Westchester Groups File Brief Against AIM Pipeline

On Friday, July 29th, a coalition of 21 plaintiffs including local groups Riverkeeper, Sierra Club Lower Hudson, Food and Water Watch NY, Stop the Algonquin Pipeline Expansion (SAPE), and Reynolds Hill, Inc. filed a brief in the U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia seeking to overturn the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission's March 2015 approval of Spectra Energy's Algonquin Incremental Markets (AIM) pipeline project.

Nancy Vann, whose property is being taken by eminent domain for the AIM project, said, "FERC has only rejected one pipeline project in its entire 40-year history. It's shameful that the public must take a government agency to court in order to make it do its job. I'm so grateful for the determination of Riverkeeper, SAPE, Food & Water Watch and all of the other coalition members who have persisted in asserting these important issues and I'm looking forward to getting our day in court."

The Algonquin natural gas pipeline owned by Spectra Energy runs through Rockland, Westchester and Putnam counties on its way to New England. Spectra’s plan to enlarge the pipeline is in three phases so far.

The AIM Project involves the construction, installation, operation, and maintenance of 37.4 miles of pipeline and related facilities in New York, Connecticut, and Massachusetts. Most of the pipeline installation will replace existing pipeline with larger diameter pipeline. Atlantic Bridge includes replacement of another 10.9 miles of existing pipeline with new larger diameter pipe. Access Northeast includes the expansion of approximately 125 miles of the existing Algonquin pipeline system, plus new lines and facilities, including a new Liquified Natural Gas Storage Facility in Acushnet, Massachusetts.

The projects comprise an expansion plan for the pipeline from New Jersey to New England. FERC is considering each separately.

The coalition's brief addresses some of the points they had raised in their Rehearing Request that FERC rejected in January 2016.

First it argues that the Commission improperly segmented the Algonquin pipeline expansion by dividing it into three different projects to avoid having to address its full environmental impact.

Second, approximately 2,159 feet of the AIM pipeline will run through property that is part of the Indian Point nuclear power plant. The brief challenges the approval of installing the pipeline a little over 100 feet from critical safety structures at the Indian Point.

It notes that the Commission relied on findings by Entergy Nuclear Operations, the company that operates Indian Point, and the Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC), neither of which have expertise in pipeline safety. Entergy and the NRC concluded that the AIM Project would not impact safety at Indian Point, and this brief challenges that conclusion.

Lastly, the brief argues FERC violated its own regulations by relying on a third-party contractor that had a financial interest in the construction of the AIM Project. FERC relies on third-party contractors to prepare the Environmental Impact Statements required for approving projects. Those contractors are identified by and paid for by the project applicant — in this case Spectra.

To avoid conflicts of interest, potential third-party contractors must complete and submit an Organizational Conflict of Interest statement, according to the brief. No such statement has been found in the AIM record. An investigation has also revealed that NRG, the third-party contractor that prepared the Environmental Impact Statement for AIM, was working for Spectra on another related project at the same time, and the brief argues that that is an apparent violation of FERC regulations.

RELATED:

• Pipeline Project Making Progress Under the Hudson
• Pipeline Foes Step Up Protest Blockades in Cortlandt
• Algonquin Pipeline Foes File Appeal
• Opponents Protest Pipeline at FERC Meeting in Sleepy Hollow