In a March 22, 2016, 42 page filing at FERC, Tennessee Gas Pipeline Company takes on “INTERVENTIONS, PROTESTS, COMMENTS, MOTION FOR STAY, AND MOTION FOR SUMMARY DISPOSITION” by Massachusetts AG office, CLF, NRDC, PLAN, NHMPC, other intervenors.
Mason is part of NHMPC which shares an attorney with PLAN.
The response claims that “consistent with the Commission’s reasoning, the NED Project serves a different purpose, different customers, and different markets than the Access Northeast Project, and the Atlantic Bridge Project, and other regional projects that were recently approved, pending, or may be proposed in the future.”
In the conclusion to the report: “Tennessee has fully demonstrated and firmly established the need for the NED Project in the Application and in this Answer. In addition, the Commission is not required to, and need not, perform a programmatic EIS for the NED Project together with other projects in the same general region. Further, the Commission is not improperly segmenting its NEPA review of other pipeline projects and the NED Project. Additionally, consistent with the Commission’s long-standing practice and procedure, an evidentiary hearing is not necessary or required for the Commission’s review of the Project.”
Light reading it’s not.