Overview

PennEast Pipeline Co. Proposes 114-mile Large Scale Natural Gas Transmission Line Through the Delaware River Basin. 

PennEast has been improperly accessing properties for purpose of surveys.  See their letter and our response.

The PennEast Pipeline project is being proposed by AGL Resources, NJR Pipeline which is a subsidiary of New Jersey Resources, South Jersey Industries, UGI PennEast which is a subsidiary of UGI Energy Services, PSEG Power, Spectra Energy Partners.

The project, as proposed, will cut through Luzerne County, PA, Carbon County, PA, Northampton County, PA, Bucks County, PA, and Hunterdon County, NJ Proposed  The company has created a searchable map if you want a more detailed look at the proposed route: PROPOSED ROUTE

Learn About Pipelines:

Information about pipelines, including research, reports and video interviews with experts, can be found at: www.stopthepipelines.org

Learn about all the natural resources and preserved lands PennEast will cut on its way from start to finish.  Fact sheet here.

Delaware Riverkeeper Network comments, copies of township resolutions, and additional information regarding PennEast can be found below.

Project Details: 

The PennEast Pipeline Co. L.L.C. announced its new pipeline project on August 12, 2014 called the PennEast Pipeline. The Federal Energy Regulatory Commission (FERC) granted approval for the project (a Certificate of Public Convenience & Necessity) on February 20, 2018.  PennEast quickly began demanding that property owners who had not yet signed access agreements with the company either do so or receive a lower payment for the property rights the company would ultimately be taking.  Actions for eminent domain have been filed by PennEast against well over 100 properties. (NJ eminent domain actions are listed here; PA eminent domain actions are listed here) .  Among the properties targeted are those in which states have property interest.  In the State of New Jersey the state has property interests in a reported 42 parcels that PennEast is targeting.  New Jersey resisted PennEast’s exercise of eminent domain over these parcels in which the state has property interest and rights.  In a decision issued on September 10, 2019 titled In re PennEast Pipeline Company LLC the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit determined that PennEast did not have the right to exercise eminent domain over these parcels as to do so was an infringement on the sovereign immunity of the state.  In response, on October 4, 2019, PennEast filed Docket No. RP20-41 urging FERC, after only an 8 day comment period, to issue a declaratory order that rejected the Third Circuit’s interpretation.  

To date regarding reviews and approvals:

• On April 26, 2017 the New Jersey issued a determination that the PennEast application materials submitted to the state were significantly deficient and incomplete. On June 28, 2017, NJDEP determined the PennEast Pipeline Company’s application for state approval of its project to be “administratively closed” due to the company’s failure to remedy significant identified deficiencies and its failure to provide full information in a timely fashion for Clean Water Act decisionmaking.  On August 4, 2019 PennEast submitted a renewed application for a state Freshwater Wetlands Act permit, a Flood Hazard Area Verification and Letter of Interpretation, and a Clean Water Act Section 401 Certification.  On October 8, 2019, NJDEP denied the applications without prejudice (leaving the door open for PennEast to re-file if they so chose). 
• The DRBC has not issued a docket, necessary for the project to move forward, nor has it scheduled hearings on a docket proposal.   The Delaware Riverkeeper Network has issued a petition regarding DRBC jurisdiction over the project and its roll in preventing tree felling or clearing prior to approval which can be read here.
• The Army Corps of Engineers has yet to issue permits for the project.
• Pennsylvania has issued Clean Water Act 401 Certification for the project, a decision the Delaware Riverkeeper Network is challenging in court.  But has not issued the underlying permits.The Army Corps has not fully signed off on the project with permits.  

The PennEast Pipeline is designed to be a large scale 36 inch transmission pipeline that will stretch 108 miles from a gathering system in Luzerne County and terminate at Transcontinental Gas Pipe Line Co.’s Trenton-Woodbury Lateral in Mercer County, N.J. The proposed project is planned to transport roughly 1 billion cubic feet of natural gas per day. The project will also require the siting and construction of multiple high-powered compressor stations scattered along the line. 

The PennEast Pipeline Project will cut its right-of-way for over 114 miles approximately 87% of which will be within the boundaries of the Delaware River watershed.  Among the waterways to be crossed are the Delaware, Lehigh and Susquehanna Rivers. Among the federally listed species already identified that could be impacted by the project are the Bog Turtle, the Indiana Bat, the Dwarf Wedge Mussel and the Northern Long-eared Bat which has been proposed-for-listing. Also targeted are forests as well as public and private lands, much of that land being sensitive green fields that have not previously been disturbed. 

The pipeline will affect approximately 1,094 tracts of land and approximately 861 landowners. Eleven municipalities have already passed resolutions opposing the pipeline including: Hopewell Twp, Delaware Twp, Holland Twp, West Amwell Twp, Lambertville, Alexandria, Milford, Princeton, Clinton Twp, Kingwood Twp, NJ and Moore Twp, PA. 

Size and Scope 

The size and scope of the construction activity for the PennEast line and stream crossings associated with this project will have a deleterious effect on the water resources of the Delaware River Basin. Large scale transmission lines such as the PennEast line also result in significant forest fragmentation, invite and propagate the spread of invasive species, and degrade the diversity and dispersion of native flora and fauna. Furthermore, pipeline projects also degrade the functions and values of the wetlands that they plow through, as the construction and operation of the pipeline permanently converts forested wetlands to uplands or emergent wetlands. 

There are also significant concerns related to the cumulative impacts of the continuous water crossings and wetlands disturbance that pipeline construction activity has on the health and vitality of the Delaware River Basin. This is particularly a concern with the PennEast line, as many of these same subwatersheds were recently impacted by construction activity on Transco’s parallel line. Also, in addition to the Transco’s previous and proposed pipeline projects, there are several other pipeline projects that have been concentrated in the same sub watersheds as the PennEast line, such as: Texas Eastern’s TEAM 2014 Project and Columbia’s East Side Expansion Project. 

