States Push Back on FERC Bid to Expand Pipeline Permit Exemptions
Rigzone reports that attorneys general from 14 states and the District of Columbia filed comments Monday opposing a FERC rulemaking (Docket No. RM25-12-001) that would widen blanket certification for interstate gas pipelines, letting developers build more and larger projects without a case-specific authorization order. The proposal would also raise the cost limits for projects that qualify for the streamlined process, which currently allows fast-tracked approval for what FERC has historically called “routine and minor” work.
Arizona, California, Colorado, Connecticut, Illinois, Maine, Maryland, Massachusetts, Michigan, Minnesota, New York, Oregon, Vermont and Washington, along with D.C., argue the changes exceed the “narrow” purpose established when the blanket certificate program was created in 1982. The officials say the rule would let developers undertake major infrastructure investments without adequately assessing costs passed on to ratepayers or impacts to landowners and communities. They contend the proposal would violate the Natural Gas Act, the Administrative Procedure Act and the National Environmental Policy Act. FERC has not commented on the pending matter. The commission previously cited “pressing nationwide near-term demand” for gas transport capacity when it raised the blanket-certificate cost limit from $41.1 million to $61.65 million for projects operational by May 2027.
What It Means for Subcontractors
- If FERC finalizes the expanded blanket certificate, pipeline operators could greenlight more mainline and compression work under $61.65 million without individual case review, potentially speeding subcontract releases for civil, welding and E&I crews on qualifying projects.
- A rule loss for FERC, or a court challenge citing NEPA or APA violations as the 14 states argue, could stall project timelines and push more jobs back into the slower, case-specific certificate process, delaying bid packages.
- Contractors bidding pipeline work should track the RM25-12-001 docket for a final rule date, since the outcome directly affects whether upcoming projects move through blanket authorization or face landowner and state-level protest hearings that add months to scheduling.
