Maine Climate Change Council legislation unveiled

Maine Governor Janet Mills has introduced proposed legislation to create a Maine Climate Change Council. While the bill had not been formally printed by the legislature's Office of the Revisor of Statutes as of May 1, the Governor's office posted a copy of the bill captioned, LR2478, An Act to Create the Maine Climate Council to Assist Maine to Mitigate, Prepare for and Adapt to Climate Change.

The draft bill includes a variety of provisions designed to advance clean energy goals:

• It includes language requiring the inclusion of more renewable resources in the state's electricity supply -- 80 percent by 2030, and 100 percent by 2050. (Current law requires 40 percent of electricity sold at retail to come from renewable resources. According to the U.S. Energy Information Administration, in 2017, about three-quarters of Maine's net electricity generation came from renewable energy resources, with 30% from hydroelectricity, 26% from wood and other biomass, and 20% from wind.)
• It repeals the existing law setting Maine's goals for reduction of greenhouse gases (which currently calls for a reduction to 1990 levels by 2010, to 10 percent below 1990 levels by 2020, and in the long term "reduction sufficient to eliminate any dangerous threat to the climate. According to the most recent report of the Maine Department of Environmental Protection, in 2015 Maine's greenhouse gas emissions were 11.7 percent below 1990 levels.) It replaces this section with a new section, requiring reduction to 45 percent below 1990 levels by 2030, and 80 percent below 1990 levels by 2050. The bill requires the Department of Environmental Protection to adopt rules to ensure compliance with these new levels.
• It creates the Maine Climate Change Council to advise the Governor and Legislature on ways to mitigate the causes of, prepare for and adapt to the consequences of climate change. The council would be composed of up to about 40 people filling specific roles prescribed in the legislation such as business, youth, and science. The structure would include a scientific and technical subcommittee, plus working groups on transportation, coastal and marine issues, buildings, infrastructure and housing, working lands and ecosystems, and energy topics.
• It requires the Maine Climate Change Council to update the state climate action plan by December 2020, with further updates to the plan every 4 years thereafter. (The Maine Department of Environmental Protection released the current version of the climate action plan in 2004.) The bill also requires the council to report on progress toward implementing the climate action plan by December 2022, and every 2 years thereafter.

In a statement, Governor Mills said that the bill represents a step in combating the threat of climate change by "expanding our clean energy economy, and investing in our future by creating the Maine Climate Council and marshaling experts across the state to take urgent action." The bill's lead sponsor, Senator David Woodsome, is a Republican co-chair of the legislature's energy committee. Procedurally, next steps include the formal printing of the bill by the Revisor, followed by its reference to legislative committee for a public hearing to be scheduled in the coming weeks.

FERC ends DOE resilience rulemaking, opens new proceeding

U.S. energy regulators have terminated a fast-tracked proceeding opened last fall to consider rules proposed by the Department of Energy that would have compensated certain electric generating plants for reliability and resilience values; instead, the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission has opened a broader case to examine the resilience of the bulk power system.

On September 29, 2017, Secretary of Energy Rick Perry directed the Commission to consider a proposed rulemaking to ensure that "traditional baseload resources, such as coal and nuclear" are rewarded for their reliability and resilience attributes. As proposed, the rule would have required grid operators to set rates for compensation paid to certain "grid reliability and resiliency resources" with a 90-day fuel supply on site and capable of providing "essential energy and ancillary reliability services, including but not limited to voltage support, frequency services, operating reserves, and reactive power."

The request under Section 403 of the Department of Energy Organization Act bore an expedited timeline. The Commission solicited public comments on the proposed rulemaking, and Commission staff issued a series of questions to frame the discussion. Many comments expressed concerns that rapid changes to wholesale markets could have harmful or perverse effects, and prior to yesterday's most seated Commissioners had publicly expressed reservations.

On January 8, 2018, the Commission issued its Order Terminating Rulemaking Proceeding, Initiating New Proceeding, and Establishing Additional Procedures.  In doing so, it recognized "that we must remain vigilant with respect to resilience challenges, because affordable and reliable electricity is vital to the country’s economic and national security." The order recites a history of the evolution of the electric power industry and the Commission's efforts to help ensure bulk power system resilience, including the adoption of NERC reliability standards, reforms to capacity markets and gas-electric coordination.

