Great News!! More jobs and cheaper energy - what AMERICA needs! (despite the efforts of Odumba and the Democraps)

Members of the public who want to voice their opinion on the controversial Spectra Energy natural-gas pipeline proposed for portions of Hudson County will get yet another chance to speak out at two hearings at Liberty State Park today

Monday?s meetings take place at 3 and 6 p.m. at the Terminal Building at 1 Audrey Zapp Dr. in Liberty State Park. Members of the public will be allowed to comment

Full article at
http://www.nj.com/jjournal-news/index ... gs_on_spectra_gas_pi.html

From No Gas Pipeline
http://nogaspipeline.org/2012-04-16/dec-hearing-lsp

Please note the [...]DEP's public meetings on April 16th at the Terminal Building to solicit public comments about proposed impacts to Liberty State Park from the gas pipeline to be installed by Texas Eastern (Spectra Energy). The meeting will take place in the Blue Comet Auditorium. There will be two meetings that day, at 3 pm and 6 pm. We are working on a web page for information about the project and hope to have it go live by next Tuesday (April 3rd.) There will be links to the information page from the Green Acres web site and from the Parks and LSP web sites. At this point, it appears that the information page will be posted at www.state.nj.us/dep/greenacres/Spectra.html (but that may change in the final translation.)
Please feel free to share this information with anyone you think mat be interested.
Thank you.

Robert W. Rodriguez
Superintendent
Liberty State Park
200 Morris Pesin Drive
Jersey City, NJ 07305
Office: 201-915-3404
Fax: 201-915-3408
Email: lspsupt@verizon.net
Website: http://www.nj.gov/dep/parksandforests/parks/liberty.html

Hudson Reporter: Spectra hearing is April 16: Energy company wants to rent land near Liberty State Park for natural gas pipeline

Sunday, April 1, 2012

The article only mentions the meeting at 3 p.m. on Monday, April 16. There is second meeting at 6 p.m. the same day.

by E. Assata Wright Reporter

The state Department of Environmental Protection (DEP) is currently seeking public comment regarding a request by Spectra Energy to divert and rent less than an acre of land near Liberty State Park for its proposed natural gas pipeline. The public hearing will take place on Monday, April 16 at 3 p.m. at Liberty State Park, 1 Audrey Zapp Drive in the CRRNJ Terminal Building.

The DEP will also accept written comments regarding Spectra?s proposed lease of state-owned land through April 20. Written comments can be sent to Nancy Lawrence in the DEP?s Green Acres Program, nancy.lawrence@dep.state.nj.us.

Under current plans, the 19.8-mile pipeline would be constructed through parts of Jersey City, Bayonne, and Linden. A portion of the pipeline route would be constructed along the border of Liberty State Park and would affect six lots of state-owned property, totaling almost one acre of land, according to a notice from the DEP. Two of these lots are in the vicinity of Bayview Avenue. Four lots are located near Liberty Science Center.

Spectra has filed a request with DEP to lease these six lots for 20 years. Additional state-owned land would be needed during the pipeline?s construction phase as well. To compensate the state, Spectra will pay New Jersey a total of $2.27 million over the course of the 20-year lease. According to the DEP, this money covers $862,721, total, in rent; $65,809 for temporary work space during the construction phase of the project; and $1.3 million to offset any ?permanent ecological, environmental, and recreational [impacts]? of the pipeline to the area. The company has also agreed to compensate the state for ?tree mitigation,? the amount of which has yet to be determined.

The Friends of Liberty State Park Board of Directors opposes the pipeline project.

Awaiting state approval

If approved by the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission (FERC), the proposed pipeline would include 19.8 miles of new and replacement pipes, six new stations, and other related modifications in Linden, Jersey City, and Bayonne. In Jersey City, the underground pipeline route would run through nearly every municipal ward and near such sensitive areas as Jersey City Medical Center, several schools, the Holland Tunnel, the New Jersey Turnpike, and transportation infrastructure near the Jersey City-Hoboken border.

The pipeline would cross the Hudson River into New York to connect the company?s existing pipeline infrastructure to Manhattan and Staten Island, supplying customers of Con Edison.

The portion of the pipeline route near Liberty State Park will be 30 inches in diameter and will be built four-to-six feet underground, according to the DEP.

Spectra has also said that it will supply energy to power facilities operated by Bayonne Plant Holding and boilers at the International Matex Tank Terminals, also in Bayonne. It is designed to bring 800 million cubic feet of natural gas each day to the two states, according to the project web site.

Because of the pipeline?s close proximity to sensitive areas, local activists and city officials have argued that a natural gas explosion could cause mass casualties and significantly damage important transportation infrastructure. Mayor Jerramiah T. Healy has also noted that the potential hazards posed by a gas pipeline could hurt future commercial and residential development in the city.

Despite the concerns of residents and the city, and the upcoming DEP hearing, in December 2011 DEP Commissioner Bob Martin approved several land use permits allowing Spectra to move forward with pipeline construction.

Last month, FERC issued its Final Environmental Impact Statement, paving the way for federal approval of the project this summer. Spectra expects to begin construction on the pipeline late this year.

