Regulation and Rates	12 Months Ended
Dec. 31, 2011
Notes to Financial Statements [Abstract]
Regulation and Rates	19. Regulation and Rates Panhandle. Trunkline LNG commenced construction of an enhancement at its LNG terminal in February 2007. The key components of the enhancement are an ambient air vaporizer system and NGL recovery units. On March 11, 2010, Trunkline LNG received approval from FERC to place the infrastructure enhancement construction project in service. Total construction costs were approximately $440 million plus capitalized interest, which includes additional costs incurred during final commissioning. The negotiated rate with the project's customer, BG LNG Services, has been adjusted based on final capital costs pursuant to a contract-based formula. In addition, Trunkline LNG and BG LNG Services have extended the existing terminal and pipeline services agreements to coincide with the infrastructure enhancement construction project contract, which runs 20 years from the in-service date. On August 31, 2009, Sea Robin filed with FERC to implement a rate surcharge to recover Hurricane Ike-related costs not otherwise recovered from insurance proceeds or from other third parties. The surcharge is primarily related to recovery of property, plant and equipment costs. On September 30, 2009, FERC approved the surcharge to be effective March 1, 2010, subject to refund and the outcome of hearings with FERC to explore issues set forth in certain customer protests, including the costs to be included and the applicability of the surcharge to discounted contracts. The Administrative Law Judge (ALJ) issued an initial decision on December 13, 2010, approving the surcharge for recovery from all shippers, including discounted and non-discounted shippers, over a recovery period of 21.4 years and including applicable carrying charges. The Company, as well as other parties, filed briefs for exception on certain aspects of the decision. On December 15, 2011, FERC issued an order changing the 21.4 year recovery period to a four-year recovery period and held that the commencement of carrying charges should begin the later of August 31, 2009 and the date the associated cost is incurred. FERC also determined that Sea Robin's discount agreements with certain shippers permit it to recover the surcharge from those shippers. In December 2011, Sea Robin reversed all outstanding reserves for refund associated with the surcharge filing, approximately $17.7 million of which had been reserved as of September 30, 2011. As of December 31, 2011, Sea Robin has incurred approximately $44 million of costs remaining to be recovered via the surcharge, including carrying charges and net of insurance and surcharge recoveries to date. In October 2011, Trunkline and Sea Robin jointly filed with FERC to transfer all of Trunkline's offshore facilities, and certain related onshore facilities, by abandonment and sale to Sea Robin to consolidate and streamline the ownership and operation of all regulated offshore assets under one entity and better position the offshore assets competitively. Several parties have filed interventions and protests of this filing. The Company is responding to information requests from FERC on this filing. The transfer is subject to approval by FERC. In November 2011, FERC commenced an audit of PEPL to evaluate its compliance with the Uniform System of Accounts as prescribed by FERC, annual and quarterly financial reporting to FERC, reservation charge crediting policy and record retention. The audit is related to the period from January 1, 2010 to present and is estimated to take approximately one year to complete. On December 15, 2003, the U.S. Department of Transportation issued a final rule requiring pipeline operators to develop integrity management programs to comprehensively evaluate their pipelines, and take measures to protect pipeline segments located in what the rule defines as HCAs. This rule resulted from the enactment of the Pipeline Safety Improvement Act of 2002. The rule requires operators to identify HCAs along their pipelines and to complete baseline integrity assessments, comprised of in-line inspection (smart pigging), hydrostatic testing or direct assessment, by December 2012. Operators were required to rank the risk of their pipeline segments containing HCAs; assessments are generally conducted on the higher risk segments first. In addition, some system modifications will be necessary to accommodate the in-line inspections. As of December 31, 2011, Panhandle had completed approximately 93 percent of the baseline risk assessments required to be completed by December 2012. While identification and location of all the HCAs has been completed, it is not practicable to determine with certainty the total scope of required remediation activities prior to completion of the assessments and inspections. The required modifications and inspections are currently estimated to be in the range of approximately $20 million to $30 million per year through 2012. Missouri Gas Energy. On July 13, 2011, a joint application was filed by Southern