Rep. Watson Coleman will introduce the SAFER Pipelines Act.
HOPEWELL TOWNSHIP -- Dozens gathered atop Baldpate Mountain preserve in Hopewell Township on Wednesday to endorse U.S. Rep. Bonnie Watson Coleman's plan to propose a bill in Congress to revamp pipeline approvals.
Watson Coleman said she will introduce the Safe and Accountable Federal Energy Review for Pipelines Act of 2016, or SAFER Pipelines Act.
Dozens of affected residents also attended the announcement at the scenic backdrop of Baldpate, near sites where the proposed PennEast pipeline will carve through their land.
"We looked at the way in which (the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission) does business and we recognized that they're doing business in isolation, and that's not helpful to communities like ours," Watson Coleman said.
Watson Coleman (D-12th Dist.) said the PennEast Pipeline specifically made her come to realize that additional guidelines were needed to ensure that the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission (FERC) -- the agency that approves interstate pipeline projects -- was not agreeing to unnecessary projects.
"What this does is not heavy-brained consideration, it's not out-of-the-box thinking, it's actually quite logical," she said.
Watson Coleman says the bill is designed to force FERC to analyze the cumulative environmental impact of newly proposed pipelines in combination with existing gas pipelines. It would also place the agency in charge of monitoring approved projects for five years to ensure that the environmental standards have been fully implemented.
"This is the approach FERC should be using for all of its pipeline applications," she said. "And if they take these steps, there's no way duplicative and damaging proposals -- like the PennEast Pipeline -- will ever be approved."
Local officials, conservation groups and residents of Hunterdon and Mercer counties showed up to express their support for the bill and to voice concerns over the possible impacts of the PennEast and future projects.
Other speakers raised issue with carbon and methane emissions, PennEast's contract irregularities, drinking water cleanliness and the use of eminent domain to build on private and preserved lands.
Watson Coleman said the bill wasn't overhaul of the regulation process, but it will ensure that regulators operate in the best interest of the public.
"It's not perfect," she said. "It's not everything, but we believe it fully moves in the right direction."
"We didn't think that any of the objective criteria had been appropriately applied in determining whether or not (PennEast) is necessary," she said.
Pat Kornick, spokeswoman for PennEast, blasted the proposal saying that it is the SAFER Pipelines Act -- not the pipeline -- that is duplicative.
"The existing process, administered by FERC, thoroughly considers need and extensively analyzes environmental impact," Kornick said.
"PennEast continues to demonstrate its commitment to minimizing environmental impact -- including evaluating more than 100 route options and implementing multiple route modifications based on stakeholder feedback," she said.
"These efforts have resulted in co-locating approximately 37 percent of the route with existing rights of way," she said.
PennEast introduced the project in August 2014, she said. "Pending regulatory approval, the PennEast Pipeline Project has an estimated in-service date of second half of 2018."
"This approximately four-year timeline demonstrates the rigorous pipeline review process in place," she said.
There are some questions surrounding the timeline of the pipeline project.
FERC lists PennEast's filing date as October 2014.
And according to a 2015 filing with the Securities and Exchange Commission, New Jersey Resources -- part owner of the PennEast Pipeline -- estimates the project will be completed and operational by November 2017.
Despite timeline disagreements Kornick insists that public opposition alone is not grounds for dismissal of the pipeline's need.
"PennEast recognizes that some groups and individuals are opposed to the project," she said. "Simply because they object to the pipeline doesn't mean it is not needed or that it isn't involved in a thorough environmental review."
"Additionally, 75 percent of New Jersey households depend on natural gas to heat their homes," she said.
"Rather than seeking ways to make the infrastructure review process more onerous solely due to antagonistic attitudes toward clean-burning natural gas, efforts would be best directed to pursuing public policy that supports building natural gas infrastructure to help reduce energy costs for New Jersey families and businesses," she said.
Greg Wright may be reached at gwright@njadvancemedia.com. Follow him on Twitter @GregTheWright. Find NJ.com on Facebook.