The City of Jersey City, the membership-based activist group No Gas Pipeline, and the New Jersey chapter of he Sierra Club have all threatened to file lawsuits if FERC approves the pipeline. (See ?Kill Time,? Jersey City Reporter, Feb. 26, 2012.)

?Although it would be unfortunate for such a legal action to materialize, it would not be unusual or unexpected,? said Spectra spokeswoman Marylee Hanley. ?As has been true since the [pipeline] project began, we will continue to reach out and work with the community.?

SIDEBAR Spectra vs. Chevron

For the past two years Jersey City has argued that construction of the proposed Spectra Energy natural gas pipeline will hurt future residential and commercial development in the city since, the city argues, it will pose an environmental risk that few developers will want to inherit.

It seems Chevron, a Fortune 100 petrochemical company, agrees with the city?s assessment.

When Chevron took over Texaco in 2001 the company acquired several oil fields and other Texaco-owned properties.

?Chevron is now looking to consolidate some of these properties and holdings,? said Jeff Tittel, executive director of the New Jersey chapter of he Sierra Club. ?As a part of that consolidation the company is planning to convert some of its properties for other uses.?

Among the Texaco properties Chevron acquired was a site in Bayonne which the company plans to remediate and sell to a developer for residential development. The Spectra pipeline would, however, cross this Bayonne site, a fact Chevron believes could impact the value of its property.

In written comments submitted to the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission (FERC), Chevron stated, ?the project?s proposed route across the Chevron site poses significant environmental risks by passing under a protective slurry wall, passing through the area of highest benzene contamination on the site, passing through an area of heterogeneous historic fill, risking the opening of preferential pathways for the movement of contaminants and risking the re-contamination of remediated areas of the site?These concerns relate to the possibility that the proposed crossing could negatively impact?future residential units to be located within 20 feet and installation of utilities for residential redevelopment on the Chevron site.?

Chevron has asked FERC to grant an emergency abeyance.

?What we?re seeing is a powerful, multi-billion dollar energy company making many of he same arguments we?ve been making for two years,? said Tittel.

Marylee Hanley, a spokesman for Spectra Energy, said there is no basis for granting the emergency motion. ?We?ve adequately addressed these concerns,? she said, calling the draft environmental impact statement a viable and safe route for the pipeline project.

The company has in the past stated that the proposed route was drafted because of its ?constructability? and the fact that it does not cross residential property along 100 percent of its 16 miles. ?

EAW E-mail E. Assata Wright atawright@hudsonreporter.com.

Source:Hudson Reporter

NO Gas Pipeline - 235 3rd Street, Jersey City, NJ 07302 | nogaspipeline@gmail.com

I read a lot of the FERC response to the Spectra filing. It mostly responded to environmental impact. Their assessment was simply a statement agreeing with Spectra that they didn't think there was an adverse impact due to the pipeline.

The FERC "bobble-heads" addressed none of the the safety, security nor most of the questions asked by the public, City and concerned citizens. They didn't address any issue on resident/school/infrastructure safety.

After Katrina, most of us downtown JC residents were forced to pay flood insurance on our properties. And that's based on a FEMA risk assessment. Can't FERC provide a similar pipeline risk assessment, and ask Spectra to pay? Or do I get to pay when Spectra blows up my house, my kids schools, and my hood?

Gas Leak on Offshore Platform Forces Evacuation in North Sea

http://www.nytimes.com/2012/03/28/wor ... ea-forces-evacuation.html

Jersey City officials discuss strategy on proposed natural-gas pipeline

March 26, 2012, 7:59 PM
By Terrence T. McDonald/The Jersey Journal

Jersey City officials tonight blasted a federal report issued about a week ago that says the controversial Spectra Energy natural-gas pipeline proposed for parts of Hudson County would have limited adverse environmental impacts.

Speaking to a group of about 50 assembled inside City Hall, the officials said the report makes it all but certain that the four members of the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission will end up giving the pipeline a green light.

The report, issued on March 16, disregards the city?s position that the pipeline would have adverse impacts on the environment, public safety and future real-estate development, Mayor Jerramiah Healy said tonight.

?Our concerns, once again, have not been heard,? Healy said.

City attorney Derek Fanciullo told the crowd that the timeline from here on will be ?a lot faster? than they may think. If FERC?s decision, expected to come in mid-June, is favorable to Spectra, the city will have 30 days to make an initial appeal, and if that?s rejected, it will have 90 days to appeal to a federal circuit court, Fanciullo said.

?If nothing happens, in the worst-case scenario this may be done by the end of the summer,? he said.

Fanicullo added that he could not discuss the city's specific plan of action.

"If for nothing else, we don?t want them to know our strategy," he said.

Spectra proposes to add about 15 miles of natural-gas pipeline starting in Staten Island and running through parts of Bayonne, Jersey City and offshore Hoboken before heading into Manhattan. An additional five miles of pipe running from Linden to Staten Island would be replaced.

The Houston-based energy giant says the pipeline would be one of the safest in North America. It would create jobs and lower energy costs throughout the region, Spectra spokeswoman Marylee Hanley said recently.

Ward E Councilman Steve Fulop, who represents much of the area in Jersey City that the pipeline would travel under, noted that it is ?rare? for so many elected officials to oppose unanimously a project the way Jersey City politicos have come out against the pipeline.

