Q&A
QUESTION:
What is our City’s Comprehensive Plan?
ANSWER:
Our City of Fernandina Beach 2030 Comprehensive Plan is our city’s growth management tool. “The Comprehensive Plan can be best described as the City’s ‘constitution,’ in other words, it’s the basis for which laws should be developed and enforced.” It is our ‘blueprint for development” and serves as “a guide for land use decision making.” As the basis for our city’s Land Development Code (LDC), our Municipal Code, and our Capital Improvement Program, it “lead(s) the city to achieve a ‘smart growth’ form of development and enable both the current and future commissions and administrations to be proactive, rather than reactive in planning of the City.”
QUESTION:
Can the Comprehensive Plan be amended?
ANSWER:
Yes. But like our country’s constitution, only via a formal prescribed process. Indeed, because it is designed to be a living document, the State of Florida requires its cities to do so every seven years through a formal process completed through an Evaluation and Appraisal Review (EAR).
QUESTION:
What are the LDC and FLUM?
ANSWER:
Our Land Development Code (LDC), derived from our Comprehensive Plan, contains our city’s land use and zoning regulations.
The FLUM or Future Land Use Map lays out the city’s various zoning districts.
QUESTION:
Isn’t RYAM’s mill site already in our city’s industrial zone?
ANSWER:
Yes, but not every proposed industrial use is allowed in that zone. According to our FLUM, RYAM’s mill site is within an I-2 or Heavy Industrial Zone. Heavy Manufacturing is defined in our LDC. Land in this zone can be developed for any industrial use so long as the proposed development is not specifically excluded or would generate potentially harmful environmental impacts, or nuisance impacts. RYAM’s proposed plant is specifically excluded because there are both chemical manufacturing processes and chemical refining processes involved in the production of 2G bioethanol, and chemical manufacturing as well as chemical refining are specifically prohibited.
The CP and LDC’s Chemical Manufacturing Prohibition
QUESTION:
Why should RYAM’s proposal to add 2G Bioethanol Manufacturing at its site be denied?
ANSWER:
This answer is simple. Both our Comprehensive Plan and LDC specifically prohibit chemical manufacturing or refining in the Industrial Zone where RYAM’s plant is located, and the city has obtained expert legal advice that a 2G Bioethanol Plant employs chemical manufacturing as well as refining processes, and therefore, is prohibited.
QUESTION:
Why is the expert legal opinion obtained by the City not the end of the story?
ANSWER:
Because RYAM has not yet submitted its permit to the City and RYAM has asserted that the conclusions reached by the land use law experts who responded to the city are flawed because, as RYAM asserts, they lacked complete information.
We at NEF believe that the City was wise to get out in front of this situation by securing outside expert legal advice, and we believe that the City is well positioned to place a high burden on RYAM to address and disprove its conclusions.
Because RYAM’s proposal presents so many concerns meriting a comprehensive review, we at NEF have suggested that before the City undertakes such a comprehensive evaluation, it first reviews RYAM’s permit application only so far as to confirm or deny the validity of the legal conclusions it has already obtained. If indeed the proposed use is expressly prohibited by our Comprehensive Plan, then it should be summarily rejected on this ground. The City will need to evaluate whether it is wise to also establish that RYAM’s proposal is prohibited on other grounds as well, as discussed below.
QUESTION:
How long has RYAM known that adding new chemical processes would be prohibited?
ANSWER:
RYAM has known of this prohibition for at least 20 years. This provision was in Fernandina’s first Comprehensive Plan, which was enacted in 2002. That same identical provision prohibiting new development was also in our LDC.
Additional Grounds to Deny Ethanol Production
QUESTION:
Should the City permit the proposed plant if RYAM somehow establishes that it won’t be conducting any chemical manufacturing or refining processes?
ANSWER:
No, it should not! Our City Comprehensive Plan and our LDC explicitly names “chemical or petroleum manufacturing or refining” as specifically prohibited uses but those are not the only industries we decided to prohibit in our industrial zones.
Regardless of the definition used to describe the functioning and operation of its proposed 2G Bioethanol Plant, we know for certain that operation of such a plant, where sited, would generate grave potentially harmful environmental impacts and would also raise serious private and public nuisance impacts, and as such it is still a specifically prohibited use.
