1 lrv|rg P|ace, Zlr F|oor, NeW Yor|, NY 10003 Ň Te|: (212) 253-2727 Fax: (212) 253-5êêê Ň WWW

.rpa.org

CHAIRMAN
Elliot G. Sander

VICE CHAIRMAN AND
CO-CHAIRMAN, NEW JERSEY
Christopher J. Daggett

VICE CHAIRMAN
Douglas Durst

VICE CHAIRMAN AND
CO-CHAIRMAN, NEW JERSEY
Hon. James J. Florio

VICE CHAIRMAN AND
CO-CHAIRMAN, CONNECTICUT
John S. Griswold, Jr.

TREASURER AND
CO-CHAIRMAN, LONG ISLAND
Matthew S. Kissner

CHAIRMAN EMERITUS AND
COUNSEL
Peter W. Herman

PRESIDENT
Robert D. Yaro


Bradley Abelow
Rohit T. Aggarwala
Hilary M. Ballon
Stephen R. Beckwith
Robert Billingsley
Edward J. Blakely
Tonio Burgos
Michael J. Cacace
Frank S. Cicero
Kevin S. Corbett
Anthony R. Coscia
Alfred A. DelliBovi
Brendan P. Dougher
Ruth F. Douzinas
Brendan J. Dugan
Fernando Ferrer
Barbara J. Fife
Timur F. Galen
Carl Galioto
Jerome W. Gottesman
Maxine Griffith
John K. Halvey
Dylan Hixon
David Huntington
Adam Isles
Kenneth T. Jackson
Marc Joseph
Richard D. Kaplan
Greg A. Kelly
Marcia V. Keizs
Robert Knapp
Michael Kruklinski
John Z. Kukral
Richard C. Leone
Trent Lethco
Charles J. Maikish
Joseph J. Maraziti, Jr.
Peter J. Miscovich
J. Andrew Murphy
Jan Nicholson
0LFKDHO2·%R\OH
Richard L. Oram
Kevin J. Pearson
Lee H. Perlman
James S. Polshek
Richard Ravitch
Gregg Rechler
Michael J. Regan
Denise Richardson
Peter Riguardi
Michael M. Roberts
Elizabeth Barlow Rogers
Lynne B. Sagalyn
Lee B. Schroeder
Anthony E. Shorris
H. Claude Shostal
Robert Stromsted
Susan L. Solomon
Gail Sussman
Luther Tai
Marilyn J. Taylor
Sharon C. Taylor
Richard T. Thigpen
Arthur J. Torno
Karen E. Wagner
William M. Yaro
John Zuccotti

EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR
Thomas K. Wright

June 22, 2012

Kimberly D. Bose
Federal Energy Regulatory Commission
888 First Street NE, Room 1A
Washington, DC 20426

RE: PF09-8-000: Rockaway Delivery Lateral Project

Dear Ms. Bose

Regional Plan Association is pleased to submit our comments on the potential
environmental impacts of the Rockaway Delivery Lateral Project.

Regional Plan Association (RPA) is a non-profit research and planning organization
that has promoted the quality of life and economic vitality of the New York
Metropolitan Region for nearly a century. RPA has had a long-time vested interest
in Gateway National Recreation Area. A generation ago, we helped lead the planning
and advocacy efforts that created the Park, and we later supported it in its infancy.
We continue to work with the Park Service, the City, and other stakeholders to see
improvements in the Park and Jamaica Bay, including staffing the recent Blue
Ribbon Panel convened by Senator Schumer and leading the Jamaica Bay Greenway
Coalition.

We are also concerned about air quality and climate change, and the ability of New
York to meet its energy needs through a variety of reliable sources that reduce our
FDUERQIRRWSULQWDQGSURWHFWWKHSXEOLF·VKHDOWK

For all these reasons, RPA is very supportive of the proposed pipeline facility. The
proposed project will expand the supply of natural gas in New York City, helping
support future economic development, improving public health by increasing air
TXDOLW\DQGKHOSLQJPHHWWKHFOLPDWHPLWLJDWLRQJRDOVODLGRXWLQ1HZ<RUN&LW\·V
PlaNYC. We believe that the proposed project can be structured in a way that
improves the park, including restoration of one its historically significant hangars,
while addressing significant City-wide environmental goals.

We note that the 6HQDWRU·VBlue Ribbon Panel reached a similar conclusion. Its
report, called for the Field WR´$FFRPPRGDWHcritical infrastructure needs such as the
XWLOLW\FRUULGRURQ)ODWEXVK$YHQXHµDQGWKDW´&XUUHQWDQGIXWXUHDUUDQJHPHQWV
should be structure so as to enhance, and not detract from, the experience of park
YLVLWRUVDQGZLOGOLIHDQGGLUHFWO\EHQHILWWKHSDUNLWVHOIµ
(http://www.rpa.org/floydbennett/).

It is within this context that we offer some specific considerations for the
preparation of the Environmental Impact Statement.

1 lrv|rg P|ace, Zlr F|oor, NeW Yor|, NY 10003 Ň Te|: (212) 253-2727 Fax: (212) 253-5êêê Ň WWW.rpa.org

CHAIRMAN
Elliot G. Sander

VICE CHAIRMAN AND
CO-CHAIRMAN, NEW JERSEY
Christopher J. Daggett

VICE CHAIRMAN
Douglas Durst

VICE CHAIRMAN AND
CO-CHAIRMAN, NEW JERSEY
Hon. James J. Florio

VICE CHAIRMAN AND
CO-CHAIRMAN, CONNECTICUT
John S. Griswold, Jr.

TREASURER AND
CO-CHAIRMAN, LONG ISLAND
Matthew S. Kissner

CHAIRMAN EMERITUS AND
COUNSEL
Peter W. Herman

PRESIDENT
Robert D. Yaro


Bradley Abelow
Rohit T. Aggarwala
Hilary M. Ballon
Stephen R. Beckwith
Robert Billingsley
Edward J. Blakely
Tonio Burgos
Michael J. Cacace
Frank S. Cicero
Kevin S. Corbett
Anthony R. Coscia
Alfred A. DelliBovi
Brendan P. Dougher
Ruth F. Douzinas
Brendan J. Dugan
Fernando Ferrer
Barbara J. Fife
Timur F. Galen
Carl Galioto
Jerome W. Gottesman
Maxine Griffith
John K. Halvey
Dylan Hixon
David Huntington
Adam Isles
Kenneth T. Jackson
Marc Joseph
Richard D. Kaplan
Greg A. Kelly
Marcia V. Keizs
Robert Knapp
Michael Kruklinski
John Z. Kukral
Richard C. Leone
Trent Lethco
Charles J. Maikish
Joseph J. Maraziti, Jr.
Peter J. Miscovich
J. Andrew Murphy
Jan Nicholson
0LFKDHO2·%R\OH
Richard L. Oram
Kevin J. Pearson
Lee H. Perlman
James S. Polshek
Richard Ravitch
Gregg Rechler
Michael J. Regan
Denise Richardson
Peter Riguardi
Michael M. Roberts
Elizabeth Barlow Rogers
Lynne B. Sagalyn
Lee B. Schroeder
Anthony E. Shorris
H. Claude Shostal
Robert Stromsted
Susan L. Solomon
Gail Sussman
Luther Tai
Marilyn J. Taylor
Sharon C. Taylor
Richard T. Thigpen
Arthur J. Torno
Karen E. Wagner
William M. Yaro
John Zuccotti

EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR
Thomas K. Wright

x Cultural Resources: Floyd Bennett Field and the historic hangers along
Flatbush Avenue are significant reminders of the early aviation history of the
nation. Unfortunately the National Park Service has not had the resources to
maintain these structures, much less animate them with vital programs.
Aviator Sports illustrates the promise of rehabilitation and reuse of these
nationally significant historic buildings in a manner in keeping with
Gateway·VPLVVLRQDQGFKDUDFWHU:HEHOLHYHthat housing the planned M&R
facility in one of the hangars is similarly appropriate. The EIS should
identify the positive contribution made by the proposed stabilization of the
building as well as any significant impacts on the hangar·s historic character,
especially any proposed perimeter fencing or other new structures outside
the building·s historic façade. As the public would clearly lose the
opportunity to go inside a hangar housing the M & R facility, the impact of
this loss of access and mitigation that enabled additional aviation-related
programs elsewhere would be appropriate.

x Recreational Resources: Flatbush Avenue is the public·s gateway to Floyd
Bennett Field. The recent opening of the Ryan Visitor Center in the Control
7RZHUZLOORQO\DPSOLI\WKHLPSRUWDQFHRIWKLVORFDWLRQIRUWKHSDUN·VIXWXUH
Moreover, Hangar Row is seen by tens of thousands motorists every day as
well as bicyclists on the Jamaica Bay Greenway. The popular community
gardens are nearby. The negative and positive impacts of the proposed
pipeline and the M&R facility on these users should be identified in the EIS.
In particular, this includes any proposed changes in the view of the hangar
from the park, Flatbush Avenue, and Greenway. Noise impacts from the
operation of the M&R facility must be assessed and mitigated so that it does
not impair the current quality of the park. Any disruption in use, whether
temporary during construction or permanent, should be assessed and
mitigated. Note that the increasing number of bicyclists along Flatbush use
both the Jamaica Bay Greenway as well as the west side of Flatbush Avenue
as they come to and from the Gil Hodges Bridge.

x Air Quality and Noise: As noted above, M&R facilities do make noise. Any
impact that will be heard outside the hangar should be identified, minimized
and/or mitigated so that it does not impair the current quality of the park.

Thank you for this opportunity to comment on this important project. We look
forward to its continued progress in a way befitting its location in a National Park.

Sincerely,

Robert Pirani
Vice President ² Environmental Programs
1. A. Venesky
6/26/12

I am writing to express my opposition to the proposed natural gas pipeline to run
through Jamaica Bay into Flatbush, Brooklyn, where I am a resident. It is clear to any
rational person that there is no long-term upside to fracking, based on reporting
elsewhere and especially at http://www.propublica.org/series/fracking.

Our tax dollars must be better spent on investments in energy that is actually clean,
such as solar and wind, which have proved far better alternatives in other countries.
A natural gas pipeline in Brooklyn will threaten the health of all area residents,
including myself, because of the risk of chemical contamination into the surrounding
soil. It will destory the habitats of wildlife in our area. It will only provide a short-
term benefit for a DEAD technology for a bunch of visionless cretans who don't care
about "externalities" such as the health of people in the area. Their technology is
anything but proven. And our health and the health of the environment are not
things to gamble with.

So please try and put politics aside for once and act in the best interest of our
environment and ourselves. The future depends on you.

2. Alice Zinnes
6/25/12

The proposed Williams/Transco Rockaway Lateral Project must not be approved.

Very likely,t his pipeline will deliver gas contianing high levels of radioactive radon
to our kitchens since it will supply NYC appliances and boilers with gas from the
Marcellus Shale, which is highly radioactive. Marcellus shale gas has been estimated
to contain up to 70 times as much radon as the gas from sources in Texas and
Louisiana which currently provide most of the supply for New York City’s gas.
The risk of higher radon levels is increased by the proximity of the Marcellus to NYC,
as there is not time for significant radioactive decay to occur within the small
number of hours (approximately 10) gas would be delivered.

There is no safe level for inhaled radon, and radon is the leading cause of lung
cancer in non-smokers. The likelihood of inhaling radon while cooking or doing
laundry is increased by the small size of NYC kitchens, the typical lack of windows or
vents connected to the outside. By testimony previously provided to FERC by Sane
Energy Project, the majority of NYC kitchens have only a recirculating hood (which
blows fumes back into the kitchen) or a passive wall vent, many of which have been
disabled. NYC building code disallows through-the-wall venting in the majority of
situations for older building stock, which is the majority of construction in NYC.
Since radon is heavier than air, it falls to the floor where children, who are most
vulnerable to the effects of radon contamination, play. Plus, radon decomposes to
lead, which is not healthy to have in our air either.
Additionally, the problem of radioactive agents plating out on the sides of pipelines
from gas in transit, causing hot pipes creates another environmental and disposal
risk.

No official health impact study has ever been done to document either the current
radon level at point of delivery, the actual state of ventilation available in actual city
kitchens, nor the cumulative effects of exposure to radon over a lifetime of
residential gas appliance use. Before allowing any new gas pipelines to be built,
FERC should be compelled to study and document all of the above.

