Contingent Liabilities and Commitments (Notes)	12 Months Ended
Dec. 31, 2017
Commitments and Contingencies Disclosure [Abstract]
Contingent Liabilities and Commitments	CONTINGENT LIABILITIES AND COMMITMENTS Rate Matters General rate case (Docket No. RP06-569) On August 31, 2006, we submitted to the FERC a general rate filing principally designed to recover increased costs. The rates became effective March 1, 2007, subject to refund and the outcome of a hearing. All issues in this proceeding except one were resolved by settlement. The one issue reserved for litigation or further settlement related to our proposal to change the design of the rates for service under our WSS-OA storage rate schedule, which was implemented subject to refund on March 1, 2007. Following a hearing, the FERC issued an opinion approving our proposed incremental rate design, and subsequently denied requests for rehearing of that approval. On February 21, 2014, the U. S. Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit (D.C. Circuit) issued an opinion that vacated and remanded the FERC's order because the FERC did not adequately support its conclusions. On March 17, 2016, the FERC issued an order addressing the issues raised by the D.C. Circuit's opinion. In the March 17 order, the FERC reversed its prior opinion and found that Transco's incremental rate design was unjust and unreasonable. The FERC directed Transco to design its WSS-OA rates on a rolled-in basis, to file revised WSS-OA rates reflecting the findings in the order, and to refund the amounts collected in excess of those rates since March 1, 2007. On April 18, 2016, we submitted the compliance filing reflecting rolled-in rates for WSS-OA service consistent with the March 17 order, and began charging those rates beginning April 19, 2016. We also filed a request for rehearing of the March 17 order. On October 4, 2017, the FERC issued an order denying all requests for rehearing of the March 17 order, accepting our April 18, 2016 compliance filing, and directing us to make refunds. No party filed a request for rehearing of the October 4 order, and no party filed an appeal of the March 17, 2016 or October 4, 2017 order. On November 16, 2017, we issued refunds of $19.2 million to the affected customers. The rates we charge to our customers are subject to the rate-making policies of the FERC. These policies permit us to include in our cost-of-service an income tax allowance that includes a deferred income tax component. The recently enacted Tax Reform, makes significant changes to the U.S. federal income tax rules applicable to both individuals and entities, including among other things, a reduction in corporate federal income tax rates. Although we expect that the decreased federal income tax rates will require us to return amounts to certain customers in the future and as a result we recognized a regulatory liability as of the date of enactment of Tax Reform, the details of any regulatory implementation guidance remain uncertain. Station 62 Incident On October 8, 2015, an explosion and fire occurred at our Compressor Station No. 62 in Gibson, Louisiana. At the time of the incident, planned facility maintenance was being performed at the station and the facility was not operational. The incident was related to maintenance work being performed on the slug catcher at the station. Four contractor employees were killed in the incident and others were injured. In responding to the incident, we cooperated with local, state and federal authorities, including the Louisiana State Police, Terrebonne Parish, the Louisiana Department of Environmental Quality, the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (Region 6), the Occupational Safety and Health Administration, and the U.S. Department of Transportation's Pipeline and Hazardous Materials Safety Administration (PHMSA). On July 29, 2016, PHMSA issued a Notice of Probable Violation (NOPV), which includes a $1.6 million proposed civil penalty to us in connection with the incident. This penalty was accrued in the second quarter of 2016 and would not be covered by our insurance policies. We filed a response to the NOPV on August 25, 2016, and on July 14, 2017, PHMSA held a hearing on the NOPV. The incident did not cause any rupture of the gas pipeline or any damage to the building containing the compressor engines. In anticipation of the planned maintenance, our Southeast Louisiana Lateral was taken out of service on October 4, 2015, which affected approximately 200 MMcf/d of natural gas production. The lateral was restored to service in early 2016 after repairs were made to the facilities damaged in the incident. We are a defendant in lawsuits seeking damages for wrongful death, personal injury and property damages. We believe it is reasonably possible that losses will be incurred on some lawsuits. However, in management's judgment, the ultimate resolution of these matters will not have a material effect on our financial condition, results of operations or cash flows. While we also have claims for indemnification, we believe that it is probable that any ultimate losses incurred will be covered by our general liability insurance policy. Environmental Matters We have had studies underway for many years to test some of our facilities for the presence of toxic and hazardous substances such as polychlorinated biphenyls (PCBs) and mercury to determine to what extent, if any, remediation may be necessary. We have also similarly evaluated past on-site disposal of hydrocarbons at a number of our