1 / 19

Increasing Pipeline Safety Through Shared Planning

Increasing Pipeline Safety Through Shared Planning. Pipeline Safety Trust Conference New Orleans, Louisiana 9:30 a.m. Session, November 16, 2007. Topic The need for policies affecting the siting, width and other characteristics of new pipeline rights-of-way (ROW).

aerona
Download Presentation

Increasing Pipeline Safety Through Shared Planning

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. Increasing Pipeline Safety Through Shared Planning Pipeline Safety Trust Conference New Orleans, Louisiana 9:30 a.m. Session, November 16, 2007

  2. Topic The need for policies affecting the siting, width and other characteristics of new pipeline rights-of-way (ROW)

  3. Presented byJoseph Rust Affected Landowner, REX East Natural Gas Pipeline, Greensburg (Decatur County), Indiana

  4. Background Most landowners affected by the REX East natural gas pipeline received initial notification of the project from REX in June 2006 via first class mail.

  5. Summary of Project: From www.rexpipeline.com • Pipeline Route from REX website

  6. REX “Open Houses” Were Ineffective, Even Harmful.

  7. Our Pipeline Path Apparently Changed

  8. Panhandle Eastern Pipeline Path In Indiana

  9. Various Reasons For Southern Route Given By REX At Different Times • The Real Reason May Well Have To Do With Waiver REX Received From PHMSA. • “Approximately 90 percent of the Rockies Express pipeline will be located in Class 1 areas in a common right-of-way with other pipelines.”

  10. REX Changed The Formula But Wasn’t Challenged By FERC • In their application of April 30, 2007, REX stated “A majority of the pipeline (over 50%) will parallel existing utility corridor right-of-way…The majority of the route…83%, traverses Class 1 (rural and agricultural) areas.” (Pg. 16) • What happened and what are the consequences? • Indiana Regulatory Agencies Were Not Aware of the Project

  11. Some Pipeline Path Changes Were Made Behind Closed Doors • REX Refused to Negotiate a Satisfactory Mitigation Agreement with Agricultural Interests In A Timely Manner • REX Did Not Do Their Homework • REX Assumed the Process That Worked West of the Mississippi Would Work East of It

  12. Poor Upfront Research Has Caused Numerous Changes • Communications With Landowners in the Field Are Poor

  13. What Can We Learn From This and Help Future Pipelines Proceed More Efficiently? • Any route following existing pipelines should proceed as today, subject to investigation in #6 below. • Any new pipeline going into “virgin” territory needs to follow a different pre-routing procedure, including direct involvement of the federal, state and local government agencies, including agricultural interests, before a pipeline route is pre-filed.

  14. Having all hearings open to public in this pre-route time would eliminate the mistrust. Encourage Area Planning and Zoning Boards and County Commissioners to participate. Cast a wide net. • FERC should be in charge of the pre-routing process and insure relevant agencies are engaged, not just notify them. • D.O.T. (PHMSA) and FERC should work together, not act like safety, routing and environmental concerns are somehow separate concepts. Neither the public, nor state and local authorities, see them as separate, nor should PHMSA and FERC. This is bureaucracy at its worst.

  15. Before virgin routes are proposed, FERC should determine whether existing pipelines are in need of replacement with more modern, larger, and safer lines. • Granting waivers should be a rare exception. • Realistic pipeline and compressor station setbacks need to be developed by D.O.T. in conjunction with state pipeline safety agencies. • Educate First Responders and disaster preparedness agencies what they must plan for in case of a leak or rupture.

  16. Summary Better pre-planning groundwork will eliminate most of the mistrust and misunderstandings that exist today, and will allow natural gas to flow in the best interests of the U.S., resulting in lower costs and safer conditions for all.

  17. Thank YouI am available for questionsJoseph Rust9597 E. Co. Rd. 550 NGreensburg, IN 47240joerust@dishmail.net

More Related