3. Alice Zinnes
6/25/12- #2

The proposed Williams/Transco Rockaway Lateral Project must not be approved.
The proposed pipeline threatens flourishing wetland areas and bird sanctuaries.
The pipe would traverse delicate underwater and wetland areas, bird sanctuaries,
and a wildlife sanctuary that has only recently been restored. Millions of dollars
were spent to restore this area. The construction of this pipeline, as well as a
potential explosion and emissions from its daily operations, put all of that at risk.

Floyd Bennett Field has a history of fires, including brush fires. Hydrants there are
relatively few, and many of the existing ones have been problematic. It does not
appear that there are adequate resources to deal with the potential for fires caused
by introducing a massive gas line into this area. Ģ The metering station proposed
will be remotely controlled from Texas. If there is a brush fire or an explosion and
the gas shutoff from Texas does not work, the results could be disastrous. Even if
new gas can be prevented from coming into the metering station in the event of a
fire, the gas that is already in the station remains.

Sediments stirred up by these construction operations may obstruct gills and filter-
feeding structures of fishes and sedentary invertebrates.

The artificial reef near the proposed pipeline route has become a very sensitive
ecological area, which is critical not only to marine life, but also to the local
economy. Many charter boats and commercial party boats depend on this area, so
any damage to the reef will have economic impacts as well as environmental
impacts.

There is no guarantee where the large amount of sand that will be blown out from
the sea bottom to form a shallow trench will be carried. Given the currents, it will
probably move to the west, but if a strong storm comes up, it could end up
anywhere, including on the reef.

Heavy metals whose existence near the proposed pipeline route have been
documented, including arsenic, cadmium, copper, lead and mercury, may be
disturbed from their current locations beneath the ocean floor during these
trenching operations, and may contaminate the reef and adjacent areas.

Attempts to document existing marine organisms have been inadequate, and should
be repeated during the summer months, when marine life is at its peak, by divers
utilizing GPS positioning to ensure full documentation.

4. Alice Zinnes
6/25/12- #3

The proposed Williams/Transco Rockaway Lateral Project must not be approved.
In addition to threatening Jamaica Bay, the surrounding communities and New York
City, the pipeline threatens the public health, safety, property values and economy
of all regions of the Marcellus shale, including upstate New York, Pennsylvania, Ohio,
West Virginia and other areas, since it inevitability will increase the demand for
hydrofracturing.

Industry wants this pipeline not so much to bring “clean” energy to New York
City, but rather to bring fracked Marcellus shale gas to market, especially
internation markets where the price for natural gas is 5-8 times the domestic price.
This proposed pipeline would encourage further production in gas fields upwind
and upstream from the densely populated metro area, with ruinous impact on air
and water quality for populations in both rural and metro areas. Air pollution from
gas field and pipeline emissions can travel in a radius of up to 200 miles and will
more than negate the purported “clean- burning” advantage of gas. Instead of
cleansing New York City's air with the currently clean air of upstate NY, if drilling
were to occur upstate, NYC would receive polluted air. Thus, any asthma
improvements from our converted our grid to natural gas would be eliminated by
the worsened overall air quality throughout NYC. Emissions from pipelines are so
prevalent that industry even has a name for them: LUGs (lost unaccounted gas).
Leaks are part and parcel of pipelines and can be expected to occur 24/7, losing
anywhere from 3-12% of the total volume. Local and global climate will suffer, as
evidenced by the Howarth Cornell study, published April 2011, that documents
methane as a much more potent emitter of greenhouse gases than even coal or oil,
especially when viewed over a 20-year cycle.

5. Ann Eagan
6/23/12

I am strongly opposed to all pipelines into NYC. We do not need this filthy,
dangerous, radon gas. There are many alternatives and they are out there for all to
see, all sustainable.

6. Bonita Rothman
6/24/12

To Whom it May Concern:

It would appear that the government is once again planning to put a pipeline
through sensitive city and wetland areas. The safety record of the companies that
do this work has been less than stellar and the ease with which this seems to pass
calls into question the judgment of everyone involved -- especially since there is so
little transparency in these actions.

The Rockaway lateral is another high-pressure, large-diameter gas pipeline,
proposed to run across newly restored wetlands in Jamaica Bay, under Riis Park
beach, Floyd Bennett Field, all the way to Avenue U, near the always-crowded Kings
Plaza shopping center in Brooklyn.

All the same problems with fracking apply to the Spectra pipeline, namely leaking
and destruction of surrounding land through pollution, and to the Rockaway
Lateral, and more: pollution risks to delicate wetlands as well as risks from frequent
brush fires at Floyd Bennett field.

The safety record of this pipeline builder (Williams Transco) is just as bad as
Spectra's. Since 2008, there's apparently been only one month out of the past 45 in
which they have not operated under a federal Corrective Action Order. Just this past
March, they were fined $50,000 for failures related to corrosion control on pipes
running through Staten Island.

Wow! Is this a record that inspires your confidence? It does not inspire mine. If this
represents "safety" then I would like to know when and how you will get a better
record. Otherwise, I urge that this project be postponed or eliminated as simply not
safe enough for the population that literally lives on top of it!

Sincerely,
Bonita Rothman
107 Bolivar St.
Staten Island, NY 10314

7. Carolyn Birden
6/24/12

The nation, and especially New York, do not need any more gas lines, especially if
the gas is coming from the fracking process that is so fraught with danger for the
environment, including people. Do not allow new gas lines anywhere in New York,
and especially not in wetlands, populated areas, and anywhere in a metropolitan
area. Not anywhere at all. I am not a single-issue voter by inclination, but a vote by
my representatives for anything that encourages or installs fracking and gas lines
will mean that I will NOT be voting for them for any office or election campaign,
ever.
I am a voter, a taxpayer, and a citizen committed to stopping fracking wherever I
can.
Did I remember to say that I am a voter?
Thank you for listening to the people.

8. Claire Donohue of “Sane Energy Project,” an organization with 3,694
supporters.
6/24/12

Ms. Kimberly D. Bose,

Secretary Federal Energy Regulatory Commission

888 First Street, NE, Room 1A

Washington, DC 20426
RE: Opposition to the Williams/Transco Rockaway Lateral Docket: PF09-8-000

June 24, 2012
Dear Ms. Bose,

On behalf of Sane Energy Project and our network of 3,694 supporters, I am writing
to object to the proposed Williams/Transco Rockaway Lateral Project on the basis
of the following reasons:

1. The pipeline is a direct threat to the public health, safety, and property of
residents in the area, as well as the multitude of shoppers and businesses along
Flatbush Avenue and surrounding blocks in Brooklyn, as well as the fishermen,
boaters and visitors to the recreational areas of Jacob Riis Park, Floyd Bennett Field,
Breezy Point, and the wetlands and harbor areas of Jamaica Bay.

Gas pipelines are subject to leaks and explosions. Fear of an explosion from this
pipeline is well placed: Nationwide, pipeline accidents result in, on average, a death
every 3 weeks, and injuries or burns more than once a week. Siting a high-pressure,
large diameter pipeline such as this in a densely populated urban area, which
includes the crowded Kings Plaza Shopping Center, is inappropriate and subjects the
area to a risk out of proportion with the supposed benefits. The standard for
deciding the risk from a pipeline such as this should not be the percentage of
pipelines that explode, but the impact of the damage should it explode. In other EISs,
FERC has positively compared the chances of dying from a pipeline explosion to the
chances of dying in a car accident. While it’s true that one’s chances of dying in
a car accident are quite high compared with one’s chances of dying in a pipeline
explosion, car accidents normally do not destroy entire urban areas, blow up dozens
of buildings, injure or kill multitudes of people, or leave a crater 4 stories deep, as a
pipeline explosion of comparable size and pressure did in San Bruno, California in
2010.

2. The proposed pipeline threatens flourishing wetland areas and bird sanctuaries.

The pipe would traverse delicate underwater and wetland areas, bird sanctuaries,
and a wildlife sanctuary that has only recently been restored. Millions of dollars
were spent to restore this area. The construction of this pipeline, as well as a
potential explosion and emissions from its daily operations, put all of that at risk.

Floyd Bennett Field has a history of fires, including brush fires. Hydrants there are
relatively few, and many of the existing ones have been problematic. It does not
appear that there are adequate resources to deal with the potential for fires caused
by introducing a massive gas line into this area.

The metering station proposed will be remotely controlled from Texas. If there is a
brush fire or an explosion and the gas shutoff from Texas does not work, the results
could be disastrous. Even if new gas can be prevented from coming into the
metering station in the event of a fire, the gas that is already in the station remains.

Sediments stirred up by these construction operations may obstruct gills and filter-
feeding structures of fishes and sedentary invertebrates.

The artificial reef near the proposed pipeline route has become a very sensitive
ecological area, which is critical not only to marine life, but also to the local
economy. Many charter boats and commercial party boats depend on this area, so
any damage to the reef will have economic impacts as well as environmental
impacts.

There is no guarantee where the large amount of sand that will be blown out from
the sea bottom to form a shallow trench will be carried. Given the currents, it will
probably move to the west, but if a strong storm comes up, it could end up
anywhere, including on the reef.

Heavy metals whose existence near the proposed pipeline route have been
documented, including arsenic, cadmium, copper, lead and mercury, may be
disturbed from their current locations beneath the ocean floor during these
trenching operations, and may contaminate the reef and adjacent areas.

Attempts to document existing marine organisms have been inadequate, and should
be repeated during the summer months, when marine life is at its peak, by divers
utilizing GPS positioning to ensure full documentation.


9. Claire Donohue
6/24/12- #2

The following is part 2 of 3 e-comment which comprises a single comment letter on
the Transco Rockaway pipeline.

3. The likelihood that Radon levels in delivered gas will rise as a result of this
pipeline.

The proposed pipeline is anticipated to supply NYC appliances and boilers with gas
from the Marcellus Shale, which is highly radioactive. Marcellus shale gas has been
estimated to contain up to 70 times as much radon as the gas from sources in Texas
and Louisiana which currently provide most of the supply for New York City’s
gas. The risk of higher radon levels is increased by the proximity of the Marcellus to
NYC, as there is not time for significant radioactive decay to occur within the small
number of hours (approximately 10) gas would be delivered.

* There is no safe level for inhaled radon, and radon is the leading cause of lung
cancer in non-smokers. The likelihood of inhaling radon while cooking or doing
laundry is increased by the small size of NYC kitchens, the typical lack of windows or
vents connected to the outside. By testimony previously provided to FERC by Sane
Energy Project, the majority of NYC kitchens have only a recirculating hood (which
blows fumes back into the kitchen) or a passive wall vent, many of which have been
disabled. NYC building code disallows through-the-wall venting in the majority of
situations for older building stock, which is the majority of construction in NYC.

The actionable level of indoor radon is 4 picocuries per liter. A Citizen’s Radon
Test performed on behalf of Sane Energy Project in the winter of early 2012 showed
current indoor radon levels mostly below the actionable level.

Additionally, the problem of radioactive agents plating out on the sides of pipelines
from gas in transit, causing “hot pipes” creates another environmental and
disposal risk.

No official health impact study has ever been done to document either the current
radon level at point of delivery, the actual state of ventilation available in actual city
kitchens, nor the cumulative effects of exposure to radon over a lifetime of
residential gas appliance use. Before allowing any new gas pipelines to be built,
FERC should be compelled to study and document all of the above.

FERC and PSHMSA, as well as the Department of Health, the NYC Public Advocate,
office, and the NY City Council, should compel Williams Transco, the builder of this
pipeline, National Grid, the ultimate distributor of the gas from this pipeline, as well
as the drillers and suppliers of the gas within this pipeline, to guarantee to NYC gas
customers that radon levels in their gas will not rise as a result of this new source of
gas.
4. The pipeline is a larger threat to the public health, safety, property values and
economy of all regions of the Marcellus shale, including upstate New York,
Pennsylvania, Ohio, West Virginia and other areas, due to the inevitability that it will
increase the demand for hydrofracturing.

