Date: 1988-10-04
Speaker: FRANCIS S. BLAX (democrat)
Chamber: S

Esquire. General Counsel. Environmental Protection Agency. Washington. DC. DEAR MR. BLAKE: We are pleased to respond to (tie Environmental Protection Agencys (EPAs) April 29. 1987 letter to the Commission regarding the environmental issues raised In the pending application by Texas Eastern Transmission Corporation (Texas Eastern) and PennEast Gas Service Company (PennEist) to construct and/or replace certain natural gas pipelines In Ohio. West Virginia. Pennsylvania. New Jersey and New York. (Docket Nos. CP8792000 and 001). We appreciate the comments In that letter. as well as EPAs ofler to provide further amplification of those comments. This letter documents the meetlng between our staffs held in your office June 10. 1987 regarding the scope of the Comml!.ions NEPA review of this project. EPAs letter noted that Texas Eastern and the EPA are discussing resolution of EPAs pending enforcement action regarding the cleanup and disposal of polychlorinated biphenyl... or "PCBs" along portions of tile existing Texas Eastern pipeline. The letter also pointed out that "a substantial array of major environmental concerns regarding potentially toxic contaminants that could be affected by pipeline construction and replac..-nients remains to be resolved" between Texas Eastern and EPA. The Commissions staff concurs in EPAs assessment that here appears to be overlap between the matters under negotiation in the Texas Eastern enforcement case and the subject matter the Commission Is reviewing pursuant to the Natural Gas Act and tile National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA). Therefore. we agree that EPA and FERCs staff should coordinate our actions In fulfilling our respective statutory responsibilities. To achieve this objective. we propose that the Commissions staff proceed as follows: The Commissions staff will defer to EPAs determinations. consent decrees and other actions related to environmental Issues arising out of EPAs enforcement action against Texas Eastern or any other PCBrelated actions by Texas Eastern under EPAs jurisdiction. For example. the Commission staff will defer to EPAs findings. conclusions. agreements. and orders concerning PCB site cleanup. disposal and construction procedures relating to tile project. The Commission staff will not conclude our NEPA review in those areas covered by your enforcement action until such time as tile related PCB control Issues have been settled between EPA and Texas Eastern In a consent decree. The Commissions staff will however. continue to accumulate and analyze relevant facts for our NEPA review In coordination with your ongoing enforcement proceeding. On all other environmental Issues. whether specific or generic. as well as the ultimate decision on the need for an environmental inpact statement on the project. the Commissions staff will proceed with the NEPA review process. In those areas. EPA will defer to our Jurisdiction. expertise. determinations and orders. subject to EPAs responsibility under section 309 of the Clean Air Act to review published NEPA documents. In addition to this coordination of the NEPA review of Texas Easterns proposal. the Commissions staff from timetotine. may need EPAs assistance in Interpreting the statutes and regulations over which EPA has direct jurisdiction. This Is particularly Important where the definitions and threshold&ln the regulations will be applied to factual situations under EPA regulations. For this reason. we would expect to seek your advict rind counsel regarding the Interpretation of regulations administered by you that would be applicable to tile Texas Eastern project. Where we require a pipeline such as Texas Eastern to sui..nit a facilIty abandonment arid removal plan to uF for review. you would review that plan and determine whether it is In compliance with your apliicable regulations. Likewise. if EPA encounters any questions concerning the Natural Gas Act and FERCs regulations as they apply to tile Texas Eastern ease. we will be happy to provide EPA with an interpretation of our regulations. Finally. the Commissions staff request that. to tile extent consistent with EPA regulatory practices. correspondcne received by EPA pertaining to pipeline removal and disposal that may also affect FERCs responsibilities will be shared with the Commission staff. Commission staff will proceed In a similar manner with correspondence It receives that may affect EPAs responsibilitles. We believe that the approach outlined above. as applied to the proposed Texis EasternPennEast project. will help produce the following results: 1. EPA and Texas Eastern can proceed promptly with resolution of tile PCB enforcement action. compliance and cleanup issues. 2. FERCs staff can proceed promptly with Its NEPA review process in connection with the project. EP.4s asslstance in interpreting its regulations when requested by FERC on an asneeded basis. will accelerate that NEPA review. In addition. such assistaice will elimlinate duplicative efforts where Texas Eastern seeks answers to the same questions at each agency. If this plan for managing the overlapping jurisdiction of EPA and FERC in this case meets with your approval. we can begin coordinating our efforts immediately. Please let us know your response as soon as posslble. and Identify appropriate contact points for future inquiries. We appreciate your cooperation and assistance and look forward to our continuing. effective relationship. Sincerely.