Homeowners' choice: Pipeline or federal court

Rob Burton sat with pen in hand at his kitchen table.

In front of him was an offer of $15,200 from a natural-gas company to buy the rights to widen a pipeline that runs under the yard of his four-bedroom, 41/2-bathroom house near Exton.

Burton really didn't want to sign. The offer wasn't enough, he thought. It would mean restricted use of his own property. He could never again plant a tree or put up a shed in the gas line right-of-way, which would be 95-feet wide.

But Burton felt powerless. That day, the gas company had filed papers in Philadelphia federal court to gain forced access to his property under eminent domain. He said he'd been warned that, if he held out, an arbitrator might award him as little as $8,000 and still grant the easement the company was after.

So he capitulated. He signed.

"I didn't think it was possible to win against these guys," he said later.

The gas-line expansion involves a seven-mile stretch of Chester County, and about 170 property owners have found themselves with a similar choice. They either have to take what they can get from the Williams Companies Inc. of Tulsa, Okla., or face the heavy odds that the courts will act against them, clearing the way for the gas company.

Some landowners have accepted offers. To push others, the gas company filed eminent-domain actions against 37 owners March 10. A local official said that filings against an additional 34 appear to be in the offing.

The landowners, who are mostly affluent people living in comfortable suburban communities, say they are not asking anyone to feel sorry for them.

But they say they are sounding an alarm that what happens to them could be replicated in hundreds of other cases in years ahead. Two other pipelines on a bigger scale are planned for the county, which already is crisscrossed by numerous long-distance gas lines.

Under a law passed during the build-up to World War II, Congress gave authority over interstate oil and gas lines to the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission (FERC). The thinking was that the national need for energy trumped local concerns.

The line in Chester County is part of the 1,800-mile Transco pipeline running from Hidalgo County, Texas, to 134th Street in New York City. It serves gas utilities in the Northeast and also provides fuel for electrical generation, often substituting for coal or oil. Peco is among its users.

State Sen. Andrew Dinniman, an area Democrat, said that local elected officials felt as powerless as the homeowners.

With the backing of FERC, Dinniman said, Williams has been free to bypass local concern over environmental issues, including the probable cutting down of hundreds of trees and possible harm to streams, including the Brandywine, at points where the pipeline crosses them.

He said that other areas where pipelines projects are planned - across the country - would face similar issues.

"This is not just a Chester County question," he said. "I believe this will be one of the largest political conflicts in the decade ahead. What is the proper balance between federal energy policy and local jurisdiction in terms of land use? At this point, it is totally out of sync."

J. Mark Robinson, director of energy projects for FERC, whose office oversees 2,000 miles of pipeline construction each year across the nation, agreed that pipeline work was a growing issue in many areas.

"There are fewer and fewer places where you can put things that it doesn't affect someone," he said, "but there is greater and greater need for energy."

He disputed that local residents and officials had little input into the Williams pipeline plan approved by FERC in August.

He said FERC officials "walked every inch" of the route to hear concerns. As a result, the agency nixed a proposal to dig a new line in the Exton-Downingtown area. Instead, it required that a section of the old pipe come out and that the new one go into the same trench.

New sections are to be laid in Northeastern Pennsylvania (Luzerne and Monroe Counties) and in the Bethlehem area (Northampton County). New lines will also be laid in Somerset and Union Counties in New Jersey.

"We have not had any opposition in any other county" than Chester, said Chris Stockton, a Williams spokesman.

The Chester County portion of the pipeline was built in 1951 when the area was more wooded and agricultural.

The company plans to dig up a 30-inch gas line and replace it with a 42-inch line. In most cases, it wants wider right-of-way.

For Burton, in East Caln Township, it means having to take down a treehouse he built for his boys, 7 and 11. He expects to lose a number of trees.

"More than half of our property is owned by the gas company, more or less," he said. "I cut the grass, and I pay the taxes, but that's all I can do."

Several homeowners who will be affected said they weren't against granting the easements on their terms. It's partly the feeling of powerlessness that has annoyed them.

"Municipalities, counties, states - even they don't have any influence," said Harry McHugh, a retired Wawa company executive in West Whiteland who is still holding out. "They [the residents] don't feel that FERC is on their side. They feel that FERC is an agent for Williams."

Lynda Farrell, of East Caln, a state agricultural consultant and leader of a homeowners group, said 10 acres of trees would be cut down along the right-of-way.

By her count, 63 people have signed easements. She and her husband are holding out.

"Money has never been the issue," she said. "The environmental aspect has always been the issue."

State Rep. Curt Schroder, an area Republican, noted that the state Department of Environmental Protection must issue a permit for the pipeline to cross the Brandywine. He said he hoped that DEP would require the line to be buried under the stream and not run through it.

"We don't have the power to stop it," he said. "The only thing we can do is to try to help our constituents as much as we can and help out on the environmental issues."