has spent millions of dollars on public relations firms in Washington and Sacramento, and the terms of the congressional probe appear to include their documents as well.

BHP Billiton president Chip Goodyear, an American who works out of the company’s Australian headquarters, was given two weeks to supply those documents and e-mails to congressional researchers.

A public relations firm executive working for BHPB said neither company had seen the letters Friday morning, and could not yet comment.

In the letter to EPA, Waxman said what he has learned so far has convinced him that EPA’s decision in 2005 to grant BHPB what amounts to a smog rule loophole for Cabrillo Port “is likely to result in degraded air quality in California.” Waxman also said documents already sent to him by EPA indicate that EPA officials had “sound policy and legal basis” for the tough stand they took in 2004 and 2005 in analyzing BHP Billiton’s request. But the agency’s tentative ruling, Waxman said, was reversed after intervention from a political appointee who may have been acting after consultation with the White House.

Waxman is chair of the House Oversight and Government Reform Committee, the powerful house investigations committee that has been rejuvenated after he assumed that post in January. The committee is also investigating the role of Attorney General Alberto Gonzales in the firing of eight U.S. attorneys, the Valerie Plame affair, and other high-profile probes.

The BHP Billiton investigation was started after a Malibu newspaper reported in 2005 that, after two years of strongly insisting that Cabrillo Port abide by strong on-shore smog regulations, EPA staffers abruptly said they would “use our discretion” to tentatively decide to allow the LNG terminal 13.8 miles off Malibu to be built under lesser air pollution standards.

The company still contends that its 484 tons per year of emissions are not subject to onshore Ventura County smog rules, because the county in 1992 exempted two small federal generators on Anacapa and San Nicolas islands from the tougher rules. The Ventura regulation in question says the smog exemption applies only to emission sources “on” the islands, and EPA officials steadfastly said the Cabrillo Port ship was not an island until that 2005 reversal.

Lawyers for the Environmental Defense Center filed a Freedom of Information Act request, and found a chain of documents between Billiton, the White House and EPA showing that regional EPA officials in San Francisco were pressured to adopt what the White House called “the Anacapa rules.”

Five EPA officials in the San Francisco have been asked to appear before House investigators for interviews with a court reporter present, Waxman revealed in his letter to EPA Friday.

Included in the five was Amy Zimpfer, the EPA official who told a Malibu reporter in 2005 that the EPA’s reversal had come after BHP Billiton had lobbied for it.

In several official letters in 2004 and early 2005, Zimpfer and her boss, Gerardo Rios, had told BHPB that EPA would not grant the Anacapa exemption to Cabrillo Port. EPA several times told the company it was expected to follow the Clean Air Act and local provisions, which would require the company to purchase and retire air pollution offset credits in order to gain permits to build the LNG ship.

Ventura County smog officials have said it is likely that there are not enough smog offset credits available in their air basin at any price to allow the port to operate, meaning the EPA ruling could block construction of the $800 million terminal.

After news of the EPA reversal was published, more than 12,000 people sent protest form letters to the agency, and officials said it would reevaluate the tentative finding. A final decision on the Anacapa exemption issue may come this summer, after other licensing decisions are already made, EPA officials have said.

LNG Watch: Cabrillo Port

LNG Watch: Cabrillo Port
License Application
Hearing Timetable

Wednesday, April 4: United States Coast Guard and the
Maritime Administration (MARAD) will hold a public hearing at the Oxnard Performing Arts Center, 800 Hobson Way, Oxnard.
Open House:
3 to 4:30 p.m.
(Ventura Room)
Public Hearing:
5 to 8 p.m.
(Oxnard Room)

Monday, April 9: California State Lands Commission hearing and vote at the
Oxnard Performing
Arts Center,
800 Hobson Way, Oxnard.
10 a.m. on.

Thursday, April 12: Coastal Commission hearing and vote at
Fess Parker’s
Doubletree Resort,
633 E. Cabrillo Street, Santa Barbara.
9 a.m. on.

Council Members Learn More about DNA Sampling to Trace Pollution

BY BILL KOENEKER

The Malibu City Council got an update about a Los Angeles County study of the water quality of two streams in Malibu that caused a major furor in the media when it was first announced.

Members learned the study designed to try to find the point sources of pollution in Ramirez and Escondido creeks was supposed to start sampling this week, but will probably be delayed because of the possibility of rain.

Mayor Ken Kearsley said the study of where the pollution is coming from and whether it is human, equine or avian is important. “If my septic is not functioning I want to know,” said the mayor, who added he believes that everyone in the two watersheds also wants to know. The county is spending $1 million on the study with the board of supervisors say is necesaary to track down the pollutants. The county and city formed an executive task force with county officials crediting municipal staff with giving valuable input into the study.

The research will be conducted in four phases, according to county officials. The first phase involves what is called a watershed characterization to determine where in the creeks the high levels of pollution exist and then to determine whether they are human or nonhuman generated.

Over the course of 10 weeks, 27 samplings will be taken each week from the creeks and beaches. Sampling is expected to start within a few days. Two sampling events will be undertaken during the length of the study. At the beginning of what is called the dry season and then at the end of that season.

The next phase involves the location of such hot spots and then carrying out more sampling throughout he canyons based on that information. Phase two will take place in 2008. City council members were told about half of the property involved in the study is public lands with the other 50 percent involving private lands. Everyone in the canyons was noticed by mail.

DNA testing will be done to determine the origin of the bacteria found. The fourth or final phase is considered optional, if needed, and would involve developing a library of the DNA testing to determine more clearly what is happening in the two creeks. “We don’t know if phase four is necessary,” said a county official, who stressed that privacy and discretion are considered extremely important to the success of the study.

The mayor reiterated. “We are not here to point fingers,” he insisted. “It will solve a big mystery. It is of critical interest to the whole watershed.”

In other council activity, members heard about the fundraising plans of the Malibu Green Machine. They learned that Malibu Creek Plaza shopping center owner Steve Soboroff is chairing the fundraising activity for the group which needs to raise $1.5 million for the entire project which consists of decorating and landscaping the median of 1.4 miles of Pacific Coast Highway from Cross Creek Road to Malibu Canyon Road. Plans call for starting construction in December or January and completing the project before the summer of 2008.

Soboroff said he was inspired to get involved because he does not believe that anybody wants to see what he called a “trashy entrance” to the Civic Center area. “We don’t want an unsafe or ugly highway,” he added.

He said he has been calling people for donations and has secured a promise of $50,000 from Michael Koss, who owns the Malibu Country Mart and Richard Wientraub, who owns the hotel site and is expected to be the master lease holder for the old lumber yard site. Weintraub contributed $180,000. “We are putting up $100,000,” Soboroff added.

Soboroff said he also got a promise of cash from Robert Gold and Richard Ackerman.

Soboroff said he hoped to be half way to their goal at this time, but said he remained upbeat about getting the rest of the funds for the project. “Nobody has said no twice,” he joked, adding he is trying to tap donors other than those who are being asked to give for the improvements at Legacy Park.

Council members also talked about how money was going to be raised for the improvements at Legacy Park.

Steve Uhring, who represents the Malibu Coastal Land Conservancy, said he and his members are talking to potential donors who had promised money for the matching grants that never materialized.

“But some of them have asked questions about the improvements. We don’t have the answers to the questions,” added Uhring.

“I talked to two of your donors. It is my understanding your association will meet with [the city manager] and the scientific team,” said Councilmember Sharon Barovsky, who said she would encourage everyone to give directly to the city. “But I bet you don’t agree with that. The answers will become more clear at [the future] public meetings,” added Barovsky.

“I guess if you are telling us there are no answers you are telling us to forget about it,” answered Uhring.

Barovsky replied, “It would be easier if the giving was directly to us. It is competitive. It is easier working together rather than competing.”

City Manager Jim Thorsen said the first of the public meetings starts on April 19, when both the city council and the planning commission will meet jointly.

Key LNG Hearings Begin Wednesday

• Three Sessions in Eight-Day Span

BY HANS LAETZ

The first of three public hearings on the liquefied natural gas terminal proposed for 13.8 miles off Malibu is next Wednesday in Oxnard. But local anti-LNG activists say they expect the bigger turnout five days later—April 9—when the California State Lands Commission holds its hearing and then takes a key vote.

“The State Lands Commission is a very big deal, and that is where we are going to see the largest number of community members,” said Owen Bailey, an organizer for Coastal Advocates, the Malibu and Oxnard-based group of anti-LNG activists.

At issue are the various permits and licenses for the $800 million project that the Australian energy and mining company BHP Billiton wants to anchor on the coastal horizon southwest of Malibu. Dubbed “Cabrillo Port,” the project would import, process and store natural gas in a 14-story high permanently-anchored ship topped with three storage domes.

The company and its supporters say the Malibu facility would ease America’s short-term shortage of clean-burning natural gas. Cabrillo Port, they say, is far enough offshore to minimize any slight danger from terrorist attacks or accidents, which federal experts said would cause a flash-fire possibly extending 7.2 miles out in all directions.

