Transcript Pipelines and People - Pipeline Safety Trust

Pipelines and People
Putting Them Together
WEST VINCENT, WEST PIKELAND, EAST
NANTMEAL, GREEN VALLEYS ASSOCIATION
CHESTER COUNTY PA
PHMSA TECHNICAL ASSISTANCE GRANT
TAG PROGRAM
 Series of 4 Public Outreach Sessions
 Pipeline Mapping
 Review Federal and State Regulations
 Research Land Development and Zoning Ordinances
 Develop Web Site to get pipeline information to
communities.
PUBLIC MEETINGS
 Four public forums:
I. Operation and Maintenance of Pipelines
 II. Pipeline Safety
 III. FERC Process
 IV. Pipeline Planning

PIPELINE OPERATION AND MAINTENANCE
Meeting l
 Representatives from Sunoco, Texas Eastern/Spectra Energy,




Williams/Transco and Columbia Gas/NiSource explained
difference between transmission lines and distribution lines.
Inspections: aerial, walking, driving, by computer
Exterior/Interior Line inspection
Alex Dankanich of DOT PHMSA corrected a
misunderstanding among pipeline representatives as to how
high vegetation could grow before cutting is required.
Pipeline companies had been cutting vegetation to a lower
height which is unhealthy for stream banks.
Notification of Inspections/Maintenance
Public Outreach
 Townships do not receive prior notification of
inspections
 No requirement to notify townships of repairs/”venting”
 Inspection reports – FOIA request
 Public Outreach:
once a year meeting for emergency responders
annual brochure mailing
What pipeline projects under consideration for County:
new, replacement, expansion? No knowledge.
Questions/ Comments from Meeting I
How is it decided that a pipeline is needed and where
it will go? Remains unanswered.
Are local townships and landowners involved in initial
design of pipeline route? No
Would like actual plans for future pipeline projects
made available to public.
Need long range pipeline grid planning.
How does the lack of access to information improve
safety of pipelines?
PIPELINE SAFETY
Meeting II
 Karen Gentile of PHMSA gave PowerPoint
presentation on PHMSA role in safety and
maintenance of pipelines with handouts on
inspection of transmission lines and clearing of
Rights of Way (ROW).
 Questions for representatives of pipeline companies
included:
 What should landowners do and look for? Call 811.
 What should landowners do if there is an incident,
other than “run like hell” advice from landman?
MAPPING
 Chester County has more than 25 pipelines.
 Large contingent of local emergency management
personnel attended Meeting ll. Request was made of
pipeline representatives for mapping identifying
properties where current pipelines are located.
 No detailed map available from pipeline companies.
 TAG Project has enabled us to have a local
engineering company create detailed mapping.
WHO REGULATES INTERSTATE PIPELINES?
Meeting III
 Carolyn Elefant, Esq. Presentation on FERC Process
 FERC reviews and approves applications
 Notification
 Intervention
 Open
House
 Eminent Domain
 States and Local Government Role
NOTIFICATION
 Pipeline company applicant is not required to
contact state and local agencies or landowners prior
to submitting its pre-filing application to FERC.
 Applicant identifies who the stakeholders are. FERC
does not mandate who shall be included as
stakeholders.
 Once an applicant files an application requesting
FERC to review its project, applicant begins to give
notice to state and county agencies and all “affected”
landowners as to where the project will be located.
Comment from Audience on Notification
 Notification Inadequate; needs to be:
 Early and Accurate (By Certified Mail) and include:
DEP
 County Planning Commission
 Township Board of Supervisors and Manager
 Land Owner(s) of Record, and Adjoining
Property Owners