The PennEast Pipeline will further facilitate the development of new gas drilling wells, access roads, gathering lines, compressor stations, and other supporting infrastructure, which will further degrade our environment. The PennEast line will need to receive a number of important federal and state permits and authorizations for it to proceed. This includes authorizations from the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission (Docket CP15-558), the Army Corps of Engineers (Section 404 permit), the Pennsylvania Department of Environmental Protection and New Jersey Department of Environmental Protection (Section 401 Clean Water Certifications). 

This fall 2019, we’re sending that message to DRBC in a big way with escalating actions that are easy for you to join from near or far, and that will culminate in a big turnout at the DRBC’s December 11 meeting.

Updates:

March 18, 2020: Delaware Riverkeeper Network sends letter urging DRBC transparency and to remain strong and vigilant on PennEast. 

September 10, 2019: The U.S. Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit, in In re PennEast Pipeline Company LLCm determined that PennEast did not have the right to exercise eminent domain over land parcels in which the state of New Jersey had property interests and was refusing access. The court said that the exercise of eminent domain over these parcesl would be  an infringement on the sovereign immunity of the state.  In response, on October 4, 2019, PennEast filed Docket No. RP20-41 urging FERC, after only an 8 day comment period, to issue a declaratory order that rejected the Third Circuit’s interpretation.  

October 1, 2019: Just 3 days before the US Court of Appeals for the DC Circuit was to hear oral argument on the case brought by the Delaware Riverkeeper Network and others to challenge the FERC certificate issued to the PennEast pipeline the court placed the case in abeyance for an undetermined period of time.

March 19, 2019: U.S Court of Appeals Grants Motion for Stay on PennEast Pipeline: “In the event [PennEast] transitions from the surveying and testing phase to the construction phase of the pipeline project, physical construction of the pipeline shall be stayed pending this appeal.”

February 16, 2019:PADEP noticed its call for public comment.  DRN requested a comment extension and submitted Comments to the DEP, which can be found here.

February 15, 2019: PennEast is Modifying Its Proposed Route.  March 8, 2019 is the deadline for Intervening in the FERC Process for the PennEast Pipeline Project Application for Amendment.  In addition, the Pennsylvania DEP is seeking comment on its proposal to approve PennEast as being in compliance with state water quality standards.

On February 15, 2019, the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission (FERC) issued a Notice of Application for Amendment (“Notice”) regarding the PennEast Pipeline Company, LLC’s (PennEast) application under section 7(c) of the Natural Gas Act (NGA) and Part 157 of the Commission’s regulations to amend the certificate of public convenience and necessity and related authorizations issued by the Commission on January 19, 2018. The proposed modifications to the PennEast Pipeline include a series of route realignments and adjustments in Luzerne, Carbon, Monroe, and Northampton Counties, in Pennsylvania. The Notice invites the public to provide motions to intervene before March 8, 2019 at 5:00 pm.

You can find the notice here and PennEast’s Application for Amendment here.

Intervening on a project that has been filed for approval with FERC is important and valuable:  it shows how strongly you are opposed to a project, it preserves your rights to bring a legal challenge should you wish to do so down the road, and it ensures you will be fully informed about every step of the process as it goes forward through email notifications. Click HERE for step by step instructions on how to intervene online with FERC for PennEast’s application to amend their certificate.

August 13, 2018:On Friday, August 10th, The Federal Energy Regulatory Commission denied the rehearing request from the Delaware Riverkeeper Network, NJDEP and others. In reply, on August 13, the Delaware Riverkeeper Network filed with the D.C. Circuit Court of Appeals challenging the FERC approval of the PennEast pipeline claiming the agency violated the Natural Gas Act and the National Environmental Policy Act when it granted approval of the pipeline.

Read the articles for more information:
FERC sued over PennEast approval after denying rehearing requests | StateImpact PA | 2018-08-13
FERC Rebuffs Requests to Reconsider Approval of PennEast Pipeline | NJ Spotlight | 2018-08-13

May 30, 2018: FERC denied the Delaware Riverkeeper Network’s requests for rehearing from the February 22 request. Commissioner Glick wrote a concurrence highlighting the need for the FERC Commission to act on Rehearing Requests as quickly as possible so as to avoid “needless and avoidable harm” to “landowners, communities, and the environment.”

DRN is committed to restoring natural balance in the Delaware River and watershed where it has been lost and ensuring preservation where it still exists. As such, we are actively engaged at the local, state, and federal government levels to ensure that full weight of legal environmental protection laws are brought to bear on all pipeline projects under consideration, including the PennEast Pipeline.

May 8, 2018: Delaware Riverkeeper Network initiates two legal actions to stop construction of Penneast pipeline in the D.C. Circuit Court of Appeals. One is challenging Penneast’s Certificate of Convenience and Necessity and includes a Petition for a Writ of Mandamus to stop construction of the pipeline. The other case challenges FERC’s continued abuses of tolling orders.

April 13, 2018: FERC issues a second order tolling the second rehearing request submitted by Delaware Riverkeeper Network on February 22.

February 22, 2018: Delaware Riverkeeper Network submits a second rehearing request. This one for the tolling order issued for the initial hearing request on February 22.

February 22, 2018: Delaware Riverkeeper Network’s first rehearing request is tolled by FERC. To learn more about FERC’s abuse of tolling orders in these instances see DRN’s Dossier of FERC Abuses.

February 15, 2018:Delaware Riverkeeper Network petitions the Delaware River Basin Commission (DRBC) to exercise its authority in the Delaware River Basin; ensure a nonpoint source pollution control plan is secured, reviewed, and approved for Penneast prior to approval of a DRBC docket; and ensure the DRBC will prevent construction on any part of the Penneast pipeline until Commissioner approval of a DRBC docket for the project.