facilities. We have worked closely with and responded to data requests from the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) and state agencies regarding such potential contamination of certain of our sites. On the basis of the findings to date, we estimate that environmental assessment and remediation costs under various federal and state statutes will total approximately $6 million to $8 million (including both expense and capital expenditures), measured on an undiscounted basis, and will substantially be spent over the next four to six years. This estimate depends on a number of assumptions concerning the scope of remediation that will be required at certain locations and the cost of the remedial measures. We are conducting environmental assessments and implementing a variety of remedial measures that may result in increases or decreases in the total estimated costs. At December 31, 2017, we had a balance of approximately $4.0 million for the expense portion of these estimated costs, $1.8 million recorded in Accrued liabilities - Other and $2.2 million recorded in Other Long-Term Liabilities - Other in the accompanying Consolidated Balance Sheet. At December 31, 2016, we had a balance of approximately $4.2 million for the expense portion of these estimated costs, $2.1 million recorded in Accrued liabilities - Other and $2.1 million recorded in Other Long-Term Liabilities - Other in the accompanying Consolidated Balance Sheet. We have been identified as a potentially responsible party (PRP) at various Superfund and state waste disposal sites. Based on present volumetric estimates and other factors, our estimated aggregate exposure for remediation of these sites is less than $0.5 million. The estimated remediation costs for all of these sites are included in the $6 million to $8 million range discussed above. Liability under the Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation and Liability Act and applicable state law can be joint and several with other PRPs. Although volumetric allocation is a factor in assessing liability, it is not necessarily determinative; thus, the ultimate liability could be substantially greater than the amounts described above. The EPA and various state regulatory agencies routinely promulgate and propose new rules, and issue updated guidance to existing rules. More recent rules and rulemakings include, but are not limited to, rules for reciprocating internal combustion engine maximum achievable control technology, air quality standards for one hour nitrogen dioxide emissions, and volatile organic compound and methane new source performance standards impacting design and operation of storage vessels, pressure valves, and compressors. On October 1, 2015, the EPA issued its rule regarding National Ambient Air Quality Standards for ground-level ozone, setting a stricter standard of 70 parts per billion. We are monitoring the rule’s implementation as the reduction will trigger additional federal and state regulatory actions that may impact our operations. Implementation of the regulations is expected to result in impacts to our operations and increase the cost of additions to Total property, plant and equipment, net in the Consolidated Balance Sheet for both new and existing facilities in affected areas. We are unable to reasonably estimate the cost of additions that may be required to meet the regulations at this time due to uncertainty created by various legal challenges to these regulations and the need for further specific regulatory guidance. We consider prudently incurred environmental assessment and remediation costs and the costs associated with compliance with environmental standards to be recoverable through rates. To date, we have been permitted recovery of environmental costs, and it is our intent to continue seeking recovery of such costs through future rate filings. As a result, as estimated costs of environmental assessment and remediation are incurred, they are recorded as regulatory assets in the Consolidated Balance Sheet until collected through rates. At December 31, 2017, we had a balance of approximately $2.2 million of uncollected environmental related regulatory assets, $1.2 million recorded in Current Assets - Regulatory assets and $1.0 million recorded in Other Assets - Regulatory assets in the accompanying Consolidated Balance Sheet. At December 31, 2016, we had a balance of approximately $2.5 million of uncollected environmental related regulatory assets, $1.2 million recorded in Current Assets - Regulatory assets and $1.3 million recorded in Other Assets - Regulatory assets in the accompanying Consolidated Balance Sheet. Other Matters Various other proceedings are pending against us and are considered incidental to our operations. Summary We estimate that for all matters for which we are able to reasonably estimate a range of loss, including those noted above and others that are not individually significant, our aggregate reasonably possible losses beyond amounts accrued for all of our contingent liabilities are immaterial to our expected future annual results of operations, liquidity and financial position. These calculations have been made without consideration of any potential recovery from third parties. We have disclosed all significant matters for which we are unable to reasonably estimate a range of possible loss. Other Commitments Commitments for construction We have commitments for construction and acquisition of property, plant and equipment of approximately $114 million at December 31, 2017.

