With the future of the Spire STL pipeline in the balance, the Environmental Defense Fund pressed the nation's top energy regulator to think critically about whether the Spire Inc. project is needed to serve the St. Louis area.
Attorneys from the environmental group, or EDF, also urged the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission to take a harder look at climate change impacts associated with the project. The pipeline operator, for its part, continued to say that the two years the project has been operating demonstrate that it is needed and that FERC should reissue permits that were struck by a U.S. appeals court in June 2021 in a legal victory for the EDF (CP17-40).
The latest back-and-forth came in a series of Jan. 14 filings at the agency that were focused on the developer's effort to secure a longer-term permit from FERC for the 65-mile, 400,000-Dth/d pipeline. FERC issued a new temporary emergency certificate in December 2021 to allow the line to keep operating and deliver gas to the St. Louis region through the winter season.
In a December 2021 notice, the regulator also asked for public input on the scope of a planned new environmental review, which will inform a commission decision about whether the project can operate long term. A June 22, 2021, decision by the U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit vacated the original certificate order for the pipeline and remanded the permit to FERC for further proceedings, finding that FERC failed to adequately consider arguments challenging the demonstration of a market need for the project (Environmental Defense Fund v. FERC, 20-1016).
"The commission must not repeat its error of accepting Spire STL's unsupported assertions regarding the purpose of and need for the project and the scope of available alternatives," the EDF said. "Assertions by [Spire subsidiaries] must be carefully analyzed given the 'record evidence of self-dealing' and their resulting incentive to exaggerate project need."
The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency also urged FERC to provide greater clarity in the energy regulator's permitting review about the need for the project.
The EPA added that FERC should include an estimate of the full life-cycle emissions associated with the project in the permitting review. The agency has frequently advised FERC to take an expanded look at the climate impacts of gas projects in permitting reviews pending revisions to the decades-old FERC natural gas infrastructure permitting policy (CP21-6). The EPA further recommended that FERC assess past and future economic impacts associated with the pipeline or alternatives with an emphasis on environmental justice communities.
Spire STL Pipeline LLC submitted two studies in the Jan. 14 filing that addressed environmental justice and shifting demographics toward the west of affiliate Spire Missouri Inc.'s territory, saying they showed limited adverse impacts from the project but harmful consequences if the pipeline is taken offline.
"Through energy security, gas supply options, and low energy costs, the Spire STL Pipeline benefits individual households, commercial customers, industries, and public services," the pipeline operator said. "Removal of the Spire STL Pipeline from service could adversely impact [environmental justice] communities in the region disproportionately."
The EDF said the commission had previously "assumed, without analysis, that 400,000 Dth per day of increased capacity from a new source of supply was a legitimate, justified need." That led to the commission finding that no project alternatives meet the objectives of the project, the EDF said.
Instead, the EDF said, the commission should have compared the proposed Spire STL pipeline against the continued use of Spire Missouri's propane peaking facilities that offered 160,000 Dth/d of capacity. FERC should have also examined if there were alternatives sources of 160,000 Dth/d of capacity with lower environmental impacts, the EDF said.
As part of the temporary order, Spire STL is barred from engaging in any construction or offering any new services, and it must continue with all restoration activities along the pipeline right of way. The EDF and some landowner groups urged FERC to require the pipeline to do more to address damaged land in the new permitting review.
In its own comments, the Spire Missouri said "substantial evidence" already shows the pipeline project is needed and FERC should be careful not to treat projects that the gas utility could pursue as "system alternatives" to allowing the pipeline to continue operating. Instead, such actions "should be viewed as potentially being needed in addition to an interstate pipeline alternative being examined."