From Caller Times
Local opposition is continuing to grow against a proposed offshore terminal that could be located near the Padre Island National Seashore, with several governmental entities asking Gov. Greg Abbott to put a stop to it.
One week after Nueces County commissioners sent a letter to the Texas General Land Office and Abbott expressing “deep concerns” about the terminal project pitched by Switzerland-based international commodities company Trafigura, the Port of Corpus Christi adopted a formal resolution against the company’s proposal.
The port has previously expressed concerns about the lack of state oversight, since the project would be located in federal waters. There are also questions about the financial impact Texas Gulf Terminals could have on the port, but Port Commissioner Richard Valls Jr. said his primary issue was the risk of an oil spill near the Padre Island National Seashore.
“I do want to place more emphasis on that — the area is critical and the lack of oversight, any spill could jeopardize our national seashore, but our beaches from Padre Island to Port Aransas, the community in Port Aransas and certainly the Port of Corpus Christi,” he said.
“The location … is of ultimate concern,” he added.
Charlie Zahn, chair of the port commission, said he was also concerned about the impact any spill would have on the “tourism economy of Corpus Christi and Port Aransas.” Port officials have said that there are also issues with Trafigura’s permit application before the Marine Division of the U.S. Department of Transportation.
“You’re right on,” Zahn said to Valls.
The Corpus Christi City Council voted to approve a similar resolution Tuesday afternoon at its regularly scheduled meeting. Chambers of Commerce in Aransas Pass and Ingleside, economic development corporations in San Patricio County and Corpus Christi, the city of Gregory, and the Corpus Christi Convention and Visitors Bureau have also adopted resolutions against Trafigura’s project.
Iain Vasey, president and CEO of the Corpus Christi Regional Economic Development Corp., said Trafigura’s project was essentially a “floating ring” that lies outside state regulations. He said there were concerns about the impact the project could have not just on marine life, but also air quality, which could affect the city’s attainment of federal air standards.
“This project would essentially allow Trafigura to fill tankers — the tankers wouldn’t have to capture the vapors and burn them off like they would within the port’s jurisdiction,” Vasey said.
The GLO is gathering public comment on the matter before submitting them to Abbott for consideration later this month. The federal Deepwater Ports Act allows any governor in a state adjacent to a proposed deep water port to halt the project if he or she has concerns it could negatively impact the state and its citizens.
“This is extremely important and critical to all of our community,” said City Council Member Paulette Guajardo. “I think it’s very important that we make it known … as to the reasons (for the resolution).”
Guajardo later read a prepared statement, where she said Trafigura had a global history of “corporate malfeasance,” including violating environmental laws and bribery. A recent article in Reuters stated Trafigura was part of a bribery scandal in Brazil. Company officials declined to comment to Reuters for that story.
“I would request, as we are doing today, that the state of Texas would not consider awarding any licenses to Trafigura until allegations on malfeasance have been fully investigated and resolved,” Guajardo said.
Trafigura officials have said that its offshore terminal would “complement, not replace exports from the Port of Corpus Christi,” adding that the facility would handle only about 10 percent of the expected growth in U.S. oil production. The company has previously said that they are complying with all state and federal agencies to ensure the facility is operated responsibly.
A permit application for the project — which would serve Very Large Crude Carriers capable of carrying 2 million barrels of crude oil — was submitted to the Marine Division of the U.S. Department of Transportation on July 9. Trafigura representatives have said the single-point mooring buoy system reduces the opportunity for spills and emissions each time crude oil is transferred by eliminating “unnecessary ship traffic” in ports and “double handling” of the same crude.
“The deepwater port facility proposed by Texas Gulf Terminals Inc. is safe, efficient and cost-effective, and we have engaged transparently with both regulators and local stakeholders,” the company said in a statement on Tuesday. “The merits of the project speak for themselves – it will play a critical role in helping to resolve the bottleneck preventing the optimal flow of U.S. oil exports from Texas.”
The company said numerous industry associations and local economic development organizations recognize the deepwater port’s potential to “enhance Gulf Coast infrastructure to sell more Texas oil around the world.”
Those include the Permian Basin Petroleum Association, Texas Alliance of Energy Producers, Big Lake Economic Development Corporation, Kingsville Chamber of Commerce, Kingsville Economic Development Council, Sweetwater Economic Development, Kleberg County Commissioners Court and Monahans Chamber of Commerce, according to its statement.
Trafigura’s proposed offshore terminal is similar to one pitched by a citizen group — Port Aransas Conservancy — as an alternative to the port’s planned crude oil terminal capable of fully loading VLCC’s on Harbor Island.
The group is concerned about that project because it would require dredging down to 75 feet, and there are questions about what impact the dredging and VLCC traffic could have on Port Aransas’ fishing and tourism industry. The group has also raised opposition to the port’s seeking of a permit for a desalination plant on Harbor Island for environmental reasons.
