04/19/2026
Today I am writing the Corp how this will affect Batwater wetlands, waterfowl, wildlife, guests, and our house that is 50 feet from the rail road track.
PUBLIC OPPOSITION COMMENT No. 1
THANK YOU! The community comments sent in opposition to the NXT refinery have been overwhelming.
Tomorrow is the deadline for public comment submission, April 20th, to the Army Corp.
I am going to share my top five favorite comments submitted. Our community is truely amazing with some brilliant minds. I summarized this 269 page comment down to its 50 core principles….
Technology and Air Quality
Technology Platform Change: In November 2025, the applicant switched from UOP/SMR technology to a Topsoe platform, rendering the DEIS’s air quality and safety analyses outdated.
Hydrogen Plant Emissions: The hydrogen plant is the largest source of NOx, CO, and PM emissions, but its profile changed significantly with the new technology.
Cancer Risk Disclosure: The facility's residential excess lifetime cancer risk (ELCR) numbers (0.2 to 0.7 per million) were omitted from the main DEIS body.
Gas Combustion Exemption: 78% of the facility's modeled cancer risk is from gas combustion, which is exempt from state compliance but must still be evaluated under NEPA.
Outdated Meteorological Data: Air modeling used a single year of surface data (1993–1994) that is 32 years old and does not reflect current climate patterns.
Background Air Quality Baseline: Cumulative air data was pulled from a monitor in Portland, 50 miles away, which does not accurately represent the rural Port Westward site.
Hydrogen Sulfide Analysis: Hâ‚‚S was only assessed for odor, not for health-based chronic effects at sub-odor concentrations.
Natural Gas Discrepancy: There is a 27% discrepancy in reported natural gas needs between the DEIS (18 MMSCFD) and state permit applications (14.2 MMSCFD).
Unmodeled Toxics: Seven emitted toxic air contaminants were excluded from risk assessments because they lack specific state risk-based concentrations.
Confidential Emissions Data: Flare startup and shutdown emission rates are marked as "Confidential Business Information," preventing public verification of acute risk.
Flood Risk and Levee Integrity
Levee Accreditation Misrepresentation: The DEIS describes the BDIC levee as "FEMA-accredited" based on 2010 data, ignoring a 2014 Corps evaluation that found it fails freeboard requirements.
Known Flooding Risk: The Beaver Drainage Improvement Company (BDIC) itself testified the site remains at risk for a 1% annual chance of flooding.
Subsidence on Levee Segments: Documented subsidence on levee-adjacent roads was not analyzed for its impact on structural integrity.
Floodplain Management Failure: The DEIS fails to document the eight-step floodplain management process required by Executive Order 11988.
Levee Consequence Classification: The "low risk" classification is based on current agricultural use rather than the 82 million gallons of fuel that would be stored there post-construction.
Sea Level Rise: A documented 3–5 foot freeboard deficit exists, yet the DEIS characterizes the impact of a projected 4-foot sea level rise as "minor".
Seismic and Geotechnical Concerns
Outdated Geotechnical Data: The entire geotechnical foundation for the project is based on a 25-year-old report (2001) prepared for a different facility (a power plant).
Seismic Science Advancements: The DEIS ignores the 2023 USGS National Seismic Hazard Model and DOGAMI earthquake impact analyses for Columbia County.
Liquefaction Risk: The site has "high" to "very high" liquefaction susceptibility, but site-specific lateral spread analysis was not included.
Foundation Vulnerability: 15,200 steel piles terminate in liquefiable soils rather than bedrock, relying on "skin friction" that may fail during an earthquake.
Compound Hazard Scenarios: The DEIS fails to analyze a combined scenario of a major earthquake, liquefaction, levee failure, and chemical release.
Water Quality and Spill Risk
Impaired Receiving Waters: The Columbia River reach is already impaired for dioxin, PCBs, and temperature, but the DEIS does not analyze how project discharges fit into TMDL limits.
Stormwater Pathway Omission: Only one of two primary stormwater discharge pathways was prominently disclosed.