February 6-13, 2018: PennEast commences almost 200 eminent domain actions in U.S. District Courts in New Jersey and Pennsylvania.

January 24, 2018: Delaware Riverkeeper Network submits its first Rehearing Request to FERC and a Motion for Stay to halt construction of any land disturbance project associated with the pipeline.

January 19, 2018: FERC issues Certificate of Convenience and Necessity with a 4-1 vote. The Certificate included two concurrences and a dissent. Commissioner La Fleur and Commissioner Chatterjee wrote separate concurrences to highlight the issue of how pipeline developers engage with landowners. Commissioner Glick wrote a dissent highlighting and criticizing FERC’s allowance of contracts among affiliates to show need and the practice of FERC conditionally granting Certificates due to lack of evidence of environmental harms.

March 2, 2016 the Delaware Riverkeeper Network filed a Constitutional Challenge to the FERC process as it applies ot the PennEast project. While the court determined that DRN has met the bar for purposes of standing (an important precedent), the case was ultimately dismissed.  DRN is appealing.  

April 2016: responding to an effort led by the Delaware Riverkeeper Network that was supported by over 6,000 individuals, DRBC announced its intent to hold independent hearings.

September 2014: the Delaware Riverkeeper Network submitted a formal petition to the Delaware River Basin Commission (DRBC) requesting the agency take jurisdiction over the proposed PennEast pipeline project; DRN also crafted an action alert calling for letters from the public which has resulted in the submission of well over 500 citizen letters. Initially DRBC resisted jurisdiction, but follow-up letters from the Delaware Riverkeeper Network along with a deliberate press strategy and growing public pressure finally convinced the agency otherwise. The DRBC has made the decision to exercise jurisdiction over the project.  DRBC has the authority to stop PennEast if it so chooses.  

 

Editor’s note: This issue is currently dormant. We will continue monitoring the situation and may take up the issue in the future.

April 24, 2018 Update: DRN has sued FERC challenging the issuance of the Certificate of Public Convenience and Necessity in the US Court of Appeals for the DC Circuit.

Overview

Tennessee Gas Pipeline Company, L.L.C (TGP), a subsidiary of Kinder Morgan Inc, filed an application with the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission (FERC) for its proposed Orion Project on October 9, 2015. The proposed $143 million project consists of the installation of 13 miles of additional pipe adjacent to and connecting with the existing TGP pipeline in Pike and Wayne counties, Pennsylvania. TGP also proposes to make minor adjustments to an existing compressor in Pike County, Pennsylvania. 

According to Kinder Morgan, the proposed Orion Project will allow TGP to transport up to 135,000 dekatherms per day of additional firm natural gas capacity on its pipeline system. The Orion Project’s full capacity is subject to agreements with three shippers. 

Kinder Morgan owns an interest in or operates approximately 84,000 miles of pipelines and 165 terminals.

TGP asserts that the Orion Project is anticipated to begin in January 2017, with a June 2018 in-service planned. 

Orion’s FERC Docket No. is CP 16-4-000 

See below for a fact sheet describing the resources impacted by the Orion Pipeline.

Litigation and Advocacy Updates:

In September 2016, DRN submitted an extensive comment regarding the inadequacy and problems with the FERC Draft EA as part of the public process. You can view DRN’s comments and technical reports that were submitted by clicking on the components below. 

In February 2017, FERC granted the Orion project a Certificate of Convenience and Necessity. In response, DRN submitted a rehearing request, on the grounds that FERC failed to conduct a thorough environmental review of the project and ignored the fact that the Orion project was a piece of a larger project by TGP.  On February 27, 2018, one year after the request was submitted, FERC denied DRN’s Rehearing Request, maintaining that it was unnecessary to consider the impacts of all of TGP’s pending pipelines, as the projects are independent of one another.

On March 24, 2017, DRN commenced two lawsuits attempting to stop construction of the pipeline.  DRN sued the PADEP for issuing a 105 Water Encroachment Permit and the United States Army Corps for issuing a Section 404 Dredge and Fill Discharge permit.  Additionally, DRN submitted emergency motions for stay of construction activity. The Third Circuit denied DRN’s motions to halt construction on the project, and in August 2017, the Third Circuit court ruled against DRN in both lawsuits, allowing the project to continue.

On May 15, 2018, in response to FERC’s rehearing request denial, DRN submitted a petition for review to the US Court of Appeals for the DC Circuit challenging FERC’s certification.  In the challenge, DRN accuses of FERC of failing to adequately review the project by allowing unlawful segmentation, failing to properly account for GHG emissions, and failing to adequately consider project alternatives.

 

Overview

On May 11, the Federal Energy Regulatory Committee (FERC) released a notice of their intent to prepare an environmental assessment (EA) for the Millennium Pipeline Company’s proposed Eastern System Upgrade—a project that includes two new compressors and 7.8 miles of new pipeline in the Upper Delaware River watershed.  This is your opportunity to tell FERC your specific comments and concerns about Millennium’s proposed expansion, and why it would be detrimental to the environment, communities and our region.

Comments are due on or before June 10, 2016.

FERC needs to hear about all potential environmental and community impacts.

Please be sure to include in your comment – feel free to cut and paste any of this text to use in your comment:

FERC must extend the comment period by 90 days because it has failed to release all of the information necessary for full review.

FERC will not be releasing key documents requested by the Delaware Riverkeeper Network necessary for expert review and comment on this project until after the comment period closes or just days before it closes. As a member and supporter of DRN who will be represented by their comments I urge FERC to extend the comment period by 90 days in order to allow for release, review and comment upon this critical information.

Millennium is clearly planning for a more significant expansion of its pipeline – a full Environmental Impact Statement that includes all potential expansions of the Millennium Pipeline is necessary.

