Over a dozen states and the District of Columbia have told the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission that widening the pool of gas pipeline projects exempt from case-specific review would violate three federal statutes. Their attorneys-general want FERC to strengthen public protections under the existing blanket certificate program instead. FERC does not comment on pending matters.
Over a dozen states and the District of Columbia have protested a proposed FERC rulemaking that would broaden the kinds of gas pipeline projects qualifying for review exemptions. The attorneys-general of Arizona, California, Colorado, Connecticut, Illinois, Maine, Maryland, Massachusetts, Michigan, Minnesota, New York, Oregon, Vermont, Washington and the District of Columbia filed their comments Monday, urging the commission to bolster public protections under the existing blanket certificate program.
Under the planned rules, Docket No. RM25-12-001, FERC would revise its blanket certification to widen the scope and scale of projects that interstate natural gas pipelines may construct without a case-specific authorization order, and to raise the cost limits for such projects.
States say the proposal breaks three federal laws
The chief state legal officers argue the changes fall outside the narrow justification behind the 1982 creation of blanket certification, which exists, they wrote, "to streamline review of genuinely routine and minor projects". As proposed, the rule would violate the Natural Gas Act, the Administrative Procedure Act and the National Environmental Policy Act, they said.
Their objection turns on who pays. The rule would let developers undertake major investments without adequately assessing impacts to ratepayers, the attorneys-general wrote, at a time when consumers in the identified states already face unaffordable energy costs. The cost of building new gas infrastructure reaches end-use consumers as higher gas transmission fees, and a wider program would expose communities and landowners to potential adverse environmental effects and safety hazards without adequate scrutiny.
Where the states back FERC
The filing is not a rejection of everything on the table. The states strongly support the commission's proposal to keep its current regulations letting any person protest a prior notice application under a blanket certificate, rather than restricting protest eligibility to those with a substantial economic interest, commission staff and affected landowners.
The cost ceiling moved once already
FERC found good cause when it granted in part a petition by the Interstate Natural Gas Association of America last year, raising the cost limit from $41.1 million to $61.65 million for projects put into operation by May 2027. The commission pointed to pressing nationwide near-term demand for expanded gas transportation capacity and to reliability concerns associated with maintaining the existing system.
Before that, the last major modification to the blanket certificate program came in 2006, when FERC raised cost limits, made mainline facilities eligible and expanded the environmental conditions and notice provisions. A FERC spokesperson declined to comment on the pending matter, and neither INGAA nor the American Petroleum Institute has yet responded to Rigzone's request for comment.
Source: Rigzone.com
Trading involves risk.
Risk Disclaimer