The proposed pipeline will not bring “clean” energy to New York City. This
pipeline would bring fracked Marcellus shale gas to market. This would encourage
further production in gas fields upwind and upstream from the densely populated
metro area, with ruinous impact on air and water quality for populations in both
rural and metro areas. Air pollution from gas field and pipeline emissions can travel
in a radius of up to 200 miles and will more than negate the purported “ clean-
burning‚ Äù advantage of gas. Emissions from pipelines are so prevalent that
industry even has a name for them: LUGs (lost unaccounted gas). Leaks are part and
parcel of pipelines and can be expected to occur 24/7, losing anywhere from 3-12%
of the total volume. Local and global climate will suffer, as evidenced by the
Howarth Cornell study, published April 2011, that documents methane as a much
more potent emitter of greenhouse gases than even coal or oil, especially when
viewed over a 20-year cycle.

5. There is a history of safety issues with the builder of this pipeline.

Transco Williams is currently operating under a federal Corrective Action Order,
issued in December of 2011 in connection with a massive natural gas pipeline
explosion in Alabama.

• That explosion, On December 3, 2011, created a large crater and propelled a 47-
foot, 3-inch piece of buried pipe more than 200 feet away. The releasing gas ignited
and continued to burn for several hours, causing damage to one of the adjoining
pipelines and scorching approximately eight acres of surrounding property.

A prior corrective order, issued on Sept. 25, 2008, in connection with the Sept. 14,
2008, natural gas explosion near Appomattox, Virginia that destroyed two homes
and seriously injured five people, was closed by PHMSA on Nov. 3, 2011. In other
words, there has been only one month out of the most recent 45 in which Transco
has not operated under a Corrective Action Order.

On March 5, 2012 the Williams Partners subsidiary, Transcontinental Gas Pipeline
Co. LLC was fined $50,000 by PHMSA for failure to follow its own, internal policies
related to controlling external corrosion in natural gas pipelines running through
the New York City borough of Staten Island.

6. The proposed pipeline is a security and terrorist risk.

The proposed pipeline is a significant security risk, and a potential target for
terrorists.

Like all pipelines, this one is vulnerable to Stuxnet cyber attacks, which could
disable necessary systems or remotely affect pressures within the pipeline, causing
accidents, leaks or explosions.

Airplanes leaving or approaching JFK airport could be affected by any explosion,
fire, or terrorist actions associated with the pipeline.

10. Claire Donohue
6/24/12- #3

The following is part 3 of 3 in a single comment letter being submitted via e-
comment:

7. Its the wrong choice for New Yorks energy future.

Building new gas infrastructure wrongly invests in dirty fossil fuel when New York
City can and should ramp up investment in clean sustainable energy infrastructure
instead. For all the danger, cost, and environmental destruction of extraction and
transport, the supply of gas will be short-lived, with recent studies projecting only
20% of earlier reserves, a mere 11-year supply. According to the peer reviewed
2010 Stanford University study, using technologies already available, the world can
run solely on renewable energy by 2050. With this in mind, it is a poor investment
to shackle ourselves to polluting methane and explosive pipelines.

8. Pipeline regulation and oversight in America is sorely inadequate and slanted in
support of industry‚ interests rather than the expressed desires of American
citizens.

FERC is a federal agency mandated to speed implementation of energy
infrastructure. As such, its review of pipeline projects has been limited to ensuring
only that pipeline proposals meet current regulations for pipeline construction.
These regulations do not adequately take into account the risks to the human and
animal populations in the affected area once the pipeline has been built. FERC does
not consider whether or not a particular pipeline is actually appropriate to the
project area, only whether or not it meets guidelines which have been written to
support industry‚ interests, not those of citizens. This is evident in the fact that FERC
has approved nearly 100% of applications presented to it.

FERCs review process is compromised by the fact that FERC’s operating budget is
supplied by the industry it is deemed to regulate. FERC’s review process is
further compromised by the standard procedure whereby the project applicant pays
for its own Environmental Impact Study. This clear conflict of interest is apparent in
statements from prior EISs wherein FERC dismisses alternatives to the project,
including the no-action alternative, on the grounds that it “does not meet the
objectives of the Applicant” (i.e., the pipeline builder). FERC has approved
projects even in cases where the overwhelming proportion of public comment has
been in opposition to the project, i.e., in the case of the Spectra Pipeline (docket
CP56-11-000).

FERC willfully and by design delegates the post-construction safety of people,
animals and ecosystems to other agencies, such as the PHMSA, under the
assumption that those agencies will offer protection once a pipeline is in operation;
experience has proven this is not the case. A federal investigation into the San Bruno
explosion deemed it “a failure of the entire system,” with inadequate actions at
every stage of the pipeline’s construction, inspection, maintenance, and
emergency response.

Before 2002, there was no federal regulation of pipelines at all. Nationwide, there
are roughly 2.5 million miles of pipeline; of these, PHMSA has jurisdiction over just
174,000 miles of interstate lines. Just 7% of pipelines are subject to mandatory
internal inspection. Of that 7%, inspection is required only once every 7 years.

The number of auditors nationwide is inadequate, and they primarily review
industry-supplied reports supplemented by occasional field inspections. PHMSA
reports 800-900 annual field inspections, or roughly just 10 per inspector.

A senate bill calling for 40 additional inspectors and doubling the maximum fine,
introduced after the 2010 San

Bruno explosion, died in session. Tighter regulations are unlikely to pass under the
current Congress and those proposed offer scant additional protections for urban
areas.

The inadequacy and inaccuracy of pipeline maps nationwide has been well
documented.

Steel pipes, such as the type suggested for the Rockaway Lateral, corrode from
moisture. When a pipeline loses thickness from corrosion, it is often “de-rated,”
meaning that instead of replacing the damaged section, the pressure is lowered. The
pressure had been lowered in the pipeline which blew up in San Bruno, CA.

The principal means of detecting leaks is to search for desiccated grass and trees
along the route, a method with obvious drawbacks in the underwater and paved
urban areas this pipeline would traverse.

GIVEN THE ABOVE CONCERNS, THIS PROJECT PRESENTS AN UNACCEPTABLE
ADVERSE IMPACT, AND SHOULD NOT GO FORWARD.

Sincerely,

Clare Donohue
Sane Energy Project
459 Columbus Avenue #51
New York, NY 10024

11. Dave Publow
6/24/12

Ms. Kimberly D. Bose,
Secretary Federal Energy Regulatory Commission
888 First Street, NE, Room 1A
Washington, DC 20426

RE: Opposition to the Williams/Transco Rockaway Lateral

Docket: PF09-8-000



Dear Ms. Bose,

I am writing to object to the proposed Williams/Transco Rockaway Lateral Project
on the basis of the following reasons:

1. The pipeline is a direct threat to the public health, safety, and property of
residents in the area, as well as the multitude of shoppers and businesses along
Flatbush Avenue and surrounding blocks in Brooklyn, as well as the fishermen,
boaters and visitors to the recreational areas of Jacob Riis Park, Floyd Bennett Field,
Breezy Point, and the wetlands and harbor areas of Jamaica Bay.

Gas pipelines are subject to leaks and explosions. Fear of an explosion from this
pipeline is well placed: Nationwide, pipeline accidents result in, on average, a death
every 3 weeks, and injuries or burns more than once a week. Siting a high-pressure,
large diameter pipeline such as this in a densely populated urban area, which
includes the crowded Kings Plaza Shopping Center, is inappropriate and subjects the
area to a risk out of proportion with the supposed benefits. The standard for
deciding the risk from a pipeline such as this should not be the percentage of
pipelines that explode, but the impact of the damage should it explode. In other EISs,
FERC has positively compared the chances of dying from a pipeline explosion to the
chances of dying in a car accident. While its true that ones chances of dying in a car
accident are quite high compared with one’s chances of dying in a pipeline
explosion, car accidents normally do not destroy entire urban areas, blow up dozens
of buildings, injure or kill multitudes of people, or leave a crater 4 stories deep, as a
pipeline explosion of comparable size and pressure did in San Bruno, California in
2010.

2. The proposed pipeline threatens flourishing wetland areas and bird sanctuaries.

The pipe would traverse delicate underwater and wetland areas, bird sanctuaries,
and a wildlife sanctuary that has only recently been restored. Millions of dollars
were spent to restore this area. The construction of this pipeline, as well as a
potential explosion and emissions from its daily operations, put all of that at risk.

Floyd Bennett Field has a history of fires, including brush fires. Hydrants there are
relatively few, and many of the existing ones have been problematic. It does not
appear that there are adequate resources to deal with the potential for fires caused
by introducing a massive gas line into this area.

The metering station proposed will be remotely controlled from Texas. If there is a
brush fire or an explosion and the gas shutoff from Texas does not work, the results
could be disastrous. Even if new gas can be prevented from coming into the
metering station in the event of a fire, the gas that is already in the station remains.

Sediments stirred up by these construction operations may obstruct gills and filter-
feeding structures of fishes and sedentary invertebrates.

The artificial reef near the proposed pipeline route has become a very sensitive
ecological area, which is critical not only to marine life, but also to the local
economy. Many charter boats and commercial party boats depend on this area, so
any damage to the reef will have economic impacts as well as environmental
impacts.

‚There is no guarantee where the large amount of sand that will be blown out from
the sea bottom to form a shallow trench will be carried. Given the currents, it will
probably move to the west, but if a strong storm comes up, it could end up
anywhere, including on the reef.

Heavy metals whose existence near the proposed pipeline route have been
documented, including arsenic, cadmium, copper, lead and mercury, may be
disturbed from their current locations beneath the ocean floor during these
trenching operations, and may contaminate the reef and adjacent areas. Attempts to
document existing marine organisms have been inadequate, and should be repeated
during the summer months, when marine life is at its peak, by divers utilizing GPS
positioning to ensure full documentation.

(continued...)

12. Dave Publow
6/25/12- #2

3. The likelihood that Radon levels in delivered gas will rise as a result of this
pipeline.

The proposed pipeline is anticipated to supply NYC appliances and boilers with gas
from the Marcellus Shale, which is highly radioactive. Marcellus shale gas has been
estimated to contain up to 70 times as much radon as the gas from sources in Texas
and Louisiana which currently provide most of the supply for New York City’s
gas. The risk of higher radon levels is increased by the proximity of the Marcellus to
NYC, as there is not time for significant radioactive decay to occur within the small
number of hours (approximately 10) gas would be delivered.

* There is no safe level for inhaled radon, and radon is the leading cause of lung
cancer in non-smokers. The likelihood of inhaling radon while cooking or doing
laundry is increased by the small size of NYC kitchens, the typical lack of windows or
vents connected to the outside. By testimony previously provided to FERC by Sane
Energy Project, the majority of NYC kitchens have only a recirculating hood (which
blows fumes back into the kitchen) or a passive wall vent, many of which have been
disabled. NYC building code disallows through-the-wall venting in the majority of
situations for older building stock, which is the majority of construction in NYC.

The actionable level of indoor radon is 4 picocuries per liter. A Citizen’s Radon
Test performed on behalf of Sane Energy Project in the winter of early 2012 showed
current indoor radon levels mostly below the actionable level.

Additionally, the problem of radioactive agents plating out on the sides of pipelines
from gas in transit, causing hot pipes creates another environmental and disposal
risk.

No official health impact study has ever been done to document either the current
radon level at point of delivery, the actual state of ventilation available in actual city
kitchens, nor the cumulative effects of exposure to radon over a lifetime of
residential gas appliance use. Before allowing any new gas pipelines to be built,
FERC should be compelled to study and document all of the above.

FERC and PSHMSA, as well as the Department of Health, the NYC Public Advocates
office, and the NY City Council, should compel Williams Transco, the builder of this
pipeline, National Grid the ultimate distributor of the gas from this pipeline, as well
as the drillers and suppliers of the gas within this pipeline, to guarantee to NYC gas
customers that radon levels in their gas will not rise as a result of this new source of
gas.

4. The pipeline is a larger threat to the public health, safety, property values and
economy of all regions of the Marcellus shale, including upstate New York,
Pennsylvania, Ohio, West Virginia and other areas, due to the inevitability that it will
increase the demand for hydrofracturing.

The proposed pipeline will not bring “clean” energy to New York City. This
pipeline would bring fracked Marcellus shale gas to market. This would encourage
further production in gas fields upwind and upstream from the densely populated
metro area, with ruinous impact on air and water quality for populations in both
rural and metro areas. Air pollution from gas field and pipeline emissions can travel
in a radius of up to 200 miles and will more than negate the purported clean-
burning advantage of gas. Emissions from pipelines are so prevalent that industry
even has a name for them: LUGs (lost unaccounted gas). Leaks are part and parcel of
pipelines and can be expected to occur 24/7, losing anywhere from 3-12% of the
total volume. Local and global climate will suffer, as evidenced by the Howarth
Cornell study, published April 2011, that documents methane as a much more
potent emitter of greenhouse gases than even coal or oil, especially when viewed
over a 20-year cycle.

