Dozens of residents urged the Davidson County Board of Commissioners on Tuesday to oppose Williams Transco's proposed Southeast Supply Enhancement Project, saying the 24-mile pipeline expansion would bring little benefit to local residents while posing risks to water, air and property.

"I'm here tonight to express my serious and well founded concerns about Transco's proposed Southeast supply enhancement project," said Crystal Norford of Clean Water for North Carolina, who told the board the pipeline would run about 24 miles in the state with roughly 10 miles in Davidson County and that "residents in impacted areas are not slated to be able to access the gas from SSEP for their homes or businesses." She also warned that the project would cross multiple streams in the Yadkin River watershed and criticized "dry ditch open cut" crossing methods that, she said, risk cumulative ecological impacts and drinking-water contamination.

Bill Huisman, a Davidson County resident, told commissioners the project raises environmental, economic and safety concerns, citing, in his words, a history of incidents and civil penalties affecting the company. "The benefits of the project are not realized by those who are impacted," Huisman said, quoting a company filing to the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission.

Another resident who said she lives about a quarter mile from an existing compressor station said air quality, noise and health are already a problem near the facility and urged the board to oppose expansion: "This project will pass through tributaries that directly feed into Lake Tomilek's, putting our drinking water at risk," she said.

Speakers noted that neighboring jurisdictions and governing bodies, including the town of Midway, Guilford and Forsyth county boards, and the Greensboro City Council, have passed resolutions expressing opposition or concern. Commissioners acknowledged that state and federal permitting and public hearings control approvals for the project but directed staff to gather the details of nearby jurisdictions' resolutions and to arrange an informational meeting so the board could hear additional evidence and options.

Chair Yates (chair identified in the record) said staff should report back with what other local governments have done and the regulatory steps available to the commissioners. Several commissioners said they were prepared to go on record opposing the proposal if the factual record supported that step.

No formal resolution or vote was taken at Tuesday's meeting; commissioners approved a separate informational meeting to collect more material before taking any formal action.