CONTINGENT LIABILITIES AND COMMITMENTS

Rate Matters

General rate case (Docket No. RP06-569) On August 31, 2006, we submitted to the FERC a general rate filing principally designed to recover increased costs. The rates became effective March 1, 2007, subject to refund and the outcome of a hearing. All issues in this proceeding except one were resolved by settlement.

The one issue reserved for litigation or further settlement related to our proposal to change the design of the rates for service under our WSS-OA storage rate schedule, which was implemented subject to refund on March 1, 2007. Following a hearing, the FERC issued an opinion approving our proposed incremental rate design, and subsequently denied requests for rehearing of that approval. On February 21, 2014, the U. S. Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit (D.C. Circuit) issued an opinion that vacated and remanded the FERC's order because the FERC did not adequately support its conclusions. On March 17, 2016, the FERC issued an order addressing the issues raised by the D.C. Circuit's opinion. In the March 17 order, the FERC reversed its prior opinion and found that Transco's incremental rate design was unjust and unreasonable. The FERC directed Transco to design its WSS-OA rates on a rolled-in basis, to file revised WSS-OA rates reflecting the findings in the order, and to refund the amounts collected in excess of those rates since March 1, 2007. On April 18, 2016, we submitted the compliance filing reflecting rolled-in rates for WSS-OA service consistent with the March 17 order, and began charging those rates beginning April 19, 2016. We also filed a request for rehearing of the March 17 order. On October 4, 2017, the FERC issued an order denying all requests for rehearing of the March 17 order, accepting our April 18, 2016 compliance filing, and directing us to make refunds. No party filed a request for rehearing of the October 4 order, and no party filed an appeal of the March 17, 2016 or October 4, 2017 order. On November 16, 2017, we issued refunds of $19.2 million to the affected customers.

The rates we charge to our customers are subject to the rate-making policies of the FERC. These policies permit us to include in our cost-of-service an income tax allowance that includes a deferred income tax component. The recently enacted Tax Reform, makes significant changes to the U.S. federal income tax rules applicable to both individuals and entities, including among other things, a reduction in corporate federal income tax rates. Although we expect that the decreased federal income tax rates will require us to return amounts to certain customers in the future and as a result we recognized a regulatory liability as of the date of enactment of Tax Reform, the details of any regulatory implementation guidance remain uncertain.

Station 62 Incident

On October 8, 2015, an explosion and fire occurred at our Compressor Station No. 62 in Gibson, Louisiana. At the time of the incident, planned facility maintenance was being performed at the station and the facility was not operational. The incident was related to maintenance work being performed on the slug catcher at the station. Four contractor employees were killed in the incident and others were injured.

In responding to the incident, we cooperated with local, state and federal authorities, including the Louisiana State Police, Terrebonne Parish, the Louisiana Department of Environmental Quality, the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (Region 6), the Occupational Safety and Health Administration, and the U.S. Department of Transportation's Pipeline and Hazardous Materials Safety Administration (PHMSA). On July 29, 2016, PHMSA issued a Notice of Probable Violation (NOPV), which includes a $1.6 million proposed civil penalty to us in connection with the incident. This penalty was accrued in the second quarter of 2016 and would not be covered by our insurance policies. We filed a response to the NOPV on August 25, 2016, and on July 14, 2017, PHMSA held a hearing on the NOPV.

The incident did not cause any rupture of the gas pipeline or any damage to the building containing the compressor engines. In anticipation of the planned maintenance, our Southeast Louisiana Lateral was taken out of service on October 4, 2015, which affected approximately 200 MMcf/d of natural gas production. The lateral was restored to service in early 2016 after repairs were made to the facilities damaged in the incident.

We are a defendant in lawsuits seeking damages for wrongful death, personal injury and property damages. We believe it is reasonably possible that losses will be incurred on some lawsuits. However, in management's judgment, the ultimate resolution of these matters will not have a material effect on our financial condition, results of operations or cash flows. While we also have claims for indemnification, we believe that it is probable that any ultimate losses incurred will be covered by our general liability insurance policy.

