Overview
Title
Southern Star Central Gas Pipeline, Inc.; Notice of Request for Extension of Time
Agencies
ELI5 AI
Southern Star Central Gas Pipeline, Inc. wants a bit more time to finish a project in Kansas because they're still waiting for the go-ahead from some important people. It's like waiting for your teacher to say you can do something special in class. People have until March 12, 2025, to say if they're okay with this delay.
Summary AI
Southern Star Central Gas Pipeline, Inc. has requested an extension from the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission to complete a project in Kansas, originally set to be finished by February 28, 2025, now aiming for August 29, 2025. This extension is needed because the Kansas Corporation Commission has not yet made a decision on whether to approve the sale tied to the project. The public can comment on this request until March 12, 2025, through the Commission's electronic filing system or by mail. The Commission will engage with any significant disputes about this extension within 45 days, but will not revisit any foundational decisions regarding the project's authorization.
Keywords AI
Sources
AnalysisAI
Summary of the Document
This notice from the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission (FERC) informs the public about a request from Southern Star Central Gas Pipeline, Inc. for more time to complete a pipeline project in Kansas. Initially, the project was expected to be finished by February 28, 2025, but due to delays in obtaining necessary approvals from the Kansas Corporation Commission (KCC), Southern Star now aims to complete it by August 29, 2025. The public has until March 12, 2025, to submit any comments or concerns about this extension request. FERC will consider written comments through their electronic filing system or via mail submissions.
Significant Issues and Concerns
One major concern with the notice is its lack of detail on why there has been a delay in getting approval from the KCC. This missing information could provide critical context for understanding the necessity of the extension. Moreover, the document is filled with technical jargon and references to specific regulations and docket numbers without adequate explanation. This might be particularly challenging for readers who are not familiar with FERC's procedures and regulations.
Additionally, while the process for public participation is outlined, it might still seem daunting for individuals who are unfamiliar with how to navigate FERC's systems. There's also no mention of what outcomes might occur if the extension request is denied, which leaves an open question about the project's future and the stakeholders involved. Lastly, footnotes and references are included in the document without much context, potentially confusing readers who lack background information on previous orders or similar cases.
Public Impact
Broadly speaking, the document's notice affects the public by allowing them an opportunity to voice any concerns or support for the project's timeline extension. However, the technical nature of the document could hinder effective public engagement, potentially reducing the amount of feedback FERC receives.
Moreover, delays in such infrastructure projects can have broader consequences, including economic impacts on local communities and potential utility disruptions. Public stakeholders, particularly those living near the proposed pipeline, are likely to be directly impacted by any changes in the construction timeline.
Impact on Specific Stakeholders
For businesses and entities involved in the construction and operation of the pipeline, the extension provides a crucial window to address regulatory approvals and complete project requirements. This can ensure that investments already made do not go to waste and that the project aligns with legal expectations.
Conversely, environmental groups and residents may see the extension request as a point of contention, especially if they have concerns about the project's environmental impacts. The delay could afford them more time to push for additional evaluations or considerations regarding safety and environmental compliance.
In summary, while FERC's notice provides necessary information for stakeholders to engage with the decision-making process, the complexity and technical nature of the document might limit comprehensive public involvement. Ensuring all stakeholders understand the process and implications would enhance the transparency and effectiveness of regulatory decisions.
Issues
• The notice does not specify the reasons for the delay in securing approval from the Kansas Corporation Commission, which could provide more context for the requested extension.
• The document uses technical terms and references specific regulations (such as 18 CFR 385.214 or 385.211) without explanation, which could be difficult for a layperson to understand.
• The document assumes familiarity with specific docket numbers and previous orders without providing background information for readers unfamiliar with the case.
• The process for public intervention and comments is outlined, but it may still be challenging for individuals unfamiliar with FERC procedures to follow these steps, potentially limiting public participation.
• The notice does not specify what happens if the request for extension of time is denied, leaving ambiguity about the consequences for the involved parties.
• Footnotes and references in the document may require further explanation for clarity, as they assume the reader's understanding of previous similar cases or orders.
• The document mentions the responsibility of the Director of the Office of Energy Projects to act on uncontested requests but does not outline the specific criteria or processes for determining whether a request is contested.