Energy legislation pending in Congress to affirm FERC’s exclusive jurisdiction over the siting of liquefied natural gas (LNG) import terminals “would not diminish the important role the states play in the authorization process,” FERC Chairman Pat Wood said Friday.

“The states would retain their considerable authorities, which in addition to local zoning and state laws, include key federal laws in which significant regulatory powers are delegated to the states” to block energy projects they oppose, Wood wrote in a letter to the editor that was published in the Friday edition of The Wall Street Journal.

While pending energy legislation “would explicitly affirm FERC’s authority under the Natural Gas Act…the states would retain the ability to effectively veto any proposed LNG import facility with the authority delegated to them under the Clean Water Act, the Clean Air Act and the Coastal Zone Management Act,” he said.

This belief that FERC was awarded undisputed authority over LNG siting, while the states’s role was diminished was the “largest misconception” dominating last month’s debate over the House energy bill (HR 6), Wood noted. The House-passed energy measure clarified that the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission has sole authority over the siting of LNG terminals, but it also gave states a “stronger role, not a weaker role” in this area, said Rep. Joe Barton (R-TX), chairman of the House Energy and Commerce Committee, at the time (see Daily GPI, April 22).

Congress decided to take up the issue after California regulators last year challenged FERC’s claim of exclusive jurisdiction over the siting of a planned LNG facility in Long Beach, CA. The issue currently is pending before the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals in California.

©Copyright 2005Intelligence Press Inc. All rights reserved. The preceding news reportmay not be republished or redistributed, in whole or in part, in anyform, without prior written consent of Intelligence Press, Inc.