The R.I. Department of Environmental Management says it is taking into consideration the safety and pollution concerns raised by neighborhood groups about the Shell Oil terminal at Fields Point, but the agency has not committed to holding a public hearing on renewing the facility’s operating permit.

PROVIDENCE — The R.I. Department of Environmental Management says it is taking into consideration the safety and pollution concerns raised by neighborhood groups about the Shell Oil terminal at Fields Point, but the agency has not committed to holding a public hearing on renewing the facility’s operating permit.

Such renewals through the agency’s Office of Air Resources are typically routine, but in a letter submitted earlier this week NO LNG in PVD and the Washington Park Neighborhood Association raised a host of environmental concerns about the sprawling fuel terminal on the west bank of the Providence River, saying it doesn’t belong near residential areas.

In addition, the groups called for a hearing in South Providence or Washington Park, the neighborhoods closest to the facility. The letter was supported by Climate Action RI, Nature’s Trust Rhode Island, the Rhode Island chapter of the Sierra Club and Sunrise RI.

DEM spokesman Michael Healey said in an email that the letter is being considered, but added that a hearing “on this state air permit would by law have to focus on the facility’s permit application as opposed to where the facility is already sited.”

The DEM’s air office opened the renewal process to public comment on March 29. According to the notice, a hearing will be scheduled “if requested by 10 or more persons, or by a governmental subdivision or agency or by an association having not less than 10 members.” The Washington Park Neighborhood Association said it has an email list of more than 250 people and represents a neighborhood of 8,750 residents. NO LNG in PVD, a grassroots group that formed in opposition to a liquefied natural gas plant in Fields Point (which ultimately won approval), said it has an email list of 1,800 people and a leadership team of 16 people.

In their letter, the groups said that as many as 29,000 people may live within one mile of the terminal, 80 percent of whom are people of color. They cite data from the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency showing that the terminal is the largest emitter of air pollution in Providence. The emissions include benzene, a known carcinogen.

They also raised concerns about accidents and the impacts of sea level rise and storm surges on the facility.

“Shell is one of the largest fossil fuel companies in the world and is responsible for a large amount of the global greenhouse gas emissions that are causing climate change and generating the climate impacts and risks that are now threatening this facility,” the groups wrote. “The operation of the facility and air pollution released has caused harm to the neighboring community, and any future incident caused by climate-related impacts will also disproportionately harm the neighboring community.”

They are not the first entities to question the resilience of the 75-acre terminal, which receives deliveries by ships and stores gasoline, diesel, heating oil and other petroleum products in its 25 tanks.

The Conservation Law Foundation, a Boston-based group, filed a lawsuit in federal court in Providence in 2017 alleging that Shell has taken inadequate steps to protect the facility from higher storm surges and more extreme rainfall. The case is pending.

In a hearing last fall, lawyers for the foundation argued that superstorm Sandy, Hurricane Harvey and other extreme weather events prove that waterfront terminals like the one in Providence are vulnerable.

Shell contends that the allegations are speculative and exaggerated and says that the facility is in compliance with the federal Clean Water Act and other state and federal laws.

NO LNG in PVD and the Washington Park Neighborhood Association called on the DEM to reject a new permit for the terminal.

“Business as usual at Shell Terminal is not acceptable to our community,” they wrote. “Air pollution from this facility is an ongoing environmental injustice. The draft permit should not be approved, and ideally a large high-risk fuel storage facility and major air polluter should not be allowed to operate in a high-density residential area that is also at risk of sea level rise and storm surge.”

—akuffner@providencejournal.com

(401) 277-7457