A divided Federal Energy Regulatory Commission said Friday it won't make broad evaluations about the impact of climate change when it decides whether to approve interstate pipelines.

FERC’s three Republican commissioners issued the surprise ruling as part of an otherwise routine decision on a pipeline upgrade proposed by the utility giant Dominion. The commission approved the Dominion project, which is in western New York.

The two dissenting Democrat commissioners, Richard Glick and Cheryl LaFleur, quickly released statements criticizing the ruling by the GOP majority, saying the decision changed FERC policy on how it examines greenhouse gas emissions.

“In a reversal of its practice, FERC announces new policy limiting when it will consider the [greenhouse gas] emissions from the production [and] consumption of natural gas caused by a new pipeline,” Glick said in a post to Twitter. “This is inconsistent with basic obligations to consider a pipeline’s contribution to climate change.”

FERC Chairman Kevin McIntyre and fellow Republicans Robert Powelson and Neil Chatterjee wrote in the majority opinion that federal law does not require the commission to consider the upstream and downstream greenhouse gas emission impact in pipeline reviews.

That means it can't evaluate the effect of greenhouse gas emissions released by the products transported through pipelines and during the production process of the natural gas to be shipped.

The Republican commissioners said FERC will continue to examine the environmental effects of the construction of the pipeline, not the effect of using the fuel it transports.

“Our decision does not in any way indicate that the commission does not consider, or is not cognizant of the potentially severe consequences of climate change,” the Republicans wrote. “In fact, the [commission] considered direct greenhouse gas emissions from the construction and operation of the project and recommended mitigation measures to reduce greenhouse gas emissions.”

The Republican commissioners said accounting for greenhouse gas emissions outside of building and operating the pipeline structure is “extraneous” and "generic in nature and inherently speculative." They said such consideration "muddles" the environmental analysis FERC conducts under the National Environmental Policy Act.

The National Environmental Policy Act, or NEPA, mandates that agency decisions that could have an environmental impact on the nation’s air, water, or wildlife habitats include a scientific analysis of potential effects.

“We are not aware of any basis that indicates the commission is required to consider environmental effects that are outside of our NEPA analysis of the proposed action in our determination of whether a project is in the public convenience and necessity,” the Republicans wrote. “Moreover, the commission does not control the production or consumption of natural gas.”

Tony Clark, a Republican who served on FERC from 2012 to 2016, argues the commission's ruling does not stray much from how it currently considers emissions from pipeline projects.

“I don't think they changed policy all that much,” Clark told the Washington Examiner. “This is basically how the commission has looked at these things historically. The only degree this changes anything is the last 18 months or so, the commission has been providing additional information that was voluntary above and beyond NEPA giving some upper bounds on what greenhouse gas emissions may be, and now they are saying they won’t be doing that anymore.”

The move appears to show how FERC is willing to test a federal court ruling from August.

The D.C. Circuit Court of Appeals ruled FERC did not properly evaluate the effects of greenhouse gas emissions from the natural gas shipped by the Sabal Trail pipeline when it approved that project. Most climate scientists blame the emissions from fossil fuels for driving manmade climate change.

In March, the Republican FERC majority defied the court ruling and reissued its approval of Sabal Trail. The Republicans in that case said FERC could not determine the significance of the greenhouse gas emissions of burning the gas transported by the pipeline.

Friday's decision is surprising in its timing because it comes as FERC is reviewing its 1999 policy for approving pipeline projects, as the agency evaluates how to best manage the transport of shale natural gas to the market, while balancing environmental and climate change concerns.

FERC is still soliciting comments for the pipeline policy review, which are due June 25.

It’s not clear how Friday’s decision will affect the commission's formal review of its pipeline policy.

Jon Wellinghoff, FERC’s former Democratic chairman from 2009 to 2013, told the Washington Examiner he is hesitant to make a strong conclusion on what Friday's ruling means and how it differs from current policy. But he had at least one take-away.

“It certainly signals where the majority is going in that pipeline policy review,” he said. “That certainly can be said.”

Democrats seemed to suggest Republicans pre-empted the pipeline policy review.

“I am particularly troubled that this policy shift is occurring a few weeks after we initiated a proceeding to look broadly at the commission’s pipeline review, and more specifically at the commission’s current policy regarding consideration of upstream and downstream [greenhouse] impacts,” LaFleur said.

Currently, FERC makes decisions about pipelines based mostly on the economic need for the project and whether developers have secured contracts with companies that want to use the pipeline to ship fuel.

Pipeline opponents say FERC’s pipeline policy is outdated, created when climate change concerns were less dominant and the shale boom was unanticipated.