The Ventura County and state Chambers of Commerce and U.S. maritime unions have vigorously championed the project, which they say would provide jobs. BHP Billiton has also said California’s air would be cleaner if Cabrillo Port is built than if it is not.

Opponents say the need for importing more fossil fuels from foreign nations is overstated, and would be a politically unwise move. They have attacked Cabrillo Port’s proposed smog emissions, which would add more than 480 tons of smog-causing chemicals to the atmosphere .

Opponents also question the company’s studies on the dangers of an explosion or fire at the ship. They are bolstered by a federal study released this month that says existing safety studies are based on estimates and computer projections that may be inaccurate.

At Wednesday’s hearing, the U.S. Coast Guard will take testimony beginning at 5 p.m. There’s an open house between 3 and 4:30 p,m, No decision will be made for up to 90 days, spokesman Ray Martin said. Although the hearing is slated to end at 8 p.m., Martin said, “We plan on staying there until every single person has had his or her opportunity to say what it is they have to say.”

The attorney coordinating anti-LNG legal arguments said most of the specific criticisms of Cabrillo Port will be delivered to the State Lands Commission when it meets April 9, also in Oxnard. At the Coast Guard hearing, “We’ll express how dysfunctional the whole Deepwater Ports Act process is,” said Linda Krop, lead attorney for the Environmental Defense Center.

“It would have been much more appropriate for the Coast Guard to have its hearing on this after the state had made its decision on all the environmental impacts,” she said.

The recent GAO study shows that the Coast Guard “is not adequately prepared to ensure the safety and liability of this port against terrorists, sabotage or accidents,” she said.

Requests for comment from BHP Billiton officials in Oxnard and Houston went unanswered. A company public relations agent in Ventura did not respond to a request for comment for this article.

Following the Coast Guard and State Lands Commissions hearings, the California Coastal Commission will take public testimony and vote on April 12 on the issue of Cabrillo Port’s compliance with the Coastal Zone Management Act. That federal law allows California to manage its coastline, and authorizes the CCC to reject a project that does not comply with its interpretation of the federal act.

Coastal Commission officials have said, however, that their federal counterparts and BHP Billiton are not in accordance on how much power the Coastal Commission has to possibly reject Cabrillo Port.

After all that, the LNG terminal must still get approval from Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger by the middle of May.

One still unresolved issue is the federal Environmental Protection Agency, which is still determining if Cabrillo Port can be built under U.S. and Ventura County smog rules. White House interference on behalf of BHP Billiton prompted both houses of Congress to open informal investigations into an apparent EPA flip-flop on the issue that benefited BHPB.

Congress Holds Hearings on LNG Safety Shortcomings

• Members Tell Coast Guard It Doesn’t Have Enough Ships or Crew to Guard Terminals

BY HANS LAETZ

Some members of Congress from both sides of the aisle are unhappy with Coast Guard answers about the agency’s ability to prevent terrorism at the nation’s planned 30 or so liquefied natural gas terminals. And at a Washington hearing Wednesday, March 21, that unhappiness went public.

The congressional hearing was three weeks before regulators in California are to take a key vote on the BHP Billiton proposal to build an LNG terminal near Malibu. Some coastal residents oppose the project, and the possibility of a terrorist attack or accident at the floating gas terminal is a major objection to them.

A General Accounting Office report issued a week ago said not enough research has been done on the effects of a leak, spill or sabotage on LNG ships.

The Congressional hearing last week gave representatives an opportunity to ask federal agencies about the safety of the rapidly expanding LNG import industry. It was accompanied by a closed-door session on terrorism and LNG facilities that included secret briefing materials.

“Coast Guard assets are aging by the day, and I am concerned about whether or not the Coast Guard has the assets to meet this growing mission,” said Committee Chair Bennie Thompson, D-Louisiana.

Rep. Christopher Shays, a Connecticut Republican whose district might play host to a floating offshore LNG terminal, asked a Coast Guard rear admiral if the Coast Guard has enough people and ships to guard LNG vessels, which federal officials say are possible terrorism targets.

At the hearing, which was webcast, Rear Admiral Brian Salerno told Shays “the question of resources is being looked at carefully.”

“Isn’t the honest answer to that question ‘no’?” Shays asked.

Salerno paused, looked at his notes, and replied, “That’s on the table.”

“I think that’s a punt,” Shays snapped.

Coast Guard officials in New York have said they would need one ship and 70 additional crewmembers for security at Broadwater, a floating LNG terminal very similar in concept to the BHP Billiton proposal for an unloading, processing and storage tank facility 13.8 miles off the Malibu coast.

Coast Guard officials have not prepared a similar Waterways Suitability Assessment for Cabrillo Port, the BHP Billiton project proposed for coastal Malibu, because it is not within a harbor or bay, like the Broadwater project.

The Coast Guard air and sea fleet is in a state of distress right now, with a half dozen ships showing hull cracks after a modernization program failed, leaving the ships and cutters unsafe and unusable. New helicopters are behind schedule and over budget, and the new GAO report warns that the Coast Guard may not be equipped to handle the task of guarding five existing LNG terminals, 15 LNG terminals in the permitting process, and another 25 or so proposed.

Thompson said he realized Coast Guard officials are attempting to fix the problems, “but I want to know if this course correction will occur before the additional LNG facilities come on line.”

Thompson said he was puzzled by the Coast Guard’s inability to say right now if it has enough staff. “Very rarely do I find a (Congressional) committee offering to help, and the offer is declined,” he said.

Some California decision-makers in behind-the-scenes meetings with anti-LNG activists have reportedly raised the possibility of an LNG tanker being hijacked “and rammed into Santa Monica.”

At last Wednesday’s hearing, an official with the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission downplayed the dangers of a terrorist attack, saying the worst-case scenario imaginable is a “pool fire” of spilled LNG that would burn for a half hour. “If you read the popular press, it (the danger) is overblown,” said J. Mark Robinson, FERC’s director of energy projects.

“What they are talking about is second degree burns on exposed skin one mile away if you hold your arm out for a minute,” he told the committee. “If you just move away within 20-to-30 seconds, you won’t have a burn.”

In a 2005 report, the institute said the hijacking and destruction of an LNG tanker was unimaginable in a pre-9/11 world. “The attack on the U.S.S. Cole (in 2002) by al-Qaeda operatives in the harbor in Aden, Yemen changed all that.”

Using a small inflatable boat loaded with explosives, the attackers were able to blow a 40x60-foot hole in the side of the armored ship, inflicting heavy damage both above and largely below the waterline.

“Seventeen Navy personnel were killed and 36 injured in the attack,” the report continued. “Shortly thereafter, a small boat laden with explosives attacked the French tanker Limburg at Ash Shihr, Yemen.”

In that attack, both the inner and outer hulls of the double-hulled ship were penetrated, and damage extended, according to the captain, seven or eight meters into the cargo hold, which was filled with crude oil.

Publisher’s Notebook: Unfriendly Fire

BY ANNE SOBLE

Whatever one’s views on the specifics, it shouldn’t be too surprising that the same military mentality that regards unprecedented civilian death tolls with indifference, or manipulates the handling of the loss of an NFL hero to friendly fire for recruiting purposes, doesn’t think the protection of marine mammals is a high priority. Last Thursday, the California Coastal Commission took the last resort measure of filing suit in federal district court against the U.S. Navy over its refusal to comply with conditions that could help protect marine mammals and other ocean creatures from the adverse effects associated with the use of undersea sonar during training exercises in local waters. Among CCC conditions the Navy refuses to implement are avoidance of critical marine mammal habitat, including the Channel Islands Marine Sanctuary and the gray whale migration route; powering down of ships at night and during times of low visibility when whales and other species are more difficult to see; expanded safety perimeters around vessels to prevent direct sonar blasts at animals; and use of the lowest sonar levels necessary for an exercise. Whales have been severely injured or killed after direct encounters with mid-frequency sonar. Scientific research documents a direct correlation, if not outright causality, between these loud pulses of sound and animal disorientation and irreparable damage.

The choice is not between naval exercises and marine life. Effective training can be balanced with environmental protection. The current climate of political fear-mongering has made it increasingly difficult for reason to prevail, but the spectre of 9/11 only can be trotted out so many times before its manipulative misuse becomes evident. The members of the California Coastal Commission are no strangers to vociferous critics and should be able to stand up to disparagement from those for whom might makes right. Those who say that the Navy’s stance undermines not only the state Coastal Act but all federal coastal protection laws are on target. This is just one more attempt to blur lines in the sand as well as lines on the ocean’s floor.

Congress Holds Hearings on LNG Safety Issue

•Congressmen Tell Coast Guard It Doesn’t Have Enough Ships or Crew to Guard Proposed LNG Terminals•

BY HANS LAETZ

Some Congressmen from both sides of the aisle are unhappy with Coast Guard answers about the agency’s ability to prevent terrorism at the nation’s planned 30 or so liquefied natural gas terminals. And at a Washington hearing Wednesday, that unhappiness went public.

The congressional hearing was three weeks before regulators in California are to take a key vote on the BHP Billiton proposal to build an LNG terminal near Malibu. Some coastal residents oppose the project, and the possibility of a terrorist attack or accident at the floating gas terminal is a major objection to them.