?This is a bad thing for Jersey City overall,? Fulop said. ?I?m a believer that we can stop it.?
http://www.nj.com/hudson/index.ssf/20 ... ty_officials_discuss.html

Isn't the next step suing Spectra - both the city and nogaspipeline?

Who is really surprised that FERC (many of whom have actually worked for energy companies in the past) approved the pipeline?

I fully support free enterprise. If Spectra seriously believed in free enterprise, they'd take out private insurance to cover all risks with siting the pipeline through such a densely populated area. I'd be much happier with a Lloyds or an AIG giving a yearly cost to insure the pipeline, than a rubberstamp /insurance policy from FERC (aka the US Taxpayer).

That way the real cost/benefit/risks of the pipeline would be clear.

Quote:

No, they just don't care.

They (FERC) are in Spectra's pocket; all they care about are lucrative jobs and consulting assignments coming their way when they retire from FERC.

They are absolute criminals.

FERC?

Have these numbnuts given any response on why running this pipeline alongside a train track carrying chlorine gas, won't pose a significant danger to the general public?

I blow up the pipeline, alongside a chlorine train, and the gas cloud wipes out NY. Are you OUT OF YOUR #OOPS#ING MINDS?

I just received a two CD packet of pipeline info from the US Federal Energy Commission. Looking over the the proposed routes and alternatives is interesting especially when you get to page 147 (Figure 3.4.1-11). It has a map proposing the alternative route going through downtown via Grove to Montgomery and then North up Washington Blvd. This to avoid conflict with the prospected MTA line 7 and reduce the overall pipeline length. This puts the pipeline at the doorstep of City Hall.

DCNA & NO Gas Pipeline @ City Hall - Stop Spectra Pipeline City-wide Update & Film. The Downtown Coalition of Neighborhood Associations (DCNA) and NO Gas Pipeline, together with our panel guests below, will provide an update on the Spectra Energy gas pipeline and what options are available to overturn the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission's (FERC)ruling following the final Environmental Impact Statement (EIS) relative to Jersey City. This event will start promptly at 7PM. Q&A to Panel will follow. When: Monday, March 26 Time: 7-8pm Panel; Film 8-10pm Where: Council Chambers City Hall, 2nd Floor 230 Grove Street. Jersey City, NJ 07302 Contact: Dale Hardman 201-892-3846 nogaspipeline@gmail.com RSVP at FACEBOOK: Click Here! Marlene O'Haire-Sandkamp, President DCNA & Dale Hardman, President, NO Gas Pipeline - Intros-7:00 to 7:05pm *Film - Jennifer Morrill, Press Secretary, Mayor Jerramiah Healy. Mayor's film on Spectra Energy pipeline-7:05 to 7:10pm *Mayor Jerramiah Healy - Speaks at 7:10 to 7:20pm *Derek Fanciullo, Attorney for Jersey City - 7:20 to 7:30pm-Update on pipeline and what City is doing with a 1 pg take-away printed for audience. *William 'BJ' Schulte, Attorney, Eastern Environmental Law Center & Vice Chairman, Jersey City Environmental Commission-7:30-7:40pm *Councilman Steven Fulop-7:40-7:50pm *Dale Hardman-7:50-8:00pm *Wrap Up Comments-Marlene O'Haire-Sandkamp-8:00-8:05pm *Q&A Panel-8:05 - 8:30pm *Film-8:30pm -10pm-Jersey City-NYC Spectra "Don't Blow Up"-Shannon Ayala ========================================== Chevron Asks Federal Agency to Block Natural Gas Pipeline Chevron is asking FERC to put the proceedings on hold because there are still several outstanding concerns regarding the route through Chevron's property, including the risk of what Chevron is calling a catostrophic release of benzene into the Kill Van Kull. See the full story at Jersey City Independent ========================================== Membership - Why it matters? Become a Member to Help NGP Sue FERC in Federal Court. We Need to Show We Represent Our Community. More Members, Better Chance Judge Grants Us Legal Standing. YOU Make the Difference! The Spectra Energy gas pipeline is a federally regulated pipeline,just like the Exxon Keystone XL pipeline. However, Spectra Energy's pipeline is an interstate pipeline that originates domestically, not in a foreign country. The President does not have the right to stop the Spectra pipeline. Only the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission (FERC) may rule on interstate pipelines in US. Only Federal courts may overturn a FERC ruling when a suit is brought by an intervenor given legal standing. Your Membership will help NO Gas Pipeline sue FERC to Stop Spectra gas pipeline. YOU and your neighbors make the difference ! Click here for Membership

Spectra Clears Hurdle for New Jersey-New York Natural-Gas Pipe

March 16, 2012, 11:56 AM
By Bloomberg Newsl

Spectra Energy cleared an environmental hurdle in its plan to build a $1.2 billion pipeline that would bring natural gas from New Jersey to Manhattan.

Building and operating the approximately 16-mile (26- kilometer) project would have a ?less-than-significant? environmental impact with mitigation measures in place, staff of the U.S. Federal Energy Regulatory Commission said in a report issued today. The four-member commission must still vote on the project, Tamara Young-Allen, an agency spokeswoman, said in a March 14 interview.

