An environmental organization has turned to FERC to fight anatural gas pipeline crossing the U.S.-Mexico border, proposed by an affiliate, which the group worries would harm the region's tourism industry.
The Big Bend Conservation Alliance has lobbied for months toreroute the Trans-Pecos intrastate pipeline in an attempt to mitigate theproject's presence in "one of the last remaining open spaces in thecountry," as the group's Executive Director Mattie Matthaei described thearea.
"We really have no means of protesting on a state level,"Matthaei explained.
Energy Transfer's Trans-PecosPipeline LLC filed the applicationfor the Presidio border-crossing project with FERC on May 28, 2015. Commissionstaff determined thatwith mitigation measures the project would not significantly affect theenvironment.
The Presidio project would only run 1,093 feet betweenPresidio County, Texas, and Manuel Ojinaga, Chihuahua, Mexico. Trans-PecosPipeline has also proposed the 194-mile, 42-inch-diameter Trans-Pecosintrastate pipeline system and related facilities within Texas. The pipelinewould traverse three counties — Pecos, Presidio and Brewster — to deliver gasfrom the Waha Hub into Mexico, as part of an agreement with Mexico's ComisionFederal de Electricidad.
Matthaei, a resident of Alpine, a town near the Trans-Pecospipeline route, voiced concerns over the intrastate pipeline's potential impactto cultural and natural resources and to the tourism industry.
"Our tourism is directly, directly derived from anddirectly related to the open space — an untouched natural area that we havehere," Matthaei said.
Trans-Pecos Pipeline stated the intrastate pipeline willbring tax benefits and construction jobs to the region and generate localrevenue.
"It is always a priority to hire locally when possible,"said Vicki Granado, spokeswoman for Energy Transfer.
Matthaei was skeptical that the projects would providesignificant benefits. While an estimated $7.1 million would be paid in totalannual ad valorem taxes to the three counties crossed by the pipeline, Matthaeisaid, the counties would still incur significant costs, including firstresponder and emergency training, and "wear and tear" on roadways andinfrastructure due to construction activities.
"To us, it appears to be a net loss, not a net gain,"Matthaei said.
Coyne Gibson, another member of the Big Bend ConservationAlliance, does legal research for the group. Gibson said the group will takeits case against FERC on the Presidio pipeline to federal court if it must.Gibson acknowledged that such an attempt probably would not halt constructionof the Trans-Pecos pipeline.