A General Accounting Office report issued a week ago said not enough research has been done on the effects of a leak, spill or sabotage on LNG ships. The Congressional hearing last week gave representatives an opportunity to ask federal agencies about the safety of the rapidly expanding LNG import industry, and included a closed-door session on terrorism and LNG that included secret briefing materials.

“Coast Guard assets are aging by the day, and I am concerned about whether or not the Coast Guard has the assets to meet this growing mission,” said Committee Chairman Bennie Thompson, D-Louisiana.

Rep. Christopher Shays, a Connecticut Republican whose district might play host to a floating offshore LNG terminal, asked a Coast Guard rear admiral if the Coast Guard has enough people and ships to guard LNG vessels, which federal officials say are possible terrorism targets.

At the hearing, which was webcast, Rear Admiral Brian Salerno told Shays, “The question of resources is being looked at carefully.”

“Isn’t the honest answer to that question ‘no’?” Shays asked.

Salerno paused, looked at his notes, and replied, “That’s on the table.”

“I think that’s a punt,” Shays snapped.

Coast Guard officials in New York have said they would need one ship and 70 additional crewmembers for security at Broadwater, a floating LNG terminal very similar in concept to the BHP Billiton concept for an unloading, processing and storage tank facility 13.8 miles off the Malibu coast.

Coast Guard officials have not prepared a similar Waterways Suitability Assessment for Cabrillo Port, the BHP Billiton project proposed for coastal Malibu, because it is not within a harbor or bay, like the Broadwater project.

The Coast Guard air and sea fleet is in a state of distress right now, with a half dozen ships showing hull cracks after a modernization program failed, leaving the ships and cutters unsafe and unusable. New helicopters are behind schedule and over budget, and the new GAO report warns that the Coast Guard may not be equipped to handle the task of guarding five existing LNG terminals, 15 LNG terminals in the permitting process, and another 25 or so that are proposed.

Thompson said he realized Coast Guard officials are attempting to fix the problems, “but I want to know if this course correction will occur before the additional LNG facilities come on line.”

Thompson said he was puzzled by the Coast Guard’s inability to say right now if it has enough staff. “Very rarely do I find a (congressional) committee offering to help, and the offer is declined,” he said.

Some California decision-makers in behind-the-scenes meetings with anti-LNG activists have raised the possibility of an LNG tanker being hijacked “and rammed into Santa Monica.”

At the Wednesday hearing, an official with the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission downplayed the dangers of a terrorist scenario, saying the worst-case scenario imaginable is a “pool fire” of spilled LNG that would burn for a half hour. “If you read the popular press, [the danger] is overblown,” said J. Mark Robinson, FERC’s Director of Energy Projects.

“What they are talking about is second-degree burns on exposed skin one mile away, if you hold your arm out for a minute,” he told the committee. “If you just move away within 20-to-30 seconds, you won’t have a burn.”

In a 2005 report, the Foreign Policy Research Institute said the hijacking and destruction of an LNG tanker was unimaginable in a pre-9/11 world. “The attack on the U.S.S. Cole (in 2002) by al-Qaeda operatives in the harbor in Aden, Yemen changed all that. Using a small inflatable boat loaded with explosives, the attackers were able to blow a 40x60 foot hole in the side of the armored ship, inflicting heavy damage both above and largely below the waterline.

“Seventeen Navy personnel were killed and 36 injured in the attack,” the report continued. “Shortly thereafter, a small boat laden with explosives attacked the French tanker Limburg at Ash Shihr, Yemen. In that attack, both the inner and outer hulls of the double-hulled ship were penetrated, and damage extended, according to the captain, seven or eight meters into the cargo hold, which was filled with crude oil.”

ANCIENT RITUAL

Photo credit, MSN/Frank Lamonea

ANCIENT RITUAL—Holding special ceremonial wands, Mati Waiya, whose name means “Little Hawk” in Chumash, performs a traditional tribal dance as part of a program last Sunday to impart the heritage of Malibu’s earliest recorded inhabitants at the Wishtoyo Foundations’s Chumash Demonstration Village located at Nicholas Canyon County Beach. Draped in a coyote skin and adorned with sacred hawk feathers,, the body paint Mati Waiya wears is mixed by hand from natural ingredients, including charcoal and ochre, and represents symbols handed down through generations of Chumash.

City Moving Closer to Finalizing Deal for Lumber Yard Site

• Plans for Use to Go Before ERB

BY BILL KOENEKER

The City of Malibu’s Environmental Review Board is scheduled to meet on March 28 to discuss an application to permit a remodel of an existing lumber yard and hardware store located in the Civic Center as an upscale boutique shopping center consisting of retail and restaurant space.

The old Malibu lumber yard and hardware store is owned by the city and was purchased as part of the Chili Cook-Off acquisition. The city is currently negotiating with Richard Weintraub for a master lease agreement.

The application, according to city officials, is being processed before the city inks a deal with Weintraub, who has been negotiating with the city manager to operate the facility.

“We haven’t signed anything. There are still ongoing negotiations,” said City Manager Jim Thorsen, who added that the matter is still being conducted in closed-door sessions and he could not comment on details.

“We are finally getting close to a final agreement,” said Thorsen, who acknowledged that the applications were being processed as a matter of “good faith,” during the last days of negotiations. “There is a good faith effort on everybody’s part,” he added. The applications for a coastal permit and Conditional Use Permit were submitted on December 6, 2006 for processing, according to municipal documents.

The city manager said he thought the leasing agreement would be back before the city council for approval within the next 60 days.

At a previous meeting, council members announced they were pleased with the ongoing negotiations and have already been discussing that the extra money promised by the leasing agreement could be used for other municipal projects, including proposed park improvements at Trancas Park.

The ERB staff report indicates that the property, which is owned by the city, contains four vacant buildings totaling 30,331 square feet.

The applicant proposes to remodel the existing lumber yard. The proposal calls for remodeling the buildings to contain 11 new retail areas totaling 27,396 square feet and two new restaurant areas totaling 2000 square feet.

The staff report indicates the plans would not increase existing onsite square footage or floor area. Plans also call for 120 parking spaces on the property, including 46 valet and 74 self-parking stalls.

The property is located near the intersection of Pacific Coast Highway and Cross Creek Road.

The planning department indicated an initial study will be prepared pursuant to the California Environmental Quality Act and the preparation of the initial study triggered review and comment of the project by the ERB.

“The initial study is still being reviewed [in-house],” said city planner Evan Langan, who said it is not yet available for public scrutiny.

Watchdog Agency Slams Current State of LNG Science

• GAO Study Says There Are Still Too Many Unanswered Questions about Tanker Safety

BY HANS LAETZ

A Congressional study on liquefied natural gas tanker dangers concludes that safety agencies deciding about building LNG terminals do not have the tools to evaluate risk from terrorist attack, human error or natural disasters. And a portion of the study’s panel of scientific experts thinks that Cabrillo Port’s current worst-case fire scenario is underestimated.

The report, described by one industry critic as “stunning and scary,” says existing LNG safety guidelines are based on studies done in the 1970s and ’80s that only “examined small LNG spills of up to 35 meters in diameter. Following the terrorist attacks of September 11, 2001, however, many experts recognized that an attack on an LNG tanker could result in a large spill—a volume of LNG up to 100 times greater than studied in past experiments.”

New large-scale safety tests are slated to occur next year. Federal and state officials are going to make their determination on BHP Billiton’s proposal for 13.8 miles off Malibu within 60 days.

The Government Accountability Office report said the current estimate of the effects if an LNG spill from a ship is limited to a hole just 39 inches in diameter, and does not take into consideration the fact that the failure of one tank filled with a -260 degree fluid might crack a ship’s structural steel, causing other tanks to leak in what scientists call a “cascading failure.”

“One expert suggested that a one-meter hole in the center tank of an LNG tanker that resulted in a pool fire could cause the near simultaneous failure of the other four tanks, leading to a larger heat hazard zone,” the report said.

The GAO report said a majority of its panel of 15 scientists disagreed with the earlier study, done by the Sandia National Laboratory. “Only nine of 15 experts agreed with Sandia’s conclusion that only three of the five LNG tanks on a tanker would be involved in cascading failure. Five experts noted that the Sandia study did not explain how it concluded that only three tanks would be involved in cascading failure.

“Three experts said that an LNG spill and subsequent fire could potentially result in the loss of all tanks on board the tanker,” the report said. The report focused on LNG transport tankers, and did not address BHP Billiton’s plan to have such LNG tankers with five tanks tie up to Cabrillo Port and its additional three larger tanks.

“The GAO report confirms every one of the points that our experts have been saying,” said Environmental Defense Center attorney Nathan Alley. “There is so much uncertainty about very important matters, and the federal government has now gone on record that the LNG industry is shirking the amount of detailed research that needs to be done to protect people and the environment.”

Oxnard anti-LNG film producer Tim Riley said, “The GAO study shows the federal scientists are finally admitting that they do not know what the effects of millions of gallons of cryogenically-chilled liquid on a ship’s decks will be. We’ve been saying all along it would make the ship’s skin peel like a banana, and now they say they agree that more study has to be done.”

