Residents urge Oak Ridge Council to oppose Transco SSEP pipeline, urge resolution

Dozens of residents urged the Oak Ridge Town Council on Feb. 6 to adopt a resolution opposing the Williams Transco Southeastern Supply Enhancement Project, a proposed natural-gas pipeline expansion that would run parallel to existing lines through the town.

Speakers at the council meeting described safety risks, possible contamination of private wells, damage to historic sites and long-term effects on the town’s livability. “We respectfully ask you to oppose the project due to the safety and health concerns we have for the citizens of Oak Ridge,” resident Ron Ray said during public comment.

The requests came during the meeting’s public-comment period and were led by multiple homeowners who said proposed construction would run near homes, schools and churches. Residents pointed to potential damage from construction vibrations near older pipelines, concerns about groundwater contamination, and a record of pipeline incidents elsewhere.

Emily Sutton, Haw River Keeper and executive director of Haw River Assembly, urged the council to act to protect groundwater, noting private wells are not covered by the federal Safe Drinking Water Act: “These projects threaten the safety of groundwater, which once contaminated is nearly impossible to mitigate,” she said. Claire Spear, a community advocate, said local and county resolutions have influenced larger decisions about pipeline routes elsewhere and asked Oak Ridge leaders to follow suit.

Speakers described specific local risks: proximity to Oak Ridge Elementary School, Oak Ridge Military Academy and multiple churches; potential impacts on town wells and nearby streams; and disruption to historic properties in the Oak Ridge historic district. Brenda Cheney presented images from a 2008 pipeline explosion in Appomattox, Virginia, and warned of blast and incineration zones she said could affect dozens of Oak Ridge homes.

Council members acknowledged the comments and discussed the authority of the town. Several councilors said they were listening and that the council lacks direct regulatory control over a federally regulated pipeline project, but that a local resolution of opposition is within their prerogative. Mayor and council members said they would consider whether they had received enough constituent input to act; no motion or resolution opposing SSEP was made or voted on during the meeting.

Town Manager Bill Bruce and other staff did not present a council motion on SSEP during the Feb. 6 session. Multiple residents asked the council to request a full environmental study and to publicly oppose the project; speakers said Transco’s own filings indicated local communities would bear most project impacts while benefits flow elsewhere.

The council took no formal action on SSEP at the Feb. 6 meeting. Several speakers asked the council to consider a resolution of opposition at a future meeting; some council members said they would deliberate further and may schedule formal consideration in response to constituent requests.

For now, the record from Feb. 6 shows substantial public concern and a request that the Town Council use its platform to oppose the SSEP pipeline; the council left the matter open for future consideration.