A branch chief laid some responsibility for the data gaps at the feet of those who didn't allow surveyors on their land.
CLINTON TOWNSHIP -- The hotel where opponents and proponents of the PennEast pipeline gathered for a federal regulator hearing about the possible environmental impacts of the project made for a lively scene Tuesday.
Members of both camps clung to their groups where they discussed various viewpoints while a palpable tenseness hung over the location.
At the hearing, the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission (FERC) took recorded testimony over the draft environmental statement for the proposed pipeline for the first time in New Jersey.
Many of those opposed to the project were outraged that FERC would allow PennEast to proceed with plans while the draft environmental impact statement contains incomplete information.
A FERC branch chief, Alisa Lykens, who was present for the hearing, laid some of the responsibility for the data gaps at the feet of residents who would not allow surveyors on their land.
"The National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) requires an estimate based on the best available science at the time," Lykens said.
NEPA is federal legislation established in 1970 that sets guidelines for FERC over their preparation of environmental impact statements.
Lykens said that without access to land surveys, FERC must rely on desktop analyses, which inherently lead to incomplete information. In lieu of direct access, the desktop analysis provides the best estimate alternative.
She did not say that landowners were entirely to blame -- some of the issues are due things like seasonal habits of endangered and threatened species living within the projected path.
When trying to assess the habitats for endangered species, some information -- such as the mating habits for bird species -- can only be gathered during the season which it occurs. That sort of information will be gathered at the appropriate time, she said.
Lykens said she was confident that the information gathered was in compliance with NEPA because the draft is based off the best available information and is an estimate.
Since the release of the draft statement, FERC has been accused by numerous groups of providing a deficient document.
"How can the public respond when the document has 79 instances where lack of or missing information is cited?" Jeff Tittel, President of the New Jersey Sierra Club, said in a statement before the hearing. "Since they don't have enough information on the pipeline's potential impacts to the environment and safety concerns, this cannot be considered a proper analysis."
"Over 70 percent of (New Jersey) landowners have denied PennEast survey access...," Tittel said. "Without this survey access they have not gained enough data for a DEIS."
In all, more than 100 people showed up the hearing. Many participants were vocal about their displeasure in having to speak their concerns to a stenographer in stead of an official panel.
There were concerns that the new process could dampen public conversation whereby people learn new information from each other. Critics obtained a nearby conference room where they could hold their own hearing.
State Sen. Christopher "Kip" Bateman (R-16th) showed up to that meeting to express some shared concerns.
"I don't think that they're doing their job," Sen. Bateman said referring to FERC's entire review process. "I think this whole process is a sham and I'm very disturbed by it."
Lykens said the new procedure was meant to streamline the comment process so everyone could comment and be heard.
FERC will hold the final New Jersey public meeting Wednesday evening at Patriots Theater at the War Memorial in Trenton.
Greg Wright may be reached at gwright@njadvancemedia.com. Follow him on Twitter @GregTheWright. Find NJ.com on Facebook.