Millennium continues to add to their pipeline in back to back expansion projects that are obviously part of a larger vision. The current proposed addition of two new compressors and other facilities comes on the heels of both the Minisink and Hancock compressor stations additions in 2013 and 2014. Even Millennium representatives have hinted at possible future expansions.  This perpetual segmentation is a violation of the National Environmental Policy Act.  FERC must ensure full consideration of all past, present, and reasonably foreseeable connected, contemporaneous, closely related, and interdependent projects that are, or will be, before FERC for consideration. 

In addition to the obvious future expansion of the Millennium pipeline as a whole, FERC must include, in their environmental report of the Eastern System Upgrade, a thorough examination of the following interconnected and related projects: Millennium’s Valley Lateral Project; Linden Energy Services proposed connecting pipeline; Algonquin’s Access Northeast Project; Algonquin’s Atlantic Bridge Project; Algonquin’s Incremental Market project (AIM); CPV Valley’s Energy Center, currently under construction in Slate Hill, NY, as well as any others that are missing from this list or not yet known to the public.

Air quality impacts and the resulting impactions for public safety must be more fully reviewed and given high priority consideration.

Emissions from compressor stations have a demonstrated effect on the health of surrounding populations. These impacts include chronic respiratory issues, cardiovascular issues and heart attacks, neurological issues, cancer, and reproductive and development toxicity, among others. The community is advancing health impact analysis relevant to the proposed expansion.  That analysis must be fully completed and analyzed by FERC prior to any decision-making on this project.

The impacts to wetlands, waterways, endangered species and forest ecosystems are significant and require more thorough assessment and consideration.

The company’s assertion that the project and cumulative impacts will be “temporary and minor” is not compatible with recent and reliable science or observed impacts from similar work. Millennium’s Eastern System Upgrade Project would disturb significant areas of land and result in extensive harms to existing geology, soils, and sediments; water resources and wetlands; vegetation and wildlife; land use; noise quality and air quality. These impacts are unacceptably high.

Be sure to include your own thoughts and concerns regarding the proposed expansion of the Millennium pipeline, the incentive it provides for more drilling and fracking, and the need or us to be investing in clean and renewable energy infrastructure and strategies rather than more dirty fossil fuel pipelines. 

We encourage you to review the information available in Millennium’s latest resource reports (available on FERC docket here and here, as well as all of the information available on our on-going issues page here.

How To Submit: 

There are three methods you can use to submit your comments to FERC. Be sure to reference the Eastern System Upgrade Project docket number (PF16‑3-000) with your submission:

1. You can file brief, text-only comments electronically using the eComment feature on www.ferc.gov, under the link to Documents and Filings.
2. You can file longer comments or attach comments in other formats electronically by using the eFiling feature on www.ferc.gov, under the link to Documents and Filings.  New eFiling users must first create an account by clicking on “eRegister.”  Select “Comment on a Filing” as the filing type.
3. You can file a paper copy of your comments by mailing them to the following address:

Ms. Kimberly D. Bose, Secretary, Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, 888 First Street, N.E., Washington, D.C. 20426

For assistance with electronic filing, call (202) 502-8258 or email efiling@ferc.gov.

However you file, at the top of your letter, be sure to note that your comment is

RE: Comments regarding the Environmental Assessment of Millennium Pipeline Company, LLC’s proposed Eastern System Upgrade, docket no. PF16-3-000

 

Editor’s note: This issue is currently dormant. We will continue monitoring the situation and may take up the issue in the future.

Overview

The Millennium Pipeline Company (Millennium) has announced its proposed Eastern System Upgrade Project—which includes:

• a new 22,400 horsepower compressor station in the Town of Highland, NY
• addition of a new 22,400 horsepower compressor unit at the existing Hancock Compressor Station in Delaware County, NY
• installation of 7.3 miles of new 36-inch pipeline parallel to Millennium’s existing 24-inch line between the Huguenot and Westtown meter stations in Orange County, NY 

The process was set into motion on January 19, 2016 when Millennium filed a Request for Pre-Filing Review with the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission (FERC). The project’s Pre-filing docket number is PF16-3. 

FERC Issued a Certificate of Public Convenience and Necessity for the project on November 28, 2017.  NY DEC also issued needed approvals including a 401 Certificate and a SPDES Permit.

In Response

December 1, 2017 the Delaware Riverkeeper Network filed two challenges to approval of the Millennium Eastern System Upgrade Project.  First, the Delaware Riverkeeper Network (DRN) filed a petition for review with the United States Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit regarding the New York State Department of Environmental Conservation’s decision granting Millennium Pipeline Company’s (Millennium) application for a State Pollutant Discharge Elimination System General Permit for the Eastern System Upgrade (ESU) Project.  Second, the organization filed a rehearing request with the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission asking for reconsideration of their November 28 issuance of a Certificate of Public Convenience and Necessity to the Project.  The rehearing request was accompanied by a motion for a stay of any construction activity and any other land disturbance conducted under the Certificate, pending review of the Order on rehearing.  Press release and legal filings can be found below.

Related

FERC Needs to Hear From You! Re the Millennium Pipeline proposed Eastern System Upgrade project

Volunteer From the Comfort of Your Own Home – Review Millennium ESU Comments For Critical Data

 

Overview

On September 27, 2015, Sunoco submitted an application to the Delaware River Basin Commission for its Pennsylvania Pipeline Project, also referred to as Mariner East 2.  According to its August 2015 application, Sunoco’s Mariner East 2 pipeline would cut across 79 wetlands and 195 streams in the Delaware River Basin in Berks, Chester, and Delaware Counties, impacting 221 acres in Berks County, 184 acres in Chester County and 83 acres in Delaware County within the Delaware River Basin.  Since beginning construction the pipeline has wreaked havoc across the state of Pennsylvania. In response, DRN has initiated two lawsuits against Sunoco and demanded that the DRBC suspend its docket.

