Proposed Reforms to Federal Pipeline Permitting Process in Energy Legislation
Key Ideas
- The House Committee proposed new energy provisions for the budget reconciliation package, introducing an optional siting regime for carbon capture, hydrogen, and petroleum pipelines.
- The proposed Section 7A under the Natural Gas Act would allow for a $10,000,000 fee to apply for a Certificate of Public Convenience and Necessity, granting federal eminent domain authority.
- If implemented, Section 7A would provide benefits such as preempting state and local siting laws for covered pipelines, including facilities for carbon dioxide, hydrogen, and petroleum transportation.
- However, uncertainties remain regarding the application process, potential regulatory implications, and the $10,000,000 fee for amendments, raising questions about the practicality and effectiveness of the proposed reforms.
The House Committee on Energy and Commerce has unveiled proposed energy provisions for inclusion in the budget reconciliation package, aiming to reform the federal pipeline permitting process significantly. One of the key amendments, Section 7A, would introduce a new optional siting regime for carbon capture, hydrogen, and petroleum pipelines under the Natural Gas Act. This amendment would enable pipeline developers to apply for a Certificate of Public Convenience and Necessity by paying a $10,000,000 fee, granting them federal eminent domain authority and the ability to preempt state and local siting laws.
The proposal seeks to address the lack of federal regulation and certification process for carbon dioxide, hydrogen, and petroleum pipelines, which are currently not covered under existing statutes like the Interstate Commerce Act. By adding Section 7A to the Natural Gas Act, the legislation aims to create a framework for the economic regulation of covered pipelines, including those transporting carbon dioxide, hydrogen, or petroleum products.
While the Section 7A certificate offers benefits such as federal eminent domain authority and preemption of certain state and local laws, there are uncertainties surrounding its implementation. Questions arise concerning the application process, regulatory oversight, and the financial implications of the $10,000,000 fee, especially for potential amendments. The unclear procedures for facility modifications, expansions, and service changes under Section 7A raise concerns about the practicality and flexibility of the proposed reforms.
Overall, the proposed reforms signal a positive step towards streamlining the federal pipeline permitting process for a broader range of energy infrastructure, but the intricacies of implementation and the potential impact on stakeholders necessitate further clarification and evaluation.
Topics
Utilities
Federal Regulations
Permitting Process
Eminent Domain
Energy Legislation
FERC Authority
Interstate Pipelines
Siting Laws
Economic Regulation
Latest News