|
|
 COLUMBUS — As of May 4, 2010, Baard Energy had no “contract with any vendor to construct any portion of Phase I, II, or III of the [Ohio River Clean Fuels coal refinery],” according to Anthony Giuliani, an attorney for Baard Energy. The admission came in response to a “Request for Production of Documents” by the Natural Resources Defense Council and Sierra Club as part of litigation over the air pollution permit for the proposed coal refinery. The complete text of document request #14 and Giuliani’s answer follows:
14. Produce a copy of any contract with any vendor to construct any portion of Phase I, II, or III of the ORCF [Ohio River Clean Fuels coal refinery] Facility.
Answer: Subject to and without waiving the foregoing objections, ORCF states that there are no responsive documents.
In everyday use, “vendor” is a retail salesperson without an established place of business, such as a street vendor or a ballpark vendor. In business, however, “vendor” refers to any company that supplies parts or services to another company.
Ohio Citizen Action obtained a copy of the document through a public records review at the Ohio Environmental Review Appeals Commission.
– Paul Ryder, Organizing Director, Ohio Citizen Action
 CLEVELAND — The air pollution permit for the proposed Baard Energy coal refinery expired two months ago, according to a legal filing with the Ohio Environmental Review Appeals Commission by two national environmental organizations. The Natural Resources Defense Council and Sierra Club note in their brief that Baard Energy had neither begun construction, entered into contracts, nor requested a permit extension from Ohio EPA by May 20, 2010, eighteen months after the permit was granted.
In their motion, the groups ask the Commission to either vacate or revoke the proposed coal refinery’s air pollution permit. Baard Energy has not responded to this filing and the Commission has not ruled on the motion.
Ohio Citizen Action obtained a non-confidential copy of the July 13 motion through a public records review at the Commission.
The Vorys, Sater, Seymour and Pease law firm had announced in June that it was withdrawing as legal counsel for Baard Energy. On July 1, Christopher Jones and Christopher Ward of the Calfee, Halter and Griswold law firm notified the Commission they would represent Baard in this case. Jones was the Ohio EPA Director under Governor Bob Taft.
The air permit case had originally been scheduled for June but was cancelled when Vorys abruptly withdrew. On July 15, the Commission gave the attorneys in the case until August 16 to file a case management schedule for a February 7, 2011 hearing.
— Sandy Buchanan, Executive Director, Ohio Citizen Action
 CLEVELAND — Baard Energy has failed to meet a July 14 court deadline to respond to a lawsuit. for unpaid bills filed by contractor CH2MHill, according to the docket of the U.S. District Court for the Southern Division of Ohio. CH2MHill sued Baard in March for “over $75,000” for work performed for the Baard Energy proposed coal refinery in Wellsville, Ohio. Baard has not only failed to answer the lawsuit, but has not even registered the name of an attorney to represent the company in the case.
CH2MHill is apparently not the only contractor whom Baard has allegedly not paid for its work on this project. In a deposition filed at the Ohio Environmental Review Appeals Commission, a representative of Civil and Environmental Consultants of Pittsburgh claimed the company is owed “a significant amount” of money, estimated at “over half” of its half a million dollar billings.
— Sandy Buchanan, Executive Director, Ohio Citizen Action
 EAST LIVERPOOL — “The Columbiana County Port Authority has again extended a series of property purchase/option agreements for the Baard Energy project, but this will likely be the last time…
This is the third time the port authority has extended the agreements since it was awarded a $4.5 million state loan in January 2009 to purchase 522 acres outside of Wellsville on behalf of Baard Energy, which intends to build a $6 billion plant that converts coal and biomass into synthetic jet and diesel fuel. The port authority has been forced to extend the option agreements because of Baard’s inability to secure financing for the project.”
— Tom Giambroni, Lisbon Morning Journal
Read the whole story
 WARREN — “Baard Energy and the Columbiana County Port Authority need more time to create one of the largest economic development projects in the world. President Barack Obama appears to be working against them.”
— editorial, Warren Tribune Chronicle
Read the whole story
 Kristian Macoskey, Civil and Environmental Consultants, Inc. CLEVELAND — Three months ago, CH2MHill, one of the contractors for the proposed Baard Energy coal refinery sued Baard for non-payment of bills for the project. The Baard Energy project has been delayed repeatedly because of its inability to find financing.
