ATLANTIC COAST PIPELINE
COMMUNITY ADVISORY GROUP – PROPOSED BUCKINGHAM COUNTY COMPRESSOR STATION
MEETING SUMMARY – SEPTEMBER 30, 2015
The first meeting of the Community Advisory Group (CAG) for the proposed Atlantic Coast Pipeline (ACP)
compressor station in Buckingham County was held on Wednesday, September 30, 2015. The objective
of the CAG is to provide deeper understanding of the project and gather input from the community
members on preferences and priorities to be addressed by the project team in the design and
construction phases of the project. The meeting was held from 11:30 a.m. to 1:00 p.m. at the
Buckingham County Administration facility.
Participants
• Buckingham Chamber of Commerce – Development Committee
• Buckingham County Emergency Services
• Buckingham County Planning Department
• Friends of Buckingham
• Industrial Development Authority – Buckingham County Representative
• Kyanite Mining Corporation
• Sierra Club
• Soil and Water Conservation District
• Union Hill Church
• Virginia Department of Forestry
• Yogaville
The following organizations were invited but unable to attend the meeting:
• Buckingham Schools
• Toga Fire Department
• Union Hill Community
• VA Growth Alliance
Observers
• 24 observers attended the meeting
Atlantic Coast Pipeline Project Team
• Carla Picard, External Affairs Manager
• Emmett Toms, State and Local Affairs
• Paul Bastin – Engineering Manager
• Jay Riley – Lead Design Engineer
• Richard Weeks - Environmental
1
NRG:
•
Patty Rusten, Facilitator
CAG Meeting Agenda
An informal agenda was followed at the meeting and included:
I.
Welcome and Overview of the Community Advisory Group Process
II.
Group Introductions
III.
Next Steps
IV.
Post Meeting Availability
Welcome
Carla Picard opened the meeting and welcomed the participants and observers to the first meeting of
the CAG. Carla noted that all of the participants should have received an invitation in the mail that
included a letter of invitation and an overview of the CAG process. Upon arriving, each participant also
received an information packet including a CAG fact sheet, compressor station fact sheet, Atlantic Coast
Pipeline fact book, Atlantic Coast Pipeline project overview fact sheet and a list of the permit categories
and a graphic showing the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission (FERC) Environmental Review Process.
Carla stated that the Atlantic Coast Pipeline project team members appreciate everyone taking the time
to attend and participate in the process of providing community feedback on the proposed facility.
Patty Rusten began this segment of the CAG meeting by reviewing the agenda, ground rules and the
CAG process.
• Logistics: There are two sign in sheets available; one for the CAG participants and a separate
one for members of the public who are attending and observing the meeting. CAG
participants will be asked at the end of the meeting to review their contact information
provided on the sign in sheet and confirm the specific information to be shared with other
CAG participants. The facilitator will use a flip chart to record comments relevant to the
scope of work for the group and will record other issues on a “parking lot” flip chart.
•
Ground rules: The group first developed a set of ground rules that will be used as a guide
throughout the process. Additions can be made as new items are identified.
o Turn off mobile phones
o Respect other views
o No interruptions – one person talks at a time
o Limit side conversations
Community Advisory Group Process
The process of the CAG; including purpose, members, roles and scope; was reviewed to ensure that all
participants had a shared understanding of their involvement in the group.
2
•
The purpose of the CAG is to provide constructive input and feedback on certain features and
priorities for the proposed compressor station to be located in Buckingham County. This is the
only aspect of the overall ACP project that the CAG will focus on during the process – the
proposed compressor station facility and site – and the community input will influence the
design and construction phases of the facility. The CAG is one aspect of outreach for the ACP
team and project team members are interested in meeting with CAG member organizations and
other stakeholders groups about other interests in the project. This is not a public hearing or
open house format (ACP or FERC) where stakeholders can debate the broader ACP project or
provide comments for the official record. There are other avenues to submit comments outside
the scope of this process.
•
The CAG process includes three meetings:
o Meeting #1: The first meeting is focused on reviewing the CAG process, getting to know
the participants and gaining an understanding of each person’s interest in the
project/facility, meeting the ACP project team members and working together to set a
preferred date and time for the second meeting.
o Meeting #2: The second meeting will be a “work session” and the participants will learn
more about compressor stations and the specific facility and site in Buckingham County.
