Neil Chatterjee is promising to follow the facts and the law?

From an Article by Timothy Cama, The Hill, October 31, 2018

The newly minted chairman of the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission (FERC) says he is committing to keeping the agency neutral and avoiding political influence.

Neil Chatterjee, a Republican, was tapped last week by President Trump to succeed Kevin McIntyre, another Republican, atop FERC. McIntyre will remain as a commissioner on the body, which has five spots but only four commissioners.

FERC and the companies and organizations that deal with it say they value the agency’s independence and neutrality — something which Chatterjee echoed Wednesday.

“No one was more committed to ensure the depoliticization of the agency and not allowing political interference than Kevin McIntyre,” Chatterjee told reporters Wednesday at FERC’s Washington, D.C., headquarters, adding that he wants to maintain the example McIntyre set.

“There’s no evidence that there’s been political influence or interference at the agency,” Chatterjee said.

Chatterjee pointed to one of FERC’s most contentious issues: whether to require higher electricity payments to coal and nuclear power plants, as Energy Secretary Rick Perry proposed last year. FERC unanimously rejected the proposal in January, but also kept the door open to future action, including inviting comments from stakeholders.

“Whatever we do is going to be fact-based, and that’s something that I and my colleagues take very seriously. This will not be a politically influenced decision,” he said.

While the Senate must confirm all FERC commissioners, Trump has the authority to unilaterally appoint the chairman from among the confirmed commissioners, without Senate approval.

Before coming to FERC last year, Chatterjee was a top energy adviser to Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell (R-Ky.). He was chairman briefly last year before McIntyre was confirmed by the Senate.

Like his old boss, Chatterjee is from Kentucky, and is concerned about the impact that closing coal plants has on miners and their communities. But, he said, that concern will not factor into his decision on the issue of support for coal and nuclear plants.

“When I first came to the commission last fall, coming from a partisan legislative role in which I worked on behalf of my boss to fight against the retirement of coal-fired generation, initially, I was sympathetic to Secretary Perry’s proposal, because of my concern for these rural communities, because of my concern about what the retirement of nuclear units would mean for mitigating carbon emission,” Chatterjee said.

“But as I evolved into the role, I recognized that that is not part of our record, that doesn’t factor into the statutes that govern us.”

He declined to give a timeline for FERC’s consideration of the issue of electric grid resilience, which is the banner under which it considered Perry’s proposal.

Overall, Chatterjee promised that little will change at FERC after the chairman switch, including priorities and staff.

Like his predecessor, Chatterjee said some of the biggest issues FERC is working through are how it enforces the Public Utility Regulatory Policies Act, how it approves natural gas pipelines and whether its policies should reward coal, nuclear or other sources that may be labeled as “resilient.”

“Kevin demonstrated tremendous leadership in these areas and I intend to do my part to build on what he did,” he said.

He also plans to keep the staff that McIntyre brought on, in the name of “continuity.” That includes Chief of Staff Anthony Pugliese, who has faced bipartisan condemnation amid accusations that he is overly political, such as by helping the Trump administration to identify power plants that it might want to work to stop from closing.

“I think it’s important to have some continuity. There is tremendous administrative responsibility in the chairman’s office,” Chatterjee said. “From what I’ve seen, Anthony has managed the administrative capabilities of the agencies very well.”

Yes, Yes, Yes, Pipelines Galore ... !

Dangers of pipeline strategy in Virginia (and WV & PA)

From a Letter to the Editor by Tom Morgan, Roanoke VA Times, July 20, 2015

Tom Morgan and his wife are retired and split their time between Greenville, North Carolina, and their place near New Castle, Virginia. Their home and property in the Sinking Creek area of Craig County is directly in the route of the Mountain Valley Pipeline, according to proposed alternate route 110J.

Whether you think you are for or against the use of natural gas or the expansion of that use or the building of the pipelines that will bring that gas to or through Virginia, you have to be concerned about the “master plan” — the goal for natural gas in Virginia and how we get there.

You have to be concerned because no master plan exists. And, no one is actually assessing the public need for any specific pipeline or coordinating plans for pipeline infrastructure development. Currently, pipeline companies propose interstate pipelines and routes to suit their purposes. The Federal Energy Regulatory Commission reviews and approves each proposal according to its requirements. And . . . that’s it. Although environmental assessments and other agency and public input are a part of FERC’s review process, only FERC has final authority for review and approval.