Union, Merger Sub and ETE requesting that the MPSC authorize Southern Union to take certain actions to allow ETE to acquire the equity interests of Southern Union. The parties filed an amended application on September 15, 2011. On February 16, 2012, the parties filed with the MPSC a Stipulation among Southern Union, ETE and the MPSC Staff. Pursuant to the Stipulation, the parties recommend that the MPSC issue an order finding that, subject to the conditions therein, the merger of Merger Sub with and into Southern Union is not detrimental to the public interest and authorizing the undertaking of the Merger and related transactions. The Office of Public Counsel has indicated that it does not oppose the Stipulation. Southern Union and ETE have requested that the MPSC consider the Stipulation expeditiously. For additional related information, see Note 3 – ETE Merger. On June 10, 2011, Missouri Gas Energy filed an application with the MPSC requesting authority to defer the financial impact of the tornado that struck Joplin, Missouri on May 22, 2011, on the grounds that the tornado constituted a material, extraordinary and non-recurring event with respect to Missouri Gas Energy's operations. On January 25, 2012, the MPSC issued its Report and Order in which it granted Missouri Gas Energy's request to defer as a regulatory asset for consideration of recovery in a future rate proceeding the incremental costs occasioned by the tornado but denied Missouri Gas Energy's request to defer as a regulatory asset for consideration of recovery in a future rate proceeding the lost fixed cost recovery occasioned by the tornado. On April 2, 2009, Missouri Gas Energy made a filing with the MPSC seeking to implement an annual base rate increase of approximately $32.4 million. On February 10, 2010, the MPSC issued its Report and Order in this case, authorizing a revenue increase of $16.2 million and approving distribution rate structures for Missouri Gas Energy's residential and small general service customers (which comprised approximately 99 percent of its total customers and approximately 91 percent of its net operating revenues at the time the rates went into effect) that eliminate the impact of weather and conservation for residential and small general service margin revenues and related earnings in Missouri. The new rates became effective February 28, 2010. Judicial review of the MPSC's Report and Order is being sought by the Office of the Public Counsel, with respect to rate structure issues, and by Missouri Gas Energy, with respect to cost of capital issues. Those judicial review proceedings are expected to be completed in 2012, and the results of such proceedings are not expected to have a material adverse impact on the Company's consolidated financial position, results of operations or cash flows. New England Gas Company. On September 15, 2008, New England Gas Company made a filing with the MDPU seeking recovery of approximately $4 million, or 50 percent of the amount by which its 2007 earnings fell below a return on equity of 7 percent. This filing was made pursuant to New England Gas Company's rate settlement approved by the MDPU in 2007. On February 2, 2009, the MDPU issued its order denying the Company's requested earnings sharing adjustments (ESA) in its entirety. The Company appealed that decision to the Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court (MSJC). On November 13, 2009, New England Gas Company made a similar filing with the MDPU, also pursuant to the above-referenced settlement, to recover approximately $1.7 million, representing 50 percent of the amount by which its 2008 earnings deficiency fell below a return on equity of 7 percent. The MDPU held the 2008 ESA matter in abeyance pending judicial resolution of the issues pertaining to the 2007 ESA. On February 11, 2011, the MSJC issued an opinion reversing the MDPU's rejection of New England Gas Company's 2007 ESA and remanded the matter back to the MDPU to determine the appropriate amount of the 2007 ESA and the method for recovery. On July 13, 2011, New England Gas Company filed its motion for proceeding on remand requesting that the MDPU (i) find that $4.1 million is the appropriate ESA amount for recovery related to calendar year 2007 and that such amount should be recovered over a 12-month period beginning November 1, 2011; and (ii) investigate New England Gas Company's request for recovery of an ESA amount of $1.7 million over a twelve-month period beginning November 1, 2012. On January 27, 2012, the MDPU issued its order approving the 2007 ESA in its entirety and authorizing recovery of approximately $4 million over a twelve-month period beginning February 1, 2012. The 2008 ESA is awaiting further action by the MDPU. On May 13, 2011, the independent auditor selected by the MDPU submitted the final audit report pertaining to 2007 cost of service information as ordered by the MDPU in connection with New England Gas Company's 2008 base rate proceeding. On December 15, 2011, the MDPU issued its order accepting the audit report and closing the docket with no further action.