Officials from BHP Billiton would not respond with specific comments about the conclusions stated in the government report. John Lockhart, a public relations agent hired by the company, said the project would be located 14 miles from the nearest homes, and would “provide the people of California with what they want – minimal environmental impact on the coastline, sea and air—and what they need—the highest degree of safety from its sources of natural gas.”

Lockhart defended the LNG industry’s safety record, noting that more than “40,000 LNG carrier voyages covering over 60 million miles have occurred without a major accident in the past 40 years.”

The GAO study, however, noted that “some safety incidents, such as groundings or collisions, have resulted in small LNG spills that did not affect public safety.”

The GAO report said 10 major areas of study should be undertaken on how LNG spills would unfold on ships, but noted that only three areas are being researched at this time, and none of those new reports will be available to decision-makers until at least late 2008. New studies on large fire phenomena, large LNG spills over water, and large-scale fire testing will be funded in fiscal year 2008, which starts next October.

But the report says additional studies need to be conducted on cascading failures, the impact of wind and waves on a spill and pool fire, the effect of differing hole sizes, and other critical factors.

“Experts agreed that the most likely public safety impact of an LNG spill is the heat hazard of a fire and that explosions are not likely to occur in the wake of an LNG spill,” according to the report. “However, experts disagreed on the specific heat hazard and cascading failure conclusions reached by the Sandia study.”

The report noted that a majority of its panel of scientists agreed with the Sandia study. Among the dissenters, half felt it overestimated the hazards proposed by LNG tankers, the other half felt it understated those risks.

The report also notes that “some safety incidents, such as groundings or collisions, have resulted in small LNG spills that did not affect public safety.” That contradicts past claims by BHP Billiton that LNG tankers have never leaked.

The GAO study calls into question the adequacy of safety assessments at LNG terminals elsewhere in the nation being written by the U.S. Coast Guard, which has to write official Waterways Suitability Assessments for U.S. harbors. Since Malibu’s Cabrillo Port would be offshore on the high seas, a WSA is not being drafted for that project, Coast Guard officials have said.

“Experts disagreed with the heat impact and cascading tank failure conclusions reached by the Sandia study, which the Coast Guard uses to prepare Waterways Suitability Assessments,” the GAO report says.

The City of Malibu and local contributors are partially funding the EDC’s legal study and possible challenge to the Cabrillo Port permit, and EDC attorney Alley said the new congressional study confirms every point on safety that EDC has made.

“Number one, it says the risk models used by the federal government to evaluate Billiton’s safety are inadequate,” he said. “Number two, every one of their expectations on how an LNG fire would go down is based on incorrect assumptions or guesses.

“And number three, there is so much uncertainty about very important matters,” Alley said.

Riley, an Oxnard Shores attorney, said the GAO study says the same thing that he was labeled an “extremist” for bringing up three years ago.

“And there are a lot of additional questions raised by the study, like who were the scientists who were interviewed?” he said. “A lot of those people may work for the LNG industry as safety consultants.”

Riley said the GAO study shows “an ever-changing worst-case scenario” and said Malibu residents cannot rest assured that the permanently anchored Cabrillo Port would stay put in an emergency.

“BHP Billiton has a proven record of failure in that department, one of its natural gas terminals that was supposedly hurricane-proof came loose in a hurricane and traveled 200 kilometers (124 miles) upside down,” he said. “There is nothing to stop an LNG leak from snapping those anchors, and the wind from blowing that facility onto the shore.”

Film and Television Composer Comes Full Circle Scoring Ballet

• Collaboration on ‘The Sea Princess’ Brings Eric Allaman Back to Classical Roots

BY ROBBY MAZZA

Composer Eric Allaman will realize a dream on Friday, May 18. His two-year collaboration with artistic director Kim Maselli, the Pacific Festival Ballet’s choreographer and artistic director, will come to life in a ballet called “The Sea Princess” that will have two performances at the Civic Arts Plaza in Thousand Oaks.

The ballet, written and choreographed by Maselli, and composed by Allaman, is the story of Ondine, who is turned into a mermaid by an evil sorceress, Poseidenne, who then lures her into the sea. Poseidenne’s spell is broken when Ondine is reunited with her true love, Prince Raphael, and her evil is lost at sea forever. “It’s an 80 minute ballet, that’s basically good versus evil,” said Allaman, “a bit like Swan Lake and a little like the Little Mermaid.”

Allaman, a classically trained pianist, who works out of a small studio on Point Dume, says that variety is the key to being a successful composer and his work certainly proves it. His films have included “Legend,” “Trueheart,” “Elvira’s Haunted Hills,” “Latter Days” and “Breakfast with Einstein.”

He also scores the television program “Extreme Makeover” and has worked on several other shows, including the miniseries “Dante’s Cove,” “Beautiful Girl,” “Mike Hammer Private Eye” and the docudrama “Raven Warrior.” His repertoire includes two operas; “Battleship Potemkin” and “Voices from the Cellar”; theatrical productions “The Geography of Luck,” “Dragon Lady,” and “Stendahl”; as well as several CDs of original music.

Allaman and Maselli met at a party in December 2005. “She asked me if I wanted to do a ballet. I’d always wanted to, but my career wasn’t really going that way, I was more involved in film and television scoring,” he said.

He was familiar with Maselli’s extensive career—she trained at the Joffrey Ballet, and her work includes performances with the American Ballet Theater II under the direction of Richard Englund.

She was a member of the Los Angeles Ballet from 1982 to 1990, was a regular on the television series “Fame,” and has starred in numerous television specials with Mikhail Baryshnikov, as well as the 1982 Emmy Awards.

Maselli has also choreographed work for several television shows, such as “Star Search.” Currently, she trains dancers at the California Dance Theater in Agoura Hills that “feeds” the Pacific Ballet, the resident company of the Civic Arts Plaza.

Maselli wanted the music a year ahead of schedule, but because Allaman was at work scoring a film, he was unable to start until April of 2006.

“I pretty much had an open pallette to do what I wanted to do,” he said. “Kim came to my studio, and we discussed the story line, the dramatic arc of the piece, and the tempos where things should be slow and fast, and then I went to work.” Using an orchestral synthesizer that produces the sound of every instrument from oboes to drums to flutes, he completed the music for “The Sea Princess” in four months.

“There is no way you can make synthesized music sound like an orchestra,” said Allaman, who had recorded scores for films and television in Russia in the past, and wanted a full orchestra for this production. He decided to travel there to record the ballet in October of 2006.

“My decision was financial,” he said. “Here you’ll pay $300 for a player for a three-hour session, in Russia, you'll pay about $25 for a four-hour session. You hate to do it to players here, but it was either record it there or use synthesizers here.”

Using a 65-piece orchestra—the perfect ensemble for a ballet—the music was recorded in about five days at the Documentary Film Studios in St. Petersburg. “It was a phenomenal experience to go realize my ballet in the Mecca of ballets.” said Allaman. “Across the street was the St. Petersburg Music Conservatory, where a litany of great composers like Rimsky-Korsakov and Peter Tchaikovsky studied, and next door was the Mirinsky Theater, which produced some of the great ballets including Tchaikovsky’s “Nutcracker,” “Swan Lake,” and “Sleeping Beauty.”

He states that the ballet, or for that matter, most classical compositions such as opera, are an incredible amount of work and that the rewards, at least financial, are slim, but that wasn’t why he did it.

“For so many of us that do music for film and T.V., that’s how we survive, few manage it in theater and fewer manage it in the concert world. We compose mostly background music, that’s the beauty of it because it allows the actors to speak, but composition is covered by dialogue or sound,” he said. “In ballet, the music is full frontal and gets maximum exposure, even more so than opera, where singer’s voice is the focus. For a composer, instrumental music is more featured in ballet than in opera.”

“I didn’t do this thinking it would ever make a nickel, that wasn’t my interest,” he stated. "I love dance and I love music, I wanted to write something that could possibly have some longevity to it. You don’t write a ballet thinking it will be a huge financial success. It took a massive amount of time, but I loved it.”

Allaman states that historically ballet has been somewhat of then “ugly stepchild” of classical music. “Operas are not moneymakers, but they are supported by fundraisers that keep them going,” he said. “Ballets, like musical theater, are dead in the water if they don’t make it, that’s why you see productions like “Swan Lake” and “The Nutcracker” done ad nauseum year after year.”

Allaman, who has lived in Malibu since 1991, attended UCLA where he majored in music and theater. After graduating, he decided to go to Paris and write 19th century piano music. “I wanted to make it as a composer writing music that was already 250 years out of style,” he said.

After nearly a year, he hadn’t been able to “get anything going” and was running out of money. He left in search of other opportunities—traveling across Europe on a Unirail pass and shopping his music. He ended up in Berlin. "I didn’t want to go home with my tail between my legs because I failed,” he said, “so a friend loaned me $1000 and said, ‘Do what you have to do.’” Within a week, he was working, playing music on television getting his music on radio and receiving an offer to play in a cabaret.

