Mr. Chairman and other distinguished members of this Congressional subcommittee, thank you for the opportunity to speak here today on behalf of the residents of Baltimore County and all those who cherish the Chesapeake Bay.
As I am confident this panel will recognize, the proposed Liquefied Natural Gas facility at Sparrows Point poses a grave risk to the people and environment of not only Baltimore County, but of the entire region. The possibility of shipments of LNG into the heart of the Chesapeake Bay, with an 87-mile long pipeline transporting natural gas through populated areas is unacceptable. The citizens of Baltimore County have been unified in their opposition to this LNG plant. We have been joined in our opposition by our neighboring jurisdictions, along with our state and federal elected officials.
As elected officials, we have a responsibility to look beyond any minimal economic benefits of this facility to the long-term safety of our citizens and our environment. I am here today to summarize the major points that are detailed in my written testimony that we have submitted to you for your consideration as you make this important decision:
First, it is disturbing that until this hearing, local governments were not included in this process. This exclusion has given the public little confidence in the overall FERC and Coast Guard review process to date. At a minimum, I would hope that the Waterway Suitability Assessment Report will be put on hold until the Coast Guard incorporates and/or addresses issues identified by the local governments and other organizations that have been excluded from the process.
Second, my second major concern addresses what I believe is the fundamental conflict of locating a highly volatile LNG facility in the heart of a densely populated area. Placing this facility in the Port of Baltimore conflicts not only with the operations of the Port itself, but also with recreational boating and chartered fleet fishing, and has the potential of damaging the Chesapeake Bay for generations to come.
Third, this proposed facility is at odds with numerous provisions of The National Strategy for Maritime Security of 2005 and the remote siting considerations as provided in the 2005 Natural Gas Act. A terrorist attack on an LNG vessel traveling into the Port of Baltimore, passing under the Chesapeake Bay Bridges and off loading a few hundred feet from the LNG conversion and storage facilities, poses a real and unacceptable danger to the critical infrastructure of this region and thereby to the United States.
Fourth, the assurances of LNG proponents have been significantly eroded by the February 2007 Government Accountability Office report on potential terrorist attacks on LNG tankers. I understand that the Department of Energy is looking to additional studies in 2008 to begin to address some of the issues raised by the GAO report. Making decisions today without the benefit of these studies that could impact our safety is just plain reckless. It is also unacceptable to the thousands of residents of this region who will live and work with the anxiety of having this LNG facility in their backyards.
In conclusion, I am here today, on behalf of my colleagues on the Baltimore County Council and the people of Baltimore County, to oppose the proposed location of this LNG facility. An LNG Facility at Sparrow’s Point would pose a significant threat to the people, economy, and security of Baltimore County and the entire Baltimore region. It must be rejected.
Thank you for your time and your consideration.
Courthouse 