Category Archives: Eminent Domain

Warner, Kaine Introduce Bill to Improve Pipeline Permitting Process

From Allegheny-Blue Ridge Alliance’s ABRA Update 232, August 13, 2020

U.S. Senators Mark R. Warner (D-V) and Tim Kaine (D-VA) introduced legislation on August 6 to strengthen the public’s ability to evaluate the impacts of natural gas pipelines being considered by the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission. S. 4502 would make it easier for the public to offer input and clarify the circumstances under which eminent domain should and should not be used.

Among other guidelines, the bill requires public comment meetings to be held in every locality through which a pipeline would pass, at every stage of the review process, in order to minimize situations where individuals are forced to commute long distances with very little time to comment. It also strengthens landowners’ rights by improving the processes in which landowners are notified of a pipeline application and bolstering their ability to intervene to ensure any concerns about their property are given fair consideration and compensation.

The bill builds upon an earlier version of legislation the Senators introduced in the last Congress. More info here.

Podcast: Fighting Eminent Domain for Pipelines

Listen to the June 28, 2020, podcast from Forward Radio’s Truth to Power program, Fighting Eminent Domain for Pipelines. Forward Radio’s description: “On this week’s Truth To Power, we gather folks into the virtual studio to continue the community conversation about LG&E’s proposed methane gas pipeline in Bullitt County [KY]. You may be familiar with this issue through the ‘Save Bernheim’ campaign, as the proposed pipeline would run through Bernheim Arboretum & Research Forest. Forward Radio’s Justin Mog (Sustainability Now!) and Hart Hagan (The Climate Report / Let’s Talk) discuss the issue with one of the neighbors owning property near the pipeline, Christy Collins, as well as Elaine Tanner, Program Director for the Friends For Environmental Justice.”

Ten Reasons to Oppose the ACP


Back in January we posted ten reasons why Friends of Nelson opposes the Atlantic Coast Pipeline and said you’d be hearing more about them. Now we’re happy to share our slide show on the 10 reasons – use it to help you to explain to family, friends, neighbors, and legislators why you oppose the ACP.

FERC Provides “Additional Landowner Protections”

In a news release on June 9, 2020, the Federal Energy Regulatory Committee announced an amendment to its regulations which says that even if a project has all other certifications and permissions to begin construction, it must wait to do so until the Commission either acts on the rehearing request or the 30-day time limit passes with no requests for rehearing.

When FERC issues a certificate of public convenience and necessity, allowing a project to proceed, affected landowners have the right to ask FERC to reconsider. Although FERC is supposed to respond to such requests within 30 days, it frequently issues a “tolling order,” which indefinitely extends FERC’s deadline to respond. FERC thus freezes the landowner’s request for a hearing while allowing pipeline companies to continue construction – meaning that by the time a landowner has a hearing the pipeline construction may be completed.

According to FERC Chair Neil Chatterjee, quoted in the press release, “‘The Commission has undertaken a number of initiatives to improve affected landowners’ access to a fair and transparent process and today’s effort is another important step forward,’ Chatterjee said. ‘These are complex issues, with a diverse array of stakeholder input, but I remain firmly committed to doing what we can to make the FERC process as fair, open, and transparent as possible for all those affected while the Commission thoroughly considers all issues.'”

However, FERC did not define what it meant by “begin construction,” and could still allow pipeline companies to condemn property before FERC makes a decision on a landowners appeal, and, depending on the definition of “begin construction,” go forward to cut down all the trees, dig the trench for the pipeline, spray herbicides, cross waterbodies – everything but actually put the pipe in the ground.

FERC has been under mounting pressure from landowner rights advocates and from Congress to address inequities in its hearing process for affected property owners.

Read FERC’s press release here.

Read press coverage in E&E Energywire here and in Utility Dive here.

Averitt Makes Case Against FERC


Richard Averitt making the case that the current FERC approach is unfair and destructive and must be changed. Click here for the video, made for Artivism’s SUN SiNG concert series.

Related news stories from the past few days:

Audio for April 27 Court Hearing


If you were not able to listen to the oral arguments before the D.C. Circuit Court of Appeals on Monday, April 27, 2020, on “tolling orders,” the long-standing practice of the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission (FERC) to delay making decisions on appeals of its rulings, the audio is available here [all 3.5 hours of it!]. In a first for the court, the arguments were presented via telephone before all of the 11 active judges on the D.C. Circuit. The case, Allegheny Defense project v. FERC, had initially been decided 2-1 last August in FERC’s favor by a three-judge panel of the court, but a stinging dissent by Judge Patricia Millet led to the full court to hear the case.

According to Allegheny-Blue Ridge Alliance’s ABRA Update 274, “During the course of Monday’s session, several judges expressed skepticism about FERC’s tolling order policy, which effectively permits a project to proceed in taking property through eminent domain and completing a pipeline before affected parties, including landowners, receive a decision on their appeal of the project’s certificate and, if denied, proceed to appeal it in court. It was not clear, though, what decision the DC Circuit might make in the case. In an amicus brief filed by the Southern Environmental Law Center, Earthjustice, Natural Resources Defense Council and the Chesapeake Bay Foundation on behalf of several ABRA members and numerous affected landowners argued that FERC habitually tolls requests for rehearing in such a way that a timely judicial review is precluded. The brief goes on to note that the practice is inconsistent with the Supreme Court’s evaluation of Access-to-Justice Principles.”

See related story below, FERC Process Skewed Against Landowners.