The participants will also work in small groups along with ACP project team members to
review maps and other materials to provide feedback on specific information
categories. The areas include lighting, building design and color, landscaping, walls or
fences, site features and items related to potential construction and operation. This is
the first opportunity to influence the design of the proposed facility to ensure that if it is
built, the facility will include the features that are important to CAG participants and the
community. Note – there may be features that are not included for feedback – for
engineering, safety or other reasons – but will be part of the group discussion.
Optional: The ACP team offered CAG participants the option to tour a compressor
station facility. Some of the participants had already taken a tour of a Virginia facility but
would like to tour a facility that is closer to the same size as the proposed facility for
Buckingham County. This item will be included on the agenda for the second meeting.
o
Meeting #3: At the 3rd meeting, the ACP project team members will provide the group
with a draft design plan. The team will discuss how and why the CAG feedback was
incorporated into the draft design plan and explain any items that couldn’t be
incorporated and why. The ACP project team will also clarify design priorities that will be
used in developing the final design plan. An overview of potential construction
processes will be provided in order to begin the dialogue and gather feedback from CAG
participants. The ACP team is interested in re-convening this group closer to the point of
construction, should that occur.
3
•
The make-up of the CAG: During August and September, the ACP project team consulted with
Buckingham community leaders and others to identify participants to represent a cross section
of public and private interests.
•
Roles and Responsibilities:
o
o
o
CAG participants: Participants are expected to attend all meetings or identify an
alternate/delegate to step in when needed. Participants are expected to actively
participate, provide constructive feedback and focus on the purpose of the CAG. Finally,
participants should consult with their respective affiliations before and after meetings.
ACP team members: The ACP team members are a resource for the participants and will
provide relevant maps, charts, and information to help deepen CAG participants’
knowledge of the facility and support the feedback process. The ACP team seeks
community perspective and input about the proposed facility so that the final design of
the proposed facility will allow for better integration into the community and minimize
disruption.
Observers: Members of the public are welcome to attend and observe the CAG
meetings. Although the process limits active participation by observers, they will be
provided with note cards to document questions or issues they may have. If time allows,
the note cards may be addressed (within scope) at the end of each meeting or included
in the “parking lot” FAQ that will be developed and provided at the next meeting.
Observers are asked to respect the process.
Introductions
Each member of the CAG and the ACP Project team was asked to introduce themselves and provide
their name, organization, interest in the facility, expectations for the process. Some members of the
CAG read prepared printed statements and some of those were provided to the ACP project team. Only
the interests that are germane to the scope of the CAG are included in the list below. Other broader
project or policy issues are not included. Lists of interests include:
• Opportunity to have feedback incorporated in the plans
• Better understanding about the relationship with fire/rescue departments
• Want to establish good working relationship with ACP team
• Here to learn and better provide information as liaison with County and public stakeholders
• Interested in the Special Use Permit process and conditions for the facility
• Represent my Board of Directors and interest in taking care of natural resources
• Represent 40,000-50,000 people who strongly oppose the pipeline, facilities and fossil fuels
• No meaningful dialogue about the project so far; hope this is different
• Wants to understand stakeholder feedback and the plans to better prepare for the permit
conditions
• Representing organization; interested in making these facilities a positive community asset
4
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
Department of Environmental Quality oversight; ensuring compliance with environmental
requirements
Provide information on the local forest resources
Have a positive impact on the features of the proposed facility
Concerned about potential harm to the Union Hill neighborhood and need to have
representation on the CAG
Learn about the potential for impacts and influence mitigation plans
Interested in maintaining an intact community
Would like the process, feedback and results to become part of the official project record
Feels like the project/facility is not (or will not) provide benefits to the community
Want to keep our sense of community
Feel that the subject (facility) is too narrow and hope for broader discussion
Pristine environment should be maintained
Concerned about impacts to cultural, historical religious, hunting, Native American grounds
Concerned about impacts from construction – noise, dust, etc.
Tour other local compressor stations that are similar in size
Potential user of the natural gas
Next Steps
CAG Information Requests for Meeting #2
The CAG collaboratively developed a list of information needs about the proposed facility and site in
order to prepare for the second meeting of the group.
