An environmental group opposing NorthernStar Natural Gas Inc.’s liquefied natural gas terminal said Tuesday it has documents suggesting the company will not build a 36-mile pipeline crossing Cowlitz County and that it will send the gas through a separate Oregon pipeline.

NorthernStar called the accusation “ridiculous” and said its Cowlitz County line will “absolutely” be built.

“Why would we continue to spend millions of dollars if we didn’t intend to build the pipeline?” asked NorthernStar spokesman Joe Desmond. “It simply makes no sense.”

Columbia Riverkeeper, a coalition of environmentalists and landowners fighting the terminal, released a statement Tuesday saying NorthernStar had made “binding” agreements to pump 1.3 billion cubic feet of natural gas per day, or the entire capacity of its terminal, into the Palomar pipeline.

The Palomar line has been proposed to cross parts of Northwest Oregon and link NorthernStar’s proposed terminal at Bradwood terminal to another line serving California.

If all of NorthernStar’s goes into the Palomar line, why would NorthernStar need to build its own line across Clatsop, Columbia and Cowlitz counties? Riverkeeper asked.

It’s the latest tussle in a years-long fight over NorthernStar’s plan to unload and store liquefied gas from tankers on the Columbia River, across from Puget Island, revaporize the gas and send it to market through pipelines. Riverkeeper and its allies have said NorthernStar is compromising the environment and safety in communities along the river to make a buck by sending the gas to California. NorthernStar has said the gas is needed to energize the Northwest economy and that Riverkeeper simply doesn’t understand how gas markets work.

Riverkeeper executive director Brett VandenHeuvel said NorthernStar duped the public and local governments, which are spending thousands of dollars reviewing the company’s pipeline application when all along it planned to use a separate pipeline route.

It was far easier, VandenHeuvel said, for NorthernStar to get federal regulators’ approval to build its terminal in September by proposing a shorter pipeline that would cross the three counties. By contrast, Palomar line, a joint project between Northwest Natural Gas and TransCanada Corp., would span more than 200 miles in Oregon, is far more controversial, he said.

“I think its a bait-and-switch,” VandenHeuvel said. “Why are taxpayers’ dollars being spent to look at the environmental impact of this pipeline? It’s just not necessary.”

Gayle Kiser, a spokeswoman for a group of Cowlitz County landowners who would be affected by the NorthernStar pipeline, said she suspects NorthernStar isn’t being straight.

“It would be great for all the citizens of Cowlitz County if they would come out and say, ‘Oh, we’re not going to build that pipeline. We’re going to go with Palomar,’” Kiser said. “But they continue to leave us hanging.”

Riverkeeper based its case Tuesday largely on two documents. A portion of Palomar’s federal application shows NorthernStar has “binding precedent agreements” to move roughly 1.3 billion cubic feet per day through its pipeline. A separate document, filed with the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission by Palomar competitor Northwest Pipeline Co., also references the agreement.

But Kim Hyding, a spokeswoman for Northwest Natural Gas, which is building the Palomar pipeline, said the documents represent only an option for NorthernStar, not a contract.

“Bradwood is not contracted to do anything at this point,” Hyding said.

She also said the documents reference a large amount of gas because energy companies must take into account population growth and cite numbers representing maximum capacity when proposing energy infrastructure projects to regulators.

“You only get one shot to build a pipeline,” she said. “You have to build it for tomorrow and beyond.”

Desmond, the NorthernStar spokesman, said the Palomar line will be an option for the company’s customers, but that NorthernStar will need its own line to reach customers along the river, such as the Beaver power plant at Port Westward, which is gas fired, and the Wauna paper mill.

In the case of the documents cited by Riverkeeper, Desmond echoed Hyding’s comments, saying, “The term ‘binding’ in this context doesn’t mean what you think it means. At the end of the day, if you call it a binding option or not, it’s still an option.”