|
Concerns linger about impacts of the new terminal
By Dan McCue
Staff Writer
In the weeks leading up to the issuance of a permit for the S.C. State Ports Authority’s proposed terminal at the former Charleston Naval Base, a number of municipalities, responding to residents’ concerns, passed nonbinding resolutions intended to slow the permitting process.
The city of North Charleston acted first, with a resolution adopted March 22 asking that all analyses gathered by the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers be verified and all necessary mitigation be required of the SPA before it could proceed. The resolution also requested installing air monitoring stations in surrounding neighborhoods.
A second resolution asked the corps to refrain from issuing a permit until the resolution of the concerns raised by the S.C. Coastal Conservation League, which resulted in its ongoing legal challenge of state permits issued for the project.
The Charleston County Council and Charleston City Council passed similar resolutions in April.
The S.C. State Ports Authority responded by voluntarily entering into a formal agreement with the S.C. Department of Health and Environmental Control to evaluate and implement means to cut diesel emissions at the Port of Charleston’s existing and future terminals.
“A cleaner environment and economic development are mutually compatible goals,” said SPA President and CEO Bernard S. Groseclose Jr. “This agreement provides dual benefits to the Charleston community. It preserves quality of life by studying and enacting ways to cut port-related air emissions. At the same time, it generates more high-paying jobs as business expands at the Port of Charleston.”
Among other things, the agreement required the SPA to fund the installation and utility costs for a particulate matter monitoring station owned and operated by DHEC, to conduct an emissions inventory of existing facilities within 18 months, to evaluate the use of cleaner fuels such as biodiesel and ultra-low sulfur diesel and to purchase cleaner equipment for the Navy base terminal.
North Charleston Mayor Keith Summey acknowledged that the issuance of the permit had been a long time coming. However, he expressed concern about whether the information relating to potential environmental and quality of life impacts had been developed enough to warrant the issuance of permits.
“Frankly, some environmental groups came to us with their concerns, and we had hoped to have the impacts looked at again before a permit was issued,” Summey said.
“We’ll move forward from here striving to make sure promises made to us in our memorandum of understanding with the port are adhered to.”
The potential economic benefits of the new terminal to the city of North Charleston depend on the kinds of operations that will be performed at the terminal, which could include the delivery of break bulk as well as containerized material, Summey said.
“I think for the state as a whole and the Charleston region as a whole, this new terminal will be an opportunity to recruit more industry and more businesses to the state,” he said.
Hanna Goss of Hold the Port, a grassroots organization that purports to represent more than 500 North Charleston and Charleston residents and business owners, said she appreciated the “tightrope the corps has to walk” in terms of the regulations it must abide by, but said she was nonetheless disappointed to learn the permit was issued.
The coalition had been among those calling most loudly for more work to be done in regard to potential impacts from the terminal.
“We did our best to make sure neighborhoods around the new terminal would be protected, and (the SPA) has made some additional commitments in regard to air quality monitoring as a result,” she said. “At least we can say we fought all the way to end. It’s not a loss, but unfortunately, it’s not a victory either.”
In Goss’ view, the SPA’s air monitoring agreement with DHEC is a “first good step toward improving the port’s air quality monitoring during most of the new terminal’s construction. However, there’s no enforceability and many of the commitments equate to studying and evaluating options,” she said.
Lt. Col. Edward R. Fleming of the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers said while some community organizations might express disappointment, the public input did have an impact on the corps deliberations.
“As an agency, our primary focus is on navigation and wetland impacts,” he said. “But what we heard consistently from the public was that core concerns were transportation—namely traffic congestion in the I-26 corridor—quality of life issues and air quality,” he said. “As a result, those were issues we were particularly keen to consider.”
The agencies involved reviewed and approved the mitigation program set forth by the SPA for affected aquatic resources and agreed that the plan provides appropriate compensation for unavoidable impacts to aquatic resources, Fleming said.
As part of the terminal development project, the SPA will fill 60 acres of wetlands and dredge another 80 acres beneath the Cooper River.
To compensate for this, the SPA has agreed to restore wetlands on Drum Island, restore five miles of oyster beds beneath Charleston harbor, pay for flights to monitor the activities of the endangered North Atlantic right whale off the South Carolina coast and provide $1 million for the preservation of Morris Island, among other measures.
Other conditions, tied mainly to the SPA’s environmental mitigation efforts, will require follow-up inspections, said Nathaniel Ball, the corps’ project manager for the terminal permitting process.
This past month, the SPA also signed a memorandum of understanding with DHEC to conduct air quality monitoring at all of its terminals on a continuing basis.
“That in itself is a very positive step,” Fleming said. “And I think all of these steps fit into our objective of avoiding negative impacts wherever possible, minimizing those we can and mitigating those that are simply unavoidable.”
Dan McCue is a staff writer for the Business Journal. E-mail him at dmccue@charlestonbusiness.com.
|
E-Mail This Article
Printer-Friendly Version