Regulation and Rates

12 Months Ended

Dec. 31, 2011

Notes to Financial Statements [Abstract]

19. Regulation and Rates

Panhandle. Trunkline LNG commenced construction of an enhancement at its LNG terminal in February 2007. The key components of the enhancement are an ambient air vaporizer system and NGL recovery units. On March 11, 2010, Trunkline LNG received approval from FERC to place the infrastructure enhancement construction project in service. Total construction costs were approximately $440 million plus capitalized interest, which includes additional costs incurred during final commissioning. The negotiated rate with the project's customer, BG LNG Services, has been adjusted based on final capital costs pursuant to a contract-based formula. In addition, Trunkline LNG and BG LNG Services have extended the existing terminal and pipeline services agreements to coincide with the infrastructure enhancement construction project contract, which runs 20 years from the in-service date.

On August 31, 2009, Sea Robin filed with FERC to implement a rate surcharge to recover Hurricane Ike-related costs not otherwise recovered from insurance proceeds or from other third parties. The surcharge is primarily related to recovery of property, plant and equipment costs. On September 30, 2009, FERC approved the surcharge to be effective March 1, 2010, subject to refund and the outcome of hearings with FERC to explore issues set forth in certain customer protests, including the costs to be included and the applicability of the surcharge to discounted contracts. The Administrative Law Judge (ALJ) issued an initial decision on December 13, 2010, approving the surcharge for recovery from all shippers, including discounted and non-discounted shippers, over a recovery period of 21.4 years and including applicable carrying charges. The Company, as well as other parties, filed briefs for exception on certain aspects of the decision. On December 15, 2011, FERC issued an order changing the 21.4 year recovery period to a four-year recovery period and held that the commencement of carrying charges should begin the later of August 31, 2009 and the date the associated cost is incurred. FERC also determined that Sea Robin's discount agreements with certain shippers permit it to recover the surcharge from those shippers.

In December 2011, Sea Robin reversed all outstanding reserves for refund associated with the surcharge filing, approximately $17.7 million of which had been reserved as of September 30, 2011. As of December 31, 2011, Sea Robin has incurred approximately $44 million of costs remaining to be recovered via the surcharge, including carrying charges and net of insurance and surcharge recoveries to date.

In October 2011, Trunkline and Sea Robin jointly filed with FERC to transfer all of Trunkline's offshore facilities, and certain related onshore facilities, by abandonment and sale to Sea Robin to consolidate and streamline the ownership and operation of all regulated offshore assets under one entity and better position the offshore assets competitively. Several parties have filed interventions and protests of this filing. The Company is responding to information requests from FERC on this filing. The transfer is subject to approval by FERC.

In November 2011, FERC commenced an audit of PEPL to evaluate its compliance with the Uniform System of Accounts as prescribed by FERC, annual and quarterly financial reporting to FERC, reservation charge crediting policy and record retention. The audit is related to the period from January 1, 2010 to present and is estimated to take approximately one year to complete.

On December 15, 2003, the U.S. Department of Transportation issued a final rule requiring pipeline operators to develop integrity management programs to comprehensively evaluate their pipelines, and take measures to protect pipeline segments located in what the rule defines as HCAs. This rule resulted from the enactment of the Pipeline Safety Improvement Act of 2002. The rule requires operators to identify HCAs along their pipelines and to complete baseline integrity assessments, comprised of in-line inspection (smart pigging), hydrostatic testing or direct assessment, by December 2012. Operators were required to rank the risk of their pipeline segments containing HCAs; assessments are generally conducted on the higher risk segments first. In addition, some system modifications will be necessary to accommodate the in-line inspections. As of December 31, 2011, Panhandle had completed approximately 93 percent of the baseline risk assessments required to be completed by December 2012. While identification and location of all the HCAs has been completed, it is not practicable to determine with certainty the total scope of required remediation activities prior to completion of the assessments and inspections. The required modifications and inspections are currently estimated to be in the range of approximately $20 million to $30 million per year through 2012.

