Statements On Introduced Bills And Joint Resolutions

Floor Speech

Date: March 2, 2010
Location: Washington, DC

By Mr. WYDEN (for himself, Ms. Cantwell, Ms. Mikulski, Mr. Cardin, Mr. Dodd, and Mr. Merkley):

S. 3056. A bill to amend the Energy Policy Act of 2005 to repeal a section of that Act relating to exportation and importation of natural gas; to the Committee on Energy and Natural Resources.

Mr. WYDEN. Mr. President, along with Senators Cantwell, Mikulski, Cardin, Dodd, and Merkley, I am reintroducing legislation that will repeal the authority granted to the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, FERC, in the Energy Policy Act of 2005 to site Liquified Natural Gas, LNG, terminals. Prior to enactment of these changes, States, such as Oregon, had authority to site these large energy facilities--a right that was preempted by the 2005 act. At the time, 45 Senators went on record saying that cutting State siting agencies out of the LNG siting process was a bad idea.

As citizens and their public officials in my State and those of my colleagues can attest, putting FERC in the driver's seat for LNG siting has been a colossal mistake. Rather than address the critical environmental and economic questions of whether these large, potentially dangerous natural gas storage facilities are even needed or whether energy supplies could be provided with less environmental impact and risk, FERC has taken the attitude that it's not its job to make such decisions. The result is the worst of all possible public policy worlds where FERC refuses to address the tough questions and the law limits the ability of our States to step where FERC fails.

Right now, in Oregon, we have three separate LNG projects. Two of those have been approved by FERC over the objections of citizens and State officials and one is still pending. Together, they would have a combined capacity of 3.3 billion cubic feet, BCF, of gas per day. Yet, the States of Oregon and Washington, together, only use 1.33 BCF per day. Natural gas prices in North America have significantly declined and supplies have increased since these projects were proposed. Yet, FERC categorically refuses to address the basic question of whether the three proposed facilities are even needed to serve our market. FERC also refuses to consider whether any of the competing interstate pipeline proposals to bring natural gas to Oregon from the Rocky Mountains would be a better option. In fact, FERC asserts that it is not its job to determine which, if any, of these proposals best serves our market.

While the new chairman of FERC--Jon Wellinghoff--has been willing to vote against LNG siting proposals, the truth is that FERC continues to plow ahead with siting decisions that make no economic sense and which endanger forest lands, farms, vineyards, and residential neighborhoods. Given FERC's record, my colleagues and I believe that it is essential that Congress restore the local and State role in these critical decisions about where, and even whether, LNG facilities and the pipelines that connect them are to be built.

The legislative language is identical to the bill I introduced in the last Congress--S. 2822--and which garnered the support of a number of my colleagues including then-Senator Barack Obama. That bill was needed then, and it is needed now. I am going to be calling on the President for his help in fixing this serious mistake.

Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the text of the bill be printed in the Record.

There being no objection, the text of the bill was ordered to be printed in the RECORD

BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT


Source
arrow_upward