Apparently CH2MHill is not the only contractor that hasn’t been paid for its work on this project. Kristian Macoskey, a principal with Civil and Environmental Consultants, Inc., testified in a sworn deposition* on May 4, 2010, that Baard still owes his company “a significant amount” for work that was completed by the end of 2008. Ohio Citizen Action obtained a copy of the deposition from a public records review at the Environmental Review Appeals Commission.
Here’s the exchange, where Mr. Macoskey is being deposed by Natural Resources Defense Council attorney Shannon Fisk:
Q. And do you know approximately how much CEC has billed for all of its work on the Baard project?
A. I can estimate. You mean from the beginning of the project through?
Q. Yes.
A. It’s probably on the order of half a million dollars, but that wasn’t all for just the air quality, because we did two other permits for them as well.
Q. Which ones?
A. The wetlands and streams, 401/404 permits, and the NPDES permit.
Q. Okay.
A. So that’s pretty much in total billings, I think.
Q. And is Baard up to date on its payments?
A. No.
Q. Do you know how far behind they are?
MR. COVAL: Objection; form.
A. I don’t know exactly how far, but it’s a significant amount. Over half, I believe.
Q. Over half for work that’s already been done.
A. Yeah
Q. And do you know how long that has been unpaid for?
MR. COVAL; Objection
A. It’s been though all of ’09 and I think into late 2008 so, something like that. We finished the project basically end of November, of November 2008, somewhere around that time frame, so that was when the bulk of the work was finished, I believe.
(Mr. Coval, mentioned above, is Paul J. Coval, an attorney with Vorys, Sater, Seymour & Pease, who was representing Baard Energy at the time of the deposition. Vorys, Sater abruptly withdrew as Baard’s counsel on June 1, 2010, and Baard has been given until July 2 to find a new lawyer.)
— Sandy Buchanan, Executive Director, Ohio Citizen Action
* Please email us for the complete document
 COLUMBUS — Baard Energy CEO John Baardson gave sworn testimony on April 29 which made it clear that his company does not meet the criteria which would allow it to be officially classified as “woman-owned.”
Ohio Citizen Action had recently examined the claim that, “. . . Baard Energy is a woman owned business enterprise (WBE),” made by a Columbiana County Port Authority official.
Ohio Citizen Action obtained Baardson’s deposition from a review of public records at the Environmental Review Appeals Commission. He was questioned by Shannon Fisk, an attorney for the Natural Resources Defense Council.
Q: Are you the owner of the company?
A: She’s [Kathie Baardson] 51 percent owner, and I’m 49 percent owner.
Ownership of 51% or more of the company by a woman is necessary but not sufficient to be called “woman-owned.” The woman must also “actually control the day-to-day operations of the business” (State of Washington), or “have control over the day-to-day operations of the business” (State of Ohio). The State of Delaware says the firm must be “controlled and actively managed” by the woman. John Baardson’s testimony shows that he controls the company and Kathie Baardson reports to him.
Q: You are with Baard Energy; is that correct?
A: Baard Energy.
Q: Okay. And what is your position there?
A. I’m the president and CEO. . .
Q: And how many employees does Baard have?
A: We have six.
Q: And who are those employees?
A: It’s myself and my wife, her name is Kathie.
Q: Okay.
A: And Steve Dopuch.
Q: Okay.
A: Craig Conner.
Q: Okay.
A: Elizabeth Turbyfill and Ben Norwood.
Q: And do all those employees report to you?
A: They all do.
— Paul Ryder, Organizing Director, Ohio Citizen Action
 COLUMBUS – Earlier this year, Baard Energy told State officials that the Chinese energy giant Sinopec was a “partner” in its coal refinery project in Wellsville. Baard’s securities placement agent said that “Sinopec/China Development Bank” would guarantee principal and interest on $1.8 billion of debt for the project. Now, the company has changed its story, saying that Sinopec does not have “any involvement” in the project.
Sinopec is the China Petroleum and Chemical Corporation. It is the largest company in China and the ninth largest in the world, as measured by revenue. In a February 11, 2010, application for a State subsidy, Baard said Sinopec Engineering was a “partner” in the project. Sinopec Engineering is a wholly-owned subsidiary of Sinopec.
John Steinmetz is President of European American Securities, Baard Energy’s securities placement agent. On February 18, Steinmetz wrote to Mark Shanahan, Executive Director of the Ohio Air Quality Development Authority, and said that “Sinopec/China Development Bank” would guarantee principal and interest on $1.8 billion of debt for the project.