5. There is a history of safety issues with the builder of this pipeline.

Transco Williams is currently operating under a federal Corrective Action Order,
issued in December of 2011 in connection with a massive natural gas pipeline
explosion in Alabama.

That explosion, On December 3, 2011, created a large crater and propelled a 47-
foot, 3-inch piece of buried pipe more than 200 feet away. The releasing gas ignited
and continued to burn for several hours, causing damage to one of the adjoining
pipelines and scorching approximately eight acres of surrounding property.

A prior corrective order, issued on Sept. 25, 2008, in connection with the Sept. 14,
2008, natural gas explosion near Appomattox, Virginia that destroyed two homes
and seriously injured five people, was closed by PHMSA on Nov. 3, 2011. In other
words, there has been only one month out of the most recent 45 in which Transco
has not operated under a Corrective Action Order.

On March 5, 2012 the Williams Partners subsidiary, Transcontinental Gas Pipeline
Co. LLC was fined $50,000 by PHMSA for failure to follow its own, internal policies
related to controlling external corrosion in natural gas pipelines running through
the New York City borough of Staten Island.

6. The proposed pipeline is a security and terrorist risk.

The proposed pipeline is a significant security risk, and a potential target for
terrorists.

Like all pipelines, this one is vulnerable to Stuxnet cyber attacks, which could
disable necessary systems or remotely affect pressures within the pipeline, causing
accidents, leaks or explosions.

Airplanes leaving or approaching JFK airport could be affected by any explosion,
fire, or terrorist actions associated with the pipeline.

(continued)

13. Dave Publow
6/25/12- #3


(continued from previous comment)

7. It’s the wrong choice for New York’s energy future.

Building new gas infrastructure wrongly invests in dirty fossil fuel when New York
City can and should ramp up investment in clean sustainable energy infrastructure
instead. For all the danger, cost, and environmental destruction of extraction and
transport, the supply of gas will be short-lived, with recent studies projecting only
20% of earlier reserves, a mere 11-year supply. According to the peer reviewed
2010 Stanford University study, using technologies already available, the world can
run solely on renewable energy by 2050. With this in mind, it is a poor investment
to shackle ourselves to polluting methane and explosive pipelines.

8. Pipeline regulation and oversight in America is sorely inadequate and slanted in
support of industry’s interests rather than the expressed desires of American
citizens.

FERC is a federal agency mandated to speed implementation of energy
infrastructure. As such, its review of pipeline projects has been limited to ensuring
only that pipeline proposals meet current regulations for pipeline construction.
These regulations do not adequately take into account the risks to the human and
animal populations in the affected area once the pipeline has been built. FERC does
not consider whether or not a particular pipeline is actually appropriate to the
project area, only whether or not it meets guidelines which have been written to
support industry’s interests, not those of citizens. This is evident in the fact that
FERC has approved nearly 100% of applications presented to it.

FERCs review process is compromised by the fact that FERC’s operating budget is
supplied by the industry it is deemed to regulate. FERC’s review process is further
compromised by the standard procedure whereby the project applicant pays for its
own Environmental Impact Study. This clear conflict of interest is apparent in
statements from prior EISs wherein FERC dismisses alternatives to the project,
including the no-action alternative, on the grounds that it does not meet the
objectives of the Applican (i.e., the pipeline builder). FERC has approved projects
even in cases where the overwhelming proportion of public comment has been in
opposition to the project, i.e., in the case of the Spectra Pipeline (docket CP56-11-
000).

FERC willfully and by design delegates the post-construction safety of people,
animals and ecosystems to other agencies, such as the PHMSA, under the
assumption that those agencies will offer protection once a pipeline is in operation;
experience has proven this is not the case. A federal investigation into the San Bruno
explosion deemed it a failure of the entire system, with inadequate actions at every
stage of the pipeline’s construction, inspection, maintenance, and emergency
response.

Before 2002, there was no federal regulation of pipelines at all. Nationwide, there
are roughly 2.5 million miles of pipeline; of these, PHMSA has jurisdiction over just
174,000 miles of interstate lines. Just 7% of pipelines are subject to mandatory
internal inspection. Of that 7%, inspection is required only once every 7 years.

The number of auditors nationwide is inadequate, and they primarily review
industry-supplied reports supplemented by occasional field inspections. PHMSA
reports 800-900 annual field inspections, or roughly just 10 per inspector.

A senate bill calling for 40 additional inspectors and doubling the maximum fine,
introduced after the 2010 San Bruno explosion, died in session. Tighter regulations
are unlikely to pass under the current Congress and those proposed offer scant
additional protections for urban areas.

The inadequacy and inaccuracy of pipeline maps nationwide has been well
documented.

Steel pipes, such as the type suggested for the Rockaway Lateral, corrode from
moisture. When a pipeline loses thickness from corrosion, it is often de-rated,
meaning that instead of replacing the damaged section, the pressure is lowered. The
pressure had been lowered in the pipeline which blew up in San Bruno, CA.

The principal means of detecting leaks is to search for desiccated grass and trees
along the route, a method with obvious drawbacks in the underwater and paved
urban areas this pipeline would traverse.

GIVEN THE ABOVE CONCERNS, THIS PROJECT PRESENTS AN UNACCEPTABLE
ADVERSE IMPACT,

AND SHOULD NOT GO FORWARD.
Sincerely,
Dave Publow
590 Parkside Ave., 2BW
Brooklyn, NY 11226

14. David S. Lawrence, Esq.
6/25/12

I endorse the comment of Clare Donohue of Sane Energy Project, New York, NY.

In summary, we object to the proposed Williams/Transco Rockaway Lateral Project.
It represents an unacceptable adverse impact, and should not go forward.

All sorts of immature unproven non-operational technologies are being proposed by
large corporations that have an interest in their own profits and substantial
capability to lobby our government and its agencies. They seek to proceed with
neither responsibility for nor accountability to, the public interest, health safety nor
welfare. Their proposals are defended on the backward reasoning that resulting
damages have not been proven when in fact the safety (and proportionate benefits)
of their proposals are what properly bear the burden of prior proof. In Europe, this
latter common-sense idea is called the "precautionary principle," and is widely
accepted and applied. Let's not proceed with a total lack of common sense on this
side of the Atlantic.

Natural gas is one good, though non-renewable and therefor temporary, source of
energy. Use it, don't waste it. I have heard that most of the pipelined gas will actually
be exported rather than used domestically and so the proposed project is just
another way to subsidize corporate profits without advancing an agenda of
solutions to domestic and sustainable energy problems and policies. The fact that
it's intended to advance the reckless "fracking" process of natural gas extraction is
another shortcoming of the proposed project that has been given too short shrift by
insiders and complacent government reviewers.

A cogent series of objections and reasons was provided in the comment of Ms.
Donohue referenced in the opening paragraph above (her letter of June 24. 2012 to
Ms. Kimberly Bose, Secretary FERC).

Sincerely, David S. Lawrence, Esq.
135 Ashland Place, Apt. 5-d
Brooklyn, NY 11201-3975.

15. Donna Knipp- supporter of “Sane Energy Project.”
6/24/12

Ms. Kimberly D. Bose,

Secretary Federal Energy Regulatory Commission

888 First Street, NE, Room 1A

Washington, DC 20426

June 24, 2012

RE: Opposition to the Williams/Transco Rockaway Lateral Docket: PF09-8-000

Dear Ms. Bose,

As a supporter of Sane Energy Project and its network of 3,694 supporters, I am
writing to object to the proposed Williams/Transco Rockaway Lateral Project on the
basis of the following reasons:

1. The pipeline is a direct threat to the public health, safety, and property of
residents in the area, as well as the multitude of shoppers and businesses along
Flatbush Avenue and surrounding blocks in Brooklyn, as well as the fishermen,
boaters and visitors to the recreational areas of Jacob Riis Park, Floyd Bennett Field,
Breezy Point, and the wetlands and harbor areas of Jamaica Bay.

Gas pipelines are subject to leaks and explosions. Fear of an explosion from this
pipeline is well placed: Nationwide, pipeline accidents result in, on average, a death
every 3 weeks, and injuries or burns more than once a week. Siting a high-pressure,
large diameter pipeline such as this in a densely populated urban area, which
includes the crowded Kings Plaza Shopping Center, is inappropriate and subjects the
area to a risk out of proportion with the supposed benefits. The standard for
deciding the risk from a pipeline such as this should not be the percentage of
pipelines that explode, but the impact of the damage should it explode.

In other EISs, FERC has positively compared the chances of dying from a pipeline
explosion to the chances of dying in a car accident. While it’s true that one’s
chances of dying in a car accident are quite high compared with one’s chances of
dying in a pipeline explosion, car accidents normally do not destroy entire urban
areas, blow up dozens of buildings, injure or kill multitudes of people, or leave a
crater 4 stories deep, as a pipeline explosion of comparable size and pressure did in
San Bruno, California in 2010.

2. The proposed pipeline threatens flourishing wetland areas and bird sanctuaries.

The pipe would traverse delicate underwater and wetland areas, bird sanctuaries,
and a wildlife sanctuary that has only recently been restored. Millions of dollars
were spent to restore this area. The construction of this pipeline, as well as a
potential explosion and emissions from its daily operations, put all of that at risk.
Floyd Bennett Field has a history of fires, including brush fires. Hydrants there are
relatively few, and many of the existing ones have been problematic. It does not
appear that there are adequate resources to deal with the potential for fires caused
by introducing a massive gas line into this area.

The metering station proposed will be remotely controlled from Texas. If there is a
brush fire or an explosion and the gas shutoff from Texas does not work, the results
could be disastrous. Even if new gas can be prevented from coming into the
metering station in the event of a fire, the gas that is already in the station remains.

Sediments stirred up by these construction operations may obstruct gills and filter-
feeding structures of fishes and sedentary invertebrates.

The artificial reef near the proposed pipeline route has become a very sensitive
ecological area, which is critical not only to marine life, but also to the local
economy. Many charter boats and commercial party boats depend on this area, so
any damage to the reef will have economic impacts as well as environmental
impacts.

There is no guarantee where the large amount of sand that will be blown out from
the sea bottom to form a shallow trench will be carried. Given the currents, it will
probably move to the west, but if a strong storm comes up, it could end up
anywhere, including on the reef.

Heavy metals whose existence near the proposed pipeline route have been
documented, including arsenic, cadmium, copper, lead and mercury, may be
disturbed from their current locations beneath the ocean floor during these
trenching operations, and may contaminate the reef and adjacent areas.

Attempts to document existing marine organisms have been inadequate, and should
be repeated during the summer months, when marine life is at its peak, by divers
utilizing GPS positioning to ensure full documentation.

3. The likelihood that Radon levels in delivered gas will rise as a result of this
pipeline.

The proposed pipeline is anticipated to supply NYC appliances and boilers with gas
from the Marcellus Shale, which is highly radioactive. Marcellus shale gas has been
estimated to contain up to 70 times as much radon as the gas from sources in Texas
and Louisiana which currently provide most of the supply for New York City’s gas.
The risk of higher radon levels is increased by the proximity of the Marcellus to NYC,
as there is not time for significant radioactive decay to occur within the small
number of hours (approximately 10) gas would be delivered.

* There is no safe level for inhaled radon, and radon is the leading cause of lung
cancer in non-smokers. The likelihood of inhaling radon while cooking or doing
laundry is increased by the small size of NYC kitchens, the typical lack of windows or
vents connected to the outside. By testimony previously provided to FERC by Sane
Energy Project, the majority of NYC kitchens have only a recirculating hood (which
blows fumes back into the kitchen) or a passive wall vent, many of which have been
disabled. NYC building code disallows through-the-wall venting in the majority of
situations for older building stock, which is the majority of construction in NYC.



The actionable level of indoor radon is 4 picocuries per liter. A Citizen’s Radon Test
performed on behalf of Sane

Energy Project in the winter of early 2012 showed current indoor radon levels
mostly below the actionable level.

GIVEN THE ABOVE CONCERNS, THIS PROJECT PRESENTS AN UNACCEPTABLE
ADVERSE IMPACT, AND SHOULD NOT GO FORWARD.

