An open letter to the readers of Mississippi Rod N Gun.

Let me begin by stating the following comments are mine, and not an official release of CCA-MS.  I have attached CCA-MS’s “official” position statement on LNG’s for the record.  I do, however believe my statements are consistent with that position, and reflect the philosophy of CCA-MS’s leadership.

There has been significant discussion on this chat board regarding CCA’s involvement (or perceived lack thereof) in the permitting of LNG terminals.  Please allow me to place the issue in a little clearer perspective as I see it.

CCA National (CCA-MS’s parent organization) has taken a position opposed to the construction of “open loop” vaporization systems, any time, anywhere.  That’s clear enough.  However, the realities are that CCA’s not always going to prevail.  The position further states that in those instances, we’re demanding proper monitoring of the impact those terminals are having on the marine environment, and that any damage discovered must be properly mitigated.

It is also CCA National’s policy that:    

“Inshore closed-loop systems should fall within the purview of each state to deal with as its sees the potential problems generated by other segments of the facility, i.e.: location of pipeline(s) from facility to major trunk lines, etc.”

And that brings us to the current situation in Mississippi.  Believing, and having stated that “closed loop” systems are superior to the “open loop” design, by offhandedly opposing the preferred system, CCA could well come across as petty, if not obstructionist.  This whole discussion is, after all taking place while our country’s energy police is under intense scrutiny.  There are public-safety, and perhaps air quality issues that should be addressed regarding on-shore, closed loop terminals.  But I’m not sure that’s under the purview of CCA’s mandate, or that we possess the necessary expertise to confront those issues.  To be sure, issues will arise such as the possible construction of pipelines across sea grass, oyster beds, and other sensitive habitat.  I’m confident CCA-MS will diligently monitor those issues as they arise, and do everything in its power to represent the interests of Mississippi’ recreational saltwater anglers.  Concerns will likely arise regarding access by anglers to productive fishing areas surrounding the terminals themselves as well as the shipping channels leading to the terminals.  Closures, or limited access to certain areas will likely be sought by federal agencies driven by homeland security and terrorism concerns.  It’s unclear at this juncture how much input any outside (NGO) organization, or entity will be allowed on these matters.  But again, I have no doubt that CCA-MS will perform all due diligence on behalf of its membership, and all recreational saltwater anglers.

CCA-MS’s position statement clearly states that we are, as is our parent organization, strongly opposed to permitting of the Compass Port LLC, liquefied natural gas terminal (LNG), proposed as an open loop system, just off Dauphin Island, and adjacent to Mississippi waters.  CCA-MS has identified one avenue in which we may assist in preventing the licensing of that terminal, and will assuredly pursue that course.  But it is clearly in Alabama waters and consequently CCA-MS’s options are limited in our ability to influence that licensing procedure.  CCA-MS has, and will continue to work with our sister chapter, CCA-AL in coordinating our efforts in opposition to the Compass Point open loop LNG terminal.

I believe CCA-MS should and will, expend its major efforts in insuring that the terminals proposed for Mississippi are permitted and built in the most habitat and fisher friendly configuration we can extract.

Sincerely,

Pete Umbdenstock
Chairman, Governmental Affairs
Coastal Conservation Association - Mississippi