Constitution Pipeline: What to know about the controversial gas project
At first glance, the route of one of America’s most controversial pipeline projects might not seem to have much to do with New England.
The proposed 125-mile pipeline between Pennsylvania’s Marcellus Shale field and upstate New York, however, is part of a long-standing effort to increase the flow of natural gas into parts of Connecticut and, by extension, the neighboring states of Massachusetts, Rhode Island and New Hampshire.
Such efforts have recently drawn interest from a politically-diverse group of figures such as Democratic Gov. Ned Lamont as well as Republican President Donald J. Trump and Interior Secretary Doug Burgum, all of whom view natural gas as a way of reducing the region’s cost-of-energy burden.
Opponents, meanwhile, argue that building a new pipeline will only worsen pollution and the release of climate-altering greenhouse gases, while doing little to bring down prices.
What is the Constitution Pipeline?
The Constitution Pipeline is being developed by Williams Companies, a large operator of pipelines across the United States. The pipeline would have the ability to carry up to 650 million cubic feet of gas a day, according to the company, enough to serve about 3 million homes.
Williams first received federal approvals to build the pipeline more than a decade ago, but the project hit a snag when the New York State Department of Environmental Conservation declined to issue a water quality permit in 2016.
The project continued to languish until the developers resubmitted applications to state and federal regulators earlier this year.
“Williams remains committed to advancing the Constitution Pipeline project and has submitted permit applications,” to regulators in New York and Pennsylvania, the company said in a statement this month. “We are also continuing to work with the states, Congress, and the Administration to strengthen U.S. energy markets, lower costs for American families, and support long-term economic growth.”
Pending those approvals, Williams estimates that the pipeline should begin construction next year and enter service near the end of 2027.
Is Connecticut involved?
While the Constitution Pipeline itself will not carry gas into Connecticut, its terminus in New York will link up with two existing pipelines — the Tennessee and Iroquois systems — that serve both the state and the wider region.
Those pipelines already operate at or near capacity, officials say, creating a supply bottleneck particularly during winter months when gas is used to both heat homes and fuel the power plants that produce the bulk of the region’s electricity.
In order to reduce that bottleneck, pipeline operators in Connecticut are pursuing their own expansion projects.
Iroquois pipeline’s owners, for example, are seeking to build a series of compressors that would push an additional 125 million cubic feet of gas through the each day, an increase of 8.3% over its existing capacity. Meanwhile, Canadian energy company Enbridge has its own plans to expand its regional pipeline, the Algonquin, by 2029.
Carolina Kulbeth, a spokesperson for Tennessee Pipeline operator Kinder Morgan, said in a statement that expanding pipeline capacity is “critical” to eliminating existing constraints on gas supply.
“New pipeline infrastructure is the only way to ensure reliability and affordability in the New England region, as demand continues to rise among residential, commercial, and industrial customers,” Kulbeth said.
Trump himself has touted the pipeline’s benefits, saying that it would lower energy prices by up to $5,000 per family in the Northeast — figures that critics say are wildly inflated.
“I can tell you Connecticut wants it and all of New England wants it,” Trump said in March. “And who wouldn’t it?”
What does it have to do with wind?
In May, the Wall Street Journal reported that the resurrection of the Constitution Pipeline was linked to negotiations between the Trump administration and New York over the fate of another project, Empire Wind.
Federal authorities had pulled permits for the wind project in April, only to reverse course around the same time that Williams resubmitted its pipeline applications.
While New York Gov. Kathy Hochul has denied making any explicit promises to approve the pipeline, she has expressed a willingness to work with the administration and developers on unnamed “new energy projects” that comply with state law.
Lamont, however, has strongly suggested that the two projects are intertwined.
After the Trump administration last week ordered a halt in construction on another wind project being staged in New London, Lamont expressed surprise at the decision given his prior support for the development of new pipelines.
“We’re already having very productive conversations with Williams pipeline company and [the secretaries] of Energy and Interior regarding how we can get additional sources of power here to this region, including American natural gas,” Lamont said. “So I don’t think there’s a conflict there.”
What do opponents say?
Critics of pipeline expansion argue that projects such as Constitution are at odds with the commitments made by local elected officials to slowly wean the region off of its reliance on fossil fuels. Connecticut, for example, has laws pledging to get all of the state’s power needs from carbon-free sources no later than 2040 and achieving economy-wide net-zero emissions 10 years after that.
In addition, they point to the region’s already sky-high energy prices to argue that importing more natural gas is not an effective solution.
“This is not about what’s better for the climate, or air or energy costs,” said Samantha Dynowski, the Connecticut state director for the Sierra Club. “This is about, you know, Trump’s buddies, his fossil fuel buddies.”
During his presidential campaign last year, Trump pledged to ease environmental restrictions and approve new drilling, pipeline and other fossil fuel projects. At the same time, he attempted to solicit $1 billion in campaign donations from the oil and gas industry.
Pipeline projects such as the Iroquois and Algonquin expansion projects have also faced local opposition in Connecticut, particularly in Brookfield where residents have complained about plans to build a new compressor station in close proximity to a middle school.
The Connecticut Department of Energy and Environmental Protection announced its tentative approval of the compressor on July 31.
NAUGATUCK — The future of the Naugatuck River Greenway Trail is in jeopardy following the sudden cancellation of a $5.725 million federal grant from the U.S. Department of Transportation.
