The Sierra Club showed how it plans to use a recent court victory against the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission when the group made the decision part of a demand to reopen the environmental reviews of the Atlantic Coast and Mountain Valley gas pipeline projects.
"In light of the recent decision by the D.C. Circuit Court of Appeals in Sierra Club v. FERC ... FERC must revisit its impacts analysis in the environmental impact statement (EIS) for the Atlantic Coast pipeline" and Mountain Valley, Sierra Club staff attorney Elly Benson wrote in a Sept. 18 letter to the regulator.
FERC staff had issued a positive final environmental impact statement for each of the two pipeline projects months earlier.
The Sierra Club, representing many environmental groups in two Sept. 18 requests to the commission, said FERC should reopen the records for the projects "for the purpose of taking additional evidence regarding greenhouse gas emissions and climate impacts" and issue supplemental environmental impact statements. As it does that, the group said, FERC should also address "deficiencies" with the environmental review that were already highlighted by the opposition.
In an Aug. 22 court decision, a majority at the U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit granted a petition by the Sierra Club and other groups and vacated FERC approval orders for the Enbridge Inc.-led Sabal Trail pipeline and other components of the Southeast Market Pipelines project. The court sent the matter back to FERC for additional analysis of downstream emissions from power plants connected to the pipeline. Observers have predicted that the decision could spell trouble for FERC pipeline reviews and even stall projects. (U.S. Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit, No. 16-1329)
The D.C. Circuit decision was a shot in the arm for those who until now have had little luck stopping the federal approval of pipeline projects. On Aug. 30, the New York State Department of Environmental Conservation used the decision to deny water permits for a Millennium Pipeline Co. LLC lateral project, even though the project was already approved by FERC. The state agency said a "material change in applicable law" had rendered the FERC environmental review "inadequate and deficient."
In the latest round, FERC declared Sept. 15 that the state had waived its authority to issue the permits, because it took longer than a year to make the decision.
"The court's ruling was crystal clear," Kelly Martin, director of the Sierra Club's Beyond Dirty Fuels campaign, said in a statement accompanying the group's request to FERC. "FERC's past reviews of fracked gas pipelines have been woefully inadequate."
Aaron Ruby, a spokesman for Atlantic Coast project developer Dominion Energy Inc., called the Sierra Club filing "a desperate, last-minute delay tactic."
"I doubt it will be successful," Ruby said. "The FERC already evaluated downstream greenhouse gas emissions in the ACP [Atlantic Coast pipeline]'s final EIS, so there's no need for further analysis. The EIS concluded that not only would the ACP not significantly contribute to climate change, but it could actually offset regional greenhouse gas emissions since much of the gas will be used to replace higher-emitting coal plants."
The Atlantic Coast pipeline project would put in place over 560 miles of greenfield pipeline. It would provide up to 1.5 Bcf/d of natural gas transportation capacity from a Dominion supply header in West Virginia to delivery points in Virginia and North Carolina, including interconnects with Transcontinental Gas Pipe Line Co. LLC and Columbia Gas Transmission LLC. Atlantic Coast Pipeline LLC is a partnership of Dominion, Duke Energy Corp. and Southern Co.
The Mountain Valley project would install about 300 miles of pipeline. It would provide up to 2 Bcf/d of gas transportation capacity from West Virginia to the Columbia and Transco systems. Mountain Valley is a joint venture of EQT Midstream Partners LP and affiliates of NextEra Energy Inc., RGC Resources Inc., WGL Holdings Inc. and Consolidated Edison Inc.
In addition to the Sierra Club challenge, eminent domain lawsuits by landowners and opposition groups have targeted FERC and the two projects. (FERC dockets CP15-554, CP15-555, CP16-10, CP16-13)