Why do I have to explain the yet again, ETP would not have ordered pipe, bought R.O.W. Paid untold millions in permitting fees, or even thought about hiring contractors and inspection staff to build the thing let alone break ground if they didnt have permitting approval from the Army Corps to cross the fucking river, (Transcanada got their dicks in a VERY costly, pickle with the Keystone Extension buying much the materials for a line that could not be tied in at the boarder due to the Obama Admin rejection of less than 500 feet of permitting for a 2000ish mile multinational job.). All this federal permitting and such was done during the Obama administration and HIS, Corp of Engineers, D.O.Energy, P.H.E.M.S.A. and other federal regulators and oversight bodies ALL GREEN LIGHTED THE PROJECT DURING OBAMA'S PRESIDENCY.
Next you keep asking about a EIS, I am not a lawyer/Engineer/Enviro guy in the office, I build the dam things as nothing more than a hand. My (highly educated) guess as to why an EIS was not filed, is because IT WAS NOT REQUIRED, (trust me if its required it would have been done) and a EA was enough to meet the environmental regulatory requirements. Why might this be the case when you say its the LAW to file and EIS for new construction, with out seeing the reg book I would almost be willing to bet one of my sizeable paychecks that because enough of the NEW line was to be built with in existing R.O.W. E.T.(and other Partners) already have. it got to bypass some of requirements. There is a whole plethora of other reasons it may not have needed it built into the PHEMSA reg book, or maybe it was a top Obama appointed bureaucrat that singed off on it saying an EA was good enough.
As far as the judge thing, this sets a very uneasy precedent that puts into question any interstate transmission line construction approval for water body and federal land crossings using what has been an industry wide standards across several presidential administrations. Obama appointee is still "activisting" from the bench. Last but not least it is also the law that once a shipper proves the need for the capacity the permitting can not be denied without MAJOR reasons, and crossing a fucking river is not a reason when there are at least a 100 other major lines crossing the very same river already. You dont get to change the rules once they have been granted that was a bullshit call by the 0man and in and of itself ILLEGAL, the Current admin returning to the rule of the laws governing construction of such infrastructure being found illegal should be seen for what it is BULL SHIT. But hey what do I know about any of this ......................
Next you keep asking about a EIS, I am not a lawyer/Engineer/Enviro guy in the office, I build the dam things as nothing more than a hand. My (highly educated) guess as to why an EIS was not filed, is because IT WAS NOT REQUIRED, (trust me if its required it would have been done) and a EA was enough to meet the environmental regulatory requirements. Why might this be the case when you say its the LAW to file and EIS for new construction, with out seeing the reg book I would almost be willing to bet one of my sizeable paychecks that because enough of the NEW line was to be built with in existing R.O.W. E.T.(and other Partners) already have. it got to bypass some of requirements. There is a whole plethora of other reasons it may not have needed it built into the PHEMSA reg book, or maybe it was a top Obama appointed bureaucrat that singed off on it saying an EA was good enough.
As far as the judge thing, this sets a very uneasy precedent that puts into question any interstate transmission line construction approval for water body and federal land crossings using what has been an industry wide standards across several presidential administrations. Obama appointee is still "activisting" from the bench. Last but not least it is also the law that once a shipper proves the need for the capacity the permitting can not be denied without MAJOR reasons, and crossing a fucking river is not a reason when there are at least a 100 other major lines crossing the very same river already. You dont get to change the rules once they have been granted that was a bullshit call by the 0man and in and of itself ILLEGAL, the Current admin returning to the rule of the laws governing construction of such infrastructure being found illegal should be seen for what it is BULL SHIT. But hey what do I know about any of this ......................
Comment