Document 4494ENdKG1KMpnOGGvvvKwZOj

State o fN ew Hampshire HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES CONCORD 12 Kyle Road Merrimack, NH 03054-4528 May 24,2018 The Honorable Scott Pruitt Administrator U.S. Environmental Protection Agency 1200 Pennsylvania Avenue, N.W. Washington, D.C. 20460 Dear Administrator Pruitt: I am writing to request the E PA 's consideration for providing some much-needed clarity on the scope o f states' Section 401 authority under the Clean W ater A ct (CW A). New Hampshire and other N ew England states have ju st weathered yet another winter challenged by volatile and spiking energy prices, grid reliability, reliance on imported LNG and an increased reliance on coal for our electricity needs. Gas supply constraints have m ade N ew England the w orld's most expensive power market. In January, N ew Hampshire burned more coal than the State o f N ew York despite being 15 times smaller. We continue to be at the end o f the energy pipeline and unable to build the capacity needed to meet our demands in part because other upstream states abusing the process and not allowing the infrastructure to even be considered here at the end o f the line. The permitting process is broken, and I respectfully request your assistance to help address the permitting process that has undermined attempts to expand needed natural gas infrastructure in the region. W hen used inappropriately, Section 401 o f the Clean W ater Act has become a political tool to frustrate pipeline development projects and to dictate national energy policy. Some states have manipulated the Section 401 water quality certification process to delay and even deny approvals for pipeline projects by putting o ff consideration o f a project's application well beyond the one-year statutory deadline and by expanding the scope o f review well beyond federal water quality standards. As the federal agency charged with authority under the Clean W ater Act, the EPA must clarify and ensure that Section 401 is used as was originally intended. In New Hampshire, we believe we have a rigorous process to evaluate if a proposed project meets environmental standards and is in the best interest o f our citizens. As outlined in our state's 10-year Energy plan, the m ost critical infrastructure need is for natural gas capacity which can help incorporate intermittent renewable sources and provide New England with a much-needed reliable baseload. W ithout additional natural gas pipeline capacity, New England's economy will continue to be plagued by a host o f concerns caused by capacity constraints. I know siting infrastructure is challenging, and we relish the opportunity to consider such projects. The state appreciates the work the EPA does to product our environment and I respectfully ask the EPA to issue guidance on the process to ensure the statutory requirements o f timing, waiver and scope are being followed properly to ensure the protection of federal water quality standards. W e hope the guidance can provide predictability and prevent any single state from dictating energy policy for all other states further up the supply line. Sin Rep. Richard Barry, Chairman Hillsborough- District 21 Sierra Club v. EPA 18cv3472 NDCA Tier 3/4 ED 002061 00259338-00001