FERC reviews each pipeline application as an independent project. If the project meets FERC guidelines, it is approved. In the absence of state or federal strategic plans for the development of pipeline infrastructure, essentially no effective coordination among other proposals, assessment of their cumulative effects, assessment of need, or optimization of routes is performed.

No agency or person can override FERC’s decisions, other than the courts — and even then, FERC decisions ultimately prevail in almost all cases. States and localities have little or no authority regarding interstate gas pipelines. The pipeline companies are spending billions on these projects with the anticipation of significant returns on their investments. FERC is under considerable pressure to approve these projects as rapidly as the required assessments are performed and the “boxes” checked off.

In fact, FERC reports no pipeline submission in recent years has been denied — although some have been withdrawn or never built after approval. Landowners, communities, and other concerned interests use their limited resources to expose and explain the local consequences of building these large pipelines in their areas. Natural resource and environmental agencies and organizations provide scientific information and data regarding anticipated or possible effects of pipelines, but have no overriding authority for pipeline approval/disapproval.

Recent editorials and articles suggest potential hope for a better way forward. Many reasonable and knowledgeable people are recommending consolidation of pipelines along established rights of way or easements in order to minimize the negative consequences of these pipelines. The Pennsylvania EPA is creating a team from the involved stakeholders to collaborate on coordinated plans for future pipeline development. The Nature Conservancy has developed software that will help optimize routes for pipelines.

How can anyone be opposed to such approaches? Yet, none of these ideas are being effectively pursued in Virginia. The pipeline companies see no need since they can get what they want using FERC’s process. FERC does not because it is not their charge. Private individuals and localities do not because they lack the authority, power and resources. Our elected officials are inexplicably silent.

Why does this matter? It matters because uncontrolled development of natural gas pipelines can change the character of our state forever. It matters because eminent domain can be used to take your property, and no process exists to assess whether that use was even necessary. If FERC approves a pipeline, the company can take your land to build it, and no one is collaboratively assessing the need or optimizing the routes.

We must look at where this is headed. In Pennsylvania, a “spider web” of pipelines in every county is foreseen — with 4,000 miles of interstate pipelines and 25,000 miles of “gathering pipelines” from the wellheads — in a process that has been described as chaotic. Without some type of action and intervention, Virginia’s fate will mirror that of Pennsylvania.

What can you do? Let your voice be heard. Learn about the process and the consequences. Insist that your elected officials understand the issues and risks involved, and are bringing rational and reasonable thought, consideration, and decisions to the growth of natural gas pipelines. Learn from the experiences of other states. Hold your public officials accountable for their actions and decisions — or lack thereof.

We can have natural gas and protect our land and natural resources if we assure that our common long-term good is the primary motivation and consideration. However, if we do nothing and allow the pipeline companies to proceed in their own best interest — as they are doing now — we will not be happy with the outcomes nor will those who come after us.

A similar letter entitled “Gas Pipelines Will Change the State” appears as a Letter to the Editor of the Richmond Times Dispatch, page A-10, September 11, 2015. See also: Appalachian Mountain Advocates and Friends of Nelson, the County in Virginia.

Add More Pipelines?

Large Natural Gas Transmission Pipelines in “Pipelinealachia”

>>> Commentary by S. Tom Bond, Retired Chemistry Professor & Resident Farmer, Lewis County, WV <<<

Pepe Escobar and others have referred to four countries whose names end in  … -stan (Turkmenistan, Kyrgyzstan, Uzbekistan and Kazakhstan) as “Pipelineistan” because they are rich in oil and gas and ripe for the picking. I am going to call, from time to time,  northern Appalachia as “Pipelinealachia” in analogy.

Of course, the gas over there is in conventional deposits and here it must be fracked at considerably greater expense and environmental damage. That’s “because the good stuff is gone” here. Much of it went into the atmosphere, let me remind you.

My attention was focused a few days ago by a lady who is in the unenviable position of having one of the big new pipelines go across her small property, and being within half mile of a second large pipeline. Unfortunately it is on the top of a ridge, and each of the pipelines is projecting a compressor station on that ridge within a mile of her home.

The pipeline bisects her property with a 125 foot right of way, but there is a high road bank where it enters, so they want an access road perpendicular to the pipeline, which will block off her house. To top it all, she is allergic to diesel fumes!

