It appears ET Rover isn’t coming over.
Based on maps posted last week on the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission (FERC) website, there’s a new proposed route for the interstate ET Rover natural gas pipeline and it no longer includes Oxford, Addison and Brandon townships.
Instead, the new route goes north through Lapeer County toward I-69 (see map above).
‘Oakland County has been bypassed from the route, except for two or three parcels in Groveland Township,? said Jeff Axt, president of Protecting Our Land and Rights (POLAR), a local property rights group that’s been fighting to push the pipeline out of the county.
‘I think it’s mostly because Oakland County had really good arguments (against it).?
POLAR hosted an Aug. 27 landowners meeting at the Oxford Veterans Memorial Civic Center. Approximately 40 people attended including residents of Oxford, Addison, Hadley and Brandon townships.
‘It’s official that (ET Rover has) identified a new route,? Axt told the crowd. ‘They’ve moved their crews out of Oakland County and they’re hitting it hard in the other counties.?
The proposed ET Rover pipeline is designed to transport up to 3.25 billion cubic feet per day of natural gas from the Marcellus and Utica shale production areas in Pennsylvania, West Virginia and Ohio to various markets in the United States and Canada.
Axt believes ‘it’s pretty safe to say? this change in the proposed route ‘will stick.?
‘I’m relieved,? said Addison resident Sue Kline, who attended the meeting and owns 52 acres of agricultural property near Noble and Hosner roads. ‘I wasn’t deadset against it, but I had concerns about the ecological impact.?
Kline’s property was originally part of the proposed ET Rover route and she wasn’t thrilled about the prospect of dealing with more pipeline construction.
She already has Enbridge’s Line 6B, a crude oil pipeline, running beneath her land. The Canada-based company is in the process of wrapping up its pipeline replacement project.
‘We’ve just been through this with Enbridge,? Kline said. ‘It’s very disruptive to your life. You can’t use your land . . . It’s been a mess. We’re still dealing with the aftereffects. I can’t imagine another one going through.?
Kline added she’s both ‘shocked? and ‘pleased? by news of the proposed re-route.
When asked about the apparent re-route through Lapeer County, Vicki Granado, spokesperson for ET Rover Pipeline LLC, responded via e-mail with the following statement ? ‘As you know we are in the process of conducting routing evaluations, performing civil surveys and executing environmental studies along the proposed pathway of the pipeline.
‘As routing constraints are identified, the route is being continuously tweaked or adjusted to avoid the many constraints which ultimately could move the location of the pipeline in multiple directions. Until the route is finalized and approved by the FERC and other state and federal authorities, the route is subject to change. We will hold additional open houses in any new counties that are identified.?
Oxford Township Supervisor Bill Dunn said he was made aware of the route change on Aug. 27 during a phone conversation with K. Grant Ruckel, senior director of government affairs for the Dallas-based Energy Transfer Partners, which owns ET Rover Pipeline LLC.
The supervisor said Ruckel confirmed the new proposed route runs north of Oxford Township.
‘I asked him to put it in writing, so I could have something to show people, but he wouldn’t do it,? Dunn said.
Axt, who lives on 100 acres in Brandon, credited opposition from citizens and townships as the decisive factor.
‘We believe the reason why the route changed out of Oakland County is because residents, stakeholders, municipalities, (and) elected officials filed comments (with) FERC,? Axt said.
FERC is the federal agency that must approve the pipeline and its route in order for the ET Rover project to move forward.
Property owners have been submitting comments to FERC regarding the project and they are posted at www.ferc.gov. The docket number for the project is PF14-14.
Resolutions from the Brandon and Groveland township boards opposing the pipeline route through Oakland County are also posted on the website.
To Axt, the re-route shows ‘there is something to be said? for the ability of ‘public opposition or public input to effect change.?
POLAR ‘didn’t think that Oakland County made sense? for the ET Rover pipeline route for a variety of reasons ranging from its numerous lakes and wetlands to its more densely populated residential areas, according to Axt.
In light of this apparent route change, FERC ‘encouraged ET Rover to send letters to notify landowners of route adjustments that would result in the landowner’s parcel no longer being crossed.? This was posted in the weekly meeting notes on the agency’s website.
‘We’ll see if that happens,? Axt said. ‘It was nice to see that FERC suggested that.?
Although it appears the proposed pipeline route is pretty much out of Oakland County, Axt encouraged residents to continue to ‘weigh in? and submit comments to FERC.
‘We want a public record because if another pipeline comes through, we’re going to point to this whole ordeal,? he said. ‘It will make it easier to say, ‘ET Rover bypassed Oakland County. You should, too. These were the reasons then. These are the reasons now.? That’s why we’re still doing landowner meetings in Oakland County.?
Axt noted any member of the public is free to share their thoughts, opinions and concerns with FERC, not just landowners directly affected by the ET Rover project.
‘You don’t have to be on the pipeline (route) to submit a comment,? he said. ‘This is a public comment period. You could live in California and comment on this.?
Packets handed out at the Oxford landowners meeting included several pages of example comments which Axt encouraged audience members to either copy directly or draw ideas from when writing to FERC.
Brandon resident John Strong, who’s property was not part of the original ET Rover route, believes an important concern to raise is the idea that having a 42-inch natural gas pipeline running through people’s properties, close to their homes, poses a ‘national security risk.?
‘Just think about the terrorist attack opportunities,? he said. ‘These lines are not protected. There’s no security on these lines.?
Strong said if someone were to plant explosive devices ‘every half mile? from Livingston County to Canada, the resulting damage would be ‘much worse than? the Sept. 11, 2001 terrorist attacks.
Axt was asked about gathering signatures and submitting petitions to FERC, but he said the agency ‘doesn’t usually weight those as heavily as individual comments? and resolutions from governing bodies.
Dunn told the audience he plans to see if the Oxford Township Board is willing to adopt an anti-pipeline resolution similar to the ones approved in Brandon and Groveland.
ET Rover has not endeared itself to the supervisor. ‘To be quite frank, they jerked me around,? Dunn told the audience. ‘I’m not real happy with them.?
On Aug. 19, he e-mailed the company a list of questions about the pipeline project and its proposed route with the goal being to provide the answers at last week’s POLAR meeting.
On Aug. 26, Ruckel wrote to Dunn, ‘I will give you a call shortly. And will have responses for your meeting.?
Instead of answers, Dunn received the following e-mail from Ruckel the next day ? ‘We would be glad to meet with you to go over your questions in person. We are in the process of developing the responses, but we cannot be certain for some of them until the routing studies, environmental evaluation and FERC analysis are complete.?
‘I don’t like being jerked around,? Dunn said. ‘They did lie to me . . . They were not forthright.?
Dunn noted he invited ET Rover representatives to attend POLAR’s meeting in Oxford, but the company declined.
Later this month, the Oakland County Board of Commissioners is expected to vote on a resolution supporting a re-route of the ET Rover pipeline in order to protect the county’s natural resources, such as watersheds, woodlands and wetlands, as well as citizens? property rights and values.
‘I’m confident it will pass,? said Commissioner Mike Spisz (R-Oxford), who’s coauthoring it with Commissioner Bob Hoffman (R-Highland). ‘It’s 99 percent written.?
Spisz and Hoffman began drafting the resolution prior to the proposed re-route through Lapeer County.