session b: stakeholder involvement in pipeline ......session b: stakeholder involvement in pipeline...

SESSION B: STAKEHOLDER INVOLVEMENT IN PIPELINE INFRASTRUCTURE

DEVELOPMENT – BEST PRACTICES MAY 7, 2019, 2:00 PM – 3:15 PM

Gas and oil pipeline infrastructure projects have become increasingly controversial, although some projects seem to proceed more smoothly than others. Are there best practices for stakeholder involvement that can make a difference and result in a win/win for all or are there inevitable conflicts between pipeline infrastructure development, climate and other environmental impacts, environmental justice and other local landowner issues? This panel will explore these issues from the perspective of pipelines, stakeholders, and regulators.

Moderator and Speaker: David Hanobic Outreach Coordinator, Office of Energy Projects FERC

Panelists: Susan Waller, VP Stakeholder Engagement & Enterprise Public Awareness Programs, Enbridge Phillip Musegaas, VP Programs and Litigation, Potomac Riverkeeper Network Carolyn Elefant, Law Offices of Carolyn Elefant

STAKEHOLDER INVOLVEMENT IN PIPELINEINFRASTRUCTURE DEVELOPMENT – BESTPRACTICES▪ SESSION B – MAY 7, 2019, 2:00 PM – 3:15 PM

Energy BarA ssociation

Speakers

▪ DAVID HANOBIC, OUTREACH COORDINATOR, OFFICE OF ENERGYPROJECTS, FERC (MODERATOR)

▪ SUSAN WALLER, V.P. STAKEHOLDER ENGAGEMENT & ENTERPRISEPUBLIC AWARENESS PROGRAMS,ENBRIDGE

▪ PHILLIP MUSEGAAS, V.P PROGRAMS AND LITIGATION, POTOMACRIVERKEEPER NETWORK

▪ CAROLYN ELEFANT, LAW OFFICES OF CAROLYN ELEFANT

Energy BarA ssociation

Stakeholder Outreach &FERC’s Suggested Best Practices

Energy Bar Association

May 7, 2019

Washington, DC

This presentation does not necessarily reflect the views of the Commission or any Commissioner.

Stakeholder Outreach

Outreach – communication between two partiesfocused on information exchange

Outreach Program – programs/processes used bycompanies to communicate with parties interested inthe planning, development, and construction of aproject

Outreach Goals

• Engage and educate all stakeholders

• Identify potential concerns resulting in informed siting

• Foster a transparent and respectful environment

https://www.ferc.gov/industries/gas/enviro/guidelines/stakeholder-brochure.pdf

Why Create Best Practices?

• Increasing public interest/involvement

• Industry requests for guidance

• Improve the review process

• Highlight the importance of outreach

• Management commitment

• Internal collaboration

• General training

• Stakeholder engagement and education

• Documentation of outreach

• Lifecycle approach to the program

Key Elements of an Outreach Program

FERC’s Project-Specific Outreach

• Pre-filing (front-loaded)– Notice of Intent

– Attendance at Open Houses and conducting Scoping Sessions

– Site visits

– Interagency and other meetings

• Application– Public notifications (Notice of Application/Schedule)

– Landowner notification requirements (18 CFR § 157.6)

– Environmental documents / comment sessions

• Post-Decision/Certificate

What works?

• Listening

• Responsiveness

• Transparency

• Engaging in difficult conversations

• Mutual respect

• Properly trained land agents

Broader FERC Outreach Efforts

• E-Learning modules

https://www.ferc.gov/industries/gas/e-learning.asp

• Agency training

• Conference attendance/presentations

• Environmental Review and Compliance trainingseminars

https://www.ferc.gov/industries/gas/enviro/seminars.asp

• Landowner helpline

Challenges with Outreach

• Staff/time

• Budget

• Regulatory constraints (e.g., ex parte)

• Effective engagement

• Taking outreach for “more than it is”