He started working with the legendary German electronic group Tangerine Dream that is famous for scoring the film “Risky Business” and became involved in synthesized music—techno, which is fast-pasted dance-type music and electronica, more atmospheric and ambient sound. He began writing for the group, scoring the Tom Cruise film, “Legend.” “I realized I could do this, I could write images for pictures and movies,” he said, so he scored a few more films with Tangerine Dream.

At that time he received an offer to score a silent film “The Battleship Potemkin,” which he later based his opera on for the Berlin Film Festival. He received international acclaim and decided to come home to California.

He found that diversity was the key to becoming a successful composer. “You have to be diverse as a composer to survive. You cover so much territory, you can never say you don’t understand a certain genre or style—you won’t survive.”

His scoring style has covered the gamut from retro surf music for the film “High Tide,” to techno electronica for “Latter Days,” to Native American. Although comfortable and proficient in many styles, including electronica, techno, orchestral, solo piano music and guitar music, others have proven to be challenges. Undaunted, he has gone to great measures to conquer the challenges and learn the style.

“I had to really research jazz music for ‘Mike Hammer,’ I’d never done jazz before. Stacy [Keach] loves jazz and “cool school blues,” so I listened to several recordings so I could compose the music for the show.” For “African Sky,” Robert Mitchum’s last series, the directors wanted African music.

Not knowing anything about the sound, he immersed himself and produced the score and for the film “TrueHeart,” the producers wanted Native American music, specifically reminiscent of Northwestern, so he attended powwows and studied the sound. When he was ready to record, he brought Native American singers to the studio and recorded the track.

When he takes a break, Allaman, who grew up in Laguna and is an avid surfer, can be found on his board or with his two sons, Von, 13, and Tristan, 8, whom he has been coaching in Malibu Little League for the past eight years.

“My dream was to come back and surf,” he said. “My story brought me back full circle and I’m within a stone’s throw of where I studied music.”

There will be two performances of “The Sea Princess” on Friday, May 19: at 4 and 7:30 p.m. in the Fred Kavli Theatre at the Thousand Oaks Civic Arts Plaza. For more information and to purchase tickets, visit www.californiadance theatre.com.

THE COMPOSER—Eric Allaman had to compose parts for each instrument in the 65-piece orchestra. “I love dance and I love music, I wanted to write something that could possibly have some longevity to it,” he said.


THE DANCERS—At El Matador State Beach, London O’Donnell, in white, as Ondine; and Emiko Flanagan, in red, as Poseidenne. “The Sea Princess will have two performances on May 18 at the Civic Arts Plaza in Thousand Oaks.

LNG Watch: Cabrillo Port Timetable

Wednesday, April 4: United States Coast Guard and Department of Commerce will hold a hearing at the Oxnard Performing Arts Center, 800 Hobson Way, Oxnard.

Monday, April 9: California State Lands Commission hearing and vote at the Oxnard Performing Arts Center, 800 Hobson Way, Oxnard.

Thursday, April 12: Coastal Commission hearing and vote at Doubletree Resort, 633 E. Cabrillo St., Santa Barbara.

Early June: 45-day period for Governor Arnold Schwarzenegger to veto Cabrillo Port expires.

Later this summer: EPA releases its decision on smog permits for the LNG terminal.

December, 2008 or ?: If approved, construction could start on the floating energy terminal, most likely at a shipyard in Korea or some other overseas nation.

June 1, 2013: If constructed, the first delivery of natural gas is anticipated from the facility at anchor 13.8 miles off Malibu.

##

Watchdog Agency Slams LNG Science and Says Experts Can’t Assess Disaster Potential

•GAO Study Contends that All the Questions about Tanker Safety Haven’t Been Answered Yet•

BY HANS LAETZ

A Congressional study on liquefied natural gas tankers dangers concludes that safety agencies deciding about building LNG terminals do not have the tools to evaluate risk from terrorist attack, human error or natural disasters. And a portion of the study’s panel of scientific experts thinks that Cabrillo Port’s current worst-case fire scenario is underestimated.

The report, described by one industry critic as “stunning and scary,” says existing LNG safety guidelines are based on studies done in the 1970s and ’80s that only “examined small LNG spills of up to 35 meters in diameter. Following the terrorist attacks of September 11, 2001, however, many experts recognized that an attack on an LNG tanker could result in a large spill—a volume of LNG up to 100 times greater than studied in past experiments.”

New large-scale safety tests are slated to occur next year. Federal and state officials are going to make their determination on BHP Billiton’s proposal for 13.8 miles off Malibu within 60 days.

The Government Accountability Office report said the current estimate of the effects if an LNG spill from a ship is limited to a hole just 39 inches in diameter, and does not take into consideration the fact that the failure of one tank filled with a -260 degree fluid might crack a ship’s structural steel, causing other tanks to leak in what scientists call a “cascading failure.”

“One expert suggested that a one-meter hole in the center tank of an LNG tanker that resulted in a pool fire could cause the near simultaneous failure of the other four tanks, leading to a larger heat hazard zone,” the report said.

The GAO report said a majority of its panel of 15 scientists disagreed with the earlier study, done by the Sandia National Laboratory, “Only nine of 15 experts agreed with Sandia’s conclusion that only three of the five LNG tanks on a tanker would be involved in cascading failure. Five experts noted that the Sandia study did not explain how it concluded that only three tanks would be involved in cascading failure.

“Three experts said that an LNG spill and subsequent fire could potentially result in the loss of all tanks on board the tanker,” the report said. The report focused on LNG transport tankers, and did not address BHP Billiton’s plan to have such LNG tankers with five tanks tie up to Cabrillo Port and its additional three larger tanks.

“The GAO report confirms every one of the points that our experts have been saying,” said Environmental Defense Center attorney Nathan Alley. “There is so much uncertainty about very important matters, and the federal government has now gone on record that the LNG industry is shirking the amount of detailed research that needs to be done to protect people and the environment.
Oxnard anti-LNG film producer Tim Riley said, “The GAO study shows the federal scientists are finally admitting that they do not know what the effects of millions of gallons of cryogenically-chilled liquid on a ship’s decks will be. We’ve been saying all along it would make the ship’s skin peel like a banana, and now they say they agree that more study has to be done.”

Officials from BHP Billiton and a Washington LNG lobbying group did not return phone calls or e-mails.

The GAO report said 10 major areas of study should be undertaken on how LNG spills would unfold on ships, but noted that only three areas are being researched at this time, and none of those new reports will be available to decision-makers until at least late 2008. New studies on large fire phenomena, large LNG spills over water, and large-scale fire testing will be funded in fiscal year 2008, which starts next October.

But the report says additional studies need to be conducted on cascading failures, the impact of wind and waves on a spill and pool fire, the effect of differing hole sizes, and other critical factors.

“Experts agreed that the most likely public safety impact of an LNG spill is the heat hazard of a fire and that explosions are not likely to occur in the wake of an LNG spill,” the report says. “However, experts disagreed on the specific heat hazard and cascading failure conclusions reached by the Sandia study.”

The report noted that a majority of its panel of scientists agreed with the Sandia study. Among the dissenters, half felt it overestimated the hazards proposed by LNG tankers, the other half felt it understated those risks.

The report also notes that “some safety incidents, such as groundings or collisions, have resulted in small LNG spills that did not affect public safety.” That contradicts past claims by BHP Billiton that LNG tankers have never leaked.

The GAO study calls into question the adequacy of safety assessments at LNG terminals elsewhere in the nation being written by the U.S. Coast Guard, which has to write official Waterways Suitability Assessments for U.S. harbors. Since Malibu’s Cabrillo Port would be offshore on the high seas, a WSA is not being drafted for that project, Coast Guard officials have said.

“Experts disagreed with the heat impact and cascading tank failure conclusions reached by the Sandia study, which the Coast Guard uses to prepare Waterways Suitability Assessments,” the GAO report says.

The City of Malibu and local contributors are partially funding the EDC’s legal study and possible challenge to the Cabrillo Port permit, and EDC attorney Alley said the new congressional study confirms every point on safety that EDC has made.

“Number one, it says the risk models used by the federal government to evaluate Billiton’s safety are inadequate,” he said. “Number two, every one of their expectations on how an LNG fire would go down is based on incorrect assumptions or guesses.

“And number three, there is so much uncertainty about very important matters,” Alley said.

Riley, an Oxnard Shores attorney, said the GAO study says the same thing that he was labeled an “extremist” for bringing up three years ago.

“And there are a lot of additional questions raised by the study, like who were the scientists who were interviewed?” he said. “A lot of those people may work for the LNG industry as safety consultants.”

Riley said the GAO study shows “an ever-changing worst-case scenario” and said Malibu residents cannot rest assured that the permanently-anchored Cabrillo Port would stay put in an emergency.

“BHP Billiton has a proven record of failure in that department, one of its natural gas terminals that was supposedly hurricane-proof came loose in a hurricane and traveled 200 kilometers (124 miles) upside down,” he said. “There is nothing to stop an LNG leak from snapping those anchors, and the wind from blowing that facility onto the shore.”

Current District Plans Bypass School Bond’s Goals

• Raises Issue of Whether Voter Intent Behind Passage of Measure BB Is Being Ignored

BY MAX TAVES

Last November, voters throughout the Santa Monica-Malibu Unified School District overwhelmingly approved Measure BB, which promised to improve health, safety and technology at aging district schools by raising $268 million through property taxes.

