Illustration: Rebecca Zisser/Axios

Regulatory decisions about America’s bounty of natural gas are in the hands of an obscure and understaffed federal agency with a limited mandate to think about climate change.

Why it matters: With America’s production of oil and natural gas soaring and Congress not acting on climate change, the once-sleepy Federal Energy Regulatory Commission is finding itself at the center of protests and lawsuits. Interviews with all 4 FERC members illustrate their division over how to handle greenhouse gas emissions.

Driving the news: Democratic FERC Commissioner Richard Glick wants to require companies seeking approval for pipelines and liquefied natural gas (LNG) export terminals to offset significant greenhouse gas emissions, similar to the way companies compensate for more traditional environmental impacts like creating wetlands.

  • Natural gas is cleaner than coal and oil, but as a fossil fuel it still emits heat-trapping emissions.

The other side: “I just fundamentally disagree with Commissioner Glick on this matter,” said Neil Chatterjee, the panel's Republican chairman. “The approach the commission has been taking is what we are statutorily obligated to do.”

Where it stands: Chatterjee pointed to the commission’s February approval of a gas export terminal, calling it a “breakthrough” because it was the first in two years and because it listed the greenhouse gas emissions associated with the project. (Glick dismissed the move as "window dressing.")

“I’ve been out there as a Republican from Kentucky and as a Trump appointee talking about climate change and the need to mitigate emissions. And if we can’t have a rational conversation about the role that U.S. LNG exports have in reducing global carbon emissions, I don’t think we’re ever going to get pragmatic solutions in this area.”
— Neil Chatterjee, FERC chairman

Between the lines: The FERC's relatively limited legal authority is in the economic realm and rests largely on 2 nearly century-old laws — the Federal Power Act and the Natural Gas Act — that aren't environmentally focused.

  • It's also short-staffed. Normally, it should have 5 commissioners; today it's at 4 and it's about to drop to 3. Democratic Commissioner Cheryl LaFleur is resigning next month (against her will).
  • LaFleur has struck the most centrist position and often cast the commission’s tie-breaking votes. She supports Glick's idea. "Certainly it’s potentially within our legal bounds," LaFleur said. "I think ultimately the courts are very likely to decide that."

Indeed, recent court rulings have indicated FERC should do more to contend with the emissions associated with fossil-fuel projects; currently, the agency requires most companies to list them but nothing more.

  • “If you listen to what’s going on in the courts, we’re going to have to have carbon offsets or something like that at some point soon,” said one natural-gas executive who works closely with the agency.
  • Chatterjee is confident in the FERC’s review process for pipelines, which lists the emissions that are “reasonably foreseeable” — a phrase that's subject to multiple legal interpretations.
  • The other GOP commissioner, Bernard McNamee, agrees: "We need to be careful as an agency ... to develop new policies that even Congress hasn’t been able to make decisions about," he said.

Reality check: Experts say Glick's idea is unlikely to go anywhere, at least under GOP leadership in Washington.

  • “It’s smart to look at it long term for risk management, but do I see it as a showstopper now? No," said Christi Tezak, managing director at the nonpartisan research firm ClearView Energy Partners. "Against a majority that doesn’t share the opinion and without any legal hook to tether it to, it’s elegant rhetoric."

What's next: Once LaFleur resigns at the end of next month, the two GOP commissioners will have a clear majority and be able to approve controversial projects over Glick's opposition.

Go deeper

Updated 5 mins ago - Politics & Policy

Coronavirus dashboard

Illustration: Sarah Grillo/Axios

  1. Global: Total confirmed cases as of 2 p.m. ET: 19,705,715 — Total deaths: 727,984 — Total recoveries — 11,963,915Map.
  2. U.S.: Total confirmed cases as of 2 p.m. ET: 5,022,187 — Total deaths: 162,696 — Total recoveries: 1,643,118 — Total tests: 61,080,587Map.
  3. Politics: Pelosi says states don't have the funds to comply with Trump's executive order on employment — Mnuchin says Trump executive orders were cleared by Justice Department.
  4. Public health: Ex-FDA head: U.S. will "definitely" see 200,000 to 300,000 virus deaths by end of 2020 — Fauci says chances are "not great" that COVID-19 vaccine will be 98% effective.
  5. Schools: Nine test positive at Georgia school where photo showing packed hallway went viral — How back-to-school is playing out in the South as coronavirus rages on.

Blumenthal calls classified briefing on Russian interference "absolutely chilling"

Sen. Richard Blumenthal (D- Conn.) called on the Trump administration to declassify intelligence detailing Russian efforts to influence the 2020 elections, telling MSNBC on Sunday that the classified briefing lawmakers received about the Kremlin's activities this week was "absolutely chilling."

The big picture: National Counterintelligence and Security Center Director William Evanina said in a statement Friday that the Russian government is "using a range of measures" to "denigrate" Joe Biden ahead of the election. China and Iran would prefer that Trump is defeated, according to Evanina.

2 hours ago - Health

Ex-FDA head: U.S. will "definitely" see 200,000 to 300,000 virus deaths in 2020

Former FDA commissioner Scott Gottlieb said on CBS News' "Face the Nation" that the coronavirus death toll in the U.S. will be "definitely" somewhere between 200,000 and 300,000 by the end of 2020.

Why it matters: "Whether we're closer to 200,000 or closer to 300,000 depends on what we do now and how it evolves," Gottlieb warned on Sunday as the U.S. surpassed five million confirmed coronavirus cases.