Objective 1.07.12. Industrial (IN) Paragraph (g) states: “heavy metal fabrication, batch plants, salvage yards, rubber or plastic manufacturing, and other uses generating potentially harmful environmental or nuisance aspects” as being prohibited (emphasis added). Even if deemed to not be chemical manufacturing, RYAM’s proposed 2G Bioethanol plant nonetheless presents harmful environmental and nuisance impacts. This provision, which is repeated in our LDC verbatim, is a wholly separate and distinct express prohibition by which the city must examine RYAM’s application and deny it.
There are plentiful harmful environmental impacts and grave nuisance impacts presented by RYAM’s proposal to manufacture and store ethanol at its Gum Street mill site. A nuisance can be anything that interferes with the rights of the public or an individual. RYAM seemingly recognizes the applicability of this provision by addressing, on its website, and seeking on that site to minimize some common nuisance grounds like plant emissions, visual impacts, and plant noise. If having to live with the din of elevated plant noise can rise to the level of a nuisance, then surely having to live under the threat of personal injury or damage to property from a plant explosion or fire qualifies as well. And isn’t the city’s inability to devise a proper “no notice” evacuation measures for its residents in the event of a fire tantamount to a public nuisance? We at NEF believe it is. We also believe that without advance planning for evacuations recommended by the U.S. Department of Transportation for traffic incidents along the route that RYAM’s ethanol tanker trucks will travel through our city, we believe RYAM’s proposal to truck ethanol through the city presents a public nuisance.
Potentially Harmful Environmental and Nuisance Impacts
QUESTION:
Are fires at ethanol plants a serious risk?
ANSWER:
Unfortunately, yes. One source, Stonehouse Safety (https://stonehousesafety.com/explosions-associated-with ethanol-production/) cited “over 20 explosions/fires associated with the production of ethanol over the past 10 years. Based on the after-action reports on recent accidents at ethanol plants across the United States, a serious danger is presented by ethanol production because ethanol vapors, which are heavier than air, odorless, and highly-flammable, can escape from production equipment, piping, and storage tanks, and travel along the ground until they are ignited by a source of spark.
QUESTION:
Why does ethanol production present such a particularly hazardous fire risk?
ANSWER:
“Due to its highly flammable nature, ethanol carries a substantial risk of causing fires and explosions, which underscores the importance of being aware of its flash point. Ethanol’s flash point at atmospheric pressure is around 14 °C (57.2 °F), indicating that its vapors can catch fire at or above this temperature when exposed to an ignition source. When it burns, it has a smokeless blue flame that is not always visible in normal light.”
(Stonehouse at pg 2.)
When the vapor mixes with air reaching a concentration between flammability limits, it becomes flammable and, since it’s heavier than air, it stays along the ground as it spreads. The vapor may travel considerable distances and potentially cause fires and explosions far from the source and flashback. Consequently, spaces that are not well-ventilated, particularly those below ground levels such as trenches, conduits, shafts, and sewers, are at a higher risk for the build-up of flammable substances or mixtures, where a Vapor Cloud Explosion (VCE) may occur.”
(Stonehouse at pg 2.)
If a vessel containing liquid ethanol suffers from thermal exposure due to a nearby fire, there is a possibility of a BLEVE (boiling liquid expanding vapor explosion) due to its relatively low boiling point of 172.83 °F.” (Stonehouse at pg 2.)
There is potential for a fire to start in any part of the plant, there is potential for that fire to travel to any other part of the plant, and it is precisely that “potentially harmful environmental impact” that the city has wisely determined to prohibit to safeguard its citizens and our environment.
QUESTION:
How could ethanol vapors at RYAM’s plant escape?