But preliminary designs presented Saturday at a special Board meeting at Santa Monica High made scant reference to health and safety and only vague references to technology, prompting many board members to ask that future plans pay more attention to voters’ intentions.

“I’m concerned about keeping our plans in line with what voters wanted,” said Board member Kelly Pye, who wanted to see a greater focus on campus security.

According to a recent survey, 47 percent of community members affiliated with district schools do not think that local schools do enough to protect “unwanted people from wandering onto campus.”

Last year, the district hired the architecture firms Concordia, Sidewalk Studio and Harley Ellis Devereaux to create a 20-year master plan that would fulfill its long-term goals such as lowering class sizes, providing after-school childcare and creating schools as community centers. And they hope that those goals for the 12,000-student district will, in part, be funded by Measure BB.

Despite concerns that initial designs did not address Measure BB’s intent, the bond’s fine print might be broad enough to allow large changes with little specific reference to health and safety. The oversight committee for Measure BB, which is appointed by the board, has not yet been formed.

Tim Morneau, an architect with H.E.D., said the plans are not complete, and that final plans will incorporate health, safety and technology concerns.

“We made promises to taxpayers in bringing $268 million to our schools,” said Superintendent Diane Talarico. “We will be accountable to voters who voted for safety and technology. That was part of the Measure BB.”

The designs presented Saturday promised a broad, sweeping architectural vision, culled from six month’s of district-wide surveys and focus groups. Their plans envision the district’s 16 schools as “architectural destinations.”

To that end, they want to pursue joint-use agreements with the Cities of Malibu and Santa Monica and Santa Monica College. At some Santa Monica schools, they hope to buy adjacent land to build new classrooms and extra parking facilities. And at Malibu High, they propose building affordable housing units for school and city staff.

While the recent bond has meant large funding for capital projects, a recent independent audit questions the fiscal health of the district. Last year, the board approved a five percent salary hike for teachers, but overseers now argue that the raise leaves the school without state-mandated reserve fund. There are no indications, however, that these concerns will affect the district’s long-term proposals.

Although Measure BB has allowed the district to imagine large changes, early cost estimates for completing its master plan range from $700 million to over $1 billion, which will have to funded by future bond measures. Board members acknowledged that not every school will see “big changes” in the first phases of the 20 year plan. And the allocation of the district’s new Measure BB funds is expected to become an intense fight.

“I have to manage people’s expectations,” Talarico said. “Not everyone is going to be satisfied. We need to move from a me-plan to a we-plan. There are schools with more needs than others.”

Perhaps in anticipation of a fight, Talarico and the board are organizing tours of the districts 16 schools to assess needs, and they encouraged all community members to participate.

The Malibu Surfside News asked board president and Malibu resident, Kathy Wisnicki, if she thought that Malibu schools would benefit from Measure BB’s funds. She said that all Malibu school sites “need health, safety and technology updates.”

Increasing traffic flow at Malibu schools was a common concern among locals that district designers aim to address. Architects say that their plans for Malibu’s public schools were shaped by meetings with parents, students and staff. Some of those key plans are listed below and organized by school:

Malibu Middle and High School

Designers say they would like to make the school an “architectural destination” by building and enhancing public plazas and open space. They want to “enhance” the school’s amphitheater and landscape and build additional lunch shelters. They also suggested constructing a larger media center though a joint use agreement with the city. To improve traffic flow, they propose building a road that would loop around Cabrillo Elementary through Malibu High.

Juan Cabrillo
Elementary School

Expanding classrooms and building dedicated kindergarten and childcare classrooms was a repeated theme for Cabrillo. Beyond improving landscaping, designers recommend creating dedicated drop-off/ pick-up areas to improve traffic flow.

Webster Elementary School

Fulfilling designers’ visions here might include enhancing the front entrance, building new classrooms, renovating the cafeteria, and adding a music room and multi-purpose space. They also want to create “sustainable” perma-culture and “outdoor living and learning spaces.”

Point Dume Marine Science School

Developing features that expand on the elementary school’s marine biology theme were mentioned, but no details were given. Planners want to build larger windows and allow outdoor access from classrooms. They also want childcare classrooms, a play yard and “sustainable” perma-culture.

The board plans to approve the first phase of the master plan this spring. Parents and students from Point Dume and Webster attended a briefing of the plan on Tuesday. The district will hold a similar meeting for interested stakeholders of Malibu High and Cabrillo Elementary at 12:45 p.m. on March 23. For more information, see the plan’s website at www.ourschoolplan.com.

Cabrillo Port Opponents Rally the Ranks at Malibu Pier Event

• Critics of Floating LNG Terminal Planned Off Malibu Coast Are Buoyed by Report Findings

BY SONJA MAGDEVSKI

Members of the Malibu and Oxnard communities showed up in force Saturday at the Malibu Pier for the “No BHP LNG” press conference and community rally organized by the California Coastal Protection Network. The event shined a spotlight on the three upcoming meetings that will determine the fate of BHP Billiton’s proposed liquefied natural gas terminal 13.8 miles off the coast between Malibu and Port Hueneme.

The event was moderated by Keely Shaye Brosnan, a vocal community activist and strong opponent of BHPB’s LNG terminal. She was joined by her actor husband, Pierce Brosnan, and their two children as she spoke about the detrimental environmental impacts of the Cabrillo Port project.

In addition to star power, the rally included three key California assembly members who vigorously oppose the LNG project—Lloyd Levine (D-Van Nuys), Julia Brownley (D-Malibu) and Pedro Nava (D-Santa Barbara).

Levine had earlier lent his name to advertisements taken out by Billiton, but said Saturday that endorsement was based on a false assurance from the Australian company that their project would meet all federal and state pollution laws. Levine said he now realizes that BHPB and the federal government are “playing dirty politics to thwart California’s commitment to a clean environment, and trying to inflict this project on us, bypassing our clean-and-green state and federal environmental laws.”

Prominent longtime Malibuite and actor-activist Martin Sheen, and members of the Malibu Chamber of Commerce and Association of Realtors, also took part in the rally, held under warm, sunny skies at the city’s landmark pier.

Sheen told The News after the rally, “After reviewing the points of the final Environmental Impact Report, I am absolutely convinced that this project must be stopped and stopped now.” He added, “We have to stand up and protect the environment.”

The proposed $800 million terminal would be the first of its kind, with Australia’s BHP Billiton aiming to become one of the main suppliers of Australian and Asian natural gas to California.

The terminal—three football fields in length, 13-stories tall, and designed to float in 2900 feet of water—would unload transoceanic tankers carrying natural gas that has been chilled to minus 260 degrees and liquefied. This liquid would then be cooked on board the giant terminal to transform it back into gas, which would then be sent through underwater pipes. Although the design capacity is 800 million cubic feet of natural gas daily, the company says it could double that output if the state requires the gas.

BHP Billiton claims its project is good for California and that natural gas is the least polluting fossil fuel. But the final 3000-page Environmental Impact Report released March 9 (see story on page 3) concludes that the LNG project does in fact create substantial environmental risks for the California coast in a number of areas, including air pollution and marine life. The report found that the terminal and its associated tankers would emit more than 480 tons of ozone-forming emissions, smoke and soot in local skies.

“The problem with LNG when you condense it, store it, transport it across the globe, and regasify it, is that it takes a tremendous amount of energy, all of which results in significantly increased greenhouse gas emissions—so this is not the silver bullet the industry is promoting it as,” said Susan Jordan, CCPN executive director. Dependence on LNG, Jordan said, would only stall progress for the clean renewable-energy future that California is trying to achieve.

The federal government supports the BHPB LNG proposal, which is regulated primarily under the Federal Deepwater Port Act, which gives California Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger final veto power. It has been reported that BHP Billiton spent $1.8 million last year lobbying in California. Schwarzenegger has indicated support, but taken no official position on the terminal.

Key hearings and votes in April will cap off the series of studies and debates that have been underway for more than three years. Linda Krop, chief counsel for the Environmental Defense Center, and Owen Bailey, conservation organizer for the Sierra Club, strongly urged community members to become involved and attend the upcoming meetings.

“It is not too late for people to become involved, and it is important for people to understand that this project is not clean at all,” Krop said. The pollutants, she said, would blow onshore and only exacerbate the air quality in Ventura and LA counties, which already violate air quality standards. “This is truly the time for people to have an impact, and we can make a difference.”

The U.S. Coast Guard hearing will be from 5-8 p.m. April 4, at the Oxnard Performing Arts Center, 800 Hobson Way, Oxnard. The California State Lands Commission hearing will be at the same location at 10 a.m. April 9, and the California Coastal Commission will meet April 12, at 9 a.m. at Fess Parker’s Resort, 633 E. Cabrillo St., in Santa Barbara.

Information on the upcoming meetings can be found at www.cabrilloport.ene.com/meetings.html

Photo credit, MSN/Frank Lamonea
STRONG OPPOSITION—Moderating the rally that was organized to spotlight three upcoming meetings that will determine the fate of the BNP BIlliton LNG terminal was Keely Shaye Brosnan.