The pipeline would bring 800 million cubic feet of gas a day from Linden, New Jersey, to Manhattan?s West Village, via Staten Island and Jersey City. Spectra said the project would bring abundant gas from new fields including the Marcellus Shale, potentially lowering prices for New Jersey and New York consumers.

Jersey City Mayor Jerramiah Healy and the municipal council have expressed opposition to the pipeline, which they say will run through densely populated and historic neighborhoods. Government agencies including the Port Authority of New York & New Jersey raised concerns about the project?s impact on bridges, tunnels and rail system

Spectra, based in Houston, expects to finish the line in November 2013, according to its website. The company agreed to use thicker pipe and altered the route in several places to allay local concerns.

Quote:

Your suggestion won't work. Spectra could take ANY property by eminent domain. There are two years of news, blogs and info on our site . Read it all and you will understand what we already know.

Click on my sig below to help stop the Spetra pipeline.

disappointing ...

FERC Recommends Spectra Pipeline for Approval

As expected, and despite last-minute filings urging delay, FERC has issued the final EIS (Environmental Impact Statement) for the Spectra pipeline, stating, "Impacts associated with the proposed Project would be relatively minor overall." Excerpts from the "conclusions" section of the 1000+ page EIS are included below to convey the full measure of the way this regulatory agency views exactly which impacts they consider when reviewing such a project, namely, the impact to a private corporation, rather than to the lives of affected citizens or the environment. FYI: In plain English, the "No Action Alternative" equals denial of project approval. The "Applicants" in the passage below refers to Spectra Energy.

Excerpted from Section 5.1.14 Alternatives:
As an alternative to the proposed action, we evaluated the No Action Alternative, system alternatives, interconnect alternatives, major route alternatives, minor route variations, aboveground facility site alternatives, and workspace alternatives. While the No Action Alternative would eliminate the short- and long-term environmental impacts identified in the EIS, the stated objectives of the Applicants? proposal would not be met. We also evaluated the use of alternative energy sources and the potential effects of energy conservation, but determined that these sources and measures would not be practicable alternatives to the proposed Project.

Excerpted from Section 5.1.13 Cumulative Impacts:
Three types of projects (past, present, and reasonably foreseeable projects) could potentially contribute to a cumulative impact when considered with the proposed Project. These projects include an offshore LNG terminal, non-jurisdictional facilities associated with the proposed Project, and unrelated projects in the vicinity of the proposed pipeline and associated facilities. We considered the region of influence for the cumulative impact analysis to be an area within 0.5 mile of the Project right-of-way. The environmental impacts associated with the projects that would most likely be cumulatively significant are related to wetlands and waterbodies, vegetation and wildlife (including federally and state listed endangered and threatened species), land use, air quality, and noise.

We received numerous comments on the draft EIS about the cumulative impacts associated with development of natural gas reserves in the Marcellus Shale. In evaluating the cumulative environmental impact of the Project, we determined that the Project activities would occur hundreds of miles from the Marcellus Shale region. The proposed Project may, but need not, transport gas produced from the Marcellus Shale region. Consequently, the local resources that may be affected by Marcellus Shale development are not affected by the Project and local resources affected by the Project would not be affected by Marcellus Shale development. Further, the development of the Marcellus Shale production field is not dependent on the Project, nor, given the multiple sources of gas that would be accessible to the proposed facilities, is the Project dependent on the development of Marcellus Shale gas to achieve its stated goals. Even without these two critical determinations, the future development of the Marcellus Shale is not predictable or ?reasonably foreseeable,? which makes it impossible to establish a causal relationship between the Project and the development of gas from the Marcellus Shale. As such, the effects of activities in the Marcellus Shale region are beyond the scope of the cumulative impacts analysis included in the EIS.

Impacts associated with the proposed Project would be relatively minor overall, and we included recommendations in the EIS to further reduce the environmental impacts associated with the NJ-NY Project, as summarized in Section 5.2. Additionally, Texas Eastern selected a route that collocates with existing rights-of-way for the majority of the alignment. Similarly, each of the other projects considered in our cumulative impacts analysis have been designed to avoid or minimize impacts on sensitive environmental resources. Additionally, it is anticipated that any significant impacts on sensitive resources resulting from these projects would be mitigated. Mitigation generally leads to avoidance or minimization of cumulative impacts. Consequently, only a small incremental cumulative effect would be anticipated after the impacts of the proposed Project are added to those of past, present, or reasonably foreseeable projects.

To read the entire EIS:

See this link, and have an enjoyable weekend: FERC elibrary for Docket CP11-56-000

What's next?

Sane Energy Project and our allies will be reviewing the document thoroughly in the coming weeks in order to prepare a response.

Multiple agencies such as The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA), U.S. Department of Transportation, U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, New York City Mayor?s Office, and New York City Department of Environmental Protection will also participate in the NEPA (National Environmental Policy Act) analysis. Public comment to those agencies is crucial now, please participate.

Once the agencies have weighed in, the FERC panel of 4 commissioners will sit to determine approval or denial of the project. There is no firm schedule for when that happens, though the decision may occur in June. The Commission decision is subject to a 30-day rehearing period, during which parties may file suit against the decision, and more than likely, will. Our allies across the river, NoGasPipeline and the city of Jersey City, have already signaled their intention to file suit should the project be approved.