Missouri Gas Energy. On July 13, 2011, a joint application was filed by Southern Union, Merger Sub and ETE requesting that the MPSC authorize Southern Union to take certain actions to allow ETE to acquire the equity interests of Southern Union. The parties filed an amended application on September 15, 2011. On February 16, 2012, the parties filed with the MPSC a Stipulation among Southern Union, ETE and the MPSC Staff. Pursuant to the Stipulation, the parties recommend that the MPSC issue an order finding that, subject to the conditions therein, the merger of Merger Sub with and into Southern Union is not detrimental to the public interest and authorizing the undertaking of the Merger and related transactions. The Office of Public Counsel has indicated that it does not oppose the Stipulation. Southern Union and ETE have requested that the MPSC consider the Stipulation expeditiously. For additional related information, see Note 3 – ETE Merger.

On June 10, 2011, Missouri Gas Energy filed an application with the MPSC requesting authority to defer the financial impact of the tornado that struck Joplin, Missouri on May 22, 2011, on the grounds that the tornado constituted a material, extraordinary and non-recurring event with respect to Missouri Gas Energy's operations. On January 25, 2012, the MPSC issued its Report and Order in which it granted Missouri Gas Energy's request to defer as a regulatory asset for consideration of recovery in a future rate proceeding the incremental costs occasioned by the tornado but denied Missouri Gas Energy's request to defer as a regulatory asset for consideration of recovery in a future rate proceeding the lost fixed cost recovery occasioned by the tornado.

On April 2, 2009, Missouri Gas Energy made a filing with the MPSC seeking to implement an annual base rate increase of approximately $32.4 million. On February 10, 2010, the MPSC issued its Report and Order in this case, authorizing a revenue increase of $16.2 million and approving distribution rate structures for Missouri Gas Energy's residential and small general service customers (which comprised approximately 99 percent of its total customers and approximately 91 percent of its net operating revenues at the time the rates went into effect) that eliminate the impact of weather and conservation for residential and small general service margin revenues and related earnings in Missouri. The new rates became effective February 28, 2010. Judicial review of the MPSC's Report and Order is being sought by the Office of the Public Counsel, with respect to rate structure issues, and by Missouri Gas Energy, with respect to cost of capital issues. Those judicial review proceedings are expected to be completed in 2012, and the results of such proceedings are not expected to have a material adverse impact on the Company's consolidated financial position, results of operations or cash flows.

New England Gas Company. On September 15, 2008, New England Gas Company made a filing with the MDPU seeking recovery of approximately $4 million, or 50 percent of the amount by which its 2007 earnings fell below a return on equity of 7 percent. This filing was made pursuant to New England Gas Company's rate settlement approved by the MDPU in 2007. On February 2, 2009, the MDPU issued its order denying the Company's requested earnings sharing adjustments (ESA) in its entirety. The Company appealed that decision to the Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court (MSJC). On November 13, 2009, New England Gas Company made a similar filing with the MDPU, also pursuant to the above-referenced settlement, to recover approximately $1.7 million, representing 50 percent of the amount by which its 2008 earnings deficiency fell below a return on equity of 7 percent. The MDPU held the 2008 ESA matter in abeyance pending judicial resolution of the issues pertaining to the 2007 ESA. On February 11, 2011, the MSJC issued an opinion reversing the MDPU's rejection of New England Gas Company's 2007 ESA and remanded the matter back to the MDPU to determine the appropriate amount of the 2007 ESA and the method for recovery. On July 13, 2011, New England Gas Company filed its motion for proceeding on remand requesting that the MDPU (i) find that $4.1 million is the appropriate ESA amount for recovery related to calendar year 2007 and that such amount should be recovered over a 12-month period beginning November 1, 2011; and (ii) investigate New England Gas Company's request for recovery of an ESA amount of $1.7 million over a twelve-month period beginning November 1, 2012. On January 27, 2012, the MDPU issued its order approving the 2007 ESA in its entirety and authorizing recovery of approximately $4 million over a twelve-month period beginning February 1, 2012. The 2008 ESA is awaiting further action by the MDPU.

On May 13, 2011, the independent auditor selected by the MDPU submitted the final audit report pertaining to 2007 cost of service information as ordered by the MDPU in connection with New England Gas Company's 2008 base rate proceeding. On December 15, 2011, the MDPU issued its order accepting the audit report and closing the docket with no further action.