Protest over pipeline reaches county council

Laurens County Council is poised to vote on a resolution fighting the construction of a natural-gas pipeline as federal and state-government regulators consider issuing approval of the project.

The 55-mile pipeline for Dominion Carolina Gas Transmission would run from Moore in Spartanburg County to Greenwood County, and it would affect Laurens more than any other county, dissecting the area roughly north-south for nearly 30 miles.

Environmental groups and landowners across the region are challenging the plans, already, claiming the pipeline is unneeded and would benefit only the company and its customers in the Lowcountry while Upstate residents would lose private property and bear the brunt of its impact.

Dominion officials say the pipeline, part of their Transco to Charleston Project, will help serve increasing demand with clean-burning fuel while providing more than $1.5 million in annual property taxes.

Dominion officials supporting the plan and landowners opposing it will address the council Tuesday after representatives of the South Carolina Environmental Law Project and Upstate Forever addressed council at its last meeting.

“The proposed project is to support the natural-gas needs for South Carolina customers, not exportation,” said Dominion spokesperson Kristen Beckham. “The project is 100-percent contracted, with nearly 94-percent of the natural gas capacity contracted to South Carolina Electric and Gas for its residential, commercial and industrial customers. The remaining capacity is reserved to serve local South Carolina industries.”

The pipeline is pending a decision to be issued by the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission. Construction could begin once Dominion obtains FERC approval and related authorizations, including from the state Department of Health and Environmental Control.

The resolution the council will consider Tuesday calls for “all actions within legal authority to prohibit the use of eminent domain by Dominion” for the pipeline, and it calls for county officials to file comments opposing the pipeline with FERC and DHEC.

Legal authority for the execution of eminent domain, the expropriation of private property for public use with compensation, would ultimately come from beyond the county level, but county officials’ opposition to it would be considered by state and federal regulators, according to Michael Corley, SCELP’s Upstate coordinator and staff attorney.

“I have received letters of concern and opposition to the pipeline company being able to use eminent domain to attain property in Laurens County,” said Laurens District 4 representative Stewart Jones. “A number of concerns range from farms to family properties that the owners do not wish to sell. “

“I am personally still in the process of gathering all of the information I need to make a sound decision,” said Laurens District 3 representative Garrett McDaniel.

“Projects like this are most often defeated through a combination of forces, and local political will is certainly an important part of that,” said Corley. “At a minimum this (resolution) is giving property owners in Laurens County a platform and a collective voice on a problem they had previously been fighting in isolation.”

Several owners of property that stands to be affected by the pipeline have filed official comments opposing the plan, as have other interested parties.

Greenville residents Scott and Neel Hipp, who with their children own more than 900 acres near Cross Hill, would see the pipeline cross their land though they’ve fought its construction from the outset, with impact, liability and safety among their concerns.

The plan calls for about 55 miles of 12-inch-diameter pipeline underground from Moore to the Chappells area – only about 14-percent of which would be located with existing electric transmission or other rights-of-way – including a permanent 50-foot right-of-way easement. Associated pipeline support facilities would be included above-ground, and the existing Moore Compressor Station in Spartanburg County would have two new 1,400-horsepower compressor units installed.

Dominion has reached agreements with about 60-percent of the easements required for the project, according Beckham. The company is in the process of selecting a construction contractor, procuring materials and seeking federal, state and local permits to begin construction.

Following an application for a Certificate of Public Convenience and Necessity to authorize the pipeline facilities, filed last March, FERC issued an environmental assessment that found no significant impact, a finding that’s been challenged by SCELP, a nonprofit public-interest law firm, and Upstate Forever, a nonprofit organization formed to protect natural resources while fostering responsible economic development.

The pipeline would negatively and permanently impact 255 acres of agricultural, forested and residential land while crossing bodies of water 73 times, presenting environmental damage and risk, according to SCELP and Upstate Forever, whose officials dispute Dominion’s claim that the project is needed to support economic development.

“Reliable access to natural gas will provide lasting economic benefits for South Carolina,” Beckham said. “As utilities and industries are using more natural gas, additional infrastructure is needed to meet the demand. This project will provide the natural gas needed to heat and power homes and businesses and contribute to cleaner air in our communities.”

“A private company should not be able to threaten and use eminent domain to involuntarily take away private property in order to facilitate its own profit, especially when it comes with significant environmental harm,” Corley said.

Shelley Robbins, a project manager with Upstate Forever, said the pipeline would reshape and endanger hundreds of acres, dozens of bodies of water and drinking-water supplies in the Woodruff Roebuck Water District, the city of Clinton and the city of Newberry.

“Our Upstate natural resources already face so many challenges as we try to balance growth and our own needs,” Robbins said. “An unnecessary project that threatens our water while also taking away private property is simply unacceptable.”

- Follow Michael Burns on Twitter @MikeAtGvlNwz