Searsport tank proposal

Opponents take arguments over DEP permits to Maine high court

DCP representative calls appeal 'another delay tactic'
By Tanya Mitchell | Dec 28, 2012
Photo by: Tanya Mitchell Members of Thanks But No Tank have filed an appeal with the Maine Supreme Court this month challenging permits the Maine Department of Environmental Protection Agency issued to Colorado-based DCP Midstream. The company hopes to construct a 22.7 million gallon liquefied petroleum gas terminal at Mack Point.

Portland — A local group that has publicly opposed the proposed construction of a 22.7 million gallon liquefied petroleum gas terminal at Mack Point has taken its arguments to the Maine Supreme Court.

According to a press release from Thanks But No Tank, the group filed an appeal with the Maine Law Court Tuesday, Dec. 4, challenging the permit that the Maine Department of Environmental Protection (DEP) granted to Colorado-based DCP Midstream Partners, LP, in 2011 to build the terminal.

The Kennebec Superior Court ruled against TBNT in an order issued Nov. 13.

"We feel we have strong grounds for appeal of this permit and are optimistic about our ultimate chances for success in the law court – especially on our challenge of DEP’s refusal to consider the significant safety threats posed by this proposed facility," stated the release from TBNT.

The basis for the challenge, according to TBNT, is that DCP altered its original plans as specified by the permit.

"On Dec. 11, 2012, while our appeal was still pending in the Maine Law Court, DEP transferred its 2011 permit from DCP Midstream Partners, to its shell company — DCP Searsport LLC — and granted a significant change in the route for the mile-long LPG transfer pipeline authorized by the original permit," stated the TBNT release,  "DCP and DEP called this amendment a 'minor revision' though this new route is significantly more dangerous to the environment and the surrounding population — it will take a vulnerable, above-ground pipeline through the 31 existing Irving and Sprague fuel tanks at Mack Point and their approximately 55 million gallons of volatile petrochemicals."

Additionally, TBNT argues DCP and DEP modified the permit.

"In four decades of prior court decision­­­s, the Maine Supreme Judicial Court has ruled that Maine administrative agencies were incapable of modifying permits and licenses while they are under appeal," stated the release from TBNT.  "When DCP filed applications on Oct. 22, 2012, asking to transfer and modify the 2011 DEP permits, TBNT objected — telling DEP Commissioner Patricia Aho that she and DEP lacked the jurisdiction to amend or transfer the permit while TBNT’s 2011 appeal of the permit was pending. However, DEP modified the permit on Dec. 12, 2012."

Because of this, TBNT requested that the Law Court declare the 2012 permit modifications by DEP null and void on Wednesday Dec. 19.

"To allow DEP to amend a permit while an appeal is pending would force TBNT to file a second appeal against the same permit, for the same project, on essentially the same grounds," stated the TBNT release. "To allow such modifications during an appeal would be confusing and wasteful. DCP and DEP should not be allowed to keep moving the goal posts on permits that are already the subject of an appeal."

In response to news of the TBNT appeal Wednesday, Dec. 26, DCP Midstream Vice President Roz Elliott said the issues TBNT is raising have already been considered by a variety of state agencies.

"DCP is focused on the Planning Board process. All the opposition's arguments have been reviewed by the DEP, Maine Fuel Board, Army Corp and Superior Court. And they have been rejected. This is simply another delay tactic by this group," said Elliott.

Following a five-night series of public hearings on the DCP application that took place in late November, the Searsport Planning Board has scheduled an additional three nights of public hearings in January. Those hearings have been scheduled to reconvene Wednesday, Jan. 16, and continue through Friday, Jan. 18. All of the hearings will take place at Searsport District High School at 6 p.m.

Comments (5)
Posted by: Kenneth Agabian | Aug 14, 2013 21:54

Aaaah. wrong Win Hood. Its all over for DCP Midstream in Searsport.  Bye bye.

Posted by: Melvin J. Box | Dec 30, 2012 12:33

We sure are letting a lot of "outsiders" have an opinion about not having the tank.

Posted by: David N. Berg | Dec 30, 2012 09:59

How can sensible people want to allow a potentially catastrophic project to go through?  The price is too high -- possible destruction of the town, economic hardship for local businesses, deterioration to Searsport's relationships with its neighboring towns, and most of all a town torn asunder with citizens fighting one another, making the town less inviting to its citizens and possible tourists and future homeowners.  They are allowing outside interests to create wounds that will not heal easily nor quickly,  Already many who were friends have stopped speaking to one another and all for the sake of twelve potential jobs for outsiders.

Posted by: Win Hood | Dec 29, 2012 15:45

It will all be over soon enough. Searsport will have another tank in its farm; Anglers likely will be under new ownership.

And the tourests will continue to keep traffic thru town at a snails pace.

Posted by: Melvin J. Box | Dec 28, 2012 22:40

It's only the first of many I'm sure.

If you wish to comment, please login.