Appeals court voids US agency's approval of mid-Atlantic gas project
By Jonathan Stempel
July 30 (Reuters) -A U.S. appeals court on Tuesday threw out a federal regulator's "arbitrary and capricious" approval of a new $1 billion natural gas project running through five mid-Atlantic states and intended to serve 3 million customers.
Agreeing with six environmental groups and eight U.S. states, the D.C. Circuit Court of Appeals said the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission did not properly address objections to the Regional Energy Access Expansion Project planned by Transcontinental Gas Pipe Line, a unit of Williams Cos WMB.N.
Circuit Judge J. Michelle Childs wrote for a three-judge panel, whose members were judicially appointed by Democratic presidents, that FERC should have better assessed the risk of significant greenhouse gas emissions, and how the Williams unit might reduce them.
She also said FERC did not properly consider the public interest, citing its failure to adequately review New Jersey laws designed to advance the state's clean energy goals,and whether the state needed more capacity.
Childs pointed to two studies that said current capacity would suffice beyond 2030.
About three-quarters of gas from the proposed project would go to New Jersey customers, with the rest going to Delaware, Maryland, New York and Pennsylvania. The appeals court returned the matter to FERC for "appropriate action."
FERC declined to comment. Williams and Transco's lawyers did not immediately respond to requests for comment.
The environmental groups included the New Jersey Conservation Foundation, Delaware Riverkeeper Network and Sierra Club, and had viewed FERC's approval as a rubber stamp.
Their lawyer, Moneen Nasmith of Earthjustice, said Tuesday's decision "made it clear that FERC's longstanding flawed rationale that private contracts for capacity demonstrate a public need for a gas project is no longer sound."
In opposing FERC, the eight states led by New Jersey and Washington cited their "critical interest" in reducing greenhouse gas pollution and enforcing their clean energy laws.
Circuit Judges Cornelia Pillard and Brad Garcia were also on the appeals court panel. Pillard is an appointee of former President Barack Obama. Childs and Garcia were appointed by President Joe Biden.
The case is New Jersey Conservation Foundation et al v FERC, D.C. Circuit Court of Appeals, No. 23-1064.
Reporting by Jonathan Stempel in New York
Editing by Marguerita Choy
Pinakabagong Balita
Disclaimer: Ang mga kabilang sa XM Group ay nagbibigay lang ng serbisyo sa pagpapatupad at pag-access sa aming Online Trading Facility, kung saan pinapahintulutan nito ang pagtingin at/o paggamit sa nilalaman na makikita sa website o sa pamamagitan nito, at walang layuning palitan o palawigin ito, at hindi din ito papalitan o papalawigin. Ang naturang pag-access at paggamit ay palaging alinsunod sa: (i) Mga Tuntunin at Kundisyon; (ii) Mga Babala sa Risk; at (iii) Kabuuang Disclaimer. Kaya naman ang naturang nilalaman ay ituturing na pangkalahatang impormasyon lamang. Mangyaring isaalang-alang na ang mga nilalaman ng aming Online Trading Facility ay hindi paglikom, o alok, para magsagawa ng anumang transaksyon sa mga pinansyal na market. Ang pag-trade sa alinmang pinansyal na market ay nagtataglay ng mataas na lebel ng risk sa iyong kapital.
Lahat ng materyales na nakalathala sa aming Online Trading Facility ay nakalaan para sa layuning edukasyonal/pang-impormasyon lamang at hindi naglalaman – at hindi dapat ituring bilang naglalaman – ng payo at rekomendasyon na pangpinansyal, tungkol sa buwis sa pag-i-invest, o pang-trade, o tala ng aming presyo sa pag-trade, o alok para sa, o paglikom ng, transaksyon sa alinmang pinansyal na instrument o hindi ginustong pinansyal na promosyon.
Sa anumang nilalaman na galing sa ikatlong partido, pati na ang mga nilalaman na inihanda ng XM, ang mga naturang opinyon, balita, pananaliksik, pag-analisa, presyo, ibang impormasyon o link sa ibang mga site na makikita sa website na ito ay ibibigay tulad ng nandoon, bilang pangkalahatang komentaryo sa market at hindi ito nagtataglay ng payo sa pag-i-invest. Kung ang alinmang nilalaman nito ay itinuring bilang pananaliksik sa pag-i-invest, kailangan mong isaalang-alang at tanggapin na hindi ito inilaan at inihanda alinsunod sa mga legal na pangangailangan na idinisenyo para maisulong ang pagsasarili ng pananaliksik sa pag-i-invest, at dahil dito ituturing ito na komunikasyon sa marketing sa ilalim ng mga kaugnay na batas at regulasyon. Mangyaring siguruhin na nabasa at naintindihan mo ang aming Notipikasyon sa Hindi Independyenteng Pananaliksik sa Pag-i-invest at Babala sa Risk na may kinalaman sa impormasyong nakalagay sa itaas, na maa-access dito.
