Troy-based company proposes propane facility in the town of Cortlandville

(Photo Via Ray Energy Corporation)

Troy-based Ray Energy Corporation announced plans to build a rail-supplied propane terminal in Cortlandville at a recent Planning Board meeting.

The facility, proposed for lot located at 3893 U.S. Route 11, is a rail-supplied propane terminal. The product is offloaded from railcars using compressors, stored and then loaded via pumps into trucks that transport the product to bulk plants. In turn, it loads local transport vehicles, according to the project narrative submitted to the planning board. The project will be reviewed at the next planning board meeting in March, where the board will evaluate a sketch of the plan.

As of 2018, the Yaman Commercial Industrial website listed the commercial plot of land valued at $450,000. It suggests the parcel is great for “rail-to-tractor and rail-to-truck” operations.

Eric Mulvihill, an economic development specialist at the county’s Business Development Corporation (BDC), said Ray Energy has been in touch with county business officials regarding the project.

“Any time we see capital investment in our community, we certainly support it. We help to move it forward,” Mulvihill said. “To see this proposal being developed is a sign that folks are interested in investing in our community.”

The project’s site is near Suburban Propane, a propane supplier located at 3833 U.S. Route 11. Around eight years ago, the parcel at the 3893 U.S. Route 11 location was tapped for a similar energy project. It received planning board approval, but was eventually discarded, Mulvihill said.

“We are here tonight to show an early stage of the project, to establish next steps and take this project forward,” said Matthew Napierala, a leading engineer at Napierala Consulting, a firm hired to work on the project. “We want to utilize this property, revitalizing a program that was established in 2014 and 2015.”

The company recently completed a project in Hampton, which would be “identical in design” to the proposed facility in Cortlandville, said Ken Ray, the CEO of Ray Energy. 

The project will require an aquifer protection permit, which Cortlandville zoning officer Bruce Weber said could be held up for now, since the town does not have a definition for fuel in its zoning code. This could require the project applicant to go to the Cortlandville Zoning Board of Appeals for an interpretation of local codes, Weber added.

“They could apply for variance, or they could petition the town board to change the regulations. But I am stuck with what I have written there. I cannot alter that and say propane is not a fuel,” Weber said.

Weber said he does not know how the previous permitting requests in 2014 for a similar project got approved considering both projects being discussed are similar.

“It is pretty embarrassing. I do not know what transpired in 2014 that made it go through,” he said. “There has been subsequent applications since then, and that one was treated the same as this application by Ray Energy”

Andrew Gilchrist, an attorney advising Ray Energy, said the company reviewed previous cases, but added the precedent said in 2014 was ultimately correct.

“When we look at the code, it uses the general term fuel. The zoning law does not define that term,” Gilchrist said. “Other parts of the code show some definitions that use the word fuel, such as regulations for gasoline stations and filling stations. In other contexts, there are other definitions where the code talks about fuels outside of just liquid.”

Gilchrist provided an example of the code where a wood-burning device is defined as using “wood fuel,” which he noted is not a liquid fuel. 

“Under the zoning law, if there is some meaning other than a liquid fuel regulated by the town, they used a qualifier like they did for the wood fuel,” Gilchrist said. 

The company’s counsel also pointed to zoning law 178-77, where compounds that are combustible and flammable, like propane are allowed as long as they are compliant with generally applicable requirements. In this case, propane is regulated under federal law, Gilchrist said.

“I don’t mean to step on Mr. Weber’s shoes, he is the code officer. But if we do need to seek a formal interpretation, we are prepared to do that,” Gilrchrist added. “We wanted to raise these points tonight because a similar project was reviewed and the town board did issue an aquifer protection required for that project to be approved.”

Weber said he will review the zoning law and the points raised by Gilchrist. He will then make a deliberation on that at a future meeting.