ANSWER:
“Flammable ethanol vapors are readily formed during the production process and when moved on for storage and during transportation.” (Stonehouse at pg 3) As ethanol is being produced, product approaching and ultimately attaining pure ethanol will be circulated through equipment that could leak. After being produced, the ethanol will be piped to a large storage tank with an internal floating roof designed to ride on top of the fluid to keep it from being exposed to the air. Even a small leak in a pipe, or any defect in the floating roof due to faulty manufacture, malfunction, (or something we see plenty of here in Fernandina, rust!) could cause ethanol to escape. It would then quickly vaporize due to our climate and travel along the ground creating a grave fire hazard. Another potential flash point would be the daily transfer of ethanol from the storage tanks into tank trucks (RYAM estimates 3 per day) for transportation of the ethanol through the plant site, out Gum Street to 8th Street, and over the bridge into the County and on to RYAM’s customers.
QUESTION:
Is the transportation of ethanol an issue?
ANSWER:
Yes. It is an issue for the City and the County. We at NEF believe that the City and County must both evaluate this and seek advice from the Northeast Florida Regional Council to look at the safety emergency preparedness concerns raised by RYAM’s plan to ship its product via trucks along Nassau County roads.
QUESTION:
Does ethanol production present a potential danger to the Amelia River?
ANSWER:
Yes, it does. RYAM states its project “will have little effect” on how the mill uses and manages water, but it does not provide details on the increased amount of water RYAM will draw from our aquifer. As far as increased wastewater effluent, RYAM states it will only be “a small amount.” The city should secure details and
evaluate this matter.
Frankly, although RYAM’s lack of detail is alarming, we at NEF are more concerned about the potential harmful impact of an ethanol spill. RYAM emphatically states “nor will the project harm the health of local waterways,” and it won’t if no ethanol gets into the adjacent marsh and water. But no one, even RYAM, can be certain that this won’t occur. “Apart from its flammability and health hazards, ethanol also presents environmental concerns, particularly in the event of a spill. If ethanol enters water systems, it can reduce oxygen levels, which harms aquatic life.” (https://www.gexcon.com/blog/ethanol-associated-hazards-and-safety-measures)
RYAM’s storage tanks will be located about the length of a Steph Curry three-pointer from the marsh adjacent the South shoreline of its mill site. There is potential for a spill, there is potential for that spill to get into the marsh, and it is precisely that “potentially harmful environmental impact” that the city has wisely determined to prohibit to safeguard our environment.
QUESTION:
Do the other functions already on the mill site raise additional concern about a fire?
ANSWER:
Yes, very much so. Both in terms of the risk of one starting and the severity of the fire. And, also in terms of the difficulty of extinguishing it. In terms of the risk of a fire starting, what is especially concerning to NEF by RYAM’s proposal to add ethanol production at its Gum Street mill site is the relative proximity of so many sources of spark from other adjacent facilities and operations. Sources of spark cause fire in midwestern state bioethanol plants even though they are surrounded by nothing but miles of cornfields. Trucks and trains will come and go daily, and the three facilities at the plant will operate 24/7. In terms of the potential severity of a fire, the relatively close presence of other hazardous chemicals at the site related to the mill’s operations, and those of LignoTech are a grave concern. Chemical fires are extraordinarily hazardous to the environment, but they are also particularly challenging and dangerous for first responders. Our Fire Department may have no other choice but to let it burn out. If this were to be so, the city would have to deal with the need for a mass short-notice evacuation.
QUESTION:
What would the actual risk be for an accident or fire at RYAM’s proposed plant?
ANSWER:
We know there is potential risk, and it’s not insignificant, but we can’t precisely predict what the actual risk would be. Neither can RYAM. RYAM presumably has better details, and it is certainly in a better position than NEF to provide a risk assessment, but it has not yet shared any detailed risk assessment information with NEF or the City. Rather than be forthcoming with details, thus far, RYAM has presented only very simplistic depictions of its proposed plant.
And, as previously stated, the proximity of RYAM’s large mill operation, and LignoTech operations, and the Eight Flags 20 MW power plant to the proposed ethanol production plant not only render a fire once started far more dangerous. They increase the risk of a fire starting because they all present significant sources of spark. So, whatever the risk may be for operating the proposed plant as designed and built, that risk will be amplified if it is allowed to be shoehorned into the limited land remaining on RYAM’s Gum Street site that is suitable for development, and not already taken up by infrastructure and operations related to the mill, to LignoTech, to rail and road transport, and to heat and power generating.