Council hears pipeline project concerns

Jan. 27, 2020 | Danielle Eaton
DanielleE@thereminder.com

Agawam Mayor William Sapelli speaks about a proposed gasline project during citizen speak time at the Jan. 20 city council meeting.
Photo courtesy: Agawam Public Access TV

AGAWAM – An agreement between the Town of Agawam and Tennessee Gas LLC. was at the center of discussion by both councilors and residents at the Jan. 20 town council meeting.

The resolution, TR-2019-82, would give Mayor William Sapelli consent to enter into a shared occupancy agreement with the company for the purpose of a pipeline upgrade project.

Residents showed up to speak in opposition of the pipeline project. The first one to speak was resident Susan Grossberg, an attorney, who said she was opposed to the project for several reasons. One of the reasons, Grossberg said, was that the release sent to the town by Tennessee Gas only held them liable for damages that took place on the site of the project.

“It is giving Tennessee Gas license to do whatever they want, with absolutely no accountability in regard to the construction, in regard to the temporary site for where they’re going to be hauling huge equipment,” she explained.

Grossberg then referenced a “spill of 16,500 gallons of wastewater that contained what the EPA has labelled potentially carcinogenic chemicals” that took place in 2017 at the Agawam compressor station and said she would never advise a client to sign the release. Moving on, she alluded to discussions she’d heard amongst citizens.

“I’ve heard it’s been said we can’t stop the pipeline. I want you to understand grassroots movements in Northampton and in Holyoke stopped the pipeline there,” she told the council. “This pipeline is not needed because it’s going to facilitate gas going up to Holyoke and Northampton, and they stopped their pipeline. So for those people who think this is a done deal, it is not.”

Grossberg then began reading an open letter to the council from dozens of Agawam residents that were against the project. The letter, she said, as of Jan. 20 had been signed by 35 residents in support of stopping the project.

When Grossberg ran out of the allotted five minutes given during citizen speak time, resident Abbey Massaro took over reading the letter, which outlined specific parts of the project residents were opposed to and cited reasons in support of their opposition.

“As a resident of Agawam, we oppose the project to upgrade the existing Agawam gas compressor station 261 to replace two older gas turbines with a single, more powerful gas-powered turbine, the HP replacement project and the 2.1 mile pipeline loop, the looping project from the compressor station 261 Northwards to 261B-100 paralleling Suffield St. in Agawam,” she read.

The letter explained residents were opposed to the replacement of the two gas turbines due to health concerns, environmental impacts and the impact on the neighborhood near the compressor station. Massaro said the “noise and emissions of the existing compressor are already a burden on neighbors” and how residents believed that “any changes should alleviate the problem, not make it worse.”

Additionally, the letter said, “If an upgrade is undertaken it should use quieter, efficient, electric turbines that do not pollute locally and could be converted to reliance on renewable non-polluting electricity sources as the grid is greened.”

Another concern stated in the letter was regarding the “potential deleterious effects on air quality,” within Agawam. Massaro said the replacement turbine was “calculated to generate over 11,000 tons per year of emissions,” which would pollute the air and contribute to “negative health effects for our citizens with asthma, COPD and vascular disease.” She then went on to state that the town’s board of health chair Gladys Fernandez-Largay recognized “these health hazards” and sent the letter being read to Gov. Charlie Baker, “urging him not to authorize any new natural gas infrastructure projects until further studies were conducted.”

The looping project, Massaro said, was opposed by citizens due to its “harmful effects on the environment.”

“It will damage wetlands and streams that are designated and presumed cold water fisheries, it will threaten two endangered species and several species of greatest conservation need,” she read. “It will cause the clearing of four and a half acres of forest and it will pollute thousands of gallons of local water which Tennessee Gas uses for hydrostatic testing before transporting to an off-site disposal site.”

The letter then referenced the 2017 spill which Grossberg had referred to earlier in the meeting as an environmental “hazard” and said because there was no proven need for the project, the residents found no reason for the project to be complete.

“Such effects might possibly be acceptable if there were a proven need for the project, but there’s no demonstrable need for the loop project since Columbia Gas, Massachusetts cancelled its plan to build the alternate back feed project to provide to Northampton and Easthampton, Massaro said. “This was the stated purpose for building this expensive and environmentally threatening new pipeline, but that rationale has vanished.”

Massaro concluded her time by reading her final portion of the letter, which stated the known global climate crisis and asking the council to do their part by rejecting the proposal.

Resident Nancy Bobskill then took over to finish reading the letter and recited the names of all 35 residents who had signed it.