But the Commission found that neither the Department of Energy's proposed rulemaking nor the record in the case satisfied a key legal standard for Commission action under Section 206 of the Federal Power Act. Specifically, it concluded that the existing tariffs had not been demonstrated to be unjust, unreasonable, unduly discriminatory or preferential.

The Commission also noted potential problems with the proposed rule. For example, it said that allowing all eligible resources to receive a cost-of -service rate regardless of need or cost to the system had not been demonstrated to be just and reasonable, and that the proposed rule's on-site 90-day fuel supply requirement hadn't been shown not to be unduly discriminatory or preferential -- but that it would exclude some resources with resilience attributes.

At the same time, the order states, "The resilience of the bulk power system will remain a priority of this Commission." It continued, "Although the Proposed Rule failed to satisfy the fundamental legal requirements of section 206 of the FPA, the Proposed Rule and the record developed to date have shed additional light on resilience more generally and on the need for further examination by the Commission and market participants of the risks that the bulk power system faces and possible ways to address those risks in the changing electric markets." Noting "a variety of economic, environmental, and policy drivers that are changing the way electricity is procured and used," the Commission said these changes "present new opportunities and challenges regarding the reliability, affordability, and environmental profile of each region’s electric system."

To address these changes, the Commission initiated a new proceeding, Docket No. AD18- 7-000, to take additional steps to explore resilience issues in organized wholesale electricity markets. According to the order, the goal of this proceeding is: "(1) to develop a common understanding among the Commission, industry, and others of what resilience of the bulk power system means and requires; (2) to understand how each RTO and ISO assesses resilience in its geographic footprint; and (3) to use this information to evaluate whether additional Commission action regarding resilience is appropriate at this time."

The Commission directed six regional transmission organizations and independent system operators to respond within 60 days with comments on the definition of resilience, plus how they assess and mitigate threats to resilience. The Commission also solicited public comment within 30 days of the grid operators' due date.

EPA FAQ on dam removal projects

The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency has released a document answering "Frequently Asked Questions" about the removal of obsolete dams. 

As noted by EPA, dams "provide important societal functions for drinking water supply, flood control, hydropower generation, and recreation."  EPA estimates that the U.S. is home to between 2,000,000 and 2,500,000 dams -- but that between 75% and 90% of these dams "no longer serve a functional purpose."  Given the expense of maintaining dams and their safety, and some negative social and environmental impacts of dams, there is some pressure to remove obsolete dams.  According to EPA, over 1,300 dams have been removed in the U.S. since the early 1900s, with over 60 removals in 2015 alone.

EPA framed its dam removal FAQ in this context, noting that its answers to these questions would support dam removal efforts.  The FAQ addresses 20 distinct topics, ranging from dams' impacts on water quality, permitting issues related to dam removal, and EPA-related funding that could be used to support dam removal.

For example, the FAQ discusses permitting under Section 404 of the Clean Water Act, including the use of individual permits or general permits, including Nationwide Permits.  The FAQ encourages project proponents to work closely with the Army Corps of Engineers regarding Section 404 permitting.  It describes how EPA would evaluate specific requirements for monitoring or testing, such as in the case of contaminated sediments behind the dam.  The FAQ also discusses other permitting requirements, such as state-issued water quality certifications pursuant to Section 401 of the Clean Water Act, and evaluations of consistency with coastal zone management plans under the Coastal Zone Management Act.

The FAQ also notes that various grants may be available for dam removal projects.  For example, grants under Section 319 of the Clean Water Act can be issued to states, territories, and tribes for dam removals.  EPA's Five Star Wetland and Urban Water Restoration Grant Program could also provide funding for river, wetlands, riparian, forest and coastal restoration, and wildlife conservation.  Other funding, such as under the Wetland Program Development Grant program, is available to build technical and programmatic capacity of state and tribal water agencies.  Finally, the FAQ notes that dam removals could be part of a Supplemental Environmental Project proposed in settlement of an environmental enforcement action.

As noted by EPA, the FAQs released in December 2016 do not impose legally binding requirements on anyone, and EPA retains the discretion to adopt approaches on a case-by-case basis that differ from those described in these FAQs where appropriate.  Nevertheless the document provides dam owners, regulators, and communities guidance on how EPA views dam removal proposals.

Massachusetts climate change executive order

Massachusetts Governor Charlie Baker signed an executive order last month setting a comprehensive approach to climate change.  Executive Order No. 569, Establishing An Integrated Climate Change Strategy for the Commonwealth, directs state agencies to take a portfolio of actions to reduce greenhouse gas emissions, protect against the impacts of climate change, and improve resilience.

