FR 2021-01875

Overview of the Document

The document is a formal notice from the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission (FERC) regarding a request by Transcontinental Gas Pipe Line Company, LLC (Transco) to abandon certain natural gas pipelines and facilities offshore of Texas. These pipelines, known as supply laterals, along with associated equipment, are located in various blocks in the Galveston area. Transco assures that this abandonment will not impact its current customers. The estimated cost for this process is $2.6 million. The deadline for the public to submit protests, interventions, or comments is March 23, 2021.

Potential Issues and Concerns

One notable issue with the document is the lack of detailed explanation or breakdown of the estimated $2.6 million cost for the project. While this figure is provided, not knowing how it was calculated could raise concerns about transparency in financial dealings related to the project.

The document's language and numerous references to sections of the Code of Federal Regulations (CFR) can be complex and intimidating for individuals without a legal background. This complexity may inadvertently discourage public participation, which is critical for such regulatory processes.

Additionally, while it is stated that existing customers will not be negatively affected by the abandonment, the document does not provide detailed evidence or explanations to substantiate this claim. Such a statement would benefit from more supporting details to reassure stakeholders.

Impact on the Public

For the general public, particularly those residing near the affected offshore areas, this notice may appear as another routine procedural announcement. However, the complexity of the language and the procedural requirements for participation could limit effective public involvement. This issue is particularly pertinent given that actions related to energy infrastructure often have significant environmental and economic impacts.

Impact on Stakeholders

Specific stakeholders, such as local residents, environmental groups, and business entities, might be affected by this proposal. The proposed abandonment of pipelines may have environmental implications that could concern local communities or environmental advocates. Ensuring that such groups understand how to participate and express their concerns is crucial for transparent and fair regulatory practices.

For stakeholders with more resources, such as businesses or municipalities, there might be a greater ability to engage with the procedures outlined in the document. However, there is a risk that those with less legal expertise or access might be disadvantaged in performing effective interventions or filing comments.

In summary, while this document is a standard regulatory request that forms part of FERC’s oversight on energy infrastructure, the complexity and procedural hurdles highlighted may present challenges for broad public engagement. The simplicity and clarity of such notices are vital for ensuring all stakeholders can participate equally in regulatory decisions that impact their lives and environment.

The document in question, issued by the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission (FERC), touches on the financial aspects of a project proposed by the Transcontinental Gas Pipe Line Company, LLC (Transco). Specifically, the document highlights an estimate for the cost associated with the abandonment of certain gas pipeline facilities.

Summary of Financial Allocations

In the notice, it is noted that the estimated cost for the abandonment project is approximately $2.6 million. This figure is crucial as it reflects the financial commitment required to safely and effectively decommission the specified sections of Transco’s gas pipeline infrastructure. The notice implies that this cost estimate is part of a more detailed request on file with the Commission, which is accessible for public inspection.

Relation to Identified Issues

1. Lack of Cost Breakdown: One of the primary concerns with the financial reference is the absence of detailed justification or breakdown of the $2.6 million estimate. While the notice confirms that the cost estimation is documented and publicly accessible, readers may find the overview provided in the notice insufficient. This lack of detail might lead to questions regarding how the funds will be allocated and whether the estimate covers all necessary aspects of the abandonment process, such as environmental assessments or site restoration.

2. Impact on Stakeholders: The document claims that the proposed abandonments will have no impact on Transco’s existing customers. However, without a clear breakdown of costs or specifics on how the project's funding will be managed to ensure continued service integrity, stakeholders might remain uneasy. The absence of this explanation in the notice could lead to skepticism about whether the financial allocation is indeed adequate to minimize disruption.

3. Public Accessibility and Transparency: The complexity of the procedural language and the technical nature of the document may deter public participation and understanding. The estimated financial commitment is a potentially crucial element for stakeholders, including the public and environmental groups who might have vested interests in the project's implications. Clearer financial transparency might enhance public trust and engagement in the regulatory process.

4. Favoring Well-versed Entities: The procedural requirements for interventions and comments, which require familiarity with FERC’s rules, might inadvertently favor entities accustomed to dealing with regulatory or legal documentation. These entities could more effectively scrutinize how costs are estimated and spent, compared to individual stakeholders who might lack the same resources or expertise.

In summary, while the document states the estimated cost of $2.6 million for the project, it does not provide detailed financial rationalization in the notice itself, which may affect the perceived transparency and understanding of the financial implications for broader audiences. Enhancing clarity and providing a comprehensive breakdown could address some of these issues and foster more inclusive stakeholder engagement.