Contingent Liabilities and Commitments

12 Months Ended

Dec. 31, 2012

Contingent Liabilities and Commitments [Abstract]

CONTINGENT LIABILITIES AND COMMITMENTS

2. CONTINGENT LIABILITIES AND COMMITMENTS.

Rate Matters.

General rate case (Docket No. RP12-993) On August 31, 2012, we submitted to the FERC a general rate filing principally designed to recover increased costs and to comply with the terms of the settlement in our Docket No. RP06-569 rate proceeding (see below) to file a rate case no later than August 31, 2012.  On September 28, 2012, the FERC issued an order accepting and suspending our filing to be effective March 1, 2013, subject to refund and the outcome of a hearing, except that rates for certain services that were proposed as overall rate decreases were accepted, without suspension, to be effective October 1, 2012.  These decreased rates will not be subject to refund, but may be subject to decrease prospectively under the Natural Gas Act of 1938, Section 5.

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 have been resolved by settlement.

       The one issue reserved for litigation or further settlement relates to our proposal to change the design of the rates for service under one of our storage rate schedules, which was implemented subject to refund on March 1, 2007. A hearing on that issue was held before a FERC Administrative Law Judge (ALJ) in July 2008. In November 2008, the ALJ issued an initial decision in which he determined that our proposed incremental rate design is unjust and unreasonable. On January 21, 2010, the FERC reversed the ALJ's initial decision, and approved our proposed incremental rate design. Certain parties sought rehearing of the FERC's order and, on April 2, 2012, the FERC denied the rehearing request. On June 1, 2012, one of the parties filed an appeal in the U.S. Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit (D.C. Circuit). If the D.C. Circuit were to overturn the FERC's order, we believe any refunds would not be material to our results of operations.

Environmental Matters.

       We have had studies underway to test some of our facilities for the presence of toxic and hazardous substances to determine to what extent, if any, remediation may be necessary. We have 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 $5 million to $7 million (including both expense and capital expenditures), measured on an undiscounted basis, and will be spent over the next three to five 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, 2012, we had a balance of approximately $3.3 million for the expense portion of these estimated costs recorded in current liabilities ($1.1 million) and other long-term liabilities ($2.2 million) in the accompanying Consolidated Balance Sheet. At December 31, 2011, we had a balance of approximately $3.5 million for the expense portion of these estimated costs recorded in current liabilities ($0.8 million) andother long-term liabilities ($2.7 million) in the accompanying Consolidated Balance Sheet.

       Although we discontinued the use of lubricating oils containing polychlorinated biphenyls (PCBs) in the 1970s, we have discovered residual PCB contamination in equipment and soils at certain gas compressor station sites. We have worked closely with the EPA and state regulatory authorities regarding PCB issues, and we have a program to assess and remediate such conditions where they exist. In addition, we commenced negotiations with certain environmental authorities and other parties concerning investigative and remedial actions relative to potential mercury contamination at certain gas metering sites. All such costs are included in the $5 million to $7 million range discussed above.

       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 $5 million to $7 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.

       In March 2008, the EPA promulgated a new, lower National Ambient Air Quality Standard (NAAQS) for ground-level ozone. However, in September 2009, the EPA announced it would reconsider the 2008 NAAQS for ground level ozone to ensure that the standards were clearly grounded in science, and were protective of both public health and the environment. As a result, the EPA delayed designation of new eight-hour ozone non-attainment areas under the 2008 standards until the reconsideration is complete. In January 2010, the EPA proposed to further reduce the ground-level ozone NAAQS from the March 2008 levels. In September 2011, the EPA announced that it was proceeding with required actions to implement the 2008 ozone standard and area designations. In May 2012, the EPA completed designation of new eight-hour ozone non-attainment areas. Several Transco facilities are located in 2008 ozone non-attainment areas; however, each facility has been previously subjected to federal and/or state emission control requirements implemented to address preceding ozone standards. To date, no new federal or state actions have been proposed to mandate additional emission controls at these facilities. At this time, it is unknown whether future federal or state regulatory actions associated with implementation of the 2008 ozone standard will impact our operations and increase the cost of additions to property, plant and equipment. Until any additional federal or state regulatory actions are proposed, we are unable to estimate the cost of additions that may be required to meet this new regulation.

       Additionally, in August 2010, the EPA promulgated National Emission Standards for Hazardous Air Pollutants (NESHAP) regulations that will impact our operations. The remaining emission control additions required to comply with the hazardous air pollutant regulations are estimated to include capital costs in the range of $10 million to $12 million through 2013, the compliance date.

On January 22, 2010, the EPA set a new one-hour nitrogen dioxide (NO2) NAAQS. The effective date of the new NO2 standard was April 12, 2010. This standard is subject to challenges in federal court. On January 20, 2012, the EPA determined pursuant to available information that no area in the country is violating the 2010 NO2 NAAQS and thus designated all areas of the country as “unclassifiable/attainment.” Also, at that time, the EPA noted its plan to deploy an expanded NO2 monitoring network beginning in 2013. However, on October 5, 2012, the EPA proposed a graduated implementation of the monitoring network between January 1, 2014 and January 1, 2017. Once three years of data is collected from the new monitoring network, the EPA will reassess attainment status with the one-hour NO2 NAAQS. Until that time, the EPA or states may require ambient air quality modeling on a case by case basis to demonstrate compliance with the NO2 standard. Because we are unable to predict the outcome of the EPA's or states' future assessment using the new monitoring network, we are unable to estimate the cost of additions that may be required to meet this regulation.

       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 Condensed Consolidated Balance Sheet until collected through rates. However, we had no uncollected environmental related regulatory assets at December 31, 2012 or December 31, 2011.

       By letter dated September 20, 2007, the EPA required us to provide information regarding natural gas compressor stations in the states of Mississippi and Alabama as part of the EPA's investigation of our compliance with the Federal Clean Air Act (Act). By January 2008, we responded with the requested information. By Notices of Violation (NOVs) dated March 28, 2008, the EPA found us to be in violation of the requirements of the Act with respect to these compressor stations. We met with the EPA in May 2008 to discuss the allegations contained in the NOVs; in June 2008, we submitted to the EPA a written response denying the allegations. The EPA has requested additional information pertaining to these compressor stations and in May 2011, we submitted information in response to the EPA's latest request. In August, 2010, the EPA requested, and we provided, similar information for a compressor station in Maryland.

Safety Matters.

Pipeline Integrity RegulationsWe have developed an Integrity Management Plan that we believe meets the United States Department of Transportation Pipeline and Hazardous Materials Safety Administration (PHMSA) final rule that was issued pursuant to the requirements of the Pipeline Safety Improvement Act of 2002. The rule requires gas pipeline operators to develop an integrity management program for transmission pipelines that could affect high consequence areas in the event of pipeline failure. The Integrity Management Program includes a baseline assessment plan to be completed in 2012 along with periodic reassessments to be completed within required timeframes. In meeting the integrity regulations, we have identified high consequence areas and developed our baseline assessment plan.The required pipeline segments originally identified for assessment were completed within the required timeframe, with one exception which was reported to PHMSA.  We estimate that the cost to complete the remediation associated with the 2012 assessments will be approximately $20 million, most of which we expect to be 2013 capital expenditures.   

Reassessments of the original segments have begun as required by regulations. As new pipelines are constructed and new high consequence areas are created, additional pipeline segments are required to be added to the baseline assessment plan. These segments are also on schedule as required.Management considers the costs associated with compliance with the rule to be prudent costs incurred in the ordinary course of business and, therefore, recoverable through our rates.

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 $225million at December 31, 2012.