• Leaving baggage behind

• Listening

Power ofthe People

May 7, 2019

VP, Stakeholder Engagement, Enbridge

Energy BarA ssociationA nnualConference,D C

Susan Waller

Best practices for stakeholder involvementin pipeline infrastructure development

Power of the PeopleSUSAN WALLER

VP, STAKEHOLDER ENGAGEMENT, ENBRIDGE

Best practices for stakeholder involvement in pipelineinfrastructure development

We move 28%of crude producedin North America

and 20% of the

of the natural gasconsumed in the US

80 projects

since 2007, for atotal investment of

$25B

Energy BarA ssociation

• Start early – neverstop

• Use everycommunication toolto reach people

• Door-to-door & openhouses

• Use locally trustedexperts

• Address concerns:

– Construction

– Routes

– Safety

– Environment

– Need for the project

21• No stone goes

unturned

• Every home, everystreet, every business,every official

• Talk to NGOs

• Third party studies

3

Energy BarA ssociation

• 275 miles

• 200 routeadjustments

• $250K educationgrants

• Drainage systemson ~80% of route

Energy BarA ssociation

• 176 miles

• 21 HDDs

• 150+ routeadjustments

• $350K for artificialreef

• $100K restorebutterfly habitat

Stakeholder Involvement:A Riverkeeper Perspective

Energy Bar Association

Energy Bar Association

Potomac Riverkeeper NetworkFERC Natural Gas Act Policy Review – EPCN

Pipeline Campaigns

Eastern Panhandle Expansion Project – “Potomac Pipeline”

- Federal/State Permitting Complexity

- State energy policy vs. interstate pipeline planning

- Risk vs. benefit

Atlantic Coast Pipeline

- Need and public benefit

- Property Rights

- Environmental Justice – Union Hill

Energy Bar Association

Improving Stakeholder Involvement

▪ P ublicoutreach–Early andO ften

▪ T ransparency andAccountability

▪ Acknow ledgeS takeholderD iversity

▪ ExplaintheP erm ittingP rocess

▪ AddressEm inentD om ainandP ublicN eedD ebateHead-O n

▪ Avoid“D ivideandConquer”T actics

Energy Bar Association

Thank You▪ P hillipM usegaas

▪ V iceP residentofP rogram sandLitigation

▪ P otom acR iverkeeperN etw ork

▪ P hillip@ prknetw ork.org

▪ w w w .potom acriverkeepernetw ork.org

P i p e l i n e s & P rop e rt y R i g h t sL an d ow n e rs as S t ak e h ol d e rs

En e rg y BarA s s oci at i on A n n u al M e e t i n g ( M ay 2 0 1 9 )Carol y n El e f an t

w w w . l aw of f i ce s of carol y n e l e f an t . comC ompoetingInteres ts in

Stak eh olderIn terests

Lan dow n erRigh ts

NOT YOURGRANDPA’ S

NIMBY

T h e M os t F org ot t e n Con s t i t u t i on al R i g h t . . .

La nd owne rinte re stsa re d iffe re nt… .

O T H ER I S S U ES & CO N CER N S● L ack of L e g al

R e p re s e n t at i on● Com p e t i n g & O f t e n

I n accu rat e I n f orm at i onf rom A l l S i d e s

● T rad e O f f Be t w e e nO p p os i n gP roje ct

● & N e g ot i at i n g a D e al● H e al t h , S af e t y & A i rQ u al i t y

● O rg an i c F arm s● Con s e rv at i on

Eas e m e n t s P rop e rt y V al u e s● P re e m p t i on & L os t

Ex p e ct at i on● N o Be n e f i t t o L an d ow n e r● R e m e d i at i on● L ack of A ccou n t abi l i t y● O n g oi n g R i s k : L i e n s● F u t u re U s e s

P rop os e d S ol u t i on s f orD i s cu s s i on

● Adjudicated Hearings for Transparency and Understanding ofProject

● More Coordinated & Programmatic Planning

● Royalties-based payments

Better FERC Enforcement of Landowner Rights

● Standard Easement Terms

● No acquisition until after completion of EIS (for larger projects)

● Minimum setbacks