Right now, your participation in the 2 upcoming hearings is what's needed, please attend either or both the March 21st or March 26th hearings for permits to Spectra.

Final report on Spectra Energy pipeline bad news for pipeline opponents

Friday, March 16, 2012, 11:23 AM
By Terrence T. McDonald/The Jersey Journal

A woman holds a sign showing her disapproval of the proposed Spectra natural gas pipeline project during a heated public comment meeting at Ferris High School in Jersey City on Wednesday, Oct. 19, 2011.

The proposed Spectra Energy natural-gas pipeline that would run through parts of Bayonne, Jersey City and offshore Hoboken would result in ?limited adverse environmental impacts,? according to the final environment-impact statement (EIS) on the proposal.

The highly anticipated statement, posted on the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission website this morning, is good news for Spectra and bad news for opponents of the pipeline, who have argued that it would create myriad public-safety problems and stymie development in Hudson County.

?We determined that construction and operation of the NJ-NY Project would result in limited adverse environmental impacts,? reads the 511-page report. ?These limited impacts would mostly occur during the period of construction.?

The EIS is the final step before FERC rules on the proposal, which would add about 15 miles of natural-gas pipeline starting in Staten Island and running through parts of Bayonne, Jersey City and offshore Hoboken. An additional 5 miles of pipe running from Linden to State Island would also be replaced.

An alternative plan that would have the pipeline crossing the Hudson River near the east end of Caven Point Road in Jersey City was rejected because it would have required Con Edison to build a new pipeline connecting to its facility near W 16th Street, according to the report.

A last-minute attempt by Chevron to delay the release of today?s EIS was rebuffed by the commission last night, according to a FERC spokeswoman. Chevron had argued that a portion of the pipeline that traverses its Bayonne property should be moved.

Officials with Hoboken and Jersey City, especially Jersey City Mayor Jerramiah Healy, have advocated against the plan, saying it would threaten public-safety and possible future development in the cities.

Spectra officials say the pipeline would be one of the safest in North America.

FERC is expected to issue a ruling on the proposal in late spring.

http://www.nj.com/hudson/index.ssf/20 ... nergy_pipeline_would.html

My apologies if this has been discussed already, but I see a very simple solution for the problem that should be considered.


If Spectra wants to put a pipeline through undeveloped land in Jersey City, why don't we develop it first and block their move?

Despite Chevron's concerns, and all the concerns put forth by various agencies, governments and community groups, FERC has issued the EIS today as scheduled. Now the fight gets very serious. Become a member of NO Gas Pipeline who needs your support to make the case for standing when they sue FERC for their expected decision to approve the pipeline: http://nogaspipeline.org/membership

The only thing we will work with Spectra on is helping them find the nearest exit out of JC!

Kill time
City, activist group map out plan if pipeline gets federal approval

by E. Assata Wright - Hudson Reporter staff writer
Feb 26, 2012

Jersey City officials and activists who oppose a proposed natural gas pipeline that could be routed through the city are beginning to publicly map out how they plan to block the controversial project if federal authorities give it approval this summer.

The Federal Energy Regulatory Commission (FERC) is currently reviewing an application by the Texas-based Spectra Energy to build a miles-long natural gas pipeline that could be routed through much of Jersey City and near sensitive infrastructure. FERC has said it will issue a final Environmental Impact Statement on the project by March 16. The agency is expected to approve or deny the project by June 14.

City officials and No Gas Pipeline, an anti-pipeline membership organization comprised of Jersey City residents, say they expect FERC to approve the pipeline, over the objections of elected leaders, many residents, the real estate and business communities, and health and public safety professionals.

Should FERC approve the pipeline, as the agency is expected to do, No Gas Pipeline and the city have each said they will sue in federal court to block the project. Part of their plan, they said last week, is to delay construction as long as possible. A lengthy delay could force Spectra or its chief partner in the project, Consolidated Edison (ConEd), to abandon their plans.

Proposed project

If approved by FERC, the proposed pipeline would include 19.8 miles of new and replacement pipes, six new stations, and other related modifications in Linden, Jersey City, and Bayonne. In Jersey City, the underground pipeline route would run through nearly every municipal ward and near such sensitive areas as Jersey City Medical Center, several schools, the Holland Tunnel, the New Jersey Turnpike, and transportation infrastructure near the Jersey City-Hoboken border.

The pipeline would cross the Hudson River into New York to connect the company?s existing pipeline to Manhattan and Staten Island, supplying customers of Con Edison.

Spectra has also said that it will supply energy to power facilities operated by Bayonne Plant Holding and boilers at the International Matex Tank Terminals, also in Bayonne.

But because of the pipeline?s close proximity to sensitive areas, local activists and city officials have argued that a natural gas explosion could cause mass casualties and significantly damage important transportation infrastructure. Mayor Jerramiah T. Healy has also noted that the potential hazards posed by a gas pipeline could hurt future commercial and residential development in the city.

Despite these concerns, the energy company has already received several required environmental permits from the New Jersey Department of Environmental Protection. These permits were approved in December.


