Environmentalists worried about wildlife areas at Satsop - March 26, 1999
By Ryan Teague Beckwith - Daily World Writer, The Aberdeen Daily World
SATSOP - Harbor-area environmentalists have asked a state agency that oversees nuclear power plant sites to add more protection for wildlife habitat at the Satsop Development Park.
But Allen Fiksdal, manager of the Energy Facility Site Evaluation Council, says he's not sure the agency has the legal authority to place more requirements on 1,200 acres of mitigation lands at the business park.
The council's 10-member board of directors will decide what to do on the issue some time next month.
In the meantime, lawyers for the Grays Harbor Audubon Society and the public development authority that will eventually take control of the former nuclear plant site are publicly sparring over the level of commitment to maintaining wildlife habitat.
Knoll Lowney, a Seattle attorney for the Grays Harbor Audubon Society, charged in a Feb. 25 letter to the Energy Facility Site Evaluation Council that the county tipped its hand and illegally rezoned 300 to 400 acres of the mitigation lands for industrial use.
He said conceptual plans for the business park include building on some of the wildlife habitat.
Calling Lowney's letter misleading, self-serving and "mere speculation or exaggeration," the Grays Harbor Public Development Authority's lawyer, Douglas C. Lewis, countered in a letter sent this week that the rezone was not illegal and merely reflected the fact that thorough and accurate maps were not available at the time.
Lewis also said that none of the public agencies have any plans to develop the mitigation lands and any drawings that suggest such plans are "incorrect and merely reflect the uncertainty at the time of drafting of the actual boundaries."
Lowney said the Audubon Society merely wants to make sure that wildlife management plans agreed to by the Washington Public Power Supply System and the Energy Facility Site Evaluation Council are continued by the new owners of the 1,600-acre site atop Fuller Hill.
He has asked the state agency to add conditions that explicitly instruct the Grays Harbor Public Development Authority to preserve the wildlife mitigation lands.
"We're not seeking anything new," Lowney said Wednesday. "If you look at the current mitigation agreement, it has the force of state law, and we want to assure that it continues to have the force of state law and doesn't become merely a contractual arrangement."
But Fiksdal, who manages the Energy Facility Site Evaluation Council but will not make the final decision, said he is not sure the council has the authority to interfere in the transfer of the site.
A state agency made up of representatives from nine state departments and headed by an appointed citizen, the Energy Facility Site Evaluation Council provides one-stop shopping for permitting major energy projects. Fiksdal said that does not necessarily mean the council has the legal standing to add any requirements to the transfer of the former energy project.
The Satsop Reuse Project, a predecessor to the Grays Harbor Public Development Authority, has already signed an agreement with the state Department of Fish & Wildlife to continue the same management plan.
Lewis, the Aberdeen lawyer representing the public development authority, said that agreement is a "binding contract" that was negotiated in good faith. He argued that it would be unnecessary - and possibly illegal - for the Energy Facility Site Evaluation Council to impose any more requirements.
The agency's involvement in the site dates back to the 1970s, when WPPSS started the massive $3.8 billion construction project. To counteract the environmental damage it caused, 1,200 acres of surrounding timberland were set aside.
That area includes 22 identifiable types of wildlife habitat, including mature Douglas fir forests, grasslands and barren undeveloped land, and is home to some 200 different species of wild animals.
Starting in the late 1980s, the state Department of Fish & Wildlife and WPPSS worked on a long-term wildlife mitigation plan that would map out future preservation efforts to 2040. Overseen by the Energy Facility Site Evaluation Council, the plan calls for most of the land to be left alone, though some work is required to maintain the variety of habitats.
Some of the grasslands are mowed once a year to keep it an open area. In addition, WPPSS Project Scientist Laura Schinnell said the agency authorized seven selective harvests and clearcuts of areas ranging in size from a half acre to 10 acres between 1989 and 1995, mostly to control root rot.
The rest of the land has been left alone. "We would go in if there was a major impact or slide, but Mother Nature is allowed to take its course," she said.
As part of the transfer of the nuclear plant site to local control got under way two years ago, WPPSS asked the Energy Facility Site Evaluation Council to radically shrink the area that it supervises - essentially giving up oversight of nearly all of the 1,600 acres.
Ideally, Lowney said the wildlife mitigation lands would be transferred to a third party, preferably a non-profit group like the Nature Conservancy or another environmental organization.
"The interest of the public development authority is always going to be economic development. That is their role, and their expertise is not wildlife lands management," the Audubon Society lawyer said. It simply makes more sense for a group with the experience and resources to look over the mitigation lands, he argued.
But Fiksdal said that assumes the public development authority won't be able to balance environmental concerns and economic responsibilities.
"A lot of (governmental) entities are in that position anyway and are successful," the manager of the Energy Facility Site Evaluation Council said.
This page created and maintained by Chehalis River Council
Send comments or questions to the: Chehalis River Council