County officials and advocates back study of financial responsibility for fuel terminals; industry urges careful analysis

The House Committee on Emergency Management, General Government and Veterans opened a public hearing on House Bill 2,949 on March 6, 2025. The bill would require the Department of Environmental Quality to contract a third party to study and assess financial assurance requirements for owners or operators of bulk liquid fuel terminals as defined in ORS 468B.510 (critical energy infrastructure hub), and to submit a report to the Legislature by Sept. 15, 2026. The bill provision would repeal on Jan. 2, 2027.

Multnomah County and community advocates told the committee that operators of the Critical Energy Infrastructure (CEI) Hub in Northwest Portland pose substantial public risk and that financial-assurance requirements should be mandated at the state level. John Boshetinski, director of the Multnomah County Office of Sustainability, said the county’s analysis estimates an earthquake at the CEI Hub could spill "upwards of a 94 million gallons of fuel," comparing the volume to the Deepwater Horizon discharge and stressing uncertainty about who would pay cleanup and damages. Boshetinski said federal resources and existing liability frameworks—the Oil Pollution Act of 1990 and the federal Oil Spill Liability Trust Fund (OSLTF)—leave gaps: testimony cited an OSLTF payout cap of $1,000,000,000 and a cap on natural resource damages at $500,000,000 and a county estimate that a worst-case spill could exceed the OSLTF cap by $648 million to $1.4 billion.

Nikki Mandel, of the CEI Hub task force, urged a statewide, holistic plan that includes financial assurances and a transition plan for the hub. "We need a holistic plan developed with all stakeholders and communities at the table," Mandel said, and she told members that the CEI Hub supplies 90% of the state’s gas and diesel and key industrial fuels, meaning supply disruptions would have broad state impacts.

Several public health and medical witnesses, including Ann Turner of Oregon Physicians for Social Responsibility and retired physicians, supported HB 2,949 and opposed any amendment that would preempt local jurisdictional action. Ann Turner warned that federal capacity to respond could be limited and said, "We must require that companies responsible for these bills pay for the cost of cleanup and compensate those who have been harmed."

Industry witnesses supported conducting a careful study before imposing a financial-assurance framework. Kelsey Wilson of the Western States Petroleum Association said Washington State’s HB 1691 and its rulemaking process offered a model and urged a thorough facility assessment and market analysis before imposing new requirements. "Establishing a financial assurance policy is a complex process that requires that careful evaluation," Wilson said, and WISPA recommended the committee consider preemption language to ensure statewide consistency.

Other witnesses opposed broad preemption language. Melanie Plaut, representing neighborhood residents, and Walter Schreiner, a scientist and Multnomah County resident, urged immediate local action and warned that preemption could delay protections. Schreiner said preemption would allow industry to "delay, delay, delay" and could undercut pending Multnomah County ordinances.

The bill as drafted requires DEQ to contract for an independent study; committee members asked for cost estimates and fiscal analysis from DEQ and for stakeholders to work with LPRO on amendment language. No committee vote occurred during the hearing.

Ending: The committee closed the HB 2,949 hearing and proceeded to a concurrent resolution on Wake Island civilians.