Connecticut Wants Permit Role in Broadwater Review

Connecticut seems prepared to argue that even though Broadwater’s liquefied natural gas terminal would be in the New York waters of Long Island Sound, the “exclusion zone” around the terminal (publicly-owned waters in which no boats would be allowed) extends into Connecticut, and therefore Shell and TransCanada need a permit from Connecticut.

At least that’s what I think Governor Jodi Rell and Attorney General Richard Blumenthal are saying in this New Haven Register story, which isn’t the clearest report I’ve ever read (the reporter keeps writing, for example, that Connecticut wants “a say” in the decision; of course Connecticut already has a say, via the environmental impact public review; what is doesn’t have is the authority to say yes or no, which is what it wants).

That reminds me: I didn’t catch this when I read David Funkhouser’s interview last week with the head of FERC, Joseph T. Kelliher. Kelliher said that economics weren't important to FERC when it makes its decisions; FERC is concerned with safety. But isn’t there something else FERC should be concerned about – the reason they call the study they’re doing an environmental impact study? You get the impression reading Kelliher’s comments that the environment isn’t that big of a deal to them, which may be why Ralph Lewis, Lance Stewart and two other scientists found such flaws in the EIS.