Overview
Title
Gulf South Pipeline Company, LLC; Notice of Application and Establishing Intervention Deadline
Agencies
ELI5 AI
The Gulf South Pipeline Company wants to make their gas pipes stronger and faster, costing a lot of money, and they need permission from a group called FERC. People can share their thoughts about this plan, but it's a bit tricky, so some folks might need help understanding how to do it.
Summary AI
The Gulf South Pipeline Company, LLC has filed an application with the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission (FERC) for the Southeast Compression Utility and Reliability Expansion Project. The project is aimed at adding additional compression at existing compressor stations and building a new station to increase the capacity of the pipeline system. The application details an estimated total cost of $216,000,000 and proposes specific rates for the project. Public comments, filings, and interventions regarding the project must be submitted by May 19, 2025, and additional support for the public is available through FERC's Office of Public Participation.
Keywords AI
Sources
AnalysisAI
Overview
The document is a formal notice from the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission (FERC) about an application from the Gulf South Pipeline Company, LLC, for the Southeast Compression Utility and Reliability Expansion Project. This initiative is focused on increasing the pipeline's capacity by adding additional stations and compressing units, with a projected cost of $216 million.
Summary
The Gulf South Pipeline Company is seeking authorization to expand its infrastructure, which includes installing new compression technology at existing sites in Louisiana and Mississippi, and constructing a new station in Mississippi. Their application is under sections of the Natural Gas Act that govern the construction and operation of natural gas pipeline projects. Alongside the technical details, the document outlines procedures for public participation, giving stakeholders the opportunity to comment, protest, or intervene in the proceedings. There is a clear deadline for interventions by May 19, 2025.
Issues and Concerns
A prominent concern is the document's lack of transparency regarding the $216 million cost estimate. Breaking down this figure would help the public understand the financial aspects and ensure accountability. Additionally, the document introduces "incremental rates treatment" for the new infrastructure, but does not elaborate on what this entails. This omission leaves a gap in understanding how the project might economically impact stakeholders, such as consumers who may face cost adjustments.
Another significant issue is the heavy reliance on legal terms and references to specific federal regulations without sufficient explanation. This could make the document inaccessible to those unfamiliar with FERC's processes and regulatory language. Furthermore, the description of the procedures for commenting, protesting, and intervening appears complex, potentially discouraging public engagement due to the perceived bureaucratic hurdle.
Public and Stakeholder Impact
Broadly, the public is afforded the opportunity to engage with the project, potentially influencing its execution and alignment with community interests. However, the complexity and formality of the application process might deter participation, thereby limiting input to those with specialized knowledge or significant interest.
Specific stakeholders, including landowners, local communities, and environmental groups, may be directly impacted. They might experience changes in land use or face environmental concerns due to construction activities and increased pipeline capacity. On the positive side, there is potential for economic benefits through job creation during the construction phase and improved natural gas infrastructure reliability.
Stakeholders should consider utilizing FERC's Office of Public Participation, which provides guidance and assistance throughout this procedural landscape. By doing so, they can better navigate the complexities of intervention and ensure their voices are heard.
In conclusion, while the document provides pathways for public involvement, the depth and complexity of regulatory language and processes present challenges. Greater transparency and simplification could enhance public engagement and allow a broader spectrum of stakeholders to participate effectively.
Financial Assessment
The document outlines an application submitted by Gulf South Pipeline Company, LLC to the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission (FERC) concerning its Southeast Compression Utility and Reliability Expansion Project, highlighting key financial aspects related to the project's development.
The primary financial reference in the document is Gulf South's estimation of the total cost for the project, which is stated to be $216,000,000. This significant sum is allocated for adding additional compression at three existing locations and constructing a new compressor station, all aimed at enhancing the transportation capacity of natural gas. However, the document does not delve into a detailed breakdown of this $216,000,000 estimate. Such a lack of transparency could raise concerns about potential inefficiencies or wasteful spending, given that stakeholders are not provided a clear understanding of how these funds are to be utilized at each site.
In addition to the project's cost, there is mention of a proposed incremental rates treatment for the project. While this suggests that Gulf South plans to adjust its rates to account for the project's costs, the document does not furnish specific mechanisms or justifications for this approach. This omission could generate uncertainties regarding how costs will be recovered and what impact these adjustments might have on consumers, particularly in terms of energy pricing.
Further complicating the understanding of financial operations, the document heavily references specific legal regulations without providing summaries, leaving stakeholders, especially those unfamiliar with the legal jargon, potentially confused about the implications of these financial strategies. This is compounded by the use of technically intricate terms and processes that may deter public engagement due to their perceived complexity.
Overall, while the document does provide a headline figure for the project's cost, there is a significant gap in clarity and detail regarding how the funds are allocated and recovered. This could lead to questions regarding fiscal responsibility and the ultimate financial impact on consumers.
Issues
• The document does not provide a detailed breakdown of the $216,000,000 estimated total cost for the Southeast Compression Utility and Reliability Expansion Project, which could indicate potential for wasteful spending.
• No specific mechanisms or justifications for the proposed 'incremental rates treatment' for the project are provided, which might lead to ambiguity about cost recoveries and impact on consumers.
• The document contains references to specific sections of the Commission's regulations (e.g., 18 CFR 157.9, 18 CFR 385.211) without providing summaries or explanations of these regulations, making the document difficult to understand for those unfamiliar with legal references.
• The language used to describe the filing and intervention process, including terms like 'eComment', 'eFiling', and 'document-less intervention', might be complex or difficult for some stakeholders to fully understand without additional context or explanation.
• The document contains a lengthy and detailed process for commenting, protesting, and intervening, which may deter public participation due to perceived complexity or bureaucratic hurdles.
• The text makes several references to footnotes and regulations that may require additional research, complicating a straightforward understanding of the requirements and processes outlined in the document.