16. Dr. Joan Hoffman of “Sane Energy Project”
6/24/12

Dear Ms. Bose,

As an economist and environmentalist, I am concerned that we are ginorming our
long run interests for short run gains. Our natural capital is critical to our future and
we are endangering it as described below. Ihave listed only some concerns. thank
you for pausi go to reflect beyond the world of soundbites!

On behalf of Sane Energy Project and our network of 3,694 supporters, I am writing
to object to the proposed

Williams/Transco Rockaway Lateral Project on the basis of the following reasons:

1. The pipeline is a direct threat to the public health, safety, and property of
residents in the area, as well as

the multitude of shoppers and businesses along Flatbush Avenue and surrounding
blocks in Brooklyn, as well as the fishermen, boaters and visitors to the recreational
areas of Jacob Riis Park, Floyd Bennett Field, Breezy Point, and the wetlands and
harbor areas of Jamaica Bay. Gas pipelines are subject to leaks and explosions. Fear
of an explosion from this pipeline is well placed: Nationwide, pipeline accidents
result in, on average, a death every 3 weeks, and injuries or bur more than once a
week. Siting a high-pressure, large diameter pipeline such as this in a densely
populated urban area, which includes the crowded Kings Plaza Shopping Center, is
inappropriate and subjects the area to a risk out of proportion with the supposed
benefits. The standard for deciding the risk from a pipeline such as this should not
be the percentage of pipelines that explode, but the impact of the damage should it
explode. In other EISs, FERC has positively compared the chances of dying from a
pipeline explosion to the chances of dying in a car accident. While it’s true that one’s
chances of dying in a car accident are quite high compared with one’s chances of
dying in a pipeline explosion, car accidents normally do not destroy entire urban
areas, blow up dozens of buildings, injure or kill multitudes of people, or leave a
crater 4 stories deep, as a pipeline explosion of comparable size and pressure did in
San Bruno, California in 2010.

2. The proposed pipeline threatens flourishing wetland areas and bird sanctuaries.

The pipe would traverse delicate underwater and wetland areas, bird sanctuaries,
and a wildlife sanctuary that has only recently been restored. Millions of dollars
were spent to restore this area. The construction of this pipeline, as well as a
potential explosion and emissions from its daily operations, put all of that at risk.

Floyd Bennett Field has a history of fires, including brush fires. Hydrants there are
relatively few, and many of the existing ones have been problematic. It does not
appear that there are adequate resources to deal with the potential for fires caused
by introducing a massive gas line into this area.

The metering station proposed will be remotely controlled from Texas. If there is a
brush fire or an explosion and the gas shutoff from Texas does not work, the results
could be disastrous. Even if new gas can be prevented from coming into the
metering station in the event of a fire, the gas that is already in the station remains.

Sediments stirred up by these construction operations may obstruct gills and filter-
feeding structures of fishes and sedentary invertebrates.

The artificial reef near the proposed pipeline route has become a very sensitive
ecological area, which is critical not only to marine life, but also to the local
economy. Many charter boats and commercial party boats depend on this area, so
any damage to the reef will have economic impacts as well as environmental
impacts.

There is no guarantee where the large amount of sand that will be blown out from
the sea bottom to form a shallow trench will be carried. Given the currents, it will
probably move to the west, but if a strong storm comes up, it could end up
anywhere, including on the reef.

Heavy metals whose existence near the proposed pipeline route have been
documented, including arsenic, cadmium, copper, lead and mercury, may be
disturbed from their current locations beneath the ocean floor during these
trenching operations, and may contaminate the reef and adjacent areas.

Attempts to document existing marine organisms have been inadequate, and should
be repeated during the summer months, when marine life is at its peak, by divers
utilizing GPS positioning to ensure full documentation.

3. The likelihood that Radon levels in delivered gas will rise as a result of this
pipeline.

The proposed pipeline is anticipated to supply NYC appliances and boilers with gas
from the Marcellus Shale, which is highly radioactive. Marcellus shale gas has been
estimated to contain up to 70 times as much radon as the gas from sources in Texas
and Louisiana which currently provide most of the supply for New York City’s
gas. The risk of higher radon levels is increased by the proximity of the Marcellus to
NYC, as there is not time for significant radioactive decay to occur within the small
number of hours (approximately 10) gas would be delivered.

* There is no safe level for inhaled radon, and radon is the leading cause of lung
cancer in non-smokers. The likelihood of inhaling radon while cooking or doing
laundry is increased by the small size of NYC kitchens, the typical lack of windows or
vents connected to the outside. By testimony previously provided to FERC by Sane
Energy Project, the majority of NYC kitchens have only a recirculating hood (which
blows fumes back into the kitchen) or a passive wall vent, many of which have been
disabled. NYC building code disallows through-the-wall venting in the majority of
situations for older building stock, which is the majority of construction in NYC.

17. Edith Kantrowitz
6/24/12

The following comments are submitted with respect to the upcoming EIS for docket
#PF09-8-000.
The proposed pipeline is highly problematic for a number of reasons. (1) Gas
pipelines are subject to leaks and explosions, and siting another one right near a
crowded area like the Kings Plaza Shopping Center is inviting trouble. Transco
Williams does not have a good safety record, and is already operating under a
federal Corrective Action Order in connection with a massive natural gas pipeline
explosion in Alabama last year. Transco Williams’ lengthy record of safety
violations is shown in the following link -
http://www.naturalgaswatch.org/?p=1305.
It should be remembered that on September 9, 2010, in San Bruno, California, a 30
inch gas pipeline exploded in flames, killing eight people. We do not want
something like this to happen in Brooklyn. (2) Floyd Bennett Field has a history of
fires, including brush fires. Hydrants there are relatively few, and many of the
existing ones have been problematic. It does not appear that there are adequate
resources to deal with the potential for fires caused by introducing a massive gas
line into this area. (3) The metering station proposed will be remotely controlled
from Texas. If there is a brush fire or an explosion and the gas shutoff from Texas
does not work, the results could be disastrous. It should also be noted that even if
new gas can be prevented from coming in to the metering station in the event of a
fire, the gas that is already in the station remains. (3) Incidental emissions are
associated with gas metering stations, even under proper operations. The EIS must
address what affect this will have on local air quality. (4) The proposed pipeline is a
significant security risk, and a potential target for terrorists. It does not appear that
any plans are being made to protect against this danger. Additionally, low flying
airplanes leaving or approaching JFK airport could be affected by any explosion or
fire associated with the pipeline. (5) The proposed pipeline is anticipated to supply
our stoves and boilers with gas from the Marcellus Shale, which is highly
radioactive. Marcellus shale gas has been estimated to contain at least 70 times as
much radioactivity as the gas from other sources in Texas and Louisiana which
currently provide most of the supply for New York City’s gas. (6) This Marcellus gas
is obtained by hydrofracking, which contaminates drinking water, creates air
pollution, causes earthquakes, and leads to a host of other adverse and unacceptable
effects on health, the environment, and local economies. (7) The construction
operations for this pipeline cross restored wetlands, as well as bird and wildlife
sanctuaries, and can be expected to be extremely disruptive for birds, aquatic life,
and the existing reef. Some concerns in this regard include the following: (a) there
is no guarantee where the large amount of sand that will be blown out from the sea
bottom to form a shallow trench will be carried. Given the currents, it will probably
move to the west, but if a strong storm comes up, it could end up anywhere. (b) the
artificial reef near the proposed pipeline route is a very sensitive ecological area,
which is critical not only to marine life, but also to the local economy. Many charter
boats and commercial party boats depend on this area, so any damage to the reef
will have economic impacts as well as environmental impacts. The EIS should
therefore go into great detail about how the displaced sand during the digging
operations will be prevented from covering and killing the reef, particularly given
the strong currents in this area. (c) heavy metals whose existence near the
proposed pipeline route have been documented, including arsenic, cadmium,
copper, lead and mercury, may be disturbed from their current locations beneath
the ocean floor during these trenching operations, and may contaminate the reef
and adjacent areas. (d) sediments stirred up by these construction operations may
obstruct gills and filter-feeding structures of fishes and sedentary invertebrates. (e)
attempts to document existing marine organisms have been inadequate, and should
be repeated during the summer months, when marine life is at its peak, by divers
utilizing GPS positioning to ensure full documentation. UNLESS ALL OF THE ABOVE
THESE CONCERNS CAN BE ADEQUATEDLY ADDRESED, I BELIEVE THAT THIS
PROJECT HAS AN UNACCEPTABLE ADVERSE IMPACT, AND SHOULD NOT GO
FORWARD.

18. Elaine Sperbeck
6/25/12

I'm asking you to oppose the Williams/transco Rockway lateral pipeline.this would
cause much damage to the wetlands and harm people and animals in the area.
Pipelines will corrode and leak. Toxic waste such as Radon can not be cleaned.

Brooklyn can not be subject to this kind of construction.

Please do what a concerned citizen wants and vote no for this pipeline.

19. Elizabeth Kelly- supporter of “Sane Energy Project.”
6/24/12

Ms. Kimberly D. Bose,

Secretary Federal Energy Regulatory Commission
RE: Opposition to the Williams/Transco Rockaway Lateral

Docket: PF09-8-000
Dear Ms. Bose,

I am one of the 3,694 supporters on whose behalf Clare Donahue has written so
eloquently. I am copying her letter. She is tireless and knows about the dangers of
pipelines inside out. Everyone, especially FERC employees, can learn greatly from
her.

1. The pipeline is a direct threat to the public health, safety, and property of
residents in the area, as well as the multitude of shoppers and businesses along
Flatbush Avenue and surrounding blocks in Brooklyn, as well as the fishermen,
boaters and visitors to the recreational areas of Jacob Riis Park, Floyd Bennett Field,
Breezy Point, and the wetlands and harbor areas of Jamaica Bay. Gas pipelines are
subject to leaks and explosions. Fear of an explosion from this pipeline is well
placed: Nationwide, pipeline accidents result in, on average, a death every 3 weeks,
and injuries or burns more than once a week. Siting a high-pressure, large diameter
pipeline such as this in a densely populated urban area, which includes the crowded
Kings Plaza Shopping Center, is inappropriate and subjects the area to a risk out of
proportion with the supposed benefits. The standard for deciding the risk from a
pipeline such as this should not be the percentage of pipelines that explode, but the
impact of the damage should it explode. In other EISs, FERC has positively compared
the chances of dying from a pipeline explosion to the chances of dying in a car
accident. While it’s true that one’s chances of dying in a car accident are quite high
compared with one’s chances of dying in a pipeline explosion, car accidents
normally do not destroy entire urban areas, blow up dozens of buildings, injure or
kill multitudes of people, or leave a crater 4 stories deep, as a pipeline explosion of
comparable size and pressure did in San Bruno, California in 2010.

2. The proposed pipeline threatens flourishing wetland areas and bird sanctuaries.

The pipe would traverse delicate underwater and wetland areas, bird sanctuaries,
and a wildlife sanctuary that has only recently been restored. Millions of dollars
were spent to restore this area. The construction of this pipeline, as well as a
potential explosion and emissions from its daily operations, put all of that at risk.

Floyd Bennett Field has a history of fires, including brush fires. Hydrants there are
relatively few, and many of the existing ones have been problematic. It does not
appear that there are adequate resources to deal with the potential for fires caused
by introducing a massive gas line into this area.

The metering station proposed will be remotely controlled from Texas. If there is a
brush fire or an explosion and the gas shutoff from Texas does not work, the results
could be disastrous. Even if new gas can be prevented from coming into the
metering station in the event of a fire, the gas that is already in the station remains.

Sediments stirred up by these construction operations may obstruct gills and filter-
feeding structures of fishes and sedentary invertebrates.

The artificial reef near the proposed pipeline route has become a very sensitive
ecological area, which is critical not only to marine life, but also to the local
economy. Many charter boats and commercial party boats depend on this area, so
any damage to the reef will have economic impacts as well as environmental
impacts.

There is no guarantee where the large amount of sand that will be blown out from
the sea bottom to form a shallow trench will be carried. Given the currents, it will
probably move to the west, but if a strong storm comes up, it could end up
anywhere, including on the reef.

Heavy metals whose existence near the proposed pipeline route have been
documented, including arsenic, cadmium, copper, lead and mercury, may be
disturbed from their current locations beneath the ocean floor during these
trenching operations, and may contaminate the reef and adjacent areas.