Preparing for approval

Assuming FERC approves the pipeline this summer, the city will have 30 days to appeal the ruling, according to Derek Fanciullo, associate corporation counsel for the city.

FERC can take a second look at its original decision, but will likely approve the pipeline again and grant Spectra a building certificate.

Jersey City ? and other entities that filed as interveners ? then have 60 days to file lawsuits. ?Interveners? are people, organizations, businesses, or municipalities that filed for intervener status with FERC. Having intervener status gives these entities the right to sue.

The most visible organization likely to file a class action lawsuit is the nonprofit No Gas Pipeline, an activist group of residents that has been fighting the Spectra pipeline for two years. The organization has already lined up pro-bono legal representation to assist in their fight if the project is approved by FERC.

?We have to sue in federal court. There are absolutely no other ways to stop this pipeline from going through Jersey City [if FERC gives approval],? said No Gas Pipeline co-founder Dale Hardman. ?It can?t be done at the presidential level. It can?t be done at the Congressional level. It can?t be done at the lobbyist level?The city obviously has legal standing to file suit. No Gas Pipeline will try to get legal standing to do the same thing. People may ask, why don?t we join forces? It?s simple. We each have our own strategies, both technical and tactical. Plus, the ability to have at least two parties with lawsuits is something that is obviously beneficial to us.?

Thousands of residents, community organizations, and businesses are believed to have filed for intervener status. The city of Hoboken has also filed for intervener status.

Hudson County?s construction unions have been supportive of the project and could play a role as well.

Lawsuits are part of a two-prong approach opponents of the pipeline plan to use to block the project from breaking ground, after federal approval. The other part of their emerging strategy will be to stall the project in the hope that schedule delays will doom its viability.

Stall, stall, stall

ConEd expects to have natural gas flowing from the Spectra pipeline in November 2013. Even Spectra has conceded that if the project can?t meet this target date it might not be economically feasible to move forward with it.

In order to meet this deadline, Spectra needs to break ground at the end of this year.

A lengthy court battle could derail Spectra?s ability to meet its obligations to ConEd, a fact not lost on Jersey City.

?The longer we draw this out, the better it is for us,? said Fanciullo. ?Maybe the problem will naturally abate, so to speak.?

Citing documents submitted to FERC, Fanciullo said Spectra is already making contingency plans should pipeline construction be delayed until next year. ?What they have done is they have asked FERC to allow them to truncate their construction schedule to meet those deadlines,? he said.

Already, the city has purposely blocked some necessary preliminary work. For example, last year Spectra requested city permits to conduct soil samples in Jersey City. The city denied this request.

In 2009, when the ConEd-Spectra deal was announced, ConEd President and CEO Kevin Burke said in a press release, ?The new pipeline will help us meet the growing energy needs of our area, strengthen the reliability of the natural gas system, and improve air quality for all New Yorkers. The Spectra Energy Project will also help us achieve the goals of the mayor?s and governor?s long-term energy and environmental goals as outlined in PlaNYC and the state energy plan.?

But how long will ConEd wait before coming up with a backup plan to get its natural gas somewhere else?

When asked whether the utility would drop its commitment to Spectra and re-bid its natural gas contract if Spectra gets embroiled in a long court fight, a spokesperson for ConEd said, ?The Spectra project is essential for us to reliably meet growing natural gas demand in future years, particularly with the significant increase we are seeing in oil-to-gas conversions.?

Fanciullo said there are a number of delaying tactics the city can use. However, the city has declined to publicly discuss some aspects of its possible legal strategy to prevent Spectra from having the information.

Marylee Hanley, a spokesperson for Spectra, said in response, ?As has been true since the NJ?NY Expansion Project began, we will continue to reach out and work with the community.?

Read more: Hudson Reporter - http://hudsonreporter.com/view/full_s ... ey_city_story_left_column

Quote:

You need to have prior credentials to film there. Otherwise every Tom, Dick, and Harry could come in from the street and film congressional hearings, possibly disrupting them.

Josh Fox was not credentialed, so he was removed.

And now he's making a publicity stunt out of his plight.

He's totally wrong. He should have argued that requiring credentials of reporters who film there is unconstitutional. Then he would make more sense. Otherwise it's whining - waaah, waah, waah.

But I actually think he had known he needed credentials, and purposefully did not get them in order to get kicked out and use the media to promote his cause.

Yes, I am jaded...

stillinjc, you don't have to be so jaded about everything.
This guy made an honest, informative documentary about people dealing with life shattering problems after allowing fracking on their property.

Now he was just collecting footage for a possible future follow-up documentary. Thats what it says in the article if you read it.

The law allows filming in trials/hearings that are open to the public. His forceful removal was a transgression of not only his rights but all of our rights, since now we will never have a chance to see any footage of what transpired in that room.

Doesn't that scare you just a little bit?

Sounds like a publicity stunt by Mr Josh Fox.