Over two decades ago she retired from Washington, where she had had worked as a technician in her husband’s legal practice, picking up a great deal of law knowledge, and familiarity with court procedure. She has considerable experience reading contracts and is not afraid to dive right in to reading them. As one might expect, the contracts offered to people take as much as possible, without consideration of present or future landowners.

If the pipeline doesn’t get built, the company owns the right of way after taking the lease, and the terms are vague enough that one can think of several other uses it covers. Assuming it is built, no provision is made for abandoning it. The rapid advance of other kinds of energy may make it obsolete (a “stranded asset,” the investors’ worst nightmare). If so, what happens? If it does continue for some projected lifespan, what happens then? Is whatever current landowner married to it “for time and eternity.” Or is it to become a public liability, like so much of the remains of the coal industry and chemical industry, to be cleaned up at public expense? The end of useful life certainly will come.

Some of the lady’s neighbors were glad to get a little cash. It is a poor neighborhood, and they are willing to endure the traffic, the dirt, the contamination for a modest payment. Or perhaps they had a limited concept of what was coming. The ones who bargained received second, even third offers, often with more money, but taking more land or changing the take somewhat. Of course the contracts had the standard “nondisclosure clause” to keep information, including both terms and price from the neighbors.

In such conditions people who refuse to sign are often told “Your neighbors have all signed” or “If you don’t sign, we are going to take it anyway,” even if the company has no right of eminent domain. Essentially, only interstate pipelines which have been vetted by FERC have eminent domain, although in many cases lease men may  say a line which has not been vetted can use law to take the right of way.

Lease taking is an art in applied psychology which is well cultivated. They have tough guys, they have types that can charm, they have legalistic types and so on. Lease takers have been known to threaten old people, to claim the lease doesn’t say what it does, and even to make wild claims about what the law says when in fact it doesn’t.

You are supposed to be able to write-in additional provisions, which supersede the printed page, but I’ve also heard people claim the recorded lease is different from the one they signed. You can demand different terms on a printed page, requiring the land man to come back, too, if you hint you will then sign it. He likely would have to go back to get the boss’s permission to make a change anyway.

This is pretty serious business for the owners that reside on the land, the neighbors and those that follow, the “heirs and assigns,” as the law puts it. You need to cooperate with your neighbors, and get expert help. The land men do it every day and have a big organization behind them with experts of all kinds. You do it once or a few times in your life. You are just a daily hurdle that must be gotten over. Perhaps one of several for the day. Remember, it’s your interest against the company’s.

How long will this extraction boom last? Is it likely to play out? In the view of those playing the game, it can’t be interrupted. It will go on for decades. It can’t. First of all, there is much gas in the world that can be taken out of the ground cheaper. Some is in the Arabic states that are our nominal friends. Far more is in Russia, “pipelineistan,” allied with Russia, and Iran, all of which butt up against each other in the center of the Eurasian land mass, where gas can be piped to Europe and China without fracking or liquefaction.

Secondly, solar and other “renewable” sources of energy are poised for a rapid advance. Hydrocarbon advocates deny the chance of displacement, but it will happen quickly, because it eliminates much of the cause of global warming, provides more and better jobs and eliminates huge, long distance power lines.

Third, the financial scenarios for fracking  are uncertain. The price usually quoted for gas is the Henry Hub price. So what is that? It is a concentration point for gas moving east at Erath, Louisiana, where it interconnects with nine large transmission lines to pipe the gas on east. It serves as the source of figures used for gas price in the New York Stock Exchange and elsewhere. It is not the only transshipment point for gas, however. Marcellus gas is already in the East, and it goes through other hubs, being sold by one party to another.

It’s not just need to pay off debt that forces companies to keep drilling, see here.

Experts are saying the pipelines are needed for transport to markets, but the real objective is to export liquid natural gas. The cost of liquefaction, onloading and cross sea transport, with regasification is needed in addition to the higher cost of fracking.  American businesses will have to compete with foreign countries for gas markets. Your cost may be the price in China, less what it takes to get it over there.

Then there is what I have referred to as the “White elephant in the room,’” i.e. global warming. Can economics drive us over the climate cliff, like in the movie “Thelma and Louise”?