In August, 2017, in resolution of legal action the Delaware Riverkeeper Network, in partnership with the Clean Air Council and Mountain Watershed Association brought against the Sunoco Mariner East project, the groups entered into a settlement with the DEP and Sunoco to prevent spills of drilling fluid associated with Sunoco’s horizontal directional drilling and to protect drinking water supplies and fragile ecosystems across the state. Since then, more spills have occurred, adding to the over 100 spills of drilling fluid to date. For example, during the course of less than a week in early October, 2017 there were four spills at a site in Chester County located at Boot Road and Enterprise Drive. Drilling continued anyway. 

In Response

On October 24, 2017, the organizations filed a motion requesting that the Pennsylvania Environmental Hearing Board direct the Department of Environmental Protection (DEP) to abide by a court-ordered protocol designed to prevent spills of drilling fluid along the Mariner East 2 pipelines.

The August settlement had been adopted by the Environmental Hearing Board as a Stipulated Order and established a protocol that the Department and Sunoco must follow in responding to spills.  The protocol is designed to prevent repeat spills and requires Sunoco to stop drilling until the Department inspects the site of a spill and ensures more spills won’t happen there.

The Department has not been applying the protocol in all instances, resulting in Sunoco continuing to spill drilling fluid at the same sites. Monday’s motion requests that the Board clarify the spill protocol to ensure the protections the parties agreed to are followed moving forward.

“It is unfortunate that once again it is the responsibility of non-profit organizations to ensure that the Department appropriately responds to Sunoco’s ongoing spills,” said Maya K. van Rossum, the Delaware Riverkeeper and leader of the Delaware Riverkeeper Network.

The Board’s Order is part of an ongoing appeal of 20 deficient water permits the Department issued for the Mariner East 2 pipelines in February. That Order was entered after the Board had halted all horizontal directional drilling for the Mariner East 2 pipelines due to the damage Sunoco’s drilling practices was causing to drinking water supplies and the environment.

DRN continues to monitor a few areas along the construction route where continued issues and violations are occurring along the ME2 route.  A real time water testing probe was installed by DRN and Stroud in December to document water quality conditions. Landowners along the route continue to document harms and violations and DRN has photo documented and provided reports to the Conservation District for follow up and enforcement.

Updates June12, 2018

Delaware Riverkeeper Network (DRN) filed a complaint in the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Pennsylvania against Sunoco Pipeline L.P. for their failure to obtain a National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System Permit (NPDES permit) for the Mariner East II pipeline project.

NPDES permits are required under the federal Clean Water Act (CWA) and Pennsylvania’s Clean Streams Law (CSL). The complaint states:

“During construction of an industrial scale natural-gas liquids pipeline, Defendant Sunoco Pipeline LLC (hereinafter “Sunoco”) illegally discharged, and continues to discharge, pollution in the form of sediment-laden stormwater to Pennsylvania’s waters on multiple occasions, causing or contributing to violations of water quality standards on numerous occasions and in various counties across the state of Pennsylvania.”

Construction and operation of the pipeline has resulted in numerous unlawful discharges of sediment-laden water and other pollutants into waters of the United States in violation of the CWA and the CSL. Sunoco has been operating without the necessary permit for 399 days, which subjects Sunoco to civil penalties as high as $14,962,500.

“Sunoco is polluting our waterways and violating the law.  The violations are blatant, willful and having devastating impacts on our environment.  Neither the state nor federal government has enforced this critical permitting requirement on the pipeline company, which is one of the many reasons we are seeing so much environmental harm.  Our laws were passed for a reason, to protect the environment from environmental degradation and harm. Pennsylvania’s government is failing miserably when it comes to these fracked gas and fracked gas liquids pipelines.  Once again, we the people are having to stand up in our own defense,” said Maya van Rossum, the Delaware Riverkeeper and leader of the Delaware Riverkeeper Network.

DRN is requesting the Court require Sunoco to obtain and comply with a NPDES permit, perform ground water assessments, provide relief to nearby residents if assessments show water contamination, and pay all civil penalties associated with the permit violations.

Sunoco has faced several fines and permit suspensions throughout construction of the Mariner East II project for violations such as drilling fluid spills and water contamination. Sunoco’s construction activities have also caused large sinkholes to open up in a residential neighborhoods, threatening the integrity of the parallel Mariner East 1 pipeline and consequently leading the Pennsylvania Public Utility Commission (“PUC”) to issue an Emergency Order temporarily suspending Sunoco’s operations to prevent “catastrophic results impacting the public.” A judge at the PUC specifically noted that Sunoco has “made deliberate managerial decisions to proceed in what appears to be a rushed manner in an apparent prioritization of profit over the best engineering practices available.”

Update June 15, 2018

Delaware Riverkeeper Network wrote to the Delaware River Basin Commission urging them to suspend the Docket provided the project and to undertake a thorough review of the project, because of significant and ongoing violations, the damaging impacts it is having on water resources of the basin, and the need for significant restoration and mitigation activities before any considerations regarding how, when or to what extent construction should be allowed to continue.

Update:  July 3, 2018

After DRBC refused our request to take action to suspend the DRBC docket for Mariner East, the Delaware Riverkeeper Network, joined by many community organizations, pushed back.  See our letter here.  

 

Editor’s note: This issue is currently dormant. We will continue monitoring the situation and may take up the issue in the future.

Overview

Linden Energy Services is seeking the right an easement over public lands owned by Buckingham and Preston Townships in Wayne, County PA.  The Easement would allow construction of a minimum of two natural gas pipelines on the Right of Way but would give the company an unlimited right to build more as they see fit.  It would also give the right to build pipelines larger than the originally discussed 20 inch size Linden Energy Services is currently asserting they want to build.

At a public meeting the Linden Energy Services said the pipeline was intended to connected the Tennessee Gas Company’s 300 Line in Pennsylvania with the Millennium Pipeline in New York.

 

Editor’s note: This issue is currently dormant. We will continue monitoring the situation and may take up the issue in the future.

