The Kyle City Council has joined a federal lawsuit aiming to stop the construction of a buried 430-mile natural gas pipeline that would cut through 17 counties, including Hays.
The Permian Highway Pipeline, planned by Houston-based pipeline company Kinder Morgan, would transport natural gas from West Texas to refineries along the Texas coast. The pipeline would be constructed through environmentally sensitive areas, including in Kyle.
Kyle joins the cities of Austin and San Marcos, the counties of Travis and Hays, the Barton Springs Edwards Aquifer Conservation District, and several landowners in the suit against Kinder Morgan, the U.S. Fish & Wildlife Service, and the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers. The plaintiffs argue in the suit that the pipeline violates the Endangered Species Act.
“The risks presented by this pipeline extend far beyond the Kyle city limits, and we are very sensitive to that,” Kyle City Council Member Alex Villalobos said. “This pipeline directly affects our community and our future, and we will continue this fight.”
The pipeline would not cut through Travis County, but Austin officials say they worry that the pipeline could contaminate Barton Springs.
In October, the Kyle City Council approved a $2.7 million settlement with Kinder Morgan over a separate lawsuit related to the pipeline. The company sued Kyle over a city ordinance that would have put stricter regulations on the pipeline‘s construction within the city’s limits.
Under the settlement, the pipeline would be allowed to cut through the city, under the stipulation that the company would not convert it to a crude oil line. The agreement also allowed Kyle officials to continue with other litigation, Villalobos said.
“We still are concerned how it’s going to affect our environment, how it’s going to affect our water,” Villalobos said.
The lawsuit that Kyle is joining argues that a pipeline that covers such a large swath of land could negatively affect environments across Texas.
“The pipeline’s chosen route crosses some of the most sensitive environmental features in Central Texas and the Texas Hill Country, including the recharge zones of the Edwards and Edwards-Trinity Aquifers — which provide the drinking water supply for over two million Texas residents, including towns such as Fredericksburg and Blanco,” the lawsuit says. The area “is a habitat for many (endangered) species. It will transect sites that contain artifacts of substantial cultural and historical significance. Its path will bring massive volumes of pressurized, combustible natural gas near residential subdivisions every day.”
Kinder Morgan Vice President Allen Fore said the company is prepared to begin construction once they receive the final authorization from the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers and the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service.
“We don‘t even propose projects that we’re not confident can meet and exceed the required standards,” Fore said. “We’ve done a lot of unique, particular preparation for this project.”
Whenever an entity wants to build something — like as a pipeline or a bridge — on land that might affect endangered species, developers must go through a review process with the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service to ensure no permanent harm results from the project.
That process can happen in a couple of ways. One way is for the entity to go directly to the Fish and Wildlife Service for the assessment, which is a longer process and requires public hearings, said Melinda Taylor, a University of Texas at Austin School of Law professor.
Another, quicker avenue is the one proposed under the current plan for the pipeline: the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers can conduct the assessment and issue a permit to Kinder Morgan, Taylor said.
“It’s a technical difference, but it ends up having a very substantive real-world effect on the public’s say in how the pipeline will be constructed,” Taylor said.
Credit: Source link
