Commissioner Richard Glick Statement
October 15, 2020
Docket No. CP17-458-002, CP19-17-001
Order: C-6
Allegations that a pipeline developer has violated its certificate are a serious matter. In response to those allegations, both the Commission and Commission staff must engage in a swift-yet-thorough investigation to get the bottom of the matter and ensure that landowner and environmental interests are adequately protected. I write separately to encourage the Commission to redouble its efforts to accommodate landowners as they try to navigate the sometimes byzantine set of rules and regulations that can make up a FERC proceeding. Although I ultimately agree with the determinations made in this order, I remain concerned that those rules and regulations are routinely being used as barriers to landowner efforts to protect their interests.[1] A dedicated office, with landowner liaisons, could go a long way to making FERC more accessible. It is, at the very least, something we ought to explore.
For these reasons, I respectfully concur.
[1] Double E Pipeline, LLC, 173 FERC ¶ 61,074 (2020) (Glick, Comm’r, dissenting) (the Commission denied rehearing of the decision to reject the late intervention of the environmental groups that was filed during the comment period on the Environmental Assessment); Mountain Valley Pipeline, LLC, 173 FERC ¶ 61,026 (2020) (Glick, Comm’r, dissenting in part) (the Commission denied motions to intervene from numerous landowners and environmental groups that were not parties to the underlying Certificate Order proceeding).