Buried in the massive federal budget bill passed by Congress late last year was a provision to reassert the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission’s authority to site liquefied natural gas terminals. In Maine, where local opposition has squelched several proposed LNG terminals, this reaffirmation could have serious consequences. Imagine FERC deciding a terminal needed to be located in Maine to ensure an adequate national energy supply. The opposition of the residents of Harpswell or Corea might be given little weight by federal regulators in making such a decision.

In an effort to boost local input, Rep. Michael Michaud has signed onto a “friend of the court” brief filed in a California case. The brief, signed by 18 House and Senate members from the East and West coasts, says that FERC was wrong to dismiss California’s contention that its officials should be involved in decisions regarding an LNG terminal in Long Beach. The lawmakers argued that FERC has only limited authority in siting LNG facilities.

This is counter to the language in the $388 billion spending bill passed by Congress just before it adjourned last month. It says that FERC has exclusive jurisdiction over LNG permits. While the language is not legally binding, it could give federal regulators more power to dismiss local concerns. That is what happened in California where the state public utilities commission argued that state officials should be involved in the Long Beach decision to ensure that state environmental and safety concerns were addressed.

FERC rejected that argument in April and the California PUC took the case to federal court. The commission has asked the 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals to reject the congressional language and give the state a larger role in the terminal siting decision.

In Maine, three communities have said no to LNG and Gov. John Baldacci, although he supports LNG as an economic development prospect, has said he would not consider locating a facility in a community that didn’t want it. A fourth proposal, to build a terminal on Passamaquoddy land in Washington County, is still on the table, although regional opposition is growing. FERC is far from considering the Passamaquoddy proposal, but if the California experience is repeated here, the concerns of residents of eastern Maine and Atlantic Canada wouldn’t mean much.

Locating LNG terminals should be a mix of national need and local approval. This requires federal, state and local input when such decisions are made.