The Federal Energy Regulatory Commission recently released its Environmental Impact Statement on the PennEast/UGI Pipeline. (That’t the one that is slated to cross our preserved farm.) By law, FERC must respond to “intervenors” who make comments on the EIS.
The conclusion of the EIS was that the environmental effects weren’t substantial enough to halt the pipeline,. This is a pipeline that will cut through state parks, public watersheds, preserved farmland, habitats of a number of endangered species, wetlands, streams , creeks, and rivers, but FERC says the environmental effects are either minimal or will be mitigated.
The EIS is full of omissions, errors, and inaccuracies. Many intervenors submitted multi-page statements pointing out the problems and omissions. For over 100 of the comments , FERC had a ready reply. It was not, “oh, we must have missed that,” or “whoops, we’ll look into that that.”
It was “Thank you for your comment.” I am not kidding. FERC met the statutory requirement in that it responded. Really, it did. “Thank you for your comment.”
No comments:
Post a Comment