Food & Water Watch v. Federal Energy Regulatory Commission

The D.C. Circuit Court of Appeals denied petitions for review challenging a certificate issued by the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission (FERC) for expansion of service on a natural gas pipeline running from western Pennsylvania to the New York metropolitan area to alleviate shortages in Westchester County, New York. Under the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA), the D.C. Circuit found that FERC reasonably concluded that it could not assess upstream environmental impacts from extracting natural gas from additional wells. In addition, the court found that FERC adequately discussed downstream greenhouse gas emissions, rejecting an argument that NEPA required FERC to label the increased emissions as significant or insignificant. The D.C. Circuit also rejected an argument that FERC should have quantified how much ozone would be produced as a result of an increase in natural gas combustion in Westchester County. Under the Natural Gas Act, the court rejected an argument that the New York State Climate Leadership and Community Protection Act’s mandates for carbon emissions reductions undercut FERC’s finding of need for the project. The court found that the petitioner failed to preserve a similar argument based on New York City’s ordinance that restricts use of natural gas in newly constructed and renovated buildings.

A not-for-profit organization filed a petition for review in the D.C. Circuit Court of Appeals challenging FERC’s authorization of the East 300 Upgrade Project, which is intended to increase the natural gas capacity of an existing pipeline. The project includes modifications of existing compressor stations in Pennsylvania and New Jersey and construction of a new compressor station in New Jersey. The petitioner asserted that FERC departed from D.C. Circuit precedent requiring evaluation of reasonably foreseeable indirect air pollution and greenhouse gas emissions from fossil fuel production and transportation project. In addition, the petitioner contended that FERC failed to consider whether the projects would comply with the emissions reduction mandates of the New York Climate Leadership and Community Protection Act in the Natural Gas Act analysis of whether the project was required by the public convenience and necessity.