The order opens with acknowledgements that climate change and associated extreme weather events present serious threats.  It also notes the state's Global Warming Solutions Act, and the greenhouse gas emissions limits mandated by that law -- a 25% reduction below 1990 levels, achieved by 2020.  Following a decision by the Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court earlier this year, regulations under that law must establish "declining annual aggregate emissions" for greenhouse gases.

Turning to action items, Executive Order No. 569 requires the Secretary of Energy and Environmental Affairs to publish a "comprehensive energy plan" within 2 years, with an update every 5 years thereafter.

The executive order also requires the Department of Environmental Protection to issue regulations to ensure that Massachusetts meets the 2020 statewide emissions limit required by the Global Warming Solutions Act.   Pursuant to the executive order, these regulations must be finally promulgated by August 11, 2017.

Executive Order No. 569 also requires coordination between the state's Energy and Environmental Affairs and Public Safety offices, with respect to strengthening community resilience, preparing for the impacts of climate change, and preparing for and mitigating damage from extreme weather events.  Within 2 years, this coordination will result in a Climate Adaptation Plan presenting a statewide adaptation strategy.

Paris climate agreement walkthrough

On December 12, the Parties to the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change adopted Decision 1/CP.21, adopting the Paris Agreement under that convention. The Paris Agreement itself is 12 pages long, and includes a preamble and 29 articles.  Its details merit a close read, as parties spent countless hours negotiating every word and piece of punctuation in the document.  Some articles have many operative clauses and address topics like temperature change and greenhouse gas emissions, while other articles are more ministerial.  Billions of dollars, and maybe the fate of the world, rests on the terms of these legal documents and how they are implemented.

Here's a overview-level walkthrough of the Paris Agreement:

• Preamble: recognizes climate change as a "common concern of humankind" and an "urgent threat" to which an "effective and progressive response" is necessary, that least developed countries and others may have specific needs, and interactions with other social values like food security, decent work and quality jobs, and "the importance for some of the concept of 'climate justice'".
• Article 1 provides definitions for Convention, Conference of the Parties, and Party.
• Article 2 defines the Agreement's aim as "to strengthen the global response to the threat of climate change, in the context of sustainable development and efforts to eradicate poverty," including a long-term temperature goal, a call for increased adaptation, and "making finance flows consistent with a pathway towards low greenhouse gas emissions and climate-resilient development."
• Article 3 requires all parties "to undertake and communicate ambitious efforts as defined in Articles 4, 7, 8, 10, 11, and 13" as "nationally determined contributions to the global response to climate change."
• Article 4 addresses the long-term temperature goal established in Article 2.  It requires each party to "prepare, communicate and maintain successive nationally determined contributions that it intends to achieve" and to pursue domestic mitigation measures.  Parties are expected to increase the level of ambition reflected in their nationally determined contributions over time.  Developed country parties are expected to take the lead, while supporting developing country parties and small island developing states.
• Article 5 calls for conservation and enhancement of sinks and reservoirs of greenhouse gases, including forests.  
• Article 6 recognizes that some parties may choose to pursue voluntary cooperation in implementing their nationally determined contributions.  It establishes a mechanism to promote and track "internationally transferred mitigation outcomes."  It also defines a framework to promote non-market approaches.
• Article 7 establishes a global goal of enhancing adaptive capacity, strengthening resilience and reducing vulnerability to climate change.  It requires parties to engage in adaptation planning processes and actions.  It also requires periodic "adaptation communication" reporting to the secretariat.
• Article 8 addresses averting, minimizing, and dealing with "loss and damage" associated with the adverse effects of climate change, "including extreme weather events and slow onset events."  It uses the Warsaw International Mechanism for Loss and Damage associated with Climate Change Impacts as its basis.
• Article 9 calls for developed country parties to provide financial resources to assist developing country parties with respect to both mitigation and adaptation, and to take the lead in "mobilizing climate finance from a wide variety of sources, instruments, and channels."
• Article 10 promotes technology development and transfer to "improve resilience to climate change and to reduce greenhouse gas emissions."
• Article 11 calls for "capacity-building", to enhance the capacity and ability of developing country and vulnerable parties to take effective climate change action such as adaptation and mitigation.
• Article 12 requires cooperation on "climate change education, training, public awareness, public participation and public access to information."
• Article 13 creates an "enhanced transparency framework for action and support" to build trust and confidence while allowing flexible and effective implementation.  It requires each party to regularly provide a "national inventory report of anthropogenic emissions by sources and removals by sinks of greenhouse gases," and information on how it has provided financial, technology transfer and capacity-building support to other countries.
• Article 14 requires a "global stocktake" -- that the parties periodically "take stock of the implementation of this Agreement to assess the collective progress towards achieving the purpose of this Agreement and its long-term goals."  Article 14 provides that the Conference of the Parties shall undertake its first global stocktake in 2023 and every five years thereafter unless the Conference otherwise decides.
• Article 15 establishes an expert-based committee as "a mechanism to facilitate implementation of and promote compliance with" the Paris Agreement.
• Article 16 provides procedures for aligning future meetings of parties to the Paris Agreement with the meetings of the Conference of the Parties.
• Articles 17, 18, and 19 provide procedures for the Convention secretariat, Subsidiary Body for Scientific and Technological Advice and Subsidiary Body for Implementation established by the Convention to also apply to the Paris Agreement.
• Article 20 provides processes for signature, ratification, acceptance, approval and accession of the Paris Agreement.
• Article 21 provides that the Paris Agreement "shall enter into force on the thirtieth day after the date on which at least 55 Parties to the Convention accounting in total for at least an estimated 55 percent of the total global greenhouse gas emissions have deposited their instruments of ratification, acceptance, approval or accession."
• Articles 22 and 23 provide processes for adopting any amendments or annexes to the Paris Agreement.
• Article 24 governs dispute resolution.
• Article 25 provides that each party shall have one vote, and establishes a process for "regional economic integration organizations" to vote as a bloc.
• Article 26 provides that the Secretary-General of the United Nations shall be the Depositary of the Paris Agreement.
• Article 27 prohibits any reservations being made to the Agreement.
• Article 28 provides a process for a party to withdraw from the Paris Agreement.
• Article 29 governs the original of the Paris Agreement.

