Rell Wants FERC to Postpone Broadwater Decision

Governor Jodi Rell has asked the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission to take Broadwater off its agenda for Thursday, arguing that the New York State government is in flux and Governor David Paterson will need time to brush up on the issue.

That may be, but why should that concern FERC, which hasn't been bothered by any of New York State's serious misgivings about Broadwater before?

The Department of Environmental Conservation has said Broadwater's environmental impact statement is incomplete, that it doesn't contain adequate information to analyze all the environmental affects of the big LNG platform.

But that hasn't stopped FERC.

The state Department of State has said there's strong evidence that Broadwater conflicts with state policies for use of the coastal zone.

But that hasn't stopped FERC.

Maybe Jodi Rell, a Republican, has the ear of FERC Chairman Joseph T. Kelliher. If so, great.

But FERC is not concerned with a true analysis of the environmental impacts, it's not concerned with the long-term well-being of Long Island Sound. FERC is not concerned with anything except approving Broadwater as quickly as possible.

So let them formalize the decision that everyone knows they're going to make anyway, and let's concentrate on stopping Broadwater in Albany.

Will Spitzer's Resignation Be Good or Bad for Broadwater?

I'm a bit ashamed to admit that after hearing the news on Monday about Governor Spitzer, one of the first things I thought of was: is this good or bad for Broadwater?

When David Patterson becomes governor, will he be likely to rely more on his staff for a recommendation than Spitzer (who has been lobbied personally by the head of Shell and the head of Citizens Campaign for the Environment) perhaps would have?

I certainly don't know but would welcome opinions. The deadline for the state to make its Broadwater decision is April 11. The Hartford Courant has a story with some thoughts from Donald Williams, president of the Connecticut State Senate, here.

There's a funny, parody site up now, by the way, called Fraudwater, apparently put together by someone who calls himself Long Island John. Check it out.

New York's Three Broadwater Decisions

Three bits of information or inferences from a Courant story today about how Governor Rell really really really wants Governor Spitzer to say no to Broadwater ("I'm begging you, man!"):

1. The New York State Department of State, which has to decide whether a big, industrial LNG terminal in the middle of Long Island Sound is consistent with state standards for use of the coastal area, has a deadline of February 12, at which point Spitzer will review it. But how long he'll take or whether the department's decision will be made public while Spitzer is reviewing it (doubtful but it would be nice) is unknown.

2. Broadwater has yet to respond to the many and detailed questions and concerns that the New York Department of Environmental Conservation raised in a late-December letter. A DEC spokeswoman said it could be months before the department makes its decision.

(What I still don't understand though is this: the DEC said the Broadwater environmental impact statement didn't address a number of issues and told Broadwater that it can't make a decision until it gets more and better information; but the Department of State is using that same (flawed) environmental impact statement to make its decision -- so how could the DOS be able to say yes based on an analysis that another state agency says is flawed? Maybe one of my loyal readers in state government can explain it to me, anonymously or not.)

3. Reading between the lines, it seems that Connecticut officials might believe that their best hope is the New York Office of General Services, which has to decide whether to grant an easement to Broadwater for use of the land under its terminal (I thought it was a lease rather than an easement, but whatever). Rell said in a letter:

It is critical that these agencies carefully consider ... how Broadwater would violate the state's public trust responsibilities to manage its submerged lands and waters for the benefit of the people, not for private exploitation and profit.

Could it be that that sort of basic decision -- it's our land and we've decided we're not going to let you use it -- is the one that would be hardest to challenge in court?

Unsurprisingly FERC Says Yes to Broadwater, Which Leaves the Real Decision Up to New York and Maybe the Courts

People might be outraged but nobody who is honest is surprised that the staff of FERC thinks Broadwater is a good idea, as FERC announced today when it released the final environmental impact statement for the project. As I've said before, expecting FERC to say no to a big energy project is like expecting the Nuclear Regulatory Commission to shut down a nuclear power plant: it's not going to happen because that's not the business they're in.

So the questions now are whether New York State will live up to its history of courageously rejecting bad projects -- like Davids Island in the western end of the Sound and the Iroquois pipeline crossing of the Hudson River and the St. Lawrence Cement plant near the city of Hudson -- and reject Broadwater too. I think it will.

But if it does, will Broadwater prevail in federal court, which is no doubt where it will go, arguing that the federal energy act trumps the federally-authorized state coastal zone laws? We'll see.

Read more from FERC about today's announcement, here.

It's not a surprise that the staff of FERC thinks Broadwater is a good idea. Back in May Judy Benson in The Day explained why we shouldn't be surprised at the announcement, here.

And the commision itself of course won't reject Broadwater. Among other reasons, one of the commissioners used to be a partner in the law firm that represents Broadwater, as Denise Civiletti pointed out back in July (here):

Joseph Kelliher, the chairman of the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, the federal agency that decides if Broadwater gets approved, was previously a partner in the Washington, D.C. law firm representing Broadwater before FERC: LeBeouf, Lamb, Greene & MacRae. According to the firm's Web site, it's been "intimately involved" in representing clients before FERC for 30 years.

A lot of news stories about the announcement moved this afternoon. Here's The Day, in which Adrienne Esposito says she's not surprised. Here's Denise Civiletti, who characterizes the FEIS as a major hurdle -- perhaps, but if so, it's a low one. Here's the Journal News blog. Here's Jodi Rell saying the FEIS is a travesty (as if she's read it), Richard Blumenthal saying he'll sue on Connecticut's behalf if he has too, and Chris Dodd saying the project is too dangerous and disruptive to be approved.

Broadwater Decision Early Next Year?

Adrienne Esposito of Citizens Campaign for the Environment put the word out yesterday afternoon that she has heard that FERC''s final environmental impact statement for the Broadwater LNG terminal proposed for Long Island Sound is scheduled to go to the printer in December and released to the public by the end of December or in January. She says she also heard that the state will then want to move quickly with its decision, so figure early in 2008 we'll know the fate of that proposal.

New York State Ocean and Great Lakes Ecosystem Conservation Council

New York State has a new commission trying to figure out how to keep the Atlantic, Long Island Sound, the Great Lakes, etcetera, from becoming worse than they are.

The New York State Ocean and Great Lakes Ecosystem Conservation Council met yesterday in Albany, which is sort of far from the ocean and the Great Lakes. I have four quick observations:

1. I hope the work the council does is more substantive than the shallow summary given here.

2. George Stafford is overseeing it, which is good news because for decades he's been a serious steward of the state's coastal zone.

3. I hope the responsibilities of overseeing the council do not detract from his oversight of the state's Coastal Zone Program, for a number of reasons but most importantly now because the fate of the Broadwater LNG proposal probably rests in the Coastal Zone Program's hands.

4. Shouldn't a new state council have an informative website? I looked here and here but could find virtually nothing. (Friday 12:50 p.m.: They do! It's here. Thanks, Emmett.)

Expect a Broadwater Decision by New York in August

If the key decision on Broadwater is to be made by the New York State Department of State, it looks as if we'll be waiting until August to hear what it is. The department wrote to Broadwater's attorneys last week telling them that if the final impact statement is released in June, the department will need three months to review it and decide if putting a liquefied natural gas terminal in the middle of Long Island Sound is consistent with state policies for use of the coastal zone.

As I noted here, the state has already hinted that it thinks it is not consistent. (Broadwater's law firm, by the way, is LeBoeuf, Lamb, Greene & MacRae, a red meat organization if there ever was one.)