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