NJ Pipeline Expansion Fight Heads to Federal Appeals Court
Environmental groups, New Jersey regulators, and pipeline giant Transco faced off in federal appeals court this week over a contested interstate gas pipeline expansion, according to a Courthouse News Service report via Pipeline Technology Journal.
Market Impact
The case, argued Wednesday before the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit, involves the Northeast Supply Enhancement, a proposed extension of Transcontinental Gas Pipe Line Company’s 10,000-mile network. If built, the line would run from Lancaster County, Pennsylvania, under the Lower New York Bay, to New York City.
The New Jersey Department of Environmental Protection twice denied Transco’s water quality certifications, in 2019 and 2020, citing environmental flaws and insufficient demonstrated need. In 2025, the DEP approved a nearly identical third application, this time requiring only that Transco submit environmental monitoring plans before construction begins. The Natural Resources Defense Council and New York-New Jersey Baywatch sued, alleging the approval violated the Clean Water Act and the Administrative Procedure Act by bypassing public input. NRDC attorney Jackson P. Garrity told the three-judge panel the DEP showed “an agency struggling to get to ‘Yes’ and running roughshod over clear statutory requirements.” Baywatch attorney Kaitlin Morrison said regulators withheld a 739-page stormwater management plan that environmental groups only found during litigation. U.S. Circuit Judge Cheryl Ann Krause pressed DEP attorney Nathaniel F. Rubin on whether skipping public review of that plan was “arbitrary and capricious.” Rubin countered that Transco cannot start construction until the state signs off on finalized monitoring plans. Transco attorney Richard G. Scott said both the company and the state met all legal notice requirements. The panel, which also includes Judges Arianna J. Freeman and Jane R. Roth, took the case under advisement without a ruling date.
What It Means for Subcontractors
- Pipefitting, civil, and environmental monitoring subs bidding NESE-related packages should build schedule contingency into proposals, since the Third Circuit has not set a ruling date and construction cannot start until New Jersey approves finalized monitoring plans.
- Firms with pending or future water-crossing permits in New Jersey should expect DEP to require detailed stormwater management submissions, similar to the 739-page plan at issue here, and should budget for compliance documentation costs upfront.
- Environmental consulting and monitoring subcontractors should track the outcome of this case as a precedent for how much public comment period New Jersey regulators must build into future Clean Water Act certifications on interstate pipeline projects.
- Contractors working the Pennsylvania-to-New York City corridor should factor litigation risk into mobilization timing, given that a losing ruling for Transco could send the certification back to DEP for renewed public review, adding months to the project schedule.
