By Glenn Rolfe

BRIDGEVILLE — Eastern Shore Natural Gas is seeking expansion of its Bridgeville compressor station operation with a conditional use request that faces opposition.

Following public hearing testimony and discussion Feb. 10, Sussex County Planning and Zoning Commission deferred action on ESNG’s request, which would allow ESNG, a Chesapeake Utilities Corp. subsidiary, to expand with a metered regulatory station serving as a receipt point for natural gas.

Mark Parker, engineering manager at Eastern Shore Natural Gas, explained that the gas would be trucked in and offloaded, metered, regulated, and even heated.

“The gas is not treated or handled in any way here other than to offload it for direct injection into our pipeline system. Instead of accepting gas through a pipeline, it accepts gas from a virtual pipeline — or a truck,” said Mr. Parker. “Gas is not expunged into atmosphere.”

Opponents are not buying this. Objections, voiced in 28 letters received by the planning and zoning department and several who spoke virtually during the hearing, include health and safety, danger of explosion, proximity to the Phillis Wheatley Elementary School and claims of environmental racism. Noise and truck traffic are among additional concerns.

“This is in very close proximity to an elementary school with high minority, low median income,” said Maria Payan, who presented objections on behalf of the Sussex Health & Environmental Network (SHEN).

“The logic of zoning is to prevent such incompatible use,” said Charito Calvachi-Mateyko. “Because the community is largely a community of color (Hispanic and African-American) and no adequate environmental impact statement has been presented in the record, this application carries the added burden of environmental racism for which it must be rejected. It is an outrage that it was even presented to you for consideration.”

Mr. Parker said once ESNG has a viable shipper it will be making an application with the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission.

“They (FERC) take jurisdiction when it comes to environmental social justice issues. So, FERC, to grant us a certificate of public convenience and necessity (CPCN), they look at screening tool that was referenced,” Mr. Parker said.

Speculation among those opposed is that approval will open the door to a direct connection with the Bioenergy DevCo’s proposed anaerobic digestor facility at the former Perdue AgriRecycle plant near Blades. That facility is opposed by several environmental groups.

“Because the proposal would truck gas from a ‘non-traditional’ source to the Bridgeville facility, we believe the source would likely be the controversial Bioenergy DevCo plant proposed for south of Seaford,” stated Sherri Evans-Stanton, director of the Sierra Club Delaware Chapter.

“The proposed project will serve as a receipt point where non-traditional gas supply, such as renewable natural gas … will be metered, regulated, and heated before entering the existing Eastern Shore natural gas pipeline system,” said Phoebe Gates of Food & Water Watch. “The only source of ‘non-traditional’ gas planned for the vicinity, that we know of, is at the Bioenergy DevCo site.”

Commission vice chair Kim Hoey-Stevenson posed the question, based on the letters the commission received.

“Does this have anything to do with the biogas facility in Seaford?” she asked.

“This does not. If they (Bioenergy DevCo) end up opening that unit, we could be a potential receipt point for them. But we’re not basing this project strictly on them,” said Mr. Parker.

“Where are you expecting these trucks to come from?” Ms. Hoey-Stevenson said.

“We don’t know yet. The shippers haven’t signed up,” said Mr. Parker. “That is why we haven’t made that actual application to the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission. We haven’t determined who these shippers are. It could be just general compressed natural gas that we bring out of Pennsylvania and other interconnects and hold it on site and inject it.”

The intersect development project will occupy four of the eight acres at the current ESNG site, a landlocked parcel off Emma Jane Road just south of East Newton Road. Above grade piping would be about five feet from ground level.

According to Mr. Parker, the current facility is 800 feet from the closest residence, and about a fifth of a mile from the Phillis Wheatley School and its playground on Church Street. Those distances are far outside the 200 foot potential impact area, Mr. Parker said.

“We’re looking at hazardous explosive gas,” said Camden resident Greg Layton, of behalf of Food & Water Watch. “Will this blast radius be larger if the gas caught on fire? I don’t know but I am not willing to take an optimistic view of it. Finally, I object to this proposal on the grounds that it would only entrench factory farm gas infrastructure in Sussex County for decades to come.”

Trucks would enter and hook up to any of the three offload points. Unloading typically takes about four hours, putting the likely maximum of trucks per day at 18, on a 24/7 round the clock cycle.

“It could be coming from the west. It could be coming from the east,” Mr. Parker said. “That would depend upon ultimately where the gas is coming from, whether that was compressed natural gas, liquefied natural gas or potentially a renewable natural gas. Those shippers haven’t been determined yet.”

Presently, Eastern Shore Natural Gas intends to utilize Marlin Natural Gas Services, which also is a subsidiary of Chesapeake Utilities Corp. “Our truckers, our known system, our known commodity and our operator qualified technicians using the equipment,” Mr. Parker said.

Ms. Payan said the proposal lacks details and has too many unknowns.

“We don’t know many details. They said they don’t know where this is coming from. My guess is they will negotiate with the biogas, that is a major project,” said Ms. Payan. “There is no description of the source of where the gas is coming from. I can’t understand why the zoning commission would allow such a vague and uninformed request. When you are talking about something that is flammable, that should require an emergency plan. It is really vague, especially when we are dealing with something that is potentially explosive and hazardous. I think we are putting the cart before the horse.”

Letters of opposition include individuals from throughout Delaware. Jamie Whitehouse, Sussex County Planning and Zoning Director, did note that some of the 28 letters appeared to be duplicates.

Several commissioners addressed the request prior to the unanimous move to defer.

“I feel like it is just an expansion of what is already there,” said Ms. Hoey-Stevenson.

“The feeling that I would think that the public might be perceiving is picturing something like downtown Millsboro, where you have these trucks trying to get out onto Rt. 113 at Wawa. That’s not the case here,” said Keller Hopkins, who grew up in Bridgeville. “You have (SR) 404, the bypass around Bridgeville. You have a whole lot more than 18 trucks that are turning off heading to Bridgeville. They are not going through Bridgeville, they are heading toward Bridgeville, then going into the Perdue’s feed … hundreds of trucks daily during peak season.”

Commission chairman Robert Wheatley reminded the applicant that stipulations can be tied to conditional use requests.

“If you’re saying the maximum (daily) number trucks is 18, perhaps the maximum number could be 18,” said Mr. Wheatley. “There could be a requirement for a safety plan.”

ESNG operates almost 600 miles of transmission main pipeline, with three compressor sites, one in Pennsylvania and two in Delaware — Delaware City and Bridgeville, which has been in operation since 1988.

“We have been good neighbors here, living harmoniously under this conditional use since that time,” said Mr. Parker. He noted, knock on wood, that there have been no major incidents, or explosions during Bridgeville’s operation. “We take very seriously safety at all times. We always want to know what a potential impact area is. There is always concern about these types of facilities and that is natural, and welcome that commentary.”

Mr. Parker said ESNG believes the “proposed development will not have a substantial impact on the physical, economic or social development of the area. We have selected the location to develop this project as it minimizes potential for negative environmental or community impact.”

Staff writer Glenn Rolfe can be reached at grolfe@iniusa.org.
Follow @glennrolfeBTBN on Twitter.