Only two months later, however, on April 29, 2010, Stephan Dopuch, Vice President, Baard Energy, testified in a sworn deposition that Sinopec does not have “any involvement” in the coal refinery project. Ohio Citizen Action obtained the deposition from a review of public records at the Environmental Review Appeals Commission. Dopuch was questioned by Shannon Fisk, an attorney for the Natural Resources Defense Council:
Q: How about SINOPEC Engineering?
A: SINOPEC Engineering.
Q: What’s their –
A: They’re a potential engineer.
Q: And what does that mean? A potential engineer for?
A: Oh, for design engineering, things of that nature. SINOPEC has a lot of experience in this area.
Q: But they’re not currently an engineer on the project?
A: No, huh-uh. They are not formally engaged. . .
Q: Did you testify earlier that . . . you don’t have any formal agreement with SINOPEC?
A: Uh-huh.
Q: Does SINOPEC have any involvement in the project currently?
A: Not currently.
Q: Did it at the time of this presentation [February 11, 2010]?
A: Please define formal involvement.
Q: Well, any involvement.
A: They’re well aware of the project. They know the project quite well now, and then.
Q: Okay. And outside of their knowledge that the project exists, what involvement do they have in the project?
A: I think they’re a leading candidate to do our engineering.
Q: But they haven’t been selected.
A: We have not contracted with them.
Q: Have they done anything on the [Ohio River Clean Fuels coal refinery] project?
A: They have reviewed the project.
Q: Beyond that have they done anything else?
A: No.
— Paul Ryder, Organizing Director, Ohio Citizen Action
WELLSVILLE — “Baard Energy has more time to use $4.5 million in state funds to further its plan to build a coal-to-liquid fuel plant near Wellsville.
Bethany Close, a spokeswoman for the Ohio Department of Development, said this week that Baard’s deadline has been extended to Sept. 30.
The state had granted a loan extension Nov. 5, 2009, that lasted until June 30 of this year.
The state’s controlling board in May 2009 approved funding for the project as a forgivable loan to help buy and prepare land at the 525-acre site near Wellsville.
But the development of the project was slowed by the poor economy and court challenges. The extension also will give the project more time to line up private investors for the facility that is expected to cost $6 billion.
State Rep. Linda Bolon of Columbiana, D-1st, and Tracy Drake, chief executive officer of the Columbiana County Port Authority, had been asking state officials for the extension.”
— D. A. Wilkinson, Youngstown Vindicator
Read the whole story
Loan extension could bring 200 jobs to Columbiana County, WFMJ.
The loan would be to the Columbiana County Port Authority, not Baard Energy, and the 200 jobs would not be created unless the Port Authority accepted the loan money. Port Authority CEO Tracy Drake has said he would not ask for the State loan money unless Baard Energy finds investors for the project. Otherwise, the Port would be on the hook for paying back the loan.
 COLUMBUS — The State commission considering pollution permits for the proposed Baard Energy coal refinery has rejected the company’s request for more time to find a new lawyer. On June 1, the Vorys Sater Seymour & Pease law firm abruptly dropped Baard Energy as a client. Neither the company nor the law firm have explained why Vorys withdrew from the case, nor why it did so without Baard having new counsel ready to replace them. The Ohio Environmental Review Appeals Commission rejected Baard’s new request in a two sentence ruling:
On June 9, 2010, the Commission received a request without explanation that the Commission modify its June 2, 2010 Order to allow Appellee [Baard Energy] Ohio River Clean Fuels an additional two (2) months to obtain counsel. Appellee Ohio River Clean Fuels’ request is hereby DENIED.
Documents
• Order to cancel all proceedings and orders, Ohio Environmental Review Appeals Commission, June 2, 2010
• Request for extension for counsel assignment, John Baardson, President, Baard Energy, June 8, 2010
• Appellants’ response, Natural Resources Defense Council, Sierra Club, June 9, 2010
• Appellee director’s response, Chris Korleski, Director, Ohio EPA, June 10, 2010
• Acknowledgement and denial of request, Ohio Environmental Review Appeals Commission, June 10, 2010
— Paul Ryder, Organizing Director, Ohio Citizen Action
|
Comment Guidelines Our reader comments section is moderated. We will post constructive ideas, comments, or criticisms on our issues, campaigns, and organization, signed with the reader's own name. We welcome differing points of view. If you are a whistle blower, and do not want to give your own name, the comments section is not for you. In that case, please contact our staff directly, and we will protect your anonymity. If you have questions, please write Angela Oster or call her at (216) 861-5200. |
Recent Comments