Study of Gas Plant Critiqued

A study of a proposal to build a liquefied natural gas terminal at the Port of Long Beach falls short of answering some key questions, such as whether the terminal would be vulnerable to terrorists, prone to accidents or costly for local agencies, Long Beach city officials said Wednesday.

Long Beach city leaders have said they will await a final environment impact report on the controversial proposal before deciding whether to approve it.

However, on Wednesday, in response to a request for comments, the city released a strongly worded critique of the draft version of that report.

The city said the draft neglects some worrisome possibilities of the proposal, such as the chance that terrorists could commandeer a tanker ship full of liquid natural gas, or that gas could be released in a pipeline accident. Nor does the draft sufficiently consider the danger to port workers in the event of an explosion, city officials said.

The city said the police and fire departments might have to buy equipment or retrain employees to prepare for possible accidents or attacks on the facility. The draft study neither spells out these costs nor says who would pay for them, the city said.

Natural gas is easier to store and transport in liquid form. Mitsubishi Corp. and ConocoPhillips have proposed building the $400-million liquefied natural gas storage facility at the port. Two big, dome-shaped tanks would store the liquefied fuel until it could be heated back to its gaseous form and piped to consumers.

Long Beach city officials said they would send a more detailed version of their comments to the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission and the Port of Long Beach today, and post a copy on the city’s website. Ultimately, the Long Beach Board of Harbor Commissioners will decide whether to go forward with the project.