A state environment commission Wednesday voted unanimously to approve a request to ban liquid natural gas terminals in Baltimore County?s sensitive areas, a victory in county officials? aggressive effort to block a facility in Sparrows Point.
But county attorneys conceded the win could be short-lived. They learned of the commission?s decision while simultaneously defending the legislation that prompted it in federal court. Attorneys for the company proposing the $400 million facility near the Key Bridge are asking Judge Richard Bennett to throw out the county zoning law that adds LNG terminals to a list of facilities banned within 1,000 feet of sensitive Chesapeake Bay wetlands.
If that happens, county attorney John Beverungen said Wednesday?s vote from the state?s Critical Area Commission ? which must approve amendments to the state?s plan for coastal management zones ? could be moot.
“If this is blocked in court, the plan cannot be amended,” Beverungen said. “The only way the county could put this before the commission is through legislation.”
County officials hailed the commission?s vote, which came about two weeks after a subpanel recommended denial. They said the plan for massive tankers to haul super-chilled liquid gas to the plant, where it will be stored and revaporized, could affect water quality and pose terrorism threats. Anne Arundel County Executive John Leopold and Baltimore County Executive Jim Smith supported the legislation.
“This is a major victory for Baltimore County in our effort to protect our critical coastal area,” Smith said in a statement.
Lawyers for AES argue the Natural Gas Act pre-empts local regulations, giving the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission the exclusive authority to determine LNG siting. Bennett appeared to agree in February when he threw out a similar county law banning LNG terminals within 5 miles of homes and imposing a temporary halt on the second regulation.
The secretary of commerce must approve the commission?s vote before it can be formally adopted. AES attorneys said that?s unlikely.
“This could never be an enforceable policy if it is a special effort to single out LNG terminals because they are LNG terminals,” attorney Jeffrey Lamken said.
Bennett did not issue an immediate ruling.