Photo credit, MSN/Frank Lamonea
PRESIDENTIAL PROWESS—Longtime Malibu resident and environmental activist Martin Sheen was one of critics of Cabrillo Port who addressed the enthusiastic crowd. Also on hand were three key California Assembly members.

Photo credit, MSN/Frank Lamonea
CONCERNED CITIZENS—The “No BHP LNG” rally on the Malibu Pier had a good turnout last weekend, as the deadline for a decision on Cabrillo Port gets closer.

Cabrillo Port Would Impose 20 Negative Impacts on Local Coast

• Report Says Danger to Whales, Massive Smog and Visual Impact Cannot Be Mitigated

BY HANS LAETZ

Coastal advocates, facing a three-week deadline, are digesting the massive final Environmental Impact Report on the proposed Cabrillo Port liquefied natural gas terminal, released Friday. But headlines are already out around the world reporting that BHP Billiton’s project would impose 20 risky or polluting impacts on the scenic views, air, wild sea life and people of the Malibu region.

“Twenty proposed project impacts have been identified as significant impacts, considered major, permanent, long-term, or short-term impacts under (federal and state laws),” the report says. It calls those negative effects “significant and unavoidable,” and said the problems “would remain after mitigation is applied.”

The massive, three-volume study includes an entire section devoted to answers to the 1400 specific objections to the plant filed by scientists, lawyers and Malibu residents. Among tens of thousands of conclusions, it says experts cannot estimate the likelihood of a major explosion caused by terrorist acts, such as ramming an LNG carrier into a populated area, because the probability of such a terrorist act cannot be calculated.

The study rejects complaints that experts underestimated the size of a potential circular flash-fire coming from a worst case scenario collision of a ship into the tanker, which would be anchored 13.8 miles off the Ventura county line at Malibu’s north end. Consultants have maintained their position that their best guess is that the ensuing “pool fire” would be 14.4 miles across, which would engulf the maritime shipping lanes and extend far beyond the plant’s safety closure zone.

The report’s publication triggers a 70-day series of hearings, votes, and decisions on the proposed industrial addition to Malibu’s coastline. And if the project wins approvals from the Coast Guard, U.S. Department of Commerce, California State Lands Commission and the Coastal Commission, Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger will have the power to veto the project before May 20.

The report does not take sides in the heated argument over federal smog permits for Cabrillo Port, or whether Cabrillo Port is a part of the Channel Islands exemption to local smog rules, as BHP Billiton claims. Either way, the report concludes the plant’s smog emissions would include nitrogen oxides and petrochemicals at levels that will exceed federal law, despite company plans to reduce smog emissions elsewhere in the state.

Activists have seized on that, saying the law does not allow BHP Billiton to claim to have offset local smog effects by cutting pollutants elsewhere in the state. But the company issued a press release saying the total amount of one type of pollution generated by the plant itself would be less than its emission reductions elsewhere in California.

That calculation does not, however, take into account the pollution caused by LNG tankers steaming up to the terminal, formally called a Floating Regasification and Storage Unit.

The report, posted on the internet Friday morning, concludes that “a number of adverse effects would remain significant and unavoidable. Significant and unavoidable offshore impacts during project operations would be potential public safety impacts from a high-energy marine collision or damage to subsea pipelines; noise impacts to marine animals; marine biology, air quality, and water quality impacts from a significant spill or LNG release from the FSRU or offshore pipelines.”

The report also takes a closer look at two low-income trailer parks in the Oxnard area that will sit on top of a 30-inch high-pressure natural gas line to be installed to feed gas from Cabrillo Port to Los Angeles.

The report sets up one major bone of contention with coastal advocates, who still estimate that opening up Cabrillo Port to imports would add greenhouse gas equal to five percent of California’s existing total discharge. The analysis, however, rejects that argument by only looking at actual discharges at the port itself, instead of the cumulative total caused by compressing the gas and shipping it halfway around the globe.

“The Project would generate emissions of greenhouse gases that would be insignificant alone, but could exacerbate, in combination with existing greenhouse gases, global warming effects,” the report concludes.

The analysis says negative aesthetic, noise, and recreational impacts for boaters traveling near Cabrillo Port will occur, as well as the visual intrusion of an industrial facility into two national parks.

Among other major impacts, the report concludes that commercial and recreational fishing gear could become hung up on, and potentially damage, one or both of the undersea natural gas pipelines. And it says those high-pressure, submerged gaslines coursing across 22 miles of ocean bed could be severed due to a seismic event or undersea landslide.

Every specific written or spoken concern from thousands of Malibu and Oxnard residents over the past three years is addressed in a specific response from consultants working for the state and federal governments. For example, Ventura Congressmember Lois Capps’ concern about the shape and size of the possible explosive vapor cloud is addressed:

“The Independent Risk Assessment determined that the consequences of the worst credible accident involving a vapor cloud fire would be more than 5.7 nautical miles (7.2 highway miles) from shore at the closest point, the maximum distance from the FSRU in any direction that could be affected in the event of an accident. The shape and direction of the affected area would depend on wind conditions and would be more like a cone than a circle, but would not reach the shoreline.”

The report rejects concerns from Malibu residents about the visual impact of the ship, which would be anchored just beyond the shipping lanes used by the container vessels visible most days along the coast.

“From the shoreline, and particularly from higher elevations, the FSRU would be seen but would appear as a thickening on the horizon,” the report says. “Night lighting used during pipeline construction and operations would be visible from the shore and to residents living in the foothills and higher elevation areas in Malibu and from the top of Anacapa Island, thereby altering the nighttime viewshed.”

The report does not mention that a key federal agency, the National Marine Fisheries Service, is currently withholding its input on Cabrillo Port until it gets data about how whales and other protected species will be avoided by LNG tankers, and how continuous, loud noise from the terminal will affect whales. The Coast Guard is required by law to “consult” with the fisheries service, but that agency is balking at what it says is not enough data from BHPB about how Cabrillo Port would scare away or even kill migrating whales.

“A natural gas leak from subsea pipelines could cause morbidity or mortality of marine biota, including fish, invertebrates, seabirds, sea turtles, and marine mammals,” the report says. “Even with the implementation of mitigation measures, impacts on marine biological species from a large accidental release of LNG or fuel would remain significant.”

The report also repeats fisheries service concerns that “construction and operational vessels could collide with marine mammals or sea turtles resting on the ocean surface, resulting in injury or mortality.”

And while the report acknowledges the impact of industrial intrusions into a scenic recreation area, the report does not address the economic impact to whalewatching operations if the leviathans are driven away by the loud LNG boilers.

Lengthy new material in the report about the project’s sound impact on animals is included in new technical studies also unveiled last week. Scientists and lawyers working for the Environmental Defense Center have complained that, although Billion has had months to prepare those studies, coastal advocates have only 21 days to analyze the highly technical new data.

Such analysis on two prior sets of studies uncovered hundreds of purported inaccuracies and errors, lawyers for EDC said, and there is no reason not to expect that this time.

The company refused this week to answer any specific comments about the new report and its 3000 pages of conclusions, but issued a statement saying it was pleased with the results.

Publisher’s Notebook: BHP Billiton’s PR Bust

BY ANNE SOBLE

Pity the BHP Billiton public relations machine. All that money and all that expertise, and there’s no way to spin the 3000-page final Environmental Impact Report other than to say that it’s pleased to move on to the next stage. The fence-sitters and even the proponents of Cabrillo Port are faced with the reality that the project would have a major unmitigatable impact on air quality, the marine environment and aesthetics, not just for residents of the Malibu and Oxnard communities who are directly affected, but for the millions of beachgoers who come to the local coast, including those for whom “the beach” is the most accessible and affordable way to escape the rigors of daily life. The threat of smog-laden skies and whale carcasses drifting toward the shoreline cannot be dismissed as the polemic of radical enviros. By any standard of cost-benefit analysis, the risks associated with this project are too high. Those who carry signs, write letters and attend meetings are surrogates for a thousand-fold more who are unable to take on the labyrinthian world of corporate politics.

Although BHPB is doing its best to stack the bureaucratic deck in favor of Cabrillo Port, it’s clear that it is concerned that the final EIR and the international publicity being generated by high profile critics could interfere with the master plan to turn local waters into yet another cash cow for the energy and resources conglomerate. In addition to labeling analysis in the media that questions Cabrillo Port as the product of “biased” journalists and publications, hit pieces are now beginning to appear, including one under the name of a former Bush operative who didn’t bother to check the correct spelling of the name of the Malibu environmental activist he tries to besmirch, protesting “the kind of demagoguery that eco-terrorists routinely accuse energy interests of using,” while ignoring the fact that this is what energy interests routinely do as they equate their corporate profits with God and country. If this is the best the Billiton largess can produce, the behemoth is not as powerful as it thinks it is, and it is beatable. One way to try to facilitate this defeat is to close ranks and show up in large numbers at the three upcoming meetings that could help decide Cabrillo Port’s fate.

County OKs Local Coastal Program

• Document Will Be Forwarded to Supervisors

BY BILL KOENEKER

Without comment or discussion, the Los Angeles County Planning Commission recommended approval of the county’s proposed Local Coastal Program at it’s meeting last week.