Attempts to document existing marine organisms have been inadequate, and should
be repeated during the summer months, when marine life is at its peak, by divers
utilizing GPS positioning to ensure full documentation.

3. The likelihood that Radon levels in delivered gas will rise as a result of this
pipeline.

The proposed pipeline is anticipated to supply NYC appliances and boilers with gas
from the Marcellus Shale, which is highly radioactive. Marcellus shale gas has been
estimated to contain up to 70 times as much radon as the gas from sources in Texas
and Louisiana which currently provide most of the supply for New York City’s gas.
The risk of higher radon levels is increased by the proximity of the Marcellus to NYC,
as there is not time for significant radioactive decay to occur within the small
number of hours (approximately 10) gas would be delivered.

* There is no safe level for inhaled radon, and radon is the leading cause of lung
cancer in non-smokers. The likelihood of inhaling radon while cooking or doing
laundry is increased by the small size of NYC kitchens, the typical lack of windows or
vents connected to the outside. By testimony previously provided to FERC by Sane
Energy Project, the majority of NYC kitchens have only a recirculating hood (which
blows fumes back into the kitchen) or a passive wall vent, many of which have been
disabled. NYC building code disallows through-the-wall venting in the majority of
situations for older building stock, which is the majority of construction in NYC.

These are but some of the plethora of reasons to reject this pipeline. I am beseeching
you to not be a tool of the gas industry, which only cares about profits.

This fossil fuel is not the renewable energy future which we all needed yesterday.
Think of future generations' rights to a livable planet before you push this
paperwork.

Thank you.
Elizabeth Kelley, 91 Central Park West, NY

20. Emily Fano- supporter of “Sane Energy Project.”
6/24/12

Ms. Kimberly D. Bose,

Secretary Federal Energy Regulatory Commission

888 First Street, NE, Room 1A

Washington, DC 20426

June 24, 2012

RE: Opposition to the Williams/Transco Rockaway Lateral Docket: PF09-8-000
Dear Ms. Bose,

On behalf of Sane Energy Project and our network of 3,694 supporters, I am writing
to object to the proposed Williams/Transco Rockaway Lateral Project on the basis
of the following reasons:

1. The pipeline is a direct threat to the public health, safety, and property of
residents in the area, as well as the multitude of shoppers and businesses along
Flatbush Avenue and surrounding blocks in Brooklyn, as well as the fishermen,
boaters and visitors to the recreational areas of Jacob Riis Park, Floyd Bennett Field,
Breezy Point, and the wetlands and harbor areas of Jamaica Bay.

Gas pipelines are subject to leaks and explosions. Fear of an explosion from this
pipeline is well placed: Nationwide, pipeline accidents result in, on average, a death
every 3 weeks, and injuries or burns more than once a week. Siting a high-pressure,
large diameter pipeline such as this in a densely populated urban area, which
includes the crowded Kings Plaza Shopping Center, is inappropriate and subjects the
area to a risk out of proportion with the supposed benefits. The standard for
deciding the risk from a pipeline such as this should not be the percentage of
pipelines that explode, but the impact of the damage should it explode. In other EISs,
FERC has positively compared the chances of dying from a pipeline explosion to the
chances of dying in a car accident. While it’s true that one’s chances of dying in a car
accident are quite high compared with one’s chances of dying in a pipeline
explosion, car accidents normally do not destroy entire urban areas, blow up dozens
of buildings, injure or kill multitudes of people, or leave a crater 4 stories deep, as a
pipeline explosion of comparable size and pressure did in San Bruno, California in
2010.

2. The proposed pipeline threatens flourishing wetland areas and bird sanctuaries.

The pipe would traverse delicate underwater and wetland areas, bird sanctuaries,
and a wildlife sanctuary that has only recently been restored. Millions of dollars
were spent to restore this area. The construction of this pipeline, as well as a
potential explosion and emissions from its daily operations, put all of that at risk.

Floyd Bennett Field has a history of fires, including brush fires. Hydrants there are
relatively few, and many of the existing ones have been problematic. It does not
appear that there are adequate resources to deal with the potential for fires caused
by introducing a massive gas line into this area.

The metering station proposed will be remotely controlled from Texas. If there is a
brush fire or an explosion and the gas shutoff from Texas does not work, the results
could be disastrous. Even if new gas can be prevented from coming into the
metering station in the event of a fire, the gas that is already in the station remains.

Sediments stirred up by these construction operations may obstruct gills and filter-
feeding structures of fishes and sedentary invertebrates.

The artificial reef near the proposed pipeline route has become a very sensitive
ecological area, which is critical not only to marine life, but also to the local
economy. Many charter boats and commercial party boats depend on this area, so
any damage to the reef will have economic impacts as well as environmental
impacts.

There is no guarantee where the large amount of sand that will be blown out from
the sea bottom to form a shallow trench will be carried. Given the currents, it will
probably move to the west, but if a strong storm comes up, it could end up
anywhere, including on the reef.

Heavy metals whose existence near the proposed pipeline route have been
documented, including arsenic, cadmium, copper, lead and mercury, may be
disturbed from their current locations beneath the ocean floor during these
trenching operations, and may contaminate the reef and adjacent areas.





21. Emily Genser of “Sane Energy Project.”
6/25/12

On behalf of Sane Energy Project and our network of 3,694 supporters, I am writing
to object to the proposed Williams/Transco Rockaway Lateral Project on the basis
of the following reasons:

1. The pipeline is a direct threat to the public health, safety, and property of
residents in the area, as well as the multitude of shoppers and businesses along
Flatbush Avenue and surrounding blocks in Brooklyn, as well as the fishermen,
boaters and visitors to the recreational areas of Jacob Riis Park, Floyd Bennett Field,
Breezy Point, and the wetlands and harbor areas of Jamaica Bay.

2. The proposed pipeline threatens flourishing wetland areas and bird sanctuaries.

3. The likelihood that Radon levels in delivered gas will rise as a result of this
pipeline.

4. The pipeline is a larger threat to the public health, safety, property values and
economy of all regions of the Marcellus shale, including upstate New York,
Pennsylvania, Ohio, West Virginia and other areas, due to the inevitability that it will
increase the demand for hydrofracturing.

5. There is a history of safety issues with the builder of this pipeline.

6. The proposed pipeline is a security and terrorist risk.

7. It’s the wrong choice for New York‚Äôs energy future. We should instead be
investing in sustainable energy that will never run out.

8. Pipeline regulation and oversight in America is sorely inadequate and slanted in
support of industry’s interests rather than the expressed desires of American
citizens.
I hope you take the above concerns into account. Thank you.

22. Evan Paraganos

Why are gas pipelines a bad idea? Lets see........ They promote more fracking, which
poisons water and air. They promote more energy usage which causes climate
change and CO2 concentration. They leak gas and radon which causes cancer. They
are explosive making them a very sweet terrorist target. So basically they suck
really bad. We don't need them. Build a wind farm or a solar panel field instead.



Enough with the gas lobby running amuck and unchecked. Rememeber when the
tobacco companies said more doctors smoke Camels then any other cigarette. Yea,
that was bad too.

23. Arnold M. Frogel
6/25/12

Ms. Kimberly D. Bose,

Secretary Federal Energy Regulatory Commission

888 First Street, NE, Room 1A

Washington, DC 20426

RE: Opposition to the Williams/Transco Rockaway Lateral
Docket: PF09-8-000

Dear Ms. Bose,

I am writing to object to the proposed

Williams/Transco Rockaway Lateral Project for the following reasons:

1. The pipeline is a direct threat to the public health, safety, and property of
residents in the area, as well as the multitude of shoppers and businesses along
Flatbush Avenue and surrounding blocks in Brooklyn, as well as the fishermen,
boaters and visitors to the recreational areas of Jacob Riis Park, Floyd Bennett Field,
Breezy Point, and the wetlands and harbor areas of Jamaica Bay.

Gas pipelines are subject to leaks and explosions. Fear of an explosion from this
pipeline is well founded. Nationwide, pipeline accidents result in, on average, a
death every 3 weeks, and injuries or burns more than once a week.

Siting a high-pressure, large diameter pipeline such as this in a densely populated
urban area, which includes the crowded Kings Plaza Shopping Center, is
inappropriate and subjects the area to a risk out of proportion with the supposed
benefits. The standard for deciding the risk from a pipeline such as this should not
be the percentage of pipelines that explode, but the impact of the damage should it
explode. In other EISs, FERC has positively compared the chances of dying from a
pipeline explosion to the chances of dying in a car accident. While it's true that one's
chances of dying in a car accident are quite high compared with one's chances of
dying in a pipeline explosion, car accidents normally do not destroy entire urban
areas, blow up dozens of buildings, injure or kill multitudes of people, or leave a
crater 4 stories deep, as a pipeline explosion of comparable size and pressure did in
San Bruno, California in 2010.

2. The proposed pipeline threatens flourishing wetland areas and bird sanctuaries.

The pipe would traverse delicate underwater and wetland areas, bird sanctuaries,
and a wildlife sanctuary that has only recently been restored.

Millions of dollars were spent to restore this area. The construction of this pipeline,
as well as a potential explosion and emissions from its daily operations, put all of
that at risk. Floyd Bennett Field has a history of fires, including brush fires.
Hydrants there are relatively few, and many of the existing ones have been
problematic. It does not appear that there are adequate resources to deal with the
potential for fires caused by introducing a massive gas line into this area. The
metering station proposed will be remotely controlled from Texas. If there is a
brush fire or an explosion and the gas shutoff from Texas does not work, the results
could be disastrous. Even if new gas can be prevented from coming into the
metering station in the event of a fire, the gas that is already in the station remains.

Sediments stirred up by these construction operations may obstruct gills and filter-
feeding structures of fishes and sedentary invertebrates.

The artificial reef near the proposed pipeline route has become a very sensitive
ecological area, which is critical not only to marine life, but also to the local
economy. Many charter boats and commercial party boats depend on this area, so
any damage to the reef will have economic impacts as well as environmental
impacts.

There is no guarantee where the large amount of sand that will be blown out from
the sea bottom to form a shallow trench will be carried. Given the currents, it will
probably move to the west, but if a strong storm comes up, it could end up
anywhere, including on the reef.
Heavy metals whose existence near the proposed pipeline route have been
documented, including arsenic, cadmium, copper, lead and mercury, may be
disturbed from their current locations beneath the ocean floor during these
trenching operations, and may contaminate the reef and adjacent areas.

Attempts to document existing marine organisms have been inadequate, and should
be repeated during the summer months, when marine life is at its peak, by divers
utilizing GPS positioning to ensure full documentation.

3. The likelihood that Radon levels in delivered gas will rise as a result of this
pipeline.

I anticipate that the proposed pipeline will supply NYC appliances and boilers with
gas from the Marcellus Shale, though some city officials claim that that decision
has not yet been made. Common sense belies their claim. Marcellus shale gas has
been estimated to contain up to 70 times as much radon as the gas from sources in
Texas and Louisiana which currently provide most of the supply for New York City's
gas. The risk of higher radon levels is increased by the proximity of the Marcellus to
NYC, as there is not time for significant radioactive decay to occur within the small
number of hours (approximately 10) gas would be delivered. There is no safe level
for inhaled radon, and radon is the leading cause of lung cancer in non-smokers. The
likelihood of inhaling radon while cooking or doing laundry is increased by the small
size of NYC kitchens and the typical lack of windows or vents connected to the
outside. By testimony previously provided to FERC by Sane Energy Project, the
majority of NYC kitchens have only a recirculating hood (which blows fumes back
into the kitchen) or a passive wall vent, many of which have been disabled.

Arnold M. Frogel (212)206-8427

24. Gabriel Reichler of “Sane Energy Project.”
6/25/12

Dear Ms. Bose,

On behalf of Sane Energy Project and our network of 3,694 supporters, I am writing
to object to the proposed

Williams/Transco Rockaway Lateral Project on the basis of the following reasons:

1. The pipeline is a direct threat to the public health, safety, and property of
residents in the area, as well as the multitude of shoppers and businesses along
Flatbush Avenue and surrounding blocks in Brooklyn, as well as the fishermen,
boaters and visitors to the recreational areas of Jacob Riis Park, Floyd Bennett Field,
Breezy Point, and the wetlands and harbor areas of Jamaica Bay.