The fact is that fracking is investment driven, not production drawn. Those who put the money together to capitalize the industry take theirs off the top, and they have the means to get publicity and influence legislation. Plenty of money is available to the producing companies, and they spread it around liberally to the benefit of their activities.

Like they said in pirate days, “Devil take the hindmost!”

See also:  www.FrackCheckWV.net

Open Letter to the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission (FERC)

TO: Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, 888 First Street, NE, Washington, DC, 20426

RE:  Limit Interstate Pipelines for Natural Gas & NGL from Fracked Horizontal Gas Wells

We assert to you a responsibility to apply the following principles to your consideration of the PIPELINES and COMPRESSOR STATIONS now being planned in the United States:

>> Natural gas and natural gas liquids (NGL) are hydrocarbons and fossil fuels, as such they are greenhouse gases in the atmosphere of the EARTH; and, when they are consumed will ultimately become carbon dioxide which is a greenhouse gas already above 400 ppm in the atmosphere, an unsafe level which promotes Global Warming and other problems.

>> The President of the US has mandated that greenhouse gases are to be controlled and limited to reduce Global Warming and Climate Change, which has already reached extremes as demonstrated by global temperature measures and weather conditions.

>> The US EPA seeks to control and limit greenhouse gases from all sources, particularly the fossil fuels that are the major contributors of methane and carbon dioxide.

>> The US Department of the Interior seeks to limit damages to our public lands, and this example should carryover to State properties of Schools, Parks, Forests, and others.

>> The US Forest Service has expressed substantial concerns for certain damages to our National Parks, National Forests, and other forested lands due to pipeline construction, compressor stations, and extensive land and forest damages including fires and explosions that are not uncommon.

>> The right of “eminent domain” which grants permission to private companies for the taking of personal property has been grossly abused by FERC; therefore, only in the most urgent and essential cases should such authority be granted, the instances should be very few and the land taken should be a very small amount and of marginal value.

>> The “Halliburton loopholes” should be set aside as not appropriate in the regulation of the environmental damages of fracking and pipelines to water supplies, air quality and other protections where the public health is at risk.

These considerations should apply to the Atlantic Coast Pipeline across WV, VA, and NC; to the Mountain Valley Pipeline across WV and VA, to the Nexus Pipeline across Ohio, Michigan and Canada; to the ET Rover Pipeline across WV, OH, Michigan and Canada; to the Sunoco Mariner East 2 Pipeline across Ohio, WV and PA, and to the many other large diameter and long distance pipelines that are being developed.

This should also apply to the thousands of miles of smaller and shorter pipelines within the individual States, as we are particularly concerned about Pennsylvania, West Virginia, Ohio, and Virginia where extensive pipeline develop is underway.  Access road construction and pipeline/compressor station installation and operation are destructive of the land, result in subsidence, sedimentation, fragmentation and other damages.

Air pollution results from gas well development and from vents, leaks, flares, fires and explosions.  The fracking silica sand and diesel trucks and other equipment have been shown to create dangerous health conditions due to ultra-fine particulates and other pollutants.

Duane G. Nichols, Board Member, Mon Valley Clean Air Coalition

cc: President Obama, Governors of PA, OH, VA and WV

>>>>>>>>>>>>>

See also the regional protest activities:  ”Hands Across Our Land“

US Forest Service concerned about proposed pipelines through forests in West Virginia & Virginia, but is FERC listening?

From an Article by Steve Szkotak, Associate Press, August 5, 2015

Richmond, VA — The U.S. Forest Service has raised hundreds of concerns about a proposed natural gas pipeline that would carve a 30-mile swath through national forests in Virginia and West Virginia.

The written comments to federal regulators question why the proposed route of the Atlantic Coast Pipeline has to go through the George Washington and Monongahela national forests and raises similar worries cited by residents along the path of the 550-mile energy project.

The 335 questions, comments and corrections were submitted to the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission in late July by H. Thomas Speaks Jr., forest supervisor. The Forest Service already has given the builders of the proposed pipeline the green light to survey the forests.

The pipeline is proposed by Dominion Resources Inc., Duke Energy and two energy partners. It would carry natural gas from Marcellus shale drilling in Pennsylvania, Ohio and West Virginia to the Southeast. It would run from Harrison County, West Virginia, southeast to Greensville County, Virginia, and into North Carolina.

