On Feb. 17, the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission (FERC) issued two sweeping policy statements that provide guidance on how he commissioners will consider future natural gas projects.
Revised Certificate Policy Statement (PL 18-1-000)
FERC revised its 1999 pipeline certificate policy statement by broadening the scope of factors it will consider in deciding whether to approve a pipeline project under the Natural Gas Act (NGA), including potential impacts on environmental justice communities, landowners, and the environment in general. According to FERC, the updates clarify how the Commission will execute its public interest obligations; the Commission intends to consider all impacts of a proposed project, including economic and environmental impacts.
Interim Greenhouse Gas Policy Statement (PL 21-3-000) ()
FERC issued an interim policy statement gauging the impacts of a gas project’s greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions. Under the interim policy statement, the Commission describes how it will assess a project’s impact on climate change in its reviews under the NGA and the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA). Projects with emissions above 100,000 metric tons per year of GHG emissions will require Environmental Impact Statements (EIS). The Commission is seeking comment on this interim policy statement, including how it assesses a project’s contribution to climate change. The interim policy statement is in effect, but the guidance may be revised based on comments received.
These policies provide guidance on how the commissioners will consider future natural gas projects. The policies seemingly reflect a political chasm at FERC: The three FERC Democrat commissioners (Richard Glick, Allison Clements, Willie Phillips) approved the policy statements, while the two Republican commissioners (James Danly, Mark Christie) opposed the policy statements. The commissioners have different views on how to interpret the scope of the NGA and NEPA, including fostering U.S. gas development and what is in the public interest.
If these policy statements may impact your natural gas projects or energy operations, or you have comments regarding the incorporation of environmental justice or climate change considerations, you may want to provide public comment.
FERC is taking public comments on the interim policy statement until April 4. Comments must refer to Docket No. PL21-3-000 and include the commenter’s name, the organization they represent, if applicable, and their address. The commission encourages comments to be filed electronically via the eFiling link on the commission’s web site.
Add a comment
SubscribeRSS Plunkett Cooney LinkedIn Page Plunkett Cooney Twitter Page Plunkett Cooney Facebook Page
- Environmental Regulation
- Environmental Liability
- Clean Water
- Renewable Energy
- Environmental Protection Agency
- Environmental Protection Agency (EPA)
- Environmental Legislation
- Greenhouse Gases
- Great Lakes
- Waste Water
- Climate Change
- Oil & Gas
- Clean Air
- Public Policy
- Environmental Justice
- Underground Storage Tanks (UST)
- Carbon Neutrality
- Solar Energy
- Hazardous Materials
- Regulatory Law
- Solid Waste
- Natural Gas
- Zoning and Planning
- Commercial Liability
- Housing and Urban Development (HUD)
- Lead-based Paint
- Invasive Species
- Michigan Environmental Protection Act
- Shareholder Liability
- Land Use
- Real Estate
- No Crystal Ball Needed to Predict EPA’s Future Initiatives
- Michigan Officials Negotiate PFAS Consent Decree in ‘Landmark’ Case
- What You Need to Know About EPA’s PFAS Guidance to States
- Hydrogen – What is it Good for and Why Should I Care?
- What You Can do to Prepare for Likely Impacts of EPA's Proposed Rulemaking for PFAS Chemicals
- EPA Proposes to Treat PFAS Chemicals as Hazardous Substances
- Framing the Future – Bans on New Gasoline-powered Vehicle Sales, Turning Mandates Into Opportunities
- Environmental Protection Agency Issues New PFAS Health Advisories
- Electricity Transmission Success Story in Michigan
- Understanding Gas Price Components and Potential Relief Options