Gas pipelines are subject to leaks and explosions. Fear of an explosion from this
pipeline is well placed: Nationwide, pipeline accidents result in, on average, a death
every 3 weeks, and injuries or burns more than once a week. Siting a high-pressure,
large diameter pipeline such as this in a densely populated urban area, which
includes the crowded Kings Plaza Shopping Center, is inappropriate and subjects the
area to a risk out of proportion with the supposed benefits. The standard for
deciding the risk from a pipeline such as this should not be the percentage of
pipelines that explode, but the impact of the damage should it explode. In other EISs,
FERC has positively compared the chances of dying from a pipeline explosion to the
chances of dying in a car accident. While its true that one’s chances of dying in a car
accident are quite high compared with one’s chances of dying in a pipeline
explosion, car accidents normally do not destroy entire urban areas, blow up dozens
of buildings, injure or kill multitudes of people, or leave a crater 4 stories deep, as a
pipeline explosion of comparable size and pressure did in San Bruno, California in
2010.

2. The proposed pipeline threatens flourishing wetland areas and bird sanctuaries.

The pipe would traverse delicate underwater and wetland areas, bird sanctuaries,
and a wildlife sanctuary that has only recently been restored. Millions of dollars
were spent to restore this area. The construction of this pipeline, as well as a
potential explosion and emissions from its daily operations, put all of that at risk.

Floyd Bennett Field has a history of fires, including brush fires. Hydrants there are
relatively few, and many of the existing ones have been problematic. It does not
appear that there are adequate resources to deal with the potential for fires caused
by introducing a massive gas line into this area.

The metering station proposed will be remotely controlled from Texas. If there is a
brush fire or an explosion and the gas shutoff from Texas does not work, the results
could be disastrous. Even if new gas can be prevented from coming into the
metering station in the event of a fire, the gas that is already in the station remains.

Sediments stirred up by these construction operations may obstruct gills and filter-
feeding structures of fishes and sedentary invertebrates.

The artificial reef near the proposed pipeline route has become a very sensitive
ecological area, which is critical not only to marine life, but also to the local
economy. Many charter boats and commercial party boats depend on this area, so
any damage to the reef will have economic impacts as well as environmental
impacts.

There is no guarantee where the large amount of sand that will be blown out from
the sea bottom to form a shallow trench will be carried. Given the currents, it will
probably move to the west, but if a strong storm comes up, it could end up
anywhere, including on the reef.

Heavy metals whose existence near the proposed pipeline route have been
documented, including arsenic, cadmium, copper, lead and mercury, may be
disturbed from their current locations beneath the ocean floor during these
trenching operations, and may contaminate the reef and adjacent areas.

25. Gusti Bogok- Co- chair of Sierra Club Atlantic Chapter Gas Drilling Task
Force
6/25/12

Secretary Federal Energy Regulatory Commission
888 First Street, NE, Room 1A
Washington, DC 20426
June 25th, 2012

RE: Opposition to the Williams/Transco Rockaway Lateral
Docket: PF09-8-000

Dear Ms. Bose,

As a resident of New York City and Co- chair Sierra Club Atlantic Chapter Gas
Drilling Task Force am writing to object to the proposed Williams/Transco
Rockaway Lateral Project for the following reasons:

1. The pipeline is a direct threat to the public health, safety, and property of
residents in the area, as well as the many shoppers and businesses along Flatbush
Avenue and surrounding blocks in Brooklyn, as well as the fishermen, boaters and
visitors to the recreational areas of Jacob Riis Park, Floyd Bennett Field, Breezy
Point, and the wetlands and harbor areas of Jamaica Bay.

Gas pipelines are subject to leaks and explosions. Fear of an explosion from this
pipeline is justified: Nationwide, pipeline accidents result in an average death rate of
1 every 3 weeks, and injuries or burns exceeding once a week. To site a high-
pressure, large diameter pipeline such as this in a densely populated urban area,
which includes the crowded Kings Plaza Shopping Center, is inappropriate and
subjects residents and visitors to risks that far exceed the purported benefits. The
standard for assessing the risk from pipelines such as this should not be the
percentage of pipelines that explode, but the potential for severe damage in the
event of an explosion. In other EISs, FERC has compared the chances of dying from a
pipeline explosion as far less than the chances of dying in a car accident. While it’s
true that one’s chances of dying in a car accident are quite high compared with one’s
chances of dying in a pipeline explosion, car accidents do not destroy entire urban
areas, blow up dozens of buildings, injure or kill multitudes of people, or leave a
crater 4 stories deep, as a pipeline explosion of comparable size and pressure did in
San Bruno, California in 2010.

2. The proposed pipeline threatens flourishing wetland areas and bird sanctuaries.

The pipe would traverse delicate underwater and wetland areas, bird sanctuaries,
and a wildlife sanctuary that has only recently been restored. Millions of dollars
were spent to restore this area. The construction of this pipeline, as well as a
potential explosion and emissions from its daily operations, put all of that at risk.

Floyd Bennett Field has a history of fires, including brush fires. Hydrants there are
relatively few, and many of the existing ones have been problematic. It does not
appear that there are adequate resources to deal with the potential for fires caused
by introducing a massive gas line into this area.

The metering station proposed will be remotely controlled from Texas. If there is a
brush fire or an explosion and the gas shutoff from Texas does not work, the results
could be disastrous. Even if new gas can be prevented from coming into the
metering station in the event of a fire, the gas that is already in the station remains.

Sediments stirred up by these construction operations may obstruct gills and filter-
feeding structures of fishes and sedentary invertebrates.

The artificial reef near the proposed pipeline route has become a very sensitive
ecological area, which is critical not only to marine life, but also to the local
economy. Many charter boats and commercial party boats depend on this area, so
any damage to the reef will have economic impacts as well as environmental
impacts.

There is no guarantee where the large amount of sand that will be blown out from
the sea bottom to form a shallow trench will be carried. Given the currents, it will
probably move to the west, but if a strong storm comes up, it could end up
anywhere, including on the reef.

Heavy metals whose existence near the proposed pipeline route have been
documented, including arsenic, cadmium, copper, lead and mercury, may be
disturbed from their current locations beneath the ocean floor during these
trenching operations, and may contaminate the reef and adjacent areas.

Attempts to document existing marine organisms have been inadequate, and should
be repeated during the summer months, when marine life is at its peak, by divers
utilizing GPS positioning to ensure full documentation.

3. The likelihood that Radon levels in delivered gas will rise as a result of this
pipeline.

The proposed pipeline is anticipated to supply NYC appliances and boilers with gas
from the Marcellus Shale, which is highly radioactive. Marcellus shale gas has been
estimated to contain up to 70 times as much radon as the gas from sources in Texas
and Louisiana which currently provide most of the supply for New York City’s gas.
The risk of higher radon levels is increased by the proximity of the Marcellus to NYC,
as there is insufficient time for significant radioactive decay to occur within the
small number of hours (approximately 10) gas would be delivered.

* There is no safe level for inhaled radon, and radon is the leading cause of lung
cancer in non-smokers. The likelihood of inhaling radon while cooking or doing
laundry is increased by the small size of NYC kitchens, the typical lack of windows or
vents connected to the outside. By testimony previously provided to FERC by Sane
Energy Project, the majority of NYC kitchens have only hoods for re-circulating the
air (which blows fumes back into the kitchen) or a passive wall vent, many of which
have been disabled. NYC building code disallows through-the-wall venting in the
majority of situations for older building stock, which is the majority of construction
in NYC.

The actionable level of indoor radon is 4 picocuries per liter. A Citizen’s Radon Test
performed on behalf of Sane Energy Project in the winter of early 2012 showed
current indoor radon levels mostly below the actionable level.

26. Iwona Hoffman- Floyd Bennett Field Gardener
6/25/12

To Whom It May Concern:

I, Iwona Hoffman, resident of Brooklyn, NY and long time parkgoer, am submitting
my comments regarding Williams/Transco and NPS plans to build, or more
accurately, to conveniently hide a natural gas M&R Station (meter and regulating
station) at Floyd Bennett Field, National Gateway Recreational Area, a national park
located in NYC.

The stated purpose of any national park in the US, including the NPS Gateway
National Recreation Area which includes Floyd Bennett Field is "to preserve and
protect for the use and enjoyment of present and future generations an area
possessing outstanding natural and recreational features." It is absolutely
unacceptable to bring a M&R Station and house it (or conveniently hide) in restored
historic hangars. A natural gas M&R Station is an industrial facility and it has
nothing at all to do with aviation history, nature or recreational use.
Williams/Transco considered several different sites for putting a M&R Station. In
2009, in one of their documents, they described certain alternative sites for
metering and regulating site were problematic for the project: "The construction of
a meter and regulating station on any of theses sites would change the use of the
property from recreational to industrial land use and be outside the stated purposes
for NPS and NYCPR properties." Exactly! So why now they want to build a M&R
Station on national park grounds, at Floyd Bennett Field?

A M&R Station is dangerous, environmental hazard, probably more dangerous than
the gas pipeline itself. It will not just measure the gas transferred from
Williams/Transco pipeline to National Grid,. it will actually change the pressure,
burn what should not be sent to consumers, and may be a significant source of
methane emission. The primary losses from M&R stations include fugitive
emissions and pneumatic emissions. Fugitive emissions are leakage from the sealed
surfaces of valves, connections, pressure relief valves, and open-ended lines. (EPA
studies) Depending on the design, these gas-operated pneumatic devices can bleed
gas to the atmosphere continuously and/or when the regulator is activated
(pressure regulator).
There is also the issue of a gas pipeline radiating Infrasonic low frequency noise
which e.g., in western CT is causing the “hum.” FERC and gas companies admit
to it and allow it, and refuse to address it, and in turn, subject tens of thousands to
the harm of the problem. (In northern NJ the hum has been proven in Fairlawn, and
many other areas.)

In addition, Williams/Transco has a history of serious natural gas pipeline safety
violations, according to records obtained by NaturalGasWatch.org. (recent explosion
in March 2012 in PA, and more).

I'm not an environmentalists, and it's not just the environmentalists who worry
about the plans to run the pipeline through the Rockaways and the National
Gateway Recreational Area and to build a M&R Station at Floyd Bennett Field.
Regular citizens -- residents in that area, parkgoers, gardeners, sailors, archers,
bikers, etc., etc., are very much concerned about the NPS and Williams/Transco
plans to built a meter and regulating station in one of the abandoned hangars at the
Floyd Bennett Field. The station will be sitting literally next to the largest
community gardens association in the nation (I garden there), next to the Aviator
sports center, archery range (I practice archery there), next to the Marina (I sail
with my friends from there), next to bikers and parkgoers (I bike there), and so on
and on. Williams/Transco, and the NPS, are not telling people what a meter and
regulating station is, and in fact, they make it sound like a benign building housing
some pipes and meters.

There is a group of people, regular folks, not just environmentalists, who are putting
together their efforts, who are organizing to fight the project, at least to stop the NPS
and Williams/Transco from putting a M&R Station on the grounds of FBF.

It is wrong to bring any industry to a national park grounds. A M&R Station will be a
health hazard, and environmental hazard, a safety hazard, and it will open door for
other industries to put their foot in our national parks. Floyd Bennett Field is a
national park. It is a unique place, with a long aviation history, an urban oasis on the
edge of Brooklyn, a quiet place to grow veggies and flowers, to listen to birds sing, a
heaven for a variety of birds and other creatures, a place to photograph birds,
butterflies, dragonflies, etc., a place to practice archery, to bike, to fly kites and radio
controlled planes, build model trains, explore the stars with telescope, sail boats,
camp, fish and kayak. It is a place to rebuild airplanes from the W.W.II era, a place
for adults and children, a place to hike and learn about our natural and historic
environment.

A M&R Station will introduce unacceptable levels of air pollution and noise, will
drive away our wildlife. An accident could destroy everything we enjoy and worked
so long and hard to create (gardens and wildlife habitat). The National Park system
was established for the American people, not for any industry. Please keep industry
out of our national parks, please keep Natural Gas M&R Station out of Floyd Bennett
Field!

I've already submitted a pdf file with 19 signatures. There are more people who
collect signatures of those who oppose building of M&R Station at Floyd Bennett
Field.

Thank you.

