Peninsula Daily News and news sources
PORT ANGELES — After reviewing its previous decision, the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration reaffirmed that it will not relocate its research ships to any Washington state site — which leaves Port Angeles without any hope of attracting the fleet.
NOAA said the port of Newport on the Oregon coast was the best base for its West Coast research fleet, according to a statement from the federal agency that was released by Sen. Ron Wyden, D-Ore., on Tuesday.
A NOAA spokesman declined to comment until the agency makes its statement public today.
The review was the latest round of a hot political battle between Oregon and Washington over which state will provide the home port for the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration’s four research ships.
The vessels have been based in Seattle for 45 years, but the agency in August awarded a 20-year lease to Newport.
President of the Port of Port Angeles George Schoenfeldt, who had not heard official word of the announcement, said Tuesday that he was disappointed.
“I’m really sorry, not only for Port Angeles, but for the state of Washington,” he said.
“I really had hoped that, even if we couldn’t have it here, that at least our state could keep it.”
The review was launched after the Port of Bellingham successfully appealed NOAA’s decision to base four research ships and up to two visiting ships at the new port, which is 114 miles from Portland, Ore., beginning in 2011.
The federal Government Accountability Office, the investigative arm of Congress, recommended in December that NOAA reconsider because the Newport site is within the 100-year flood plain at the mouth of the Yaquina River.
Although the Port of Port Angeles — which had originally bid for the fleet, along with Bellingham and Seattle — did not file an appeal, it could have been back in the running had bidding been reopened.
The NOAA decision released Tuesday said that both Port Angeles and Bellingham were, like Newport, in floodplains.
In the earlier environmental assessments on the properties, BergerURS wrote that a portion of the pier which was to be extended in Port Angeles would be in the 100-year floodplain for Tumwater Creek.
The assessment called that an “area of minimal flooding” that could be subject to some wave action but which was largely protected by Ediz Hook.
Ultimately it appeared that the lower cost of the Newport site was the deciding factor.
The state of Oregon kicked in $19 million that allowed Newport to significantly lower its lease bid to $2.6 million a year compared to $4 million a year for Bellingham.
The Port of Port Angeles has not released the amount of its bid, saying that if the decision was overturned, it wanted to maintain competitiveness.
“Based on its analysis, NOAA has determined that there appears to be no practicable alternative to the Port of Newport offer,” said the NOAA statement released by Wyden’s office.
Port of Port Angeles Executive Director Jeff Robb was out of town and could not be reached for comment Tuesday.
Basing four ships, 60 shoreside personnel and 110 crew members at Newport was estimated to pump $19 million a year into the regional economy along the Oregon shore, where tourism has not made up for downturns in logging and commercial fishing during the past two decades.
Work already has started on new shoreside facilities for the fleet in Newport. NOAA signed the 20-year lease, for $52 million, for the site last year.
Work on new piers can’t start until November.
Wyden said the review was definitive, although NOAA’s final decision will not be made until it reviews public comments received over the next 30 days.
“Newport and the Oregon Coast earned this because of a superior effort in the marine science field,” Wyden said.
“It’s going to be a huge plus for creating more jobs and strengthening the economy. And a huge plus for taxpayers.”
Sen. Maria Cantwell, D-Mountlake Terrace, disagreed with Wyden, saying she looked forward to an inspector general’s report for a more thorough and impartial review.
“This is taxpayer money on the line,” she said in a statement.
“Until the IG investigation is completed, I still think it would be a prudent step for NOAA to cease all operations in Oregon.”
Cantwell also said she wanted a full environmental impact statement.
“I expressed concern before, and I reiterate it now, that for this process to be impartial, it should not be conducted by those same people who conducted the original flawed competition,” she said in the statement.
“If it is, as with the practicable alternatives report released today, I fear we will see brazen attempts to preserve the award to Newport rather than any real effort to comply with the spirit [Government Accountability Office’s] recommendations and Executive Order 11988.”
