Environmental coalition appeals decision to expand Ferndale Terminal propane
AI-generated summary reviewed by our newsroom.
- Coalition of six NGOs appeals MDNS, urges Whatcom County to require EIS
- Appellants highlight unpermitted work and redacted ALA data in their challenge
- Hearing examiner review expected in months; judicial appeal remains available
A coalition of environmental activists has submitted an appeal seeking to overturn Whatcom County Planning and Development Services’ determination that permitting expansion projects for the ALA Energy Ferndale Terminal would not have “significant environmental impacts.”
Whatcom County Planning and Development Services issued a Mitigated Determination of Non-Significance (MDNS) on Sept. 3 for 33 projects at the terminal, which is operated by AltaGas and stores, processes and exports butane and propane. The MDNS means that the county is not required to conduct an environmental impact study — something advocates said in their appeal is “inconsistent with governing legal standards.”
The appeal was submitted by a coalition of six nongovernmental organizations: Friends of the San Juans, Evergreen Islands, RE Sources, the Sierra Club, Washington Conservation Action and Whatcom Environmental Council.
Earthjustice attorney Jan Hasselman, who represents the appellants, said the appeal will be heard by the Whatcom County hearing examiner, a quasi-judicial officer to makes decisions on certain land-use and development proposals.
Appellants are asking the hearing examiner to overturn the determination of non-significance and direct Whatcom County Planning and Development Services to initiate a full environmental impact statement to “allow full scrutiny of the safety and environmental impacts of expanding fossil fuel transportation at Cherry Point.”
If the hearing examiner does not overturn the MDNS, the appellants can make a judicial appeal in Whatcom County Superior Court.
“It is abundantly clear that expanding fossil fuel infrastructure is unsafe, harms human health and harms the environment,” said Keith Curl-Dove, climate and communities manager at Washington Conservation Action. “The public has a right to know the full impacts of these unpermitted expansion projects.”
Thirty-one of the permits that AltaGas sought were for projects that were already completed prior to their authorization. Councilman Todd Donovan raised questions about this unpermitted work during the Sept. 23 meeting of the Whatcom County Council Committee of the Whole.
Donovan said he wasn’t previously told of the amount of permits requested or the amount by which the import and export of natural gas would increase. With what he knows now, he said he believes the MDNS should be withdrawn and an environmental impact statement should be completed.
“There are a lot of issues associated with expanding this terminal to be a major fossil fuel transit point that have never really been studied and shared with the public for consideration,” Hasselman told The Herald.
He said he was surprised to see the county “effectively rubber-stamping” the terminal’s expansion.
“There needs to be an appropriate amount of attention brought onto this,” Hasselman said.
Mark Personius, director of Whatcom County Planning and Development Services, said during the Sept. 23 council meeting that consultations “equivalent” to an environmental impact study were done before the MDNS was issued.
“There’s been a lot of communication about it,” Personius said. “There’s been a lot of opportunities for public input on it.”
However, both Donovan and the appellants said the public has reacted against the MDNS. Concerns have been raised about safety and environmental risks, the alleged ignoring of legal precedent and what appellants called “flawed capacity assumptions.”
Some of the data used in justifying the MDNS was provided in a heavily redacted document by ALA Energy itself, according to the appellants and Donovan.
Whatcom County Executive Satpal Sidhu said during the Sept. 23 council meeting that Planning and Development Services followed an established legal process and “has not taken it lightly.” He also pointed out the potential environmental benefits of allowing the terminal to process and export more natural gas that other countries can use instead of coal.
The county did not respond to requests for comment on the appeal.
While no official date has been scheduled, Hasselman said he expects the appeal to go before the hearing examiner in about two or three months.
This story was originally published October 4, 2025 at 5:30 AM.