The final language of the Paris Agreement's 29 articles, and Decision 1/CP.21 adopting the Paris Agreement, were each adopted by consensus by all of the 195 member states and the European Union participating in the COP21 summit.  Decision 1/CP.21 and the Paris Agreement will play important roles going forward as the world tackles climate change.  Their language will shape business, government, society, and the environment. 

Feds settle on final 2011 Southwest blackout penalty

Over four years after a major 2011 power outage in Southern California and parts of the Southwest, federal energy regulators have approved the sixth and final settlement of penalties for violations of law and reliability standards. 

After the September 8, 2011 blackout left more than 5 million people in Southern California, Arizona and Baja California, Mexico, without power for up to 12 hours, the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission began investigating what had happened.  After conducting that investigation jointly with electric reliability organization North American Electric Reliability Corporation (NERC), in an April 2012 report FERC found that the outage started when a 500-kilovolt transmission line owned by utility Arizona Public Service Company tripped.

The FERC continued its investigation into the 2011 Southwest blackout after its staff report was made public.  It identified six entities believed to have been involved: Arizona Public Service Company, the California Independent System Operator, the Imperial Irrigation District, Southern California Edison, the Western Area Power Administration, and the Western Electricity Coordinating Council Reliability Coordinator.

FERC's enforcement process typically offers the accused an opportunity to agree to a stipulation of facts (for example, that the utility violated a particular reliability standard) and to pay a civil penalty and perform mitigation measures.  In its enforcement actions related to the 2011 Southwest blackout case, all six entities ultimately agreed to stipulations and penalties that were accepted by the Commission.

In July 2014, the FERC accepted Arizona Public Service's stipulation with NERC and FERC's Office of Enforcement, under which APS agreed to pay $3.25 million and improve its system reliability.  In August 2014, California's Imperial Irrigation District agreed to a $12 million fine.  Utility Southern California Edison agreed to a $650,000 fine in October.  In December, FERC settled with federal power marketing agency Western Area Power Administration with no penalty.  Grid operator California ISO agreed to pay $6 million.

This week the FERC announced a settlement with Western Electricity Coordinating Council.  WECC promotes grid reliability in the Western Interconnection, a broad area of the western United States.  According to the FERC order, FERC enforcement staff and NERC determined that WECC as the Reliability Coordinator violated nine requirements of the Interconnection Reliability Operations and Coordination (IRO) and the Facilities Design, Connection and Maintenance (FAC) groups of Reliability Standards.  Enforcement staff and NERC concluded that WECC failed to identify and prevent violations of system operating limits and Interconnection Reliability Operating Limits and was unaware of the impact of protection systems, and used an inadequate system operating limit methodology that exposed its area to cascading outages.

