A federal court has blocked the construction of two liquefied natural gas (LNG) terminals and an associated pipeline at the Port of Brownsville, Texas, citing concerns over environmental impact and inadequate review by federal regulators.
At a glance:
- The D.C. Circuit Court of Appeals struck down permits for two LNG export terminals and a pipeline at the Port of Brownsville, halting the projects.
- The ruling found that the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission (FERC) failed to properly update its environmental assessments.
- Environmental groups and local communities, including the Carrizo Comecrudo Tribe of Texas, celebrated the decision as a victory for environmental justice.
On Tuesday, October 24, 2024, the D.C. Circuit Court of Appeals vacated the permits for Texas LNG and Rio Grande LNG, along with the Rio Bravo Pipeline, citing FERC’s failure to adequately evaluate environmental and community impacts. The court ruled that FERC’s assessments did not sufficiently consider updated environmental data and neglected the agency’s own guidelines for environmental justice.
The affected projects include the construction of LNG export terminals at the deep-water Port of Brownsville, a major gateway to the Gulf of Mexico. The developments were intended to increase the export capacity of liquefied natural gas from South Texas but have faced resistance from environmental groups and local residents concerned about ecological and health impacts.
Environmental advocates, including the Sierra Club and local nonprofit Save RGV, hailed the court’s decision. Nathan Matthews, a senior attorney for the Sierra Club, emphasized that the ruling underscores the importance of environmental justice considerations in federal projects. Juan Mancias, Chairman of the Carrizo Comecrudo Tribe of Texas, also expressed pride in the decision, seeing it as a victory for indigenous land and cultural preservation.
In contrast, companies behind the LNG projects voiced their disappointment. Texas LNG and Rio Grande LNG, subsidiaries of NextDecade Corp., maintain that their environmental impact studies were thorough and that the court’s decision was procedural rather than substantive. Both companies plan to work with FERC to address the court’s concerns and seek re-approval.
The court’s ruling demands that FERC conduct new Environmental Impact Statements (EIS) and reopen public commentary periods before any further construction can proceed. While Texas LNG claims that the issue revolves around a “technical deficiency” in the original approval process, the ongoing legal challenge has already slowed down the timeline for full-scale construction.
Cameron County Judge Eddie Treviño Jr. acknowledged the decision but emphasized the economic benefits the projects could bring to the region. He suggested that the court’s ruling is more about procedural issues with FERC’s review process than fundamental problems with the projects themselves.
As the legal and regulatory battle continues, some aspects of the infrastructure, already approved, remain under construction. This decision follows ongoing legal debates, including a recent ruling in favor of Texas against the Biden-Harris administration’s restrictions on LNG exports, showcasing the broader national tensions over energy and environmental policy.