The Leidy Southeast Expansion Project

The Leidy Southeast Expansion Project (LSE project) is proposed for construction by Transcontinental Pipeline Company (“Transco”). Transco is requesting to construct and operate the LSE project in order to provide 469,000 dekatherms per day (dt/day) of natural gas from receipt points on Transco’s Leidy Line in Pennsylvania to various delivery points along Transco’s Mainline and Leidy systems in Pennsylvania and New Jersey. Transco proposes that in order to transport this volume of natural gas it must construct approximately 28.36 miles of 42-inch diameter pipeline looping, adding of 92,700 horsepower (hp) at four existing compressor stations, and modifying of various other above ground facilities. 

The Delaware Riverkeeper Network challenged the project before the DC Circuit Court of Appeals on March 10, 2015.  

The Franklin Loop

The Franklin Loop would cut across part of the Delaware River Basin in Monroe County that is made up of all special protection streams.  According to Williams Transco Resource Reports, the proposed pipeline would cut across the Lehigh River Watershed and would cross 17 perennial streams, three intermittent streams and five ephemeral streams.  Pipeline cuts would include, for example, the Lehigh River, Tunkhannock Creek, Kendall Creek, Two Mile Run, and Tobyhanna Creek – all waterbodies are designated either High Quality or Exceptional Value in this proposed loop.  The pipeline cut across Tobyhanna Creek would span 70 feet; the cut across the Lehigh River (EV) would span 55 feet; the cut across Tunjhannock Creek would span 30 feet.  Williams Transco is proposing a flowing, dry ditch,dam-and-pump, or dry flumed crossing for most of the streams in this loop despite their current special protection designations.   The Franklin Loop would impact 31 wetlands with a total wetland disturbance of 16.24 acres.  Wetland disturbance breakout reported by Williams Transco is:  4.37 emergent wetlands, 0.64 permanent impact of forested wetland, 0.65 temporary forested wetland disturbance, and 10.58 scrub shrub disturbance.  The Franklin Loop in the Delaware Watershed has more wetland disturbance than any of the other loops for this project (entire project states 22.22 acres of disturbance – Franklin Loop makes up 16.24 of that 22.22 acreage). 

Franklin Loop hydrostatic testing is also being proposed to withdraw from Tobyhanna Creek (MP 65.5) and the Lehigh River (MP61.05). 

To see the Delaware Riverkeeper Network’s initial questions and concerns about the project review the comments we submitted to FERC in June, 2013 listed below.

On October 2, 2013 the Delaware Riverkeeper Network filed to intervene with FERC on the Leidy Line docket.  Intervention motion in documents below.

In January Delaware Riverkeeper Network asked for a rescission of the Certificate of Public Convenience and Necessity issued for the project and urged rehearing.  

To follow the process and documents for this project with the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission:  
Sign up at FERC.gov 
Sign yourself up with an account and password and then ask for an eSubscription
You will want to search for and then sign up to follow Docket No. CP13-551

To see a map of this project and the others proposed for the Delaware River Watershed view our
pipeline map. 

To learn more about pipelines in general check out the documents and information at: http://stopthepipelines.org/

 

Sunoco/Energy Transfer Poised to Replace and Relocate a Gasoline Pipeline under the Delaware River near Washington Crossing

An existing gasoline pipeline that goes under the Delaware River from Upper Makefield Township, PA to Hopewell Township, NJ is planning to use Horizontal Directional Drilling (HDD) to install a new pipeline across and under the Delaware River through a new, deeper HDD pathway into Hopewell Township, replacing exposed pipe in Jacobs Creek. Jacobs Creek is a tributary to the Delaware River and is located along the Hopewell and Ewing Township border in NJ. The new pipeline will connect to the existing Sunoco pipeline in Hopewell Township.

Sunoco Pipeline L.P. (SPLP) owns and operates a 14-inch welded steel high-pressure petroleum products pipeline (“Jacobs Creek Pipeline”) that transports product (gasoline) from Sunoco’s Twin Oaks Terminal in PA to their Newark Facility in NJ. The project area is located near the confluence of the Delaware River and Jacobs Creek where an exposed length of pipeline ­­– length of 301 feet — within the Jacobs Creek bed is to be removed. This replaced section of pipeline will then be connected to approximately 2,500 feet of pipeline that will be installed underneath the Delaware River through the process of Horizontal Directional Drilling (HDD). The HDD will continue on the New Jersey side of the river through a new pathway using easements on private properties: located at portions of the pathway within the 100-year floodplain; further from Jacobs Creek than the existing pipeline; and mostly still within the Creek’s 150 foot riparian stream buffer, as defined by Hopewell Township.

The proposed HDD will commence in Upper Makefield Township, near Washington Crossing PA and emerge in Hopewell Township NJ, and then travel to a proposed tie-in location with the existing pipeline on what is known as the Gristmill property to the east of the Delaware River. The HDD entry points both in PA and New Jersey will be using easements on private residential properties; the NJ properties are “greenfields” because the pipeline is not currently installed at those locations. The proposed HDD will pass under PA SR 32/River Road, the Delaware River, the Delaware and Raritan Canal and Delaware and Raritan Canal State Park Trail, NJ SR 29/River Road, an historic rock and concrete culvert that supports Route 29 and the Canal, and will terminate where the HDD would tie in with a new length of pipeline in the Jacobs Creek buffer. The new length of pipeline will tie in with the existing pipeline at a point to the east in Hopewell Township, moving away from Jacobs Creek. The project will traverse the Delaware and Raritan Canal Historic District and through the 18^th Century Gristmill which is on the National Register of Historic Places. The new length of pipe will travel to a proposed tie-in to the existing pipeline, which travels on to Newark, NJ.

To remove the exposed pipe, “Jacobs Creek would be dammed off using sandbags or a port-a-dam to allow access into the stream and to the exposed pipe, which would be cut and capped at this location”, according to D and R Canal Commissions records. Records received from DRN’s file reviews to various agencies will be provided and updated on this web page.