As a result, the settlement calls for WECC to pay a $16 million civil penalty.  $3 million of this will be split evenly between the U.S. Treasury and NERC, and $13 million will be invested in reliability enhancement measures that go above and beyond mitigation of the violations and the requirements of the Reliability Standards.  WECC and its successor as Reliability Coordinator, Peak Reliability, also agreed to mitigation and reliability activities and to submit to compliance monitoring.

FERC has described the WECC settlement as marking "final resolution" of the investigation by FERC Enforcement staff and NERC into the 2011 Southwest blackout.

Obama links climate and health

President Obama has issued a Presidential Proclamation declaring this week, April 6-12, 2015, as National Public Health Week.  Climate change, and its impacts on human and environmental health, figure prominently in his proclamation.

The Obama administration has focused on climate change since taking office in 2009.  In 2013, President Obama released his administration's Climate Action Plan, calling for reductions in U.S. emissions of carbon and greenhouse gases, adoption of mitigation and adaptation measures, and global action.  He has also addressed climate change in his State of the Union speeches to Congress, and the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency has issued its proposed Clean Power Plan to reduce the carbon intensity of the nation's electric power sector.

While interest in addressing climate change arises from a broad range of factors, health plays an important role in the Obama administration's action on climate issues.  In this week's Presidential Proclamation on health, President Obama noted the interdependence of climate, environment, and human health:

America's public health is deeply tied to the health of our environment. As our planet becomes more interconnected and our climate continues to warm, we face new threats to our safety and well-being. In the past three decades, the percentage of Americans with asthma has more than doubled, and climate change is putting these individuals and many other vulnerable populations at greater risk of landing in the hospital. Rising temperatures can lead to more smog, longer allergy seasons, and an increased incidence of extreme-weather-related injuries and illnesses.

My Administration is dedicated to combating the health impacts of climate change. As part of my Climate Action Plan, we have proposed the first-ever carbon pollution limits for existing power plants -- standards that would help Americans live longer, healthier lives. And as we continue to ensure the resilience of our health care system, we are working to prepare our health care facilities to handle the effects of a changing planet. Climate change is no longer a distant threat. Its effects are felt today, and its costs can be measured in human lives. Every person, every community, and every nation has a duty to protect the health of all our children and grandchildren, and my Administration is committed to leading this effort.

This week the Obama administration announced further actions to protect communities against the impacts of climate change.  These actions include convening stakeholders to prepare for a White House Climate Change and Health Summit later this spring that will feature the Surgeon General, and an Adaptation in Action Report by the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC).

The Obama administration also announced an expansion of its Climate Data Initiative to include more than 150 health-relevant datasets on climate.data.gov.  President Obama unveiled the Climate Data Initiative in 2014 to host data related to climate change that can help inform and prepare businesses and citizens for the impacts of extreme weather.  The newly released datasets are designed to help the public answer questions, including:

• In what ways does the changing climate affect public health where I live?
• What risk factors make individuals or communities more vulnerable to climate-related health effects?
• How can public health agencies, communities, and individuals plan for uncertain future conditions?

FERC issues EIS for Algonquin Incremental Market gas project

Staff of the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission have issued a final Environmental Impact Statement for a proposed natural gas transmission project connecting New York and New England.  In that report, Commission staff found that Algonquin Gas Transmission, LLC's Algonquin Incremental Market Project would result in some adverse environmental impacts, but that most of these impacts could be mitigated and reduced to less-than-significant levels.

A marker for the Williams Northwest Pipeline in Arches National Park, Utah.

 Algonquin Gas Transmission, LLC -- a subsidiary of Spectra Energy Partners, LP -- already owns a natural gas pipeline and transmission network running from the Texas Eastern Transmission system in New Jersey to the Maritimes & Northeast system near Boston.