Iwona Hoffman
Brooklyn resident, Floyd Bennett Field gardener and parkgoer

27. Janna Passuntino
6/24/12

Gas pipelines are subject to leaks and explosions. Pipeline regulation in the USA is
sorely inadequate. FERC's operating budget is supplied by the industry it is
regulating. A sure disaster.

Enough with the pipelines that have a huge potential to destroy the environment.
I'm tired of the safety of people, animals and the ecosystems being ignored.

We need energy, no doubt, but must we demand that wind and solar be given the
economic boost that will allow us all to continue to have a steady supply of energy
without such destruction.

28. John Breitbart
6/24/12

Ms. Kimberly D. Bose,

Secretary Federal Energy Regulatory Commission

888 First Street, NE, Room 1A

Washington, DC 20426

June 24, 2012

RE: Opposition to the Williams/Transco Rockaway Lateral

Docket: PF09-8-000

Dear Ms. Bose,

As a New Yorker who loves the Jamaica Bay Wildlife Refuge I am writing to object
to the proposed Williams/Transco Rockaway Lateral Project on the basis of the
following reasons:

1. The pipeline is a direct threat to the public health, safety, and property of
residents in the area, as well as the multitude of shoppers and businesses along
Flatbush Avenue and surrounding blocks in Brooklyn, as well as the fishermen,
boaters and visitors to the recreational areas of Jacob Riis Park, Floyd Bennett Field,
Breezy Point, and the wetlands and harbor areas of Jamaica Bay.

2. The proposed pipeline threatens flourishing wetland areas and bird
sanctuaries.

3. The likelihood that Radon levels in delivered gas will rise as a result of this
pipeline.

4. The pipeline is a larger threat to the public health, safety, property values and
economy of all regions of the Marcellus shale, including upstate New York,
Pennsylvania, Ohio, West Virginia and other areas, due to the inevitability that it will
increase the demand for hydrofracturing.

5. There is a history of safety issues with the builder of this pipeline.

6. The proposed pipeline is a security and terrorist risk.

7. It’s the wrong choice for New York‚Äôs energy future.

8. Pipeline regulation and oversight in America is sorely inadequate and slanted
in support of industry’s interests rather than the expressed desires of American
citizens.

Given the above reasons, Williams Transco should not be issued a permit to build
this pipeline. The risks outweigh the benefits. As far as energy is concerned,
methane does not need to be the primary energy source for this area that is so
endowed with wind and sun.

Sincerely,
John Breitbart
255 West 95 St., #1A
New York, NY 10025

29. John Miglietta
6/25/12

I am a resident of New York City and very familiar with the area targeted for the
Rockaway Pipeline.

This pipeline poses an unacceptable risk to both people and protected wildlife.
It violates FERC's own guidelines for siting pipelines.
The company that is proposing to build it is infamous for its numerous violations.

It will bring into the metropolitan area shale gas whose extraction is highly
controversial and a major health hazard both at point of extraction (proven
instances of pollution of water and air) and the point of delivery (radon in the gas). s
I want a New York run on clean energy--wind, water and solar--not on polluting
shale gas!

Thank You,

John Miglietta
New York, NY

Judith K. Canepa, member of “Sane Energy Project.”
6/24/12

Ms. Kimberly D. Bose,

Secretary Federal Energy Regulatory Commission

888 First Street, NE, Room 1A

Washington, DC 20426

June 24, 2012

RE: Opposition to the Williams/Transco Rockaway Lateral

Dear Ms. Bose,

As a member of Sane Energy Project and our network of 3,694 supporters, AND as
an advocate who works with residents of group homes up and down the Rockaway
Peninsula, I am writing to object to the proposed Williams/Transco Rockaway
Lateral Project on the basis of the following reasons:

1. The pipeline is a direct threat to the public health, safety, and property of
residents in the area, the shoppers and businesses along Flatbush Avenue and
surrounding blocks in Brooklyn, and the fishermen, boaters and visitors to the
recreational areas of Jacob Riis Park, Floyd Bennett Field, Breezy Point, and the
wetlands and harbor areas of Jamaica Bay. The natural gas pipelines thus far
constructed across the country have been exploding at an alarming rate.

2. The proposed pipeline threatens flourishing wetland areas and bird sanctuaries.
Indeed, Jamaica Bay is New York's only national park.

3. The likelihood that Radon levels in delivered gas will rise as a result of this
pipeline.

4. The pipeline is a larger threat to the public health, safety, property values and
economy of all regions of the Marcellus shale, including upstate New York,
Pennsylvania, Ohio, West Virginia and other areas, due to the inevitability that it will
increase the demand for hydrofracturing.

5. There is a history of safety issues with the builder of this pipeline.

6. The proposed pipeline is a security and terrorist risk.

7. It’s the wrong choice for New York’s energy future. We are situated to take
advantage of wind, solar, tidal and other forms of renewable energy. Natural gas will
take us backwards, continuing the use of fossil fuels and driving up the carbon
concentration in the atmosphere, already beyond the safe limit according to James
Hansen of Goddard/NASA.

8. Pipeline regulation and oversight in America is sorely inadequate and slanted in
support of industry’s interests rather than the expressed desires of American
citizens.

GIVEN THE ABOVE CONCERNS, THIS PROJECT PRESENTS AN UNACCEPTABLE
ADVERSE IMPACT, AND SHOULD NOT GO FORWARD.

30. Judy Hoffman
6/25/12

1. The pipeline is a direct threat to the public health, safety, and property of
residents in the area, as well as the multitude of shoppers and businesses along
Flatbush Avenue and surrounding blocks in Brooklyn, as well as the fishermen,
boaters and visitors to the recreational areas of Jacob Riis Park, Floyd Bennett Field,
Breezy Point, and the wetlands and harbor areas of Jamaica Bay.

Gas pipelines are subject to leaks and explosions. Fear of an explosion from this
pipeline is well placed: Nationwide, pipeline accidents result in, on average, a death
every 3 weeks, and injuries or burns more than once a week. Siting a high-pressure,
large diameter pipeline such as this in a densely populated urban area, which
includes the crowded Kings Plaza Shopping Center, is inappropriate and subjects the
area to a risk out of proportion with the supposed benefits. The standard for
deciding the risk from a pipeline such as this should not be the percentage of
pipelines that explode, but the impact of the damage should it explode. In other EISs,
FERC has positively compared the chances of dying from a pipeline explosion to the
chances of dying in a car accident. While its true that one’s chances of dying in a car
accident are quite high compared with one’s chances of dying in a pipeline
explosion, car accidents normally do not destroy entire urban areas, blow up dozens
of buildings, injure or kill multitudes of people, or leave a crater 4 stories deep, as a
pipeline explosion of comparable size and pressure did in San Bruno, California in
2010.

2. The proposed pipeline2. The proposed pipeline threatens flourishing wetland
areas and bird sanctuaries.

The pipe would traverse delicate underwater and wetland areas, bird sanctuaries,
and a wildlife sanctuary that has only recently been restored. Millions of dollars
were spent to restore this area. The construction of this pipeline, as well as a
potential explosion and emissions from its daily operations, put all of that at risk.

Floyd Bennett Field has a history of fires, including brush fires. Hydrants there are
relatively few, and many of the existing ones have been problematic. It does not
appear that there are adequate resources to deal with the potential for fires caused
by introducing a massive gas line into this area.

The metering station proposed will be remotely controlled from Texas. If there is a
brush fire or an explosion and the gas shutoff from Texas does not work, the results
could be disastrous. Even if new gas can be prevented from coming into the
metering station in the event of a fire, the gas that is already in the station remains.

Sediments stirred up by these construction operations may obstruct gills and filter-
feeding structures of fishes and sedentary invertebrates.

The artificial reef near the proposed pipeline route has become a very sensitive
ecological area, which is critical not only to marine life, but also to the local
economy. Many charter boats and commercial party boats depend on this area, so
any damage to the reef will have economic impacts as well as environmental
impacts.

There is no guarantee where the large amount of sand that will be blown out from
the sea bottom to form a shallow trench will be carried. Given the currents, it will
probably move to the west, but if a strong storm comes up, it could end up
anywhere, including on the reef.

Heavy metals whose existence near the proposed pipeline route have been
documented, including arsenic, cadmium, copper, lead and mercury, may be
disturbed from their current locations beneath the ocean floor during these
trenching operations, and may contaminate the reef and adjacent areas.

Attempts to document existing marine organisms have been inadequate, and should
be repeated during the summer months, when marine life is at its peak, by divers
utilizing GPS positioning to ensure full documentation.

3. The likelihood that Radon levels in delivered gas will rise as a result of this
pipeline.

The proposed pipeline is anticipated to supply NYC appliances and boilers with gas
from the Marcellus Shale, which is highly radioactive. Marcellus shale gas has been
estimated to contain up to 70 times as much radon as the gas from sources in Texas
and Louisiana which currently provide most of the supply for New York City’s
gas. The risk of higher radon levels is increased by the proximity of the Marcellus to
NYC, as there is not time for significant radioactive decay to occur within the small
number of hours (approximately 10) gas would be delivered.

* There is no safe level for inhaled radon, and radon is the leading cause of lung
cancer in non-smokers. The likelihood of inhaling radon while cooking or doing
laundry is increased by the small size of NYC kitchens, the typical lack of windows or
vents connected to the outside. By testimony previously provided to FERC by Sane
Energy Project, the majority of NYC kitchens have only a recirculating hood (which
blows fumes back into the kitchen) or a passive wall vent, many of which have been
disabled. NYC building code disallows through-the-wall venting in the majority of
situations for older building stock, which is the majority of construction in NYC.

The actionable level of indoor radon is 4 picocuries per liter. A Citizen’s Radon Test
performed on behalf of Sane Energy Project in the winter of early 2012 showed
current indoor radon levels mostly below the actionable level.

Additionally, the problem of radioactive agents plating out on the sides of pipelines
from gas in transit, causing hot pipes‚creates another environmental and disposal
risk.

No official health impact study has ever been done to document either the current
radon level at point of delivery, the actual state of ventilation available in actual city
kitchens, nor the cumulative effects of exposure to radon over a lifetime of
residential gas appliance use.

31. K. Coffee of “Sane Energy Project.”
6/24/12
RE: Opposition to the Williams/Transco Rockaway Lateral Docket: PF09-8-000

On behalf of Sane Energy Project and our network of 3,694 supporters, I am writing
to object to the proposed Williams/Transco Rockaway Lateral Project on the basis
of the following reasons:

1. The pipeline is a direct threat to the public health, safety, and property of
residents in the area, as well as the multitude of shoppers and businesses along
Flatbush Avenue and surrounding blocks in Brooklyn, as well as the fishermen,
boaters and visitors to the recreational areas of Jacob Riis Park, Floyd Bennett Field,
Breezy Point, and the wetlands and harbor areas of Jamaica Bay.
Gas pipelines
are subject to leaks and explosions. Fear of an explosion from this pipeline is well
placed: Nationwide, pipeline accidents result in, on average, a death every 3 weeks,
and injuries or burns more than once a week. Siting a high-pressure, large diameter
pipeline such as this in a densely populated urban area, which includes the crowded
Kings Plaza Shopping Center, is inappropriate and subjects the area to a risk out of
proportion with the supposed benefits. The standard for deciding the risk from a
pipeline such as this should not be the percentage of pipelines that explode, but the
impact of the damage should it explode. In other EISs, FERC has positively compared
the chances of dying from a pipeline explosion to the chances of dying in a car
accident. While it’s true that one’s chances of dying in a car accident are quite high
compared with one’s chances of dying in a pipeline explosion, car accidents
normally do not destroy entire urban areas, blow up dozens of buildings, injure or
kill multitudes of people, or leave a crater 4 stories deep, as a pipeline explosion of
comparable size and pressure did in San Bruno, California in 2010.

2. The proposed pipeline threatens flourishing wetland areas and bird sanctuaries.

The pipe would traverse delicate underwater and wetland areas, bird sanctuaries,
and a wildlife sanctuary that has only recently been restored. Millions of dollars
were spent to restore this area. The construction of this pipeline, as well as a
potential explosion and emissions from its daily operations, put all of that at
risk.
• Floyd Bennett Field has a history of fires, including brush fires. Hydrants
there are relatively few, and many of the existing ones have been problematic. It
does not appear that there are adequate resources to deal with the potential for
fires caused by introducing a massive gas line into this area.

The metering station proposed will be remotely controlled from Texas