'Gasland' Journalists Arrested At Hearing By Order Of House Republicans (UPDATES) By Zach Carter - The Huffington Post Posted: 2/1/12 11:45 AM ET | Updated: 2/1/12 05:56 PM ET WASHINGTON -- In a stunning break with First Amendment policy, House Republicans directed Capitol Hill police to detain a highly regarded documentary crew that was attempting to film a Wednesday hearing on a controversial natural gas procurement practice. Initial reports from sources suggested that an ABC News camera was also prevented from taping the hearing; ABC has since denied that they sent a crew to the hearing. Josh Fox, director of the Academy Award-nominated documentary "Gasland" was taken into custody by Capitol Hill police this morning, along with his crew, after Republicans objected to their presence, according to Democratic sources present at the hearing. The meeting of the House Subcommittee on Energy and Environment had been taking place in room 2318 of the Rayburn building. HuffPost has obtained exclusive video of the arrest of Josh Fox. Rep. Brad Miller (D-N.C.), the ranking Democrat on the subcommittee, can be heard at the end of the clip asking Republican Chairman Andy Harris (R-Md.) to halt the arrest and permit Fox to film the public hearing. Harris denies Miller's request as Fox is escorted out of the hearing in handcuffs. WATCH Capitol Hill Police Arrest a Journalist for Filming a Public Hearing: (story continues below) "Gasland" received strong critical acclaim and takes a critical eye toward the practice of hydraulic fracturing, or "fracking," a process in which several tons of highly pressurized water and chemicals are injected into the ground, allowing valuable natural gas to escape. The practice is decried by ecological experts for destroying ecosystems and polluting groundwater. The energy industry keeps the actual content of fracking chemicals secret. Fox had hoped to film Wednesday's hearing for a follow-up to "Gasland." Fox told HuffPost later Wednesday evening, "We did get his staff on the phone, they never returned the phone call," referring to staffers for Chairman Harris. "This is not transparency. This is a lockout and it's bad. It's the people's House, after all. We went through the proper channels to arrange to tape this hearing. We have taped congressional hearings before and we've been turned down before, but I disagree with the policy. Anyone who says they're a journalist is a journalist. It's called the First Amendment. It's the freedom of the press, and that is fundamental to our core identity as the United States of America." Hearings are open to the public, and any citizen can attend. Regulations only govern the use of cameras. Even under an extreme adherence to the rules, Fox's camera could have been confiscated or disabled without subjecting him to arrest. And while Fox did not have formal Capitol Hill credentials, such formalities are rarely enforced against high-profile journalists. Temporary passes are easy to obtain, and if Republicans had objected on procedural grounds, they could have simply sent the crew to the front desk, rather than ordering police to arrest journalists. The right to a free press is protected by the First Amendment to the U.S. Constitution. Documentary crews are almost never denied access to public meetings of elected government officials. UPDATE: 12:09 p.m. -- Capitol Police public information officer Sergeant Kimberly Schneider provided the following statement to HuffPost on the morning's events: "At approximately 10:30 a.m. today, United States Capitol Police arrested Joshua Fox of Milanville, Pa. in room 2318 of the Rayburn House office building. He is charged with unlawful entry, and he is currently being processed at United States Capitol Police headquarters." UPDATE: 2:27 p.m. -- Fox apparently had applied for credentialing the day before the hearing but had been unable to obtain official permission to film. He had asked a credentialed film crew to tape the proceedings on his behalf but was informed that this was not permitted. Nevertheless, turning away journalists is extremely rare on Capitol Hill. The rules requiring pre-approval for film crews are designed to prevent hearings from being disrupted by hordes of camera operators. That was not the case for this hearing. Only two cameras requested entrance to the event, which was not crowded. Subcommittee Chairman Andy Harris (R-Md.) was unavailable for comment, but several Democrats on the committee voiced outrage with the GOP's press blackout. "I was chair of the Subcommittee for four years, and we frequently had people show up the day of a hearing to film," Rep. Brad Miller (D-N.C.) told HuffPost. "We asked for their name, but they were told if they would not disrupt the hearing, they were free to record. A couple of times staff said, 'You're getting in the way, don't stand there,' but other than that, I do not ever recall anything like this. We certainly never turned anyone away for not providing 24 hours' notice." "It's an outrageous violation of the First Amendment," Rep. Zoe Lofgren (D-Calif.) told HuffPost. "Here we've got an Academy Award-nominated filmmaker, and it's an important subject and the subject that he did his prior film on for HBO. And they put him in handcuffs and hauled him out of there. This is stunning." "I found it ironic that there was not a flood of cameras there," noted Rep. Paul Tonko (D-N.Y.). "There was the one camera and then before that, the ABC camera ... if you have a camera there to bring the issue home to the public, that's a good thing." The hearing was already being filmed by C-SPAN. Josh Fox had only sought to obtain higher-quality video by bringing their own cameras to the event. Democrats attempted to suspend the rules governing camerawork to allow Fox and ABC to film the hearing, but Republicans, who hold a majority on all House committees and subcommittees, voted down the motion. Democrats then sought to postpone the hearing to allow for filming at a later date, a motion which Republicans also overruled. UPDATE: 3:45 p.m. -- Republican staffers told Democrats that a crew for ABC News had also been denied access to the event, but ABC News told HuffPost that their organization did not have any journalists assigned to cover the hearing. It is not clear what caused the confusion. "We definitely did not have a crew on the Hill this morning to cover this hearing," an ABC News spokeswoman told HuffPost. "The individual who was turned away absolutely did not have ABC news credentials." UPDATE: 4:45 p.m. -- Rep. Jerry Nadler (D-N.Y.) told HuffPost, ?I have served in the House of Representatives since 1992, and I had the privilege of chairing the Subcommittee on the Constitution, Civil Rights, and Civil Liberties. In all that time, I cannot recall a chair of any committee or subcommittee having ever ordered the removal of a person who was filming a committee proceeding and not being disruptive, whether or not that person was accredited. It is a matter of routine that all sorts of people photograph and record our proceedings. Most of them are not accredited. I cannot recall anyone questioning their right to be there." Arthur Spitzer, legal director of the ACLU in Washington, explained that "congressional committees routinely allow professional journalists to record hearings even when they don't have official press credentials, and excluding a journalist because he doesn't share the political views of the committee chair is outrageous. The Supreme Court has explained many times that censorship based on viewpoint is the clearest kind of First Amendment violation, and that seems to be what happened here." Josh Fox, meanwhile, has issued the following statement to the press: I was arrested today for exercising my First Amendment rights to freedom of the press on Capitol Hill. I was not expecting to be arrested for practicing journalism. Today's hearing in the House Energy and Environment subcommittee was called to examine EPAs findings that hydraulic fracturing fluids had contaminated groundwater in the town of Pavillion, Wyoming. I have a long history with the town of Pavillion and its residents who have maintained since 2008 that fracking has contaminated their water supply. I featured the stories of residents John Fenton, Louis Meeks and Jeff Locker in GASLAND and I have continued to document the catastrophic water contamination in Pavillion for the upcoming sequel GASLAND 2. It would seem that the Republican leadership was using this hearing to attack the three year Region 8 EPA investigation involving hundreds of samples and extensive water testing which ruled that Pavillion's groundwater was a health hazard, contaminated by benzene at 50x the safe level and numerous other contaminants associated with gas drilling. Most importantly, EPA stated in this case that fracking was the likely cause. As a filmmaker and journalist I have covered hundreds of public hearings, including Congressional hearings. It is my understanding that public speech is allowed to be filmed. Congress should be no exception. No one on Capitol Hill should regard themselves exempt from the Constitution. The First Amendment to the Constitution states explicitly "Congress shall make no law...that infringes on the Freedom of the Press". Which means that no subcommittee rule or regulation should prohibit a respectful journalist or citizen from recording a public hearing. This was an act of civil disobedience, yes done in an impromptu fashion, but at the moment when they told me to turn off the cameras, I could not. I know my rights and I felt it was imperative to exercise them. When I was led out of the hearing room in handcuffs, John Boehner's pledge of transparency in congress was taken out with me. The people of Pavillion deserve better. The thousands across the US who have documented cases of water contamination in fracking areas deserve their own hearing on Capitol hill. They deserve the chance to testify in before Congress. The truth that fracking contaminates groundwater is out, and no amount of intimidation tactics --either outright challenges to science or the arrest of journalists --will put the genie back in the bottle. Such a brazen attempt to discredit and silence the EPA, the citizens of Pavillion and documentary filmmaking will ultimately fail and it is an affront to the health and integrity of Americans. Lastly, in defense of my profession, I will state that many many Americans get their news from independent documentaries. The hill should immediately move to make hearings and meetings accessible to independent journalists and not further obstruct the truth from being reported in the vivid and in depth manner that is only achievable through long form documentary filmmaking. I will be thinking on this event further and will post further thoughts and developments. I have been charged with "unlawful entry" and my court date is February 15. Josh Fox Washington D.C. 2/1/12 http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/02 ... ns-order-j_n_1246971.html

