For those who have seen the article in the Metro Section today which discusses our attempts to keep an LNG plant from being built on Chillum Road, please make note that there were actually 2 terribly incorrect points, which I'm now trying to correct:
1. The reporter was not aware of the two amendments, one of which has already been approved by the full delegation. The changes will eliminates the 2 mile approach and seeks adoption of the HUD safety standards. This creates a more objective evaluation process, on a case-by-case basis. We are supportive these improvements to the original bill.
2. He also misunderstood and repeated the gas company's erroneous claim that picking another site would drive the cost from $164 million to $687 million. Understandably this figure is making people from several counties fearful that their gas bills will jump significantly.
This high figure is actually what the Gas Company claims would be the cost to consumers if they don't build an LNG plant at all. This is what we call the "no build" option, and we believe this figure to be a gross exaggeration.
The cost to forget Chillum Rd. and acquire an alternative site is only $15-20 million greater than the Chillum Rd. cost. This extra $20 million is to pay for the cost to purchase a new site and build the pipes needed to connect the new site to the closest major distribution or transmission line (which costs $2-3 million per mile).