Following Bobskill, resident Wendy Hollis spoke to the council about the state of the air quality in the Pioneer Valley and how the project would contribute.

“From the EPA website as of April 11, 2019 methane is the primary component of natural gas, it is a much more potent greenhouse gas than carbon dioxide and has 25 times greater impact on our environment over a 100-year period than carbon dioxide does,” Hollis explained to the council. “This is the opposite direction we need to be going in. We need to transition to clean, renewable energy because we are in a climate crisis.”

Next to speak was resident Edward Cecchi, who explained the pipeline project was close to home for him as it was “really in my backyard.”

“It seems not only unnecessary, but very dangerous what they’re intending to do,” he said to the council. “There’s a 60-year-old gas main there now and they’re intending to dig a trench approximately two feet to the side of it and put in a 12-inch main.”

Cecchi said if the council couldn’t stop the project, they “should at least make sure they’re held accountable for anything that they do.” He finished his time by stating that he’d been able to negotiate with Tennessee Gas over the years to get them to agree to be accountable for any damages they caused.

“I’ve been negotiating with them for about two years now, and I got them to, not only eliminate the damage release, but agree to the opposite, that they would be held accountable for any damages to real properties, personal or otherwise,” he explained.

Resident Corrine Wingard spoke next and briefly echoed her opposition to the project, but said, “at the very least we should renegotiate the agreement to have Tennessee Gas put in an electric compressor instead of the gas one, which is less harmful to the environment.”

The last resident to talk during citizen speak time was Mayor Sapelli, who began by expressing his pride of the citizens who’d both spoke and attended the meeting to voice their opinion. He then said he’d come to “explain some of the things” he’d heard because there was “a lot of information out there.”

Sapelli first addressed the 2017 spill that had been referenced by several speakers throughout the night, and said it hadn’t been the fault of Tennessee Gas, but instead a third-party contractor the company had hired to test the pipes.

“They hired a subcontractor, third party, who came in, who was a reputable company insured and whatnot, and they had every faith in these individuals that came in. The containers they used to haul the water in on their truck, to test these lines, were previously used for some other chemicals,” Sapelli explained. “So when they came in and they pressure tested the pipes with that water that was in contaminated tanks that they brought on the site, it had nothing to do with Tennessee Gas other than they hired them, when they were done testing the pipes, they discarded the water on the property.”

Sapelli said there was a “potential of carcinogens,” but was determined that it was “negligible based on our health department doing an investigation.” He continued and said the $150,000 in the release was “basically for them to have use of that property wider than it is now” and the contract did not release the company from any damages related to the pipeline.

The company, Sapelli said, had an easement “that happened years ago in the 50s or 60s” and that in the 70 years since, “they’ve been a very good neighbor.”

“So I just want to say they’ve been a good neighbor, they’ve done their job, they’re going to be improving the compressors. They have a compressor that’s 50-years-old now, they’re replacing that, that’s a good thing,” he said. “They’re upgrading the pipes, I also think that’s a good thing. So I would encourage you to take a look at that tonight, and look at the whole picture.”

With citizen speak time over, the councilors then went through the agenda until they reached TR-2019-82 where there was more discussion. Councilor Gina Letellier agreed that the language in the release didn’t match that of the easement and seemed to release the company of any damage that wasn’t “crops, timber and any and all damages to the properties located on the permanent right of way and temporary workspace.” She said, “There needs to be another release that’s a lot more clear.”

Council President Christopher Johnson said there was language in the easement that stated “they must restore the surface of the easements to as nearly as practical and permissible to their prior condition following construction.” He said also, the easement had “indemnification language where Tennessee Gas agrees to defend, indemnify, and hold the town harmless relative to anything that happens within the easement,” but agreed that was not reflected in the release.

Councilor Dino Mercadante expressed concerns and questions around the safety and upkeep of the project once installed, while Councilor Robert Rossi questioned if the project was even needed.

Council Vice President Cecilia Calabrese and Councilor Mario Tedeschi said they also shared concerns about the language in the release, while Councilor Rosemary Sandlin said she’d like to see what the board of health had to say. Councilor Anthony Suffri said his question was “why are we still doing it” and said he’d like to know who the project would benefit.

Councilor Robert Cavallo suggested that a representative from the company come before the council so their questions could be answered, while several other councilors voiced their desire to wait to vote on the agreement until their questions could be answered.

Ultimately, Johnson said he would try to arrange for a representative to come before the council in workshop of the city council and the matter was tabled.

Share this: