Skip to content
The Climate Litigation Database
Collection

In re Proposed Construction of Compressor Station (CS327), Office Building & Appurtenant Structures, Highlands Applicability Determination, Program Interest No. 1615-17-0004.2 (APD200001)

In re Proposed Construction of Compressor Station (CS327), Office Building & Appurtenant Structures, Highlands Applicability Determination, Program Interest No. 1615-17-0004.2 (APD200001) 

A-3616-20N.J. Super. Ct. App. Div.1 entry
Filing Date
Type
Action Taken
Document
Summary
06/27/2025
Decision
New Jersey Department of Environmental Protection's determination affirmed.
On June 27, 2025, the New Jersey Appellate Division upheld the New Jersey Department of Environmental Protection’s (NJDEP’s) determination that the construction and operation of Compressor Station 327 by Tennessee Gas Pipeline Company was consistent with the goals of the Highlands Water Protection and Planning Act. Environmental groups—Food & Water Watch, New Jersey Highlands Coalition, and Sierra Club—challenged the project’s approval on multiple grounds, including greenhouse gas emissions and water quality impacts. However, the court found that NJDEP reasonably excluded climate change concerns like off-site GHG emissions and downstream air quality effects from the Highlands Act review. The court reasoned that they were outside NJDEP’s statutory mandate because the emissions would occur outside the Highlands region, there was no showing of direct impact on the Highlands region, and the issue had already been reviewed by the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission. The court also rejected the claim that the project would induce sprawl or increase climate-related water quality risks in the Highlands region, noting that the compressor station served out-of-state demand and did not increase local gas delivery. The court also upheld NJDEP’s finding that the project was consistent with the Water Quality Management Plan because of low projected water use and wastewater discharge. Ultimately, the court concluded that the appellants’ broader climate concerns fell outside the scope of a Highlands Applicability Determination and affirmed NJDEP’s decision.