Spill Transport Modeling: No transport modeling was conducted for downstream receptors or municipal water intakes.
Biological Inconsistency: The applicant's Biological Assessment found the project is "likely to adversely affect" 13 ESA-listed species, but the DEIS characterizes impacts as "minor".
Regulatory Gap on "Oil": It is unclear if renewable diesel qualifies as "oil" under Oregon law, potentially exempting it from mandatory spill contingency planning.
Smolt Outmigration: There is no analysis of how potential spills would intersect with the seasonal migration of millions of salmon smolts.
Wetlands and Alternatives
Massive Wetland Fill: The project proposes 104.3 acres of permanent wetland fill, a 13,000% increase over the cumulative 48-year baseline for the area.
Inadequate Alternatives Analysis: No upland or reduced-footprint alternatives were analyzed despite the project not being "water-dependent".
Unequal Depth of Analysis: Alternatives involving far less wetland fill (6–16 acres) were dismissed with "limited technical analysis" compared to the preferred site.
Mitigation Plan Risks: The 484-acre wetland mitigation site may actually threaten the levee's FEMA accreditation by altering drainage district operations.
Noise and Transportation
No Ambient Baseline: No actual field measurements were taken to establish current noise levels; baselines were estimated via aerial photos.
Nighttime Noise Violations: Modeling predicts operational noise will exceed state nighttime limits at nearby receptors, but only unquantified controls are proposed.
Rail Traffic Impact: The DEIS disclaims responsibility for analyzing the effects of rail traffic (900+ cars/month), despite it being a foreseeable consequence of the project.
Rail Spur Litigation: A pending appeal with the Land Use Board of Appeals (LUBA) regarding the rail spur is not disclosed.
Socioeconomics and Environmental Justice
Lead Paint Exposure: The neighboring community is in the 89th state percentile for lead paint exposure, a finding the DEIS omits from its overburdened community summary.
Visual Impact on Monastery: A 350-foot flare stack and 24-hour lighting would fundamentally change the visual environment required for silent meditation retreats.
Odor Study Omission: The monastery was omitted from the odor study despite being within the distance where odor detection is likely.
Procedural and Commercial Issues
Withheld Documents: Critical reports (HAZOP, blast study, air modeling input files) were cited but not included in the public record .
Feedstock Discrepancy: SEC filings show a feedstock mix (60% soybean oil) that is much higher than the DEIS baseline, which affects rail traffic and carbon intensity calculations.
Capacity Inconsistencies: There are three conflicting capacity figures (37,500 to 50,000 bpd) across the DEIS and financial disclosures, affecting all volume-dependent analyses.
Commercial Agreement Failures: The DEIS does not disclose that key feedstock and offtake agreements with BP, Shell, and Chevron have expired or terminated.
Infrastructure Repurposing: Planned future uses (hydrogen, RNG, third-party terminaling) for the permitted infrastructure were not analyzed.
Project Abandonment Precedent: The failure of Red Rock Biofuels (recently acquired by the applicant) is cited as a reason to analyze the consequences of partial project completion.
Premature Record of Decision: The commenter argues the ROD should be deferred due to pending litigation and the instability of predicate permits (Section 401, 408, and ESA) .
Institutional and Receptor Omissions
Monastery Omission: Great Vow Zen Monastery, a residential community of ~20 people located ~990 meters from the facility, was excluded from all receptor-specific analyses (noise, air, visual, and cumulative).
Scoping Notice Ignored: The monastery was a co-signatory on the initial scoping letter, yet the Corps failed to include them in receptor-specific analysis despite actual notice.
Agricultural Receptor Omissions: Multiple operating farms (e.g., Hopville Farms, Seely Mint) were omitted from noise, air quality, and agricultural inventories.
Incomplete Study Area Application: While the monastery is within the 1,500-meter air quality study area, it was categorized only as a "business" rather than a residential receptor.
Refuge Impacts: The Julia Butler Hansen National Wildlife Refuge (0.65 miles away) was only analyzed as a "visual resource," omitting indirect effects on wildlife from vessel transits, noise, and air emissions.