In 2014, Algonquin proposed the Algonquin Incremental Market project.  The AIM project's would provide firm transportation service of 342,000 dekatherms per day of natural gas to local distribution companies and municipal utilities in Connecticut, Rhode Island, and Massachusetts.  Algonquin’s stated objectives for the Project are:

• to provide the pipeline capacity necessary to transport additional natural gas supplies to meet the immediate and future load growth demands of local gas utilities in southern New England;
• eliminate capacity constraints on existing pipeline systems in New York State and southern New England;
• provide access to growing natural gas supply areas in the Northeast region to increase competition and reduce volatility in natural gas pricing in southern New England;
• improve existing compressor station emissions through the replacement of existing compressor units with new, efficient units; and
• provide the additional service by November 2016.

As envisioned by Algonquin, the project will include the construction and operation of about 37.4 miles of natural gas pipeline in New York, Connecticut, and Massachusetts.  The project entails replacing some segments of existing pipeline, extending an existing loop pipeline to increase the system's capacity to ship gas, and installing some new pipeline.  It also includes modifications to six existing compressor stations, modifying existing meter and regulating stations, and the construction of 3 new meter and regulation stations.

Under federal law, Algonquin needs authorization from the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission to construct and operate the AIM project.  Algonquin filed its application to the FERC on February 28, 2014.  As part of the FERC's review process, the National Environmental Policy Act requires the agency to analyze and document the environmental effects of proposed federal actions such as granting Algonquin's application.

In Algonquin's case, that documentation took the form of a Final Environmental Impact Statement issued by the FERC staff today. In the final EIS, FERC's environmental analysts conclude that construction and operation of the AIM project would result in some adverse environmental impacts. However, FERC staff found that most of these impacts would be reduced to less-than-significant levels with the implementation of mitigation measures and plans proposed by Algonquin, along with additional measures recommended by the FERC staff.  Staff pointed to factors including the degree to which proposed AIM project pipeline facilities would be within or adjacent to existing rights-of-way, the planned use of the horizontal directional drill method to cross the Hudson and Still Rivers, which would avoid any direct impacts on these resources, as well as plans to minimize impacts on natural and cultural resources during construction and operation of the Project.

With the final Environmental Impact Statement issued, the FERC Commissioners will consider its staff's recommendations in making a final a decision on the AIM project.  Multiple studies have highlighted the need for up to 2 billion cubic feet per day (Bcf/d) of new pipeline capacity into New England and neighboring markets to improve reliability and reduce the cost to consumers of electricity and natural gas.  At a planned size of 342,000 dekatherms (or 0.342 Bcf) per day, the AIM project is relatively small in capacity compared to other proposed projects such as Tennessee Gas Pipeline Company, L.L.P.'s proposed Northeast Energy Direct Project, which is designed to be scalable up to 1.2 to 2.2 billion cubic feet per day of natural gas capacity.  Which pipelines end up being approved and built will shape the New England energy landscape in the coming years.

Constitution Pipeline environmental impact statement

A 124-mile natural gas transmission pipeline proposed from Pennsylvania to New York has received its final environmental impact statement from federal regulators, finding that while the project would cause some adverse environmental impacts but that mitigation would reduce them to less-than-significant levels.

The proposed Constitution Pipeline is designed connect natural gas supplies in northern Pennsylvania with major northeastern markets.  Proposed by Constitution Pipeline Company, LLC, a group whose investors include Williams, Cabot Oil & Gas, Piedmont Natural Gas, and WGL Holdings, the 30-inch underground pipeline would have a design capacity of 650,000 dekatherms of natural gas per day.  Constitution has pitched the project as a response to natural gas market demands in the New York and the New England areas, and interest from natural gas shippers that require transportation capacity from Susquehanna County, Pennsylvania to the existing Tennessee Gas Pipeline Company LLC (TGP) and Iroquois systems in Schoharie County, New York.

Developing an interstate natural gas pipeline requires a series of federal, state, and local approvals.  Under the federal Natural Gas Act, interstate pipelines must obtain a Certificate of Public Convenience and Necessity from the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission prior to construction.  Constitution started the pre-filing process in April 2012, and filed its certificate application under Section 7(c) of the Natural Gas Act with the FERC on June 13, 2013.

Under the National Environmental Policy Act, federal agencies must analyze and document the environmental effects of proposed federal actions such as issuing a certificate of public convenience and necessity for an interstate pipeline.  For the Constitution Pipeline and its associated Wright Interconnect compressor transfer station, FERC staff evaluated the projects' impacts on natural resources including geology, soils, groundwater, surface water, wetlands, vegetation, wildlife, fisheries, special status species, land use, visual resources, socioeconomics, cultural resources, air quality, noise, and safety.  Staff considered the projects' cumulative impacts along with other past, present, and reasonably foreseeable actions in the projects’ area.  Staff also evaluated over 400 alternatives to the projects, including the "no-action" alternative, system alternatives, major and minor route alternatives, and minor route variations.  In a collaborative effort, FERC staff also collected input from cooperating agencies including the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, the Federal Highway Administration, and the New York State Department of Agriculture and Markets. 

