Senators hope to compel FERC to broaden analysis of pipeline projects
The senators’ amendment to an energy bill could wring a “yes” from a federal commission that has so far stuck to “no.”
That’s the intent, anyway.
Norman Bay, chairman of the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, has dismissed repeatedly the need for FERC to conduct a comprehensive, overarching analysis of the cumulative environmental effects of large-scale interstate natural gas pipelines proposed to route through Virginia.
U.S. Sen. Tim Kaine, D-Va., said Wednesday that an amendment he introduced with colleague Sen. Mark Warner, D-Va., “would make more explicit that the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission’s environmental analysis must cover the cumulative impacts of multiple pipelines.”
The proposed amendment to the Energy Policy Modernization Act would require FERC to consider and address the cumulative impacts of interstate natural gas pipeline projects “located within the same state, within 100 miles” of each other.
Bay has said that when FERC prepares project-specific environmental impact statements, the commission already considers the cumulative effects of other projects “in the vicinity.”
Tamara Young-Allen, a spokeswoman for FERC, said the commission does not have an established measure of distance between projects that quantifies “in the vicinity.”
Young-Allen said Thursday that FERC would not comment on the proposed amendment or on pipeline projects currently pending before the commission.
If the amendment moves forward, FERC would be required to conduct a broader analysis before issuing draft environmental impact statements for public review.
The senators’ amendment does not specifically call for a programmatic environmental impact statement, or PEIS, an analysis that many pipeline opponents have said should be required.
Bay has rejected conducting a PEIS, which would analyze cumulative impacts of the proposed Mountain Valley Pipeline and Atlantic Coast Pipeline projects.
For example, in letters dated Jan. 27 to U.S. Rep. Bob Goodlatte, R-Roanoke County, and Rep. Morgan Griffith, R-Salem, Bay repeated the assertion that FERC staff has determined it would be inappropriate to prepare a PEIS.
Both the Mountain Valley and Atlantic Coast projects would feature 42-inch-diameter buried pipelines that would transport natural gas at high pressure.
The pipelines, which would follow different paths through West Virginia and Virginia, have stirred fierce opposition along the proposed routes. But they have also garnered support from those who say the pipelines would boost economic development and provide a cleaner fuel for generating electricity.
Another project pending with FERC, WB XPress, would also affect property owners in West Virginia and Virginia. The Appalachian Connector pipeline, which could follow a route similar to the Mountain Valley project, has not yet moved to initiate a review process with FERC.
The commission will ultimately decide whether the projects will move forward.
Kaine said he and Warner had heard from constituents, businesses, property owners and others who have expressed concern that FERC is not adequately weighing the cumulative effects of multiple pipeline projects.
The senators’ amendment faces a few legislative hurdles. If the energy bill ultimately passes with the amendment, its provisions will take effect.
Regional pipeline opponents, including David Perry, executive director of the Blue Ridge Land Conservancy, lauded the senators’ push for a comprehensive analysis but also held out hope for a programmatic environmental impact statement.
“We applaud senators Kaine and Warner for introducing this amendment, which puts a finer point on FERC’s obligations,” Perry said.
“We still hope to see a programmatic environmental impact statement, and encourage senators Kaine and Warner to consider the public’s request for a PEIS,” he said.
Proponents of an overarching review have said it could provide a much more accurate and comprehensive analysis of the effects of major pipeline projects on the environment and to communities and property owners along the routes.
They contend also that a thorough analysis could determine whether there is even a need for new natural gas transmission pipeline infrastructure.
Once a PEIS is completed, proponents say, FERC staff could then prepare separate, project-specific draft environmental impact statements.
Bill Wolf, a co-founder of Preserve Craig, expressed mixed reactions to the proposed amendment.
“While we appreciate our senators’ efforts, this does not appear to solve fundamental problems with the FERC, the Natural Gas Act or our energy policy,” Wolf said.
“And the study of the cumulative effects of these damaging projects is already required under the National Environmental Policy Act,” he said.