INTERVENTION
 Notice will include date by which motions to intervene
are due.
 Motion to Intervene Deadline Very Important. If you
want FERC to consider your comments, if you want to
receive copies of filings and preserve your right to appeal
a decision in court, you MUST file a timely Motion to
Intervene according to FERC’s rules. Ms. Elefant
outlined requirements for the motion and provided a
sample Motion to Intervene in her handout.
 Townships and the county have right to intervene and
must do so if they wish to participate in FERC process,
and have FERC consider their input.
OPEN HOUSE
 Applicant will hold an “open house” to discuss the
project.
 Obtain as much information about the proposed
route as possible.
 If it appears that the pipeline route will not cross
your property, you should intervene if your property
is near the route, as the route may change and cross
or abut your property.
EMINENT DOMAIN
 Pipeline companies that receive a certificate from
FERC to construct and operate a pipeline and have
been unable to acquire property necessary for the
project may exercise their power of eminent domain
by bringing a condemnation action in federal court if
property is valued at $3,000.00 or more.
Questions and Comments from Audience
 Why are pipeline companies allowed to bring eminent
domain actions against landowners before complying
with all terms of FERC certificate?
 Landowners have no real bargaining power regarding
terms of easement agreement because of eminent
domain.
 What training and experience are required of landmen?
 Who do landmen answer to? Several landowners
complained about misrepresentations from landmen.
What state agency handles complaints about landmen?
STATES AND LOCAL GOVERNMENT
 FERC issues a certificate of public necessity and
convenience with conditions, contingent on pipeline
companies complying with federal and state permits.
 States do have some role in pipeline siting process
such as authority to require compliance with DEP
permits.
Questions and Comments from Audience
 Why aren’t companies required to demonstrate a
need for pipeline based on specific regional
information?
 Why don’t municipalities and landowners have more
input into the siting of pipelines before company
applies to FERC? Companies claim commercially
sensitive information, get information treated as
privileged and confidential.
 Municipalities have current and particular
knowledge of their area.
MORE COMMENTS ON LACK OF INPUT
 Land is critical resource for pipeline companies in
Chester County, but landowners have no voice in
siting of pipelines.
 A municipal official mentioned the lack of input that
townships have, stress on township infrastructure,
and lack of consideration of municipal land
planning.
 We need more information about proposed pipelines
PIPELINE PLANNING
Meeting IV
 Representatives from Chester County Conservation
District and Brandywine Conservancy discussed:


Erosion and Sedimentation Plans and Site Inspections
Impact on Watersheds and Conserved Lands
 DOT representative reviewed safety inspections of
pipelines.
QUESTIONS FROM AUDIENCE
 How can 12 DOT inspectors for Eastern region
adequately inspect all interstate pipelines?
 If County finds violation during site inspection and
can only seek voluntary compliance, how is this
ensuring pipeline safety?
 How can landowners and communities participate in
planning process?
PENDING LEGISLATION
 PA House Bill 1817
Introduced by Representative Curt Schroder
Establish a Mid-Atlantic Area Natural Gas Corridor
Compact with power to govern siting. Be more
responsive to needs and concerns of communities,
consider areas designated for conservation, impact
on environmental resources.
 House Bill 2693
Give PA PUC authority to enforce safety regulations
over intrastate gathering lines in Class 2,3,and 4.
Risk/Benefit Analysis
 No benefit to Chester County: no jobs created, no
increased revenues.
 Increased burden on local government
infrastructure.
 No benefit to landowners: loss of land, increased
liability, diminishing property value.
 Pipeline companies get benefits, the profits.
Communities get burdens: risk safety of people and
environment, potential harm to water sources,
conserved land.
What is Missing in Planning Process?
 Driving force appears to be to maximize number of
pipelines with no long term planning.
 Current siting process favors expediting approval of
pipelines at expense of local government and
landowner input.
 Municipalities and Landowners assume the risks and
the burdens.
 Need a structured framework with collaboration
among federal, state, local governments and pipeline
companies with input from landowners.
Collaboration Not Exclusion
Communities in Chester County want:
 Get out ahead of pipeline project; be informed
 Be proactive, not reactive; be part of the process
 Balancing of Interests
Pipeline safety and reliability can only improve
if there is collaboration, not exclusion.
Prepared by:
Eileen Quinn Juico [email protected]
484 888 0976
November 05, 2010