Lawmakers, grassroots organizations, towns in multiple states and individuals have in the last few weeks called on a federal agency to reconsider its approval of a natural gas pipeline expansion project and are seeking a rehearing in order to halt construction and re-evaluate legal and safety concerns.
The surge of criticism surfaced in the weeks following March 3, when the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission authorized Spectra Energy Partners LP, the company constructing the Algonquin Incremental Market Project, to move forward with its plan.
The $971.6 million project spans four states ”” New York, Connecticut, Rhode Island and Massachusetts ”” and looks to add 11.1 miles of pipeline and replace 26.3 miles of the mostly 26-inch diameter pipeline with 42-inch diameter pipes. The biggest chunk of the pipeline replacement is 20.1 miles through Putnam, Rockland and Westchester counties and Fairfield County in Connecticut.
- The planned Algonquin Incremental Market Project.
Westchester County Legislator Peter B. Harckham and a coalition that includes property owners, activist groups and towns from the four affected states are among those who filed requests for a rehearing in early April.
U.S. Sens. Charles E. Schumer and Kirsten Gillibrand and U.S. Rep. Nita M. Lowey, all of New York, also penned a joint letter recently that is addressed to FERC Chairman Cheryl A. LaFleur urging her to heed their constituents”™ requests for a rehearing.
The legislators specifically mentioned concerns about the pipeline running close to Indian Point Energy Center, a nuclear power plant in Buchanan, and asked that the federal agency assign an independent review of the safety issues raised.
Both the coalition and Harckham claimed the safety of construction near Indian Point was inadequately evaluated by the Nuclear Regulatory Commission and Entergy Corp., the company that owns and operates Indian Point.
In their submitted rehearing forms, Harkham and the coalition found issue with the veracity of many facts outlined by FERC, in particular a conclusion by Entergy that “gas flow could be terminated in three minutes in the event of a rupture” of a 42-inch natural gas pipeline.
The safety analysis conducted by Entergy is not available to the public, according to company spokesman Jerry Nappi, who cited the document”™s classification as “security sensitive” by the NRC but said Entergy”™s independent expert concluded there would be no risk in safety with the pipeline construction.
“The analysis that Entergy conducted assumed gas flow for close to six minutes,” he said, and Entergy found that “still resulted in the conclusion that there”™s no increased risk to safety at the plant.”
In the final environmental impact statement, FERC said the NRC reviewed the “site hazards analysis” provided by Entergy and the NRC did an “independent confirmatory analysis of the blast analysis,” which found that “a breach and explosion of the proposed 42-inch-diameter natural gas pipeline would not adversely impact the safe operation of the (Indian Point) facility.”
Marylee Hanley, director of stakeholder outreach for Spectra, said the company has been operating the Algonquin pipeline for many years and is hopeful it will continue to do so and carry on with the construction.
She also said Spectra officials are “reviewing the requests for a rehearing and expect to file an answer to FERC demonstrating that FERC”™s review process and authorization are consistent with regulations and court precedent.”
Susan Van Dolsen, a co-founder of the activist group Stop the Algonquin Pipeline Expansion, which is part of the coalition, said she wants an independent risk assessment performed because of the safety issues raised in the coalition”™s rehearing request.
“I feel so strongly that it”™s such a problem that I hope it will be (reopened)Â and they will do an independent review,” she said.
Van Dolsen said the coalition should hear back on the status of its request from FERC within 30 days. She said if it is not granted the rehearing, the coalition may consider going to court, but Spectra would be able to begin construction.
“At the end of the day, the story is really a safety issue” and less about the development of the pipeline, she said.
Comments 1