The $5 billion pipeline is intended to deliver cleaner burning natural gas to the Southeast as utilities move away from coal-burning power plants amid tighter federal rules on pollution that contributes to climate change.

The Forest Service filing was in response to a draft report filed in May by Dominion. Forest surveys of wetlands and wildlife, among other resources, are nearing completion, said Frank Mack, a spokesman for Dominion Transmission, a subsidiary that would build the pipeline.

“Much of what we have completed since May will address many of the comments the National Forest Service sent to the FERC, and which we plan to make public when we file our Resource Reports with our application to the FERC later this summer,” Mack wrote in an email.

The Forest Service said Speaks’ comments are intended to guide Dominion as it develops its final report with the agency on the national forest routes. The Forest Service will make the final decision whether the pipeline is a “suitable use” for the national forests, said Jennifer Adams, special project coordinator for the Forest Service.

Adams said a similar report was filed by the Forest Service on another interstate pipeline project, the Mountain Valley Pipeline, but those comments have not been released. The Mountain Valley project would go through a section of the Jefferson National Forest.

The 300-mile pipeline is a joint venture between EQT Corp. and NextEra Energy Inc. It would run from Wetzel County, West Virginia, to another pipeline in Pittsylvania County in Virginia.

On the Atlantic Pipeline, one Forest Service comment questions the “necessity to cross” forestlands in building the pipeline. Speaks wrote that the Forest Service policy does not authorize the use of U.S. forests “solely because it affords the applicant a lower cost or less restrictive location when compared to non-NFS lands.”

The Forest Service filing also questions whether hazardous materials such as blasting materials would be stored on forestland, the impact on streams and fish, and the restoration of habitat after the pipeline is built, among others.

While politically popular, the proposed pipeline has found opposition among its planned route by residents who object to a pipeline dissecting their land or on environmental grounds. The pipeline has spawned at least two groups opposed to its construction and several lawsuits.

>>>>>>>>>>>>>

See also information on the August 18th regional protests in VA, WV, PA, OH, MD, NC, TX, OR, etc.:  ”Hands Across Our Land“

Editorial Opinion: “Accurately Map Pipelines” Please in PA (& WV)

From the Editorial Board of the Scranton Times-Tribune, August 6, 2015

Pennsylvanians need look no further than the legacy of coal mining to understand the hazards of inaccurately mapping underground infrastructure. Official mine maps often do not reflect the actual extent of underground voids, and sometimes misidentify the location of some mine chambers.

Over the decades, the inaccurate information has caused an array of problems, from buildings being constructed over unmarked voids to problems with utility lines.

Now, the Wolf administration estimates that the natural gas industry will construct about 30,000 miles of natural gas pipelines over the next 20 years to gather gas from wells and carry it to main pipelines and then to market.

StateImpact Pennsylvania, which covers the economics and environmental aspects of the gas industry, has detailed that mapping of existing pipelines is inexact and often inaccurate. It noted that a heavy equipment operator was badly injured July 15 in Armstrong county while clearing a right-of-way for a new pipeline. His bulldozer struck an existing unmarked, unmapped pipeline, which exploded. His company had received a go-ahead from a state clearinghouse that keeps track of underground infrastructure.

As the gas industry took off in Pennsylvania, the state Legislature gave the Public Utility Commission the authority to regulate gas pipelines. But there are different categories based on size and population density in the areas that they traverse. Some lines are lightly regulated or not regulated.

The general locations of most pipes are known because companies must acquire rights-of-way from property owners. But in many cases the exact locations of the pipes within those rights-of-way are not known.

The Legislature should expand the PUC’s authority over all classifications of pipelines. And it should require companies to provide exact data for every pipeline so that contractors will be able to avoid them and first responders will know exactly what they are dealing with in emergencies.

NOTE: This above request goes out to the State of West Virginia as well. See also the August 18 protest rally in Pt. Marion, PA, at 12:30 pm and 6:30 pm over interstate pipelines: “Hands Across Our Land”

Huge Pipelines Invading WV, OH & PA

Billion-Dollar Projects To ‘Become the Norm’  —

Local Gas Will Be Transported By Four Interstate Pipelines

From an Article by Casey Junkins, Wheeling Intelligencer, October 26, 2014

Moundsville, WV — As natural gas production in the Marcellus Shale region increases, the next issue is getting the gas to market. That’s where the pipelines come in.

In the past few months, along with a number of smaller projects to complete the interconnection of pipelines in our local region, four major pipeline projects have been announced. Combined, these massive interstate projects will cost up to $15 billion to build and provide thousands of construction jobs.

The pipelines – the Atlantic Coast Pipeline, Rover Pipeline, Mountain Valley Pipeline and Leach XPress – will take gas from our area and other nearby regions and send it to various markets across the country. It also will open up more drilling opportunities.

“They need to have somewhere to take all of this gas,” said Tim Greene, owner of Land and Mineral Management of Appalachia and a former WV Department of Environmental Protection oil and gas inspector. “They are going north, south, east and west. And more pipelines will lead to more drilling all across the state.”

The Projects –

In just the last few months alone, developers have confirmed four interstate pipeline projects that will fall under the auspices of both the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission and the U.S. Pipeline and Hazardous Materials Safety Administration. All are at different points in the permitting and construction phases.

>>> Atlantic Coast Pipeline — The $5 billion Atlantic Coast Pipeline, developed by Dominion Resources, Duke Energy, Piedmont Natural Gas and AGL Resources, is planned to be 550 miles long with the 42-inch pipeline diameter.

The pipeline’s proposed route runs southeast through Harrison, Lewis, Upshur, Randolph and Pocahontas counties in West Virginia; southeast across central Virginia to the border of North Carolina; and south through North Carolina to Robeson County, just north of the South Carolina border. Pipelines from Tyler County will connect to this project.

>>> Rover Pipeline — The $4.3 billion Rover Pipeline, developed by ET Rover Co., will be able to transport up to 3.5 billion cubic feet of natural gas per day.

Its proposed route includes a 36-inch pipeline running from Doddridge County, W.Va., north through Tyler County, under the Ohio River to Monroe County, and north to connect with a 42-inch pipeline running from Noble County, Ohio through northern Monroe County.

This 42-inch line will run from the Clarington area, north through Belmont County. At this point, a 24-inch pipeline that travels west and under the Ohio River from Marshall County will connect with the 42-inch line in the Jacobsburg area of Belmont County. From there, the 42-inch line heads northwest through the St. Clairsville area and into Harrison County.

The 42-inch line continues north into Carroll County.  At that point, the 42-inch line will collect gas from a 36-inch line running west from northern Washington County, Pa., through Hancock County, under the Ohio River, and across Jefferson and Harrison counties. From that point, the map shows the Rover Pipeline will cut northwest across the Ohio countryside until it reaches the company’s Midwest hub in Defiance, Ohio. From there, the line continues north into Michigan.

>>> Leach Xpress — A map shows the 36-inch diameter Leach XPress, at a cost of $1.75 billion to developer NiSource Inc., will ship dry methane natural gas southwest from a Majorsville compressor station in Marshall County to the Ohio River, west under the Ohio River to an area near Clarington in Monroe County, west across areas of Monroe, Noble, Muskingum, Morgan, Perry and Hocking counties in southeast Ohio to an area near Lancaster, Ohio, due south from the area near Lancaster to another crossing of the Ohio River and finally to a compressor station in Ceredo, W.Va., near Huntington.

“Historically, we have always drawn gas from the south. Now, we can send oil and gas produced in this area to the south,” Zane Daniels, spokesman for NiSource subsidiary Columbia Pipeline Group, said. “This is the missing link in the chain.”

>>> Mountain Valley Pipeline — The $3-plus billion Mountain Valley Pipeline, developed by EQT Corp., would run 330 miles south from the MarkWest Energy Mobley complex in Wetzel County to the Transcontinental Gas Pipeline Co. Zone 5 compressor station 165 in Virginia.

The project map shows the Mountain Valley would run south through Wetzel, Harrison, Lewis, Braxton, Webster, Nicholas, Greenbrier, Summers and Monroe counties in West Virginia as it reaches the Virginia border.

What Landowners Should Know

Accompanying any interstate pipeline will be compressor stations, which can produce air pollutants such as nitrogen oxides and formaldehyde. Companies typically place compressor stations every 40 to 100 miles along the line to propel the gas toward its destination.

Tim Greene said surface owners who are asked to sign right-of-way agreements to allow the pipelines on their property should know their rights. “Don’t just take their word for it. Do the research,” Greene said. “Make sure you are getting a fair deal. Be careful what you sign.”