FR 2025-03189

Summary of the Document

The document is an official notice regarding WBI Energy Transmission, Inc.'s request for authorization from the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission (FERC) to upgrade and operate natural gas facilities in Morton County, North Dakota. This endeavor, termed the Minot Expansion Project, is designed to enhance natural gas capacity for the Montana-Dakota Utilities Company while also maintaining system integrity. The anticipated cost for this project is stated to be $13 million. The notice outlines how the public can participate in the review process by filing protests, motions to intervene, or comments, with a filing deadline set for April 22, 2025.

Significant Issues and Concerns

There are several notable issues with this document. One primary concern is the lack of detailed justification for the $13 million cost estimate for the Minot Expansion Project. The absence of detailed financial breakdowns or rationales can make it challenging for stakeholders to understand and assess the necessity and efficiency of the proposed expenditures.

Moreover, the document is replete with legalistic language and procedural jargon, which might obstruct the general public's understanding and potentially inhibit meaningful participation. References to specific sections of the Code of Federal Regulations and intricate procedural instructions could be articulated in a more accessible manner to broaden engagement and transparency.

The document also does not address potential environmental and community impacts of the project. For affected residents and stakeholders, such information is crucial for evaluating how the project might impact their local environment, lifestyle, or property.

Public Impact

In general, the document's content underscores a significant impact on public participation in federal regulatory processes. The complexity and formality of the text could discourage those unfamiliar with legal and regulatory frameworks from engaging. The public, particularly those directly impacted by the project, may feel alienated or ill-equipped to participate effectively in the decision-making process.

Conversely, there are positive aspects: the document provides mechanisms for public involvement through protests, interventions, and comments, ensuring that at least a degree of public input can be integrated into the regulatory review. This aspect emphasizes the openness of regulatory processes, though the challenge remains in making these accessible to a broad audience.

Stakeholder Impact

Specific stakeholders, including local landowners, communities near the project site, and environmental organizations, could be directly affected. For these groups, the lack of detailed environmental impact assessments in the notice might be concerning as it leaves questions about potential adverse effects on property and ecosystems unanswered.

Business entities and regional utility companies may view the project as beneficial, given its aim to enhance capacity and integrity of natural gas delivery. However, they may also be concerned about how public opposition or regulatory delays could influence the project's progress.

Overall, while the framework for stakeholder engagement exists, the manner of presentation and accessibility of information could significantly determine the level and efficacy of stakeholder influence in project outcomes.

In reviewing the Federal Register document, a single financial reference is prominently noted: the estimated cost associated with the Minot Expansion Project. This project, aimed at replacing, modifying, and operating certain natural gas facilities in Morton County, North Dakota, is projected to cost $13,000,000.

Analysis of Financial Reference

The document briefly mentions that the $13,000,000 expenditure is estimated as necessary for the completion of the Minot Expansion Project. However, it does not provide a detailed breakdown or justification of this cost, which poses several issues:

• Lack of Detailed Justification: The financial mention, while clear in its monetary figure, does not elaborate on how this sum was calculated. This is a point of concern as it may lead to questions about transparency and accountability in the spending of a substantial sum.

• Transparency and Public Understanding: For stakeholders, such as taxpayers or interested local community members, understanding how funds are allocated is crucial. When a document lists a significant financial amount without context, it can hinder public understanding and potentially cause skepticism about whether resources are being used efficiently.

Connection to Identified Issues

The estimation method and lack of detailed accounting regarding the $13,000,000 cost may exacerbate the concern that legal and procedural language used in the document is not easy to comprehend. The mention of this sum without additional context or detailed breakdown aligns with the previously identified issue of vague explanation. It could be perceived as contributing to a broader narrative of opaqueness that limits meaningful public engagement due to the complexity and potentially intimidating nature of the regulatory language used throughout the document.

Furthermore, the absence of detailed justification for the financial outlay might not only complicate public understanding but could also limit stakeholders' ability to evaluate the potential economic impacts, benefits, and downsides, including those on the environment and local communities. This omission creates a barrier for full appraisal and participatory governance by interested parties who have a stake in the financial and environmental implications of the project.

Providing a comprehensive breakdown of the projected costs, along with justifications and context, could enhance transparency and encourage a more informed public dialogue, fostering greater accountability and trust.