Aren't car wrecks like the one that happened on Grand and Marin and a lack of enforcement the perfect argument against having a natural gas pipeline snaking through our streets and highways?

It was on Pacific Street right near Lafayette Village. We drove right past it and you could smell the gas.

http://www.nj.com/hudson/index.ssf/20 ... roughly_100_resident.html
It is located at Pacific & Ash not far from the Downtown section. I think it is between Grand & Communipaw

Anyone know where this is? Just posted on on the NBC NY feed on Facebook.

http://www.nbcnewyork.com/news/local/ ... ce-Gas-PSG-137857598.html

Residents Evacuated After Gas Leak Discovered in Jersey City
A crack was discovered on a high-pressure gas main
Sunday, Jan 22, 2012 | Updated 5:10 PM ESTView Comments (0) | Email | Print

NBC New York

advertisement
Crews are on the site of gas leak in Jersey City after a crack was discovered on a gas main Sunday afternoon.

About 60 people were evacuated from a residential neighborhood in the city after a leak was discovered in the 20-inch high-pressure gas main, according to Jersey City Deputy Fire Chief Kevin Stewart.

Nearly all of the homes near the site of the leak had explosive mixtures within the building.

A number of senior citizens in senior housing also had to be moved to another side of a building, and a shelter was put in place, said Stewart.

Public Service Gas was on the scene.

"They've identified the valves they need to close to isolate the leak, and they're attempting to do so right now," said Stewart.

"We've very lucky," said Stewart. "If you look, we've had recent experiences here and in New York with buildings blowing up under these conditions, so we're very lucky."

Copyright NBC Local Media