It was just last year that U.S. Rep. Jahana Hayes, D-5, announced securing the funding through USDOT’s Rebuilding American Infrastructure with Sustainability and Equity grant. The multiuse non-mortozied trail is meant to extend 44 miles along the Naugatuck River through communities like Litchfield, Harwinton, Thomaston, Watertown, Waterbury, and others.
According to a notice sent by Maria Lefevre, executive director for the Office of the Under Secretary of Transportation, the funding was canceled due to the project no longer aligning with the priorities of the USDOT, making it fall outside the purview of the grant.
The letter said the department is looking for projects primarily focused around vehicular travel and “ensuring that taxpayer dollars are being used efficiently in ways that benefit the American people and improve their quality of life.”
“Having individually reviewed your grant in light of DOT’s priorities, the Department has determined that your project is inconsistent with the above priorities,” Lefevre said in the statement.
Naugatuck Valley Council of Governments Executive Director, Rick Dunne, said he disagreed with the DOT's assessment that vehicular travel would better work to improve the quality of life for the average citizen.
“Look, if your definition of improving quality of life is promoting vehicular travel, that's, just on its face, bad. Increase vehicle travel, increase pollution, increase safety risks,” Dunne said. “Taking this money from this project, putting it into highway travel is in no way going to increase economic efficiency. I don't see how you argue that it proves the quality of life of Americans, or the residents of this valley.”
NVCOG officials said do not know if they can appeal the decision but are looking into it and are also in discussion with federal and legislative partners to see if other funding options are still available, though much of it remains uncertain for now.
According to NVCOG, the purpose of the project was to advance an interconnected network of trails that linked downtown centers of neighboring communities that provided a transportation and recreational asset in the Naugatuck Valley – extending from Torrington to Derby.
The federal funding had been earmarked for trail expansion in Thomaston, Watertown, Waterbury, and Naugatuck. While there is about $1.5 million in other funds for the project, the amount on hand is only enough to cover design concepts, not execute construction plans for all the gaps in the trail, Dunne said. According to a NVCOG report released following the grant cancelation, current funding only covers construction for a section in Thomaston – from East Main to Maple Street – and one in Naugatuck – from Maple Street to Breen Field, extending behind South Main Street.
The only connections that can be constructed, with the funding currently available, are from East Main to Maple Street in Thomaston, and from Maple Street to Breen Field, extending behind South Main Street in Naugatuck, due to the RAISE funding being supplemental to existing money allocated to those portions of the trail, according to an NVCOG impact report released following the grant cancelation.
The only connections that can be constructed, with the funding currently available, is from East Main to Maple Street in Thomaston, and from Maple Street to Breen Field, extending behind South Main Street in Naugatuck, due to the RAISE funding being supplemental to existing money allocated to those portions of the trail, according to an NVCOG impact report released following the grant cancelation.
Dunne said the news of the cancellation came as a surprise, given that they had been coordinating with administration officials about the project and the grant. He said he suspected that once the plans had reached Washington and were reviewed was when they were rejected.
“I'm surprised because, all of the activity that we've had since the election and the current administration, the contract was moving forward,” Dunne said.
He added that the trail has a sizable economic benefit to the interconnected communities, valued at over $300 million. It has also allowed many in previously industrialized towns to once again be able to enjoy the riverfront that was once heavily polluted during the height of the region’s industrial era.
“In the letter, I find their priorities rather interesting. They said they’re focusing multimodal grant programs on projects that promote vehicular travel. If it’s only vehicular travel then it's not multimodal,” Dunn said.
Dunne said the NVCOG will still move ahead with its plans with the trail where they can, though the lack of funding poses a roadblock. With many communities in the Valley unable to pay for the work themselves, much of the improvements rely on outside federal funding, he said.
The 44-mile long connection has been worked on progressively since the 1990s, having constructed over 20 miles of trail to date.
NVCOG officials added that they are in discussion with federal and legislative partners to see if other funding options are still available, though much of it remains uncertain for now.
Hotel eyed for former farm site in Simsbury
Greg Bordonaro
A long-vacant farm parcel in Simsbury could soon become home to a new hotel, as a developer seeks approval to begin the first phase of a larger mixed-use project along Hopmeadow Street.
The 55-acre site at 1503 Hopmeadow St., once used for tobacco and pumpkin farming, is being targeted for a 120-room hotel development that would include parking and space for future retail. The property, near Dorset Crossing Drive and the International Skating Center of Connecticut, is one of the last large undeveloped tracts on that stretch of Route 10.
Project plans were submitted to the town’s Conservation Commission and Inland Wetlands and Watercourses Agency, which are scheduled to discuss the application during a meeting Tuesday night.
W. Development Co. LLC, led by Adam Westhaver, is the developer. According to the application, W. Development is under contract to purchase the property from River Bend Development CT.
The hotel would be positioned on 7.5 acres in the northwest corner of property, with access from Dorset Crossing. Engineers say the project would not directly impact wetlands tied to nearby Saxton Brook, though some grading would occur within a 100-foot buffer zone.
The hotel is described as the first step in a master plan for the parcel, with additional commercial uses envisioned in later phases. The farmland has been in cultivation for more than a century, but its barns were demolished in 2021.