Commissioner Richard Glick Statement
December 17, 2020
Docket No. CP17-458-006
Order:  C-8

 

I dissent in part from today’s order because the Commission is, once again, giving short shrift to the landowner interests affected by the development of a new natural gas pipeline.  As an initial matter, although I continue to have serious doubts about the need for the Midcontinent Supply Header Interstate Pipeline Project,[1] that issue is not before us today.  Instead, the only substantive question presented is whether to grant Midship Pipeline Company, LLC’s (Midship) request for a two-year extension of time to complete construction and place all remaining facilities into service.  The record before us indicates that the delay is due in significant part to the COVID-19 pandemic,[2] and not any bad faith or intentional delay on Midship’s part.  Accordingly, on that basis, I support the extension of time.     

Nevertheless, I dissent in part because today’s order denies motions to intervene filed by numerous landowners that were not parties to the underlying Certificate Order proceeding.[3]  The Commission states that only entities that participated in the underlying Certificate Order proceeding should be allowed to intervene and address Midship’s extension request.  Because these landowners did not, the Commission concludes that they are out of luck.[4] 

I disagree.  The would-be intervenors are landowners residing on or near the pipeline route, which gives them an obvious and undeniable interest in the outcome of this proceeding.  Throughout the country, landowners are doing their best to navigate the complexities of the Commission’s natural gas pipeline proceedings, usually without the aid of the high-priced lawyers retained by project developers.  Instead of erecting unnecessary barriers, we should take a pragmatic approach that ensures that landowners have an opportunity to participate fully in these proceedings and vindicate whatever interests they may have.  Unless and until we start doing that, the Commission will continue to put landowners at an unfair disadvantage in a way that I believe is inconsistent with our responsibility to the public interest.[5]

For these reasons, I respectfully dissent in part.

 

[1] Midship Pipeline Co., 164 FERC ¶ 61,103 (2018) (Glick, Comm’r, dissenting).

[2] Midship Pipeline Co., 173 FERC ¶ 61,255, at P 4 (2020).

[3] Id. P 5.

[4] Id.

[5] Mountain Valley Pipeline, LLC, 173 FERC ¶ 61,026 (2020) (Glick, Comm’r, dissenting in part); see also, e.g., Eagle Crest Energy Co., 168 FERC ¶ 61,186 (2019) (Glick, Comm’r, dissenting).

Contact Information


This page was last updated on December 17, 2020