Environmental Matters

We have had studies underway for many years to test some of our facilities for the presence of toxic and hazardous substances such as polychlorinated biphenyls (PCBs) and mercury to determine to what extent, if any, remediation may be necessary. We have also similarly evaluated past on-site disposal of hydrocarbons at a number of our facilities. We have worked closely with and responded to data requests from the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) and state agencies regarding such potential contamination of certain of our sites. On the basis of the findings to date, we estimate that environmental assessment and remediation costs under various federal and state statutes will total approximately $6 million to $8 million (including both expense and capital expenditures), measured on an undiscounted basis, and will substantially be spent over the next four to six years. This estimate depends on a number of assumptions concerning the scope of remediation that will be required at certain locations and the cost of the remedial measures. We are conducting environmental assessments and implementing a variety of remedial measures that may result in increases or decreases in the total estimated costs. At December 31, 2017, we had a balance of approximately $4.0 million for the expense portion of these estimated costs, $1.8 million recorded in Accrued liabilities - Other and $2.2 million recorded in Other Long-Term Liabilities - Other in the accompanying Consolidated Balance Sheet. At December 31, 2016, we had a balance of approximately $4.2 million for the expense portion of these estimated costs, $2.1 million recorded in Accrued liabilities - Other and $2.1 million recorded in Other Long-Term Liabilities - Other in the accompanying Consolidated Balance Sheet.

We have been identified as a potentially responsible party (PRP) at various Superfund and state waste disposal sites. Based on present volumetric estimates and other factors, our estimated aggregate exposure for remediation of these sites is less than $0.5 million. The estimated remediation costs for all of these sites are included in the $6 million to $8 million range discussed above. Liability under the Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation and Liability Act and applicable state law can be joint and several with other PRPs. Although volumetric allocation is a factor in assessing liability, it is not necessarily determinative; thus, the ultimate liability could be substantially greater than the amounts described above.

The EPA and various state regulatory agencies routinely promulgate and propose new rules, and issue updated guidance to existing rules. More recent rules and rulemakings include, but are not limited to, rules for reciprocating internal combustion engine maximum achievable control technology, air quality standards for one hour nitrogen dioxide emissions, and volatile organic compound and methane new source performance standards impacting design and operation of storage vessels, pressure valves, and compressors. On October 1, 2015, the EPA issued its rule regarding National Ambient Air Quality Standards for ground-level ozone, setting a stricter standard of 70 parts per billion. We are monitoring the rule’s implementation as the reduction will trigger additional federal and state regulatory actions that may impact our operations. Implementation of the regulations is expected to result in impacts to our operations and increase the cost of additions to Total property, plant and equipment, net in the Consolidated Balance Sheet for both new and existing facilities in affected areas. We are unable to reasonably estimate the cost of additions that may be required to meet the regulations at this time due to uncertainty created by various legal challenges to these regulations and the need for further specific regulatory guidance.

We consider prudently incurred environmental assessment and remediation costs and the costs associated with compliance with environmental standards to be recoverable through rates. To date, we have been permitted recovery of environmental costs, and it is our intent to continue seeking recovery of such costs through future rate filings. As a result, as estimated costs of environmental assessment and remediation are incurred, they are recorded as regulatory assets in the Consolidated Balance Sheet until collected through rates. At December 31, 2017, we had a balance of approximately $2.2 million of uncollected environmental related regulatory assets, $1.2 million recorded in Current Assets - Regulatory assets and $1.0 million recorded in Other Assets - Regulatory assets in the accompanying Consolidated Balance Sheet. At December 31, 2016, we had a balance of approximately $2.5 million of uncollected environmental related regulatory assets, $1.2 million recorded in Current Assets - Regulatory assets and $1.3 million recorded in Other Assets - Regulatory assets in the accompanying Consolidated Balance Sheet.

Other Matters

Various other proceedings are pending against us and are considered incidental to our operations.

Summary

We estimate that for all matters for which we are able to reasonably estimate a range of loss, including those noted above and others that are not individually significant, our aggregate reasonably possible losses beyond amounts accrued for all of our contingent liabilities are immaterial to our expected future annual results of operations, liquidity and financial position. These calculations have been made without consideration of any potential recovery from third parties. We have disclosed all significant matters for which we are unable to reasonably estimate a range of possible loss.

Other Commitments

Commitments for construction We have commitments for construction and acquisition of property, plant and equipment of approximately $114 million at December 31, 2017.