The dangers posed by: inadvertent returns of drilling muds and fluids during HDD drilling and construction; pollution spills; stormwater runoff, erosion and sedimentation to the River, Canal, and Jacobs Creek; disturbance of fish, aquatic life, wildlife and protected species; removal of trees and native vegetation and the need to ensure successful remediation and replacement; damage to Jacobs Creek from the planned temporary obstruction; and accidents during the project are some of the concerns of DRN and the community. Given Sunoco Energy Transfer’s many problems with the poorly executed installation of the Mariner East pipeline installation in PA, the Delaware Riverkeeper Network considers careful monitoring during its construction to be of great importance.

DRBC approved the project in November of 2021 and the project has received other approvals from PADEP, NJDEP, D and R Canal Commission, NJ Water Supply Authority, and the Army Corps of Engineers. The Delaware Riverkeeper Network has also filed OPRAs (NJ Open Public Records Act) and RTK (PA Right to Know Act) requests with several agencies and with Hopewell and Ewing Townships in NJ and Upper Makefield Township in PA to determine where else the project needs approval before construction will actually begin. Currently, the project appears to be waiting on some key approvals and a prohibition on tree cutting is in place under NJDEP requirements until August 31 for the protection of birds. An exact date of construction has yet to be determined. This page will be kept up to date as new information is learned.

Delaware Riverkeeper Network is actively gathering information on the Jacobs Creek Pipeline project and will be offering free monitoring training to residents who want to monitor the project. DRN is also establishing lines of communication with the overseeing permitting agencies for reporting purposes. To sign up for training contact: tracy@delawareriverkeeper.org.

October 2022 Update:

As of 10/21/2022 Sunoco began the Horizontal Directional Drilling in Upper Makefield Twp., PA to drill under the Delaware River and through to the NJ Side of the project. Hopewell Township has a tree removal application that has been approved for Sunoco to remove 46 trees without replacement and instead to donate to the Hopewell Tree Escrow fund for Lot 6. Lots 9 and 10, the trees will be replaced with 76 trees yet to have size and type determined. The permit for tree removal was approved by Hopewell Township subject to the following conditions: 1. Prior to tree removal, Sunoco shall prepare a performance bond estimate for review and approval by the Township Engineer. The performance bond shall be posted with the Township Clerk. 2. Prior to tree planting, Sunoco shall submit a tree replacement plan for review and approval by the Township Engineer and 3. Payment into Tree Fund Escrow shall be submitted prior to tree removal. DRN is still working on obtaining a construction schedule of how the project is planned to progress. At this time, it is unknown when staging  will begin on the NJ side of the project, along Jacobs Creek.

The HDD drilling is very loud with a banging sound that echoes in the area around the Upper Makefield Twp. location. For a video report go here: https://youtu.be/4xXf7yJGPAg

November 2022 Upate:

Delaware Riverkeeper Network is continuing to monitor the progress of the Jacobs Creek Pipeline project that spans the PA and NJ side of the Delaware River. The HDD process on the PA side began in the first week of November and we believe has concluded on the NJ side. DRN is currently seeking confirmation on this and the following construction and remediation steps that will be taking place in Jacobs Creek and through the New Jersey portion of the project. On the PA side, community monitors alerted DRN to unusual hoses they saw in Houghs Creek. DRN then sent a letter to Sunoco, Upper Makefield, and Bucks County Conservation District asking the purposes of the hoses and whether the site had the Best Management Practices in place. Upon sending this letter it does seem hay bales that were not previously present were then brought to the site and DRN was assured by Bucks County Conservation District and Upper Makefield Township that the hoses and site were in compliance with all regulations (documents below).

December 2022 Update:

The Jacobs Creek Pipeline project is ongoing and currently much of the operations and construction are now on the NJ side of the project in Hopewell Township. The Delaware Riverkeeper Network, through file review requests, became aware of a 2 gallon bentonite drilling fluid spill next to the upland area of Jacobs Creek as a result of ongoing construction with the Jacobs Creek Pipeline project.  The spill incident was reported to the appropriate agencies and at such time the spill was cleaned up with hand tools and contained using a temporary compost filter sock. DRN has sent an inquiry to NJDEP to ask further about any continued monitoring with the spill and what is being done to prevent future incidents like this as the project moves forward.

March 2023 Update: 

From DRN’s findings the above mentioned Bentonite spill has been cleaned up and preventative measures taken. The HDD process under the Delaware River and into New Jersey has been undertaken and finished. The project at Jacobs Creek on the New Jersey side of the river involves removing the old pipeline that has become exposed in the creek bed and replacing it with a new pipeline. DRN is currently working to find a schedule of when or if this removal of the old pipeline has taken place yet by reaching out to the various agencies and Sunoco itself.

April 2023 Update: 

The relocation portion of the Jacobs Creek Pipeline Project is now complete and the exposed pipeline located within Jacobs Creek in NJ is grouted in place and is in-active. DRN has been informed that due to a moratorium on in-stream activities currently, construction operations are paused until at least after July 31. It is expected that removal of the exposed section of pipeline will resume in August with final restoration happening in September or October, or throughout both months.

 

Proposed by the Eastern Shore Natural Gas Company

The Greenspring Pipeline Expansion project proposed by the Eastern Shore Natural Gas Company includes over 11 miles of pipeline (11 miles of 16-inch diameter and 0.1 mile of 10-inch diameter), two new mainline values and one pressure regulating station. The project would be installed in Kent and New Castle Counties, Delaware. And while the project largely follows an existing railroad right of way, there are still serious concerns with its environmental impacts. 