FERC staff issued their Final Environmental Impact Statement, or EIS, for the Constitution Pipeline and Wright Interconnect projects on October 24, 2014.  In that document, staff concluded that construction and operation of the Constitution Pipeline and the associated Wright Interconnect would result in some adverse environmental impacts, but these impacts would be reduced to less-than-significant levels with the implementation of mitigation measures proposed by the company and additional measures proposed by FERC.  These mitigation measures include implementing plans for upland erosion control, revegetation, and maintenance plan, protecting wetlands and waterbodies, spill plans for oil and hazardous materials, an organic farm protection plan, and a karst mitigation plan. FERC staff also proposed an environmental inspection and mitigation monitoring program to ensure compliance with all mitigation measures that become conditions of the FERC authorizations and other approvals.

For the Constitution Pipeline project, the EIS represents a relatively favorable recommendation by FERC staff to the Commissioners.  The ultimate decision whether FERC will issue the project a certificate rests solely with the Commissioners themselves, but regulators typically rely heavily on their technical staff's evaluation of environmental impacts.  Likewise, while FERC's final EIS is not necessarily binding on cooperating agencies, they may adopt it if it satisfies their own statutory mandates for environmental reviews.

While the applicants had initially proposed to start construction in 2014, FERC staff acknowledged that "the proposed dates for the start of construction are no longer feasible."  Constitution now proposes to start construction in February of 2015 and continue through the end of 2015, pending receipt of all applicable federal authorizations.  The Federal Energy Regulatory Commission may rule on the projects' certificate applications as early as late November this year.

Obama administration releases National Climate Assessment

The Obama administration has released its third National Climate Assessment, a document designed as a public presentation of the administration's comprehensive scientific assessment of how climate change is impacting the U.S. people and economy.

A view from the Lincoln Memorial to U.S. Capitol, in Washington, D.C.

The National Climate Assessment summarizes the impacts of climate change on the United States, now and in the future.  Produced as a collaboration between over 300 experts guided by the 60-member National Climate Assessment and Development Advisory Committee, the report was extensively reviewed by the public and experts, including federal agencies and a panel of the National Academy of Sciences.

The National Climate Assessment has a broad scope, in terms of both types of impacts and regions covered.  Thematically, it analyzes impacts on seven sectors – human health, water, energy, transportation, agriculture, forests, and ecosystems – and on the bigger-picture interactions between these sectors.  Geographically, the report also assesses key impacts on all U.S. regions: Northeast, Southeast and Caribbean, Midwest, Great Plains, Southwest, Northwest, Alaska, Hawai'i and Pacific Islands, as well as a more general look at coasts and oceans.

The report states that that increased scientific scrutiny has led to "increased certainty that we are now seeing impacts associated with human-induced climate change":

While scientists continue to refine projections of the future, observations unequivocally show that climate is changing and that the warming of the past 50 years is primarily due to human-induced emissions of heat-trapping gases. These emissions come mainly from burning coal, oil, and gas, with additional contributions from forest clearing and some agricultural practices.

Outcomes predicted under possible future scenarios include continued increases in average air and water temperatures, changes in rainfall and precipitation patterns, air quality decreases, sea level rise, and ocean acidification.  These changes can disrupt systems for food production, harm human health, or damage property and risk safety through flooding.

The National Climate Assessment also summarizes options for responding to climate change.  These include mitigation: reducing the amount and speed of future climate change by reducing emissions of heat-trapping gases or removing carbon dioxide from the atmosphere.  Efforts to limit emissions or promote carbon sequestration are considered mitigation efforts.  Other possible responses focus on adaptation: preparing for and adjusting to new conditions -- for example, building levees and seawalls, or promoting farmers' growth of crops more suitable to the changing conditions.

In all, the report provides insight into the Administration’s approach to addressing climate change, and can help people and businesses both minimize risks and identify new opportunities.

The full National Climate Assessment can be explored on the government's climate change website globalchange.gov, or can be downloaded.  The entire report, downloaded in print quality resolution, clocks in at over 170 megabytes.