`Dear Commissioner Glick,
`
`Please require a much-needed Environmental Impact Statement (EIS) for Williams
`Companyâs newly proposed Regional Energy Access Expansion (REAE) Project.
`
`An EIS would require an assessment of short- and long-term effects, effects on
`public health and safety, and effects that would violate Federal, State, Tribal,
`or local law protecting the environment to satisfy the National Environmental
`Policy Act Implementing Regulations. This is required to protect present and
`future generations of Americans according to these regulations.
`
`The Commission has recently acknowledged their responsibility to assess upstream
`and downstream greenhouse gas impacts to determine if a project is in the public
`interest. The Commission has recently required EISâs to only look at
`greenhouse gases impacts on climate, but not to fully assess all health,
`environmental and safety impacts that were not detailed in the EA. This is not
`sufficient to asses to true cost to public health and the environment.
`
`Given the reasonably foreseeable adverse effects from construction and operation
`of this project, it is clear that REAEâs emissions of toxic chemicals and
`greenhouse gases, along with plans to construct a new compressor station on or
`near an area with significant PFAS and VOC soil and groundwater contamination,
`warrants the more in-depth independent analysis via an EIS.
`
`I urge FERC to perform the necessary environmental impact analyses of the areas
`identified above in full, demonstrate true analysis and mitigation to these
`threats, and issue a complete EIS that more adequately represents and mitigates
`the threats this project poses to the public.
`
`Sincerely,
`Edward Bennett
`55 Ferry Rd
`Stockton, NJ 08559-1005
`
`
Accessing this document will incur an additional charge of $.
After purchase, you can access this document again without charge.
Accept $ Charge
Still Working On It
This document is taking longer than usual to download. This can happen if we need to contact the court directly to obtain the document and their servers are running slowly.
Give it another minute or two to complete, and then try the refresh button.
A few More Minutes ... Still Working
It can take up to 5 minutes for us to download a document if the court servers are running slowly.
Thank you for your continued patience.
This document could not be displayed.
We could not find this document within its docket. Please go back to the docket page and check the link. If that does not work, go back to the docket and refresh it to pull the newest information.
Your account does not support viewing this document.
You need a Paid Account to view this document. Click here to change your account type.
Your account does not support viewing this document.
Set your membership
status to view this document.
With a Docket Alarm membership, you'll
get a whole lot more, including:
- Up-to-date information for this case.
- Email alerts whenever there is an update.
- Full text search for other cases.
- Get email alerts whenever a new case matches your search.
One Moment Please
The filing “” is large (MB) and is being downloaded.
Please refresh this page in a few minutes to see if the filing has been downloaded. The filing will also be emailed to you when the download completes.
Your document is on its way!
If you do not receive the document in five minutes, contact support at support@docketalarm.com.
Sealed Document
We are unable to display this document, it may be under a court ordered seal.
If you have proper credentials to access the file, you may proceed directly to the court's system using your government issued username and password.
Access Government Site