“They voted 5-0 to approve as presented and directed it to be transferred to the Board [of Supervisors] for consideration,” said Gina Natoli, the acting section head of the regional planning department, who has headed up the LCP process.

The planning department spokesperson said there were three public speakers on the consent item, but no discussion or comment from the planning panel, which had previously heard the matter at two other separate public hearings.

The commission had met previously and then again in January to consider the LCP and voted to put the matter on last week’s consent calendar.

“Now we need to make all of the changes the planning commission directed us to make,” added Natoli, who said she did not know when the board would take up the LCP document.

The county adopted the Malibu Land Use Plan for the Santa Monica Mountains, which was certified by the California Coastal Commission in 1986. An implementation program was never adopted and the coastal agency continues to take responsibility for issuing coastal permits. To achieve a complete LCP, county planners prepared a draft plan and put together an implementation program.

After the board considers the matter, the Coastal Commission will subsequently consider the document for certification.

Natoli said other issues that were still under consideration by the commission were included in the final vote, such as prohibiting biking on non-designated trails, refining the definition of agriculture, not designating the Piuma area as a significant watershed and prohibiting the hardscaping of streams.

Additionally, planners brought up several other issues that had arisen during public testimony and those too were incorporated into the LCP.

“Some of those were clarifications and didn’t require language,” added Natoli, who said all seven were added to the LCP by direction of the commission.

The planner said it is still her hope that the document would get to the Coastal Commission by the end of the year, but didn’t expect the panel to consider it until next year.

·SPECIAL BULLETIN—MALIBU LNG WATCH·

Revised Cabrillo Port EIR Identifies 20 Significant Negative Impacts

BY HANS LAETZ

The third version of environmental studies on the proposed Cabrillo Port liquefied natural gas terminal was released Friday, and concludes that the project would impose 20 substantial negative impacts on the scenic views, air quality and wildlife of the Malibu coastal strip and waters.

“Twenty proposed project impacts have been identified as significant impacts, [and are] considered major, permanent, long-term or short-term impacts under [federal and state laws],” the long-delayed Environmental Impact Report says. It says the negative effects are “significant and unavoidable, [and even] would remain after mitigation is applied.”

The report’s publication triggers a rapid series of hearings, votes and decisions on the proposed industrial addition to Malibu’s coastline. Assuming the project wins a key approval from the California State Lands Commission and the California Coastal Commission, Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger will have to decide whether to approve or veto the project before May 20.

The report does not take sides in the heated argument over federal smog permits for Cabrillo Port, or whether Cabrillo Port is a part of the Channel Islands exemption to local smog rules, as BHP Billiton claims. But it concludes the LNG plant’s smog emissions would include nitrogen oxides and petrochemicals at levels that will exceed federal law, despite company plans to reduce smog emissions elsewhere in the state.

The EIR, posted on the Internet Friday morning, concludes that “a number of adverse effects would remain significant and unavoidable. Significant and unavoidable offshore impacts during project operations would be potential public safety impacts from a high-energy marine collision or damage to subsea pipelines; noise impacts to marine animals; marine biology, air quality and water quality impacts from a significant spill or LNG release from the [terminal] or offshore pipelines.”

The report sets up one major bone of contention with coastal advocates who estimate that opening up Cabrillo Port to imports would add greenhouse gas equal to five percent of California’s existing total discharge. The EIR, however, rejects that argument by only looking at actual discharges at the port itself, instead of the cumulative total caused by compressing the gas and shipping it halfway around the globe.

“The Project would generate emissions of greenhouse gases that would be insignificant alone, but could exacerbate, in combination with existing greenhouse gases, global warming effects,” the report concludes.

The analysis says negative aesthetic, noise and recreational impacts on boaters traveling near Cabrillo Port will occur, as well as similar impacts from the visual intrusion of an industrial facility into two national parks.

Among other major impacts, the EIR concludes:
· A high-energy collision or an intentional attack could rupture the tanks holding LNG, leading to the release of a flammable vapor cloud that could extend beyond the one-mile safety zone and cover adjacent shipping lanes, but not the adjacent coastline.
· Commercial and recreational fishing gear could become hung up on the pipeline and potentially damage one or both of the undersea pipelines.
· The undersea natural gas pipelines coursing across 22 miles of ocean bed could be severed due to a seismic event or undersea landslide.

The report includes the written and spoken concerns of thousands of Oxnard and Malibu residents over the past three years, along with specific responses to each and every specific comment from consultants working for the state and federal governments. For example, Ventura Congressmember Lois Capp’s concern about the shape and size of an explosive vapor cloud is addressed:
“The Independent Risk Assessment determined that the consequences of the worst credible accident involving a vapor cloud fire would be more than 5.7 nautical miles [7.4 highway miles] from shore at the closest point, the maximum distance from the [ship] in any direction that could be affected in the event of an accident. The shape and direction of the affected area would depend on wind conditions and would be more like a cone than a circle, but would not reach the shoreline.”

The EIR rejects concerns from Malibu residents about the visual impact of the ship, which would be anchored just beyond the shipping lanes used by the container vessels visible most days along the coast.

“From the shoreline, and particularly from higher elevations, the [terminal] would be seen but would appear as a thickening on the horizon,” the report says. “Night lighting used during pipeline construction and operations would be visible from the shore and to residents living in the foothills and higher elevation areas in Malibu and from the top of Anacapa Island, thereby altering the nighttime viewshed.”

The report does not mention that a key federal agency, the National Marine Fisheries Service, is withholding its input on Cabrillo Port until it gets data about how whales and other protected species will be avoided by LNG tankers, and how continuous, loud noise from the terminal will affect whales.

“A natural gas leak from subsea pipelines could cause morbidity or mortality of marine biota, including fish, invertebrates, seabirds, sea turtles and marine mammals,” the report says. “Even with the implementation of mitigation measures, impacts on marine biological species from a large accidental release of LNG or fuel would remain significant.”

The report also repeats NMFS concerns that “construction and operational vessels could collide with marine mammals or sea turtles resting on the ocean surface, resulting in injury or mortality.”

And while the EIR acknowledges the impact of industrial intrusions into a scenic recreation area, it does not address the economic impact to whale-watching operations if the leviathans are driven away by the loud LNG boilers.

Lengthy new material in the report about the project’s sound impact on animals is included in the technical appendices unveiled Friday.

The report also takes a closer look at two low-income trailer parks in the Oxnard area that sit on top of where a 30-inch, high-pressure natural gas line will be installed to feed gas from Cabrillo Port to Los Angeles.

The EIR, some 3000 pages thick, will be reviewed by environmental lawyers, Malibu activists and local governments over the next three weeks. On April 4, the Coast Guard will take public testimony, but will not issue its decision on the matter until later in Washington. On April 9, the Lands Commission will hold its hearing and take a vote, followed on April 12 by the Coastal Commission.

BHP Billiton plans to start operations at Cabrillo Port in three years.

EPA Unable to Show Reasons for Cabrillo Port Smog Rule Reversal

• Congressmember Charges Agency with Cover-Up and Policies that Obstruct the Clean Air Act

BY HANS LAETZ

Environmental Protection Agency political appointees used non-existent analysis and misled the public when they reversed course and rejected tough smog rules for the proposed Cabrillo Port liquefied natural gas terminal off the Malibu coast, the chairman of the House Investigations Committee said Monday.

Rep. Henry Waxman also accused top EPA officials of refusing to hand over key documents detailing the 2005 decision by a White House political appointee to overrule regional EPA officials on a key decision about whether the Cabrillo Port proposal can go forward.

The news from Washington comes as BHP Billiton and its lobbying firm have hired another two close associates of Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger and his wife, Maria Shriver, to press the case behind the scenes for Cabrillo Port. That facility faces key licensing decisions next month, and could be operating on Malibu’s coastal horizon in three years.

Waxman, a Democrat who represents Malibu, began a probe into the BHP Billiton-White House-EPA connection last January, when he assumed the chairmanship of the House Committee on Oversight and Government Reform. In a Jan. 16 letter, he asked for details about why Cabrillo Port was being classified as if it were located on a distant Channel Island, when local smog rules appear to require it to be treated as an onshore smog source.

The difference is critical: Ventura County smog regulators say it is likely the LNG terminal cannot be built, as it would be unable to buy enough smog offset credits to allow it to be built and then discharge an estimated 484 tons of smog ingredients per year just upwind of Malibu.

In a letter sent to EPA Administrator Stephen Johnson this week, Waxman charged that “EPA provided no analysis that justified the reversal of EPA’s position. Nor does the agency now claim that such an analysis even exists.

“In short, while EPA assured the public that its decision was based on sound analysis, EPA has been unable to produce documents that support this claim,” the congressman said.

Waxman’s latest letter confirmed a trail of political interference with the nation’s Clean Air Act first uncovered by lawyers for the Environmental Defense Center, the legal agency funded by the California Coastal Protection Network. The City of Malibu has chipped in $50,000 for the legal fight.

EPA spokesperson Jessica Emond in Washington would not specifically addr