The Project

The project includes a 75-foot wide construction corridor and a permanent 30-foot permanent right of way retained after construction. Approximately 131.54 acres of land would be affected by construction activities. Eleven waterways will be crossed with 13 stream crossings, all but two of those crossings using the open cut method of laying pipeline. 3.34 acres of forest land will be impacted, as will 21 wetlands in 33 different locations including 3.54 acres of palustrine forested wetlands, 0.49 acres of palustrine scrub/shrub wetlands and 1.39 acres of palustrine emergent wetlands. Permanent impacts to wetlands would include 1.47 acres of palustrine forested, 0.19 acres of palustrine scrub/shrub and 0.71 acres of palustrine emergent wetlands. 

There are 11 waterbodies that would be crossed by this project (with 13 crossings) in the four watersheds of Blackbird Creek, Smyrna river, Leipsic River and the St. Jones River, all tributaries to the Delaware Bay. Of the 11 waterbodies to be crossed by this project, 9 of them will be crossed using the open cut method – digging a trench across the streambed, laying the pipe, and covering it over before the temporary stoppage of stream flow is allowed to resume.

March 21, 2013, the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission gave permission for the project to proceed.

 

Update:  October 18, 2019 the US Energy Information Administration wrote: “No information since 2013/2014; assumed cancelled“.

Given no official announcement by the company there is a concern that this project will be revived at some point in the future.

Transcontinental Gas Pipeline Company Proposes its Third Consecutive Pipeline Upgrade in Three Years with its Diamond East Pipeline Project

Diamond East Pipeline Project (Proposed by Transcontinental Gas Pipeline Company) 

Proposed Project Locations: Potentially – Luzerne County, PA; Carbon County, PA; Northampton County, PA; Bucks County, PA; Hunterdon County, NJ; Mercer County, PA. (Route not yet finalized).

Transcontinental Gas and Pipeline Company (“Transco”) recently announced a new project on August 26, 2014 called the Diamond East Pipeline project. The Diamond East Pipeline is designed to be a large scale transmission pipeline that will stretch 50 miles from a gathering system in Luzerne County and Lycoming Counties in Pennsylvania and terminate at in Mercer County, New Jersey. The proposed project will include new pipeline looping and additional compression to transport roughly 1 billion cubic feet of natural gas per day. The Diamond East Pipeline project will impact over 600 acres of land. The project appears to be wholly redundant with the PennEast Pipeline Project which was proposed earlier in August. Both projects propose to carry 1 billion cubic feet of natural gas per day and follow a parallel path through the Delaware River Basin. 

The Diamond East project is the third in a series of pipeline upgrade projects that Transco has proposed in the last three years to its Leidy pipeline system. The first project was the Northeast Supply link, which went into service in 2013. The next project was Transco’s Leidy Southeast Expansion project, which is currently in the permitting process at both the state and federal levels. Transco’s third project proposes to fill in the gaps left by the aforementioned projects. Each of these projects impact the same sub-watersheds and tributary systems, and also involve overlapping construction zones and results in the re-disturbance of streams, soils, and habitat. This type of pipeline project segmentation has been recently rejected the D.C. Circuit in Delaware Riverkeeper Network, et al. v. Federal Energy Regulatory Commission. In that case the D.C. Circuit found that the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission improperly segmented its review of a series of four pipeline upgrade project proposed by Tennessee Gas and Pipeline Company over a period of 3 years. Here, we have a substantially similar situation. 

Size and Scope

The size and scope of the construction activity for the Diamond East project and stream crossings associated with this project will have a deleterious effect on the water resources of the Delaware River Basin. Indeed, the Diamond East project may require a crossing of the Delaware River itself as well as many other sensitive exceptional value and high quality tributaries to the Delaware River. Large scale transmission lines such as the Diamond East project also result in significant forest fragmentation, invite and propagate the spread of invasive species, and degrade the diversity and dispersion of native flora and fauna. Furthermore, these pipeline projects also degrade the functions and values of the wetlands that they plow through, as the construction and operation of the pipeline permanently converts forested wetlands to uplands or emergent wetlands. The Diamond East project will further facilitate the development of new gas drilling wells, access roads, gathering lines, compressor stations, and other supporting infrastructure, which will further degrade the local environment. 

There are also significant concerns related to the cumulative impact that continuous water body crossing pipeline construction activity and wetland disturbance has on the health and vitality of the Delaware River Basin. This is particularly a concern with the Diamond East project, as many of these same subwatersheds are proposed to be impacted by construction activity on PennEast’s parallel line.. Also, there are several other proposed pipeline projects that have been concentrated in the same sub watersheds as the Diamond East project, these projects include: Texas Eastern’s TEAM 2014 Project, Columbia’s East Side Expansion Project. 

The Diamond East project will need to receive a number of important federal and state permits and authorizations for it to proceed. This includes authorizations from the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission (Certificate of Public Convenience and Necessity), the Army Corps of Engineers (Section 404 permit), the Pennsylvania Department of Environmental Protection and New Jersey Department of Environmental Protection (Section 401 Clean Water Certifications). The project proponents have stated that they intend on holding public meetings and submitting initial proposals to regulatory agencies later this year. The process for obtaining each of the aforementioned required permits is an opportunity for the general public to engage with the regulatory body and the project proponent, submit comments, and impact the project itself. 

Additionally, the Delaware River Basin Commission has the authority to regulate pipeline construction activity if it involves a “significant disturbance of ground cover” affecting water resources. The Diamond East project certainly would trigger review under that standard; however, up to this point the Delaware River Basin Commission has failed to exercise its authority in this arena for any of the pipelines that have crisscrossed the Delaware River Basin. DRN encourages community members to write letters in support of the Commission properly exercising its authority over these projects. 

DRN is committed to restoring natural balance in the Delaware River and watershed where it has been lost and ensuring preservation where it still exists. As such, we are actively engaged at the local, state, and federal government levels to ensure that full weight of legal environmental protection laws are brought to bear on all pipeline projects under consideration, including the Diamond East project.