Request
Product
Responsibility
Site and facility detail /
specifications
Site location rationale (compare to
Transco location nearby)
Safety records of compressor
stations (Dominion and industry)
Emergency response and training
program
Regulations and permitting
• Fact Sheet – develop a new sitespecific handout
• Aerial map (show parcels and ½
mile notification corridor)
• Draft site plan (if available)
• Simulation/photo of example
• Develop a Q&A (question and
answer) document - add
information
• Add to Q&A
ACP
• Summary of programs – add to
Q&A
• Provide public awareness/safety
brochure
• information - add to Q&A
ACP
5
ACP
ACP
ACP
• Compliance enforcement
• List of permits and timelines
• Permit category information add to Q&A
• Permits applied for and timeline
for approvals (automatic or
otherwise)
• Major vs. Minor air permit
categories
Fault lines in the area – explain
• Add to Q&A
USGS involvement/studies
Explain increase in size (moved
• Add to Q&A
from 30,000 – 40,000)
• Will it change again?
If future expansion is planned,
• Add to Q&A
what is the process?
Liability and LLC (what is an LLC and • Add to Q&A
who will be liable for potential
incidents?)
Economic impact to Buckingham
County
• Construction and maintenance
• With and without the
compressor station facility
• Impact to local businesses
Specifications for sound dampening
equipment
ACP
ACP
ACP
ACP
• Add to Q&A
ACP
• Include in site-specific handout
ACP
Emissions mitigation
• Include in site-specific handout
• Dry-seal vs. wet-seal (preference
for dry seal technology)
Noise impacts (reports from other
• Add to Q&A (if information
communities with compressor
available)
stations [if available]);
• Sound study as a separate handSite-specific sound study
out
ACP
ACP
Future Meeting Days / Time
The group determined that Thursday is the best day of the week for meetings to occur and 6:00 p.m. is
the optimal meeting start time. The two options for the second meeting include October 29 and
November 5. The facilitator will contact CAG members to determine preferences and will then send an
email to the group to confirm the final date and time of the next meeting. Buckingham County
representatives will research the availability of a larger meeting room that includes the use of a
microphone.
6
Communications
A meeting summary will be created and shared with the CAG participants for comment before it is
finalized and posted on the ACP project website, www.dom.com/ACpipeline. CAG participants were
encouraged to review the CAG contact information sheet to confirm the accuracy of their personal
information and to confirm which information can be shared with other participants. The contact
information sheet will be updated to reflect any changes and sent to CAG participants prior to the
second meeting. The facilitator will also share a draft agenda with participants prior to the next meeting
– noting that the next two meetings will be working sessions.
The CAG then reviewed the items on the parking lot, made revisions and they are included below. The
facilitator collected the comment cards from members of the public who attended and observed the
meeting. Those comments are included with the parking lot issues and responses will be included in a
Q&A to be prepared for distribution at the next meeting.
Parking Lot Items
Question/Issue
Responses to be completed and
provided at the second meeting
Please provide technical experts at future meetings
Explain why Buckingham County was chosen as a location for a
compressor station
Request for ACP to participate in public forum
Withdraw the ACP FERC application
Key-Log economic report for four counties - Study should be available
later in October
Can you assure me (us) 100% that the pipeline will not leak any
gases? We live in a rural area where we depend on well water. Will
our cattle and other livestock be affected?
Is there a compressor station/pipeline where you live? If not, why
not?
If a compressor is needed, as we know it is, and the proposed pipeline
is relocated or not approved, what will Dominion do with all the land
it has purchased in Buckingham County?
Why won’t Dominion have public meeting for all concerned? Why no
full information release?
Why in 55 years has no better way been developed? Or is it a money
factor? (Assumption is the “no better way” is a pipeline)
Please add low frequency noise under noise concern of compressor
station.
Will you publish the list of all chemicals emitted by compressor
stations (from your already existing compressors?) Thank you.
7
Friends of Buckingham to
provide link and contact
information to facilitator
Does Dominion have a team studying specifically the health impacts
from compressor stations due to methane, VOC and other chemicals?
Thank you.
Will you give us and make public all the instances of Dominion’s
pipeline failures, (leaks and explosions) and compressor stations not
meeting regulatory guidelines (Leesburg Compressor Station), and
compressor station fires and explosions. Thank you.
Given that the land has been purchased for this project, is
ACP/Dominion prepared to abandon the project should a majority of
citizens and the assembly decide to oppose this project?
Please give statistics on whether FERC has ever approved speeding up
the permit process.
What does “abbreviated” application mean?
The meeting was adjourned at 1:10 p.m.
8