A bipartisan proposal to cut approval time for cross border pipelines to four months

Fuel Fix:

With North American energy markets becoming increasingly intertwined, the U.S. needs to revamp the way it scrutinizes power lines and pipelines crossing into Canada and Mexico, U.S. Rep. Gene Green of Houston said Thursday.

The current process — built up through a series of presidential orders dating back to the 1950s — is unwieldy and inefficient, leading to long delays in scrutinizing even modest applications involving existing pipelines, Green said. At the same time, trucks and trains face few impediments to carrying energy supplies across U.S. borders into Canada and Mexico, he said.

“Right now, I can put a 1,000 cars on a track in Edmonton and send it across the border without a permit, but if I want to build a pipeline, I need a State Department permit,” the Democratic lawmaker said during a discussion at the Hudson Institute. “Why punish a more efficient method?”

Green said pipelines’ efficiency extends to their lower cost over railing crude and their relative safety.

“Every study I’ve ever seen says pipelines are inherently safer than any other mode of transportation, even considering water transportation,” Green said.

Green and House Energy and Commerce Chairman Fred Upton, R-Mich., are pitching legislation that would revamp the review process for border-crossing power and pipelines. The measure, approved 31-19 by the energy panel on May 8, is on track to be considered by the full House of Representatives in June.

The legislation would replace the existing approval process with a new “certificate of crossing” before any oil pipeline or electric transmission line could be constructed across U.S. borders with Canada or Mexico. Environmental assessments would still be required under an existing federal law, but the government would face a four-month deadline to complete the permit reviews, unless proposed construction is deemed outside the public interest of the U.S.

The Secretary of State would be in charge of issuing the crossing certificates for oil pipelines, while natural gas pipelines would remain under the purview of the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission and the Department of Energy would vet electric transmission lines.

Although inspired by the protracted battle over Keystone XL, the measure would only apply to future proposals, not pending ones. Critics allege that if the bill were enacted, TransCanada Corp., could reapply for Keystone XL approval under the new certificate of crossing process.
...

I think Green is right on this one.  We need to find a way to thwart the anti energy left's policy of artificial scarcity and their wrong headed opposition to pipelines.  There is no rational reason for opposing these pipelines beyond the carbon phobia of the anti energy left.