Industries Environmental Impact Statements (EISs)
Final Environmental Impact Statement for the Proposed Southeast Supply Header Project (Docket No. CP07-044-000 & CP07-45-000)
Issued: August 10, 2007
The FERC staff has prepared a final environmental impact statement (EIS) for the Southeast Supply Header, LLP's (SESH) proposed Southeast Supply Header Project (Project). The final EIS issue date is August 10, 2007 with notice by the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) scheduled for August 17, 2007. The notice for the draft EIS for the Project was issued by EPA on April 27, 2007.
In order to provide needed new transportation capacity that significantly enhances access to reliable, onshore gas supplies to serve growing demand in the Southeast including Florida, SESH proposes to construct and operate approximately 270 miles of natural gas pipeline and associated ancillary facilities capable of transporting up to approximately 1.14 billion cubic feet per day of natural gas. Specifically, SESH proposes to construct and operate:
- Approximately 104 miles of 42-inch-diameter natural gas pipeline extending southeasterly from Richland Parish, Louisiana to Lawrence County, Mississippi
- Approximately 165 miles of 36-inch-diameter natural gas pipeline extending southeasterly from Lawrence County, Mississippi to Mobile County, Alabama
- Approximately 1.7 miles of 6-, 16-, 20-, 24- and 42-inch laterals in Jefferson Davis, Covington, and Forrest Counties, Mississippi and Mobile County, Alabama
- Three new natural gas mainline compressor stations: the Delhi, Gwinville, and the Lucedale Compressor Stations, located in Richland Parish, Louisiana, and Jefferson Davis and George County, Mississippi, respectively
- Two natural gas booster compressor stations, the Collins Booster Station and Petal Booster Station in Covington and Forrest County, Mississippi, respectively; and
- Other ancillary facilities including thirteen meter and regulator (M&R) facilities, eighteen mainline valves, two tap valves, and three pig launcher and/or receiver facilities.
- SESH would implement its Plan and Procedures and additional environmental protection plans, which would minimize and mitigate impacts to natural resources during construction and operation of the Project.
- SESH would implement an environmental inspection and monitoring program that would ensure compliance with all proposed and recommended mitigation measures.
- SESH's proposed route would incorporates over 70 route modifications developed during the NEPA process in response to issues and concerns identified by landowners and reviewing government agencies.
- SESH would implement the provisions of the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Services's Biological Opinion of July 19, 2007 for the federally listed gopher tortoise.
- We complete consultations with the NRCS and FSA for federally managed lands including WRP and CRP programs, and would implement any appropriate mitigation prior to approval to begin construction.
- SESH would complete consultation with the State Historic Preservation Officers and Advisory Council on Historic Preservation, as required by Section 106 of the National Historic Preservation Act, before beginning construction.
- SESH would obtain consistency determinations from the states of Mississippi and Alabama, in accordance with the Coastal Zone Management Act, prior to construction.
- We are recommending that SESH limit its construction right-of-way for its 42-inch-diameter pipeline to 100 feet; and removal of a 10-foot buffer between existing pipeline rights of way and the edge of SESH's construction right-of-way to further reduce vegetation impacts, including the amount of tree clearing required.
- » Cover Letter
- » Table of Contents
- » Executive Summary
- » Section 1
- » Section 2
- » Section 3
- » Section 4
- » Section 5
- » Additional Documents in eLibrary
This final EIS was prepared to satisfy the requirements of the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) and was prepared in cooperation with the United States Army Corps of Engineers, Natural Resource Conservation Service, Fish and Wildlife Service, National Park Service, and the Environmental Protection Agency.
The FERC staff concludes that if the proposed Project is found to be in the public convenience and necessity and is constructed and operated in accordance with SESH's proposed impact minimization and mitigation measures as well as our recommended mitigation measures, the proposed facilities would have limited adverse environmental impacts, with one exception. The project would result in a conversion of about five acres of forested wetland. However, our evaluation concluded that the impact would be substantive, but not significant and is environmentally acceptable. In support of this conclusion, we offer the following:
The FERC Commissioners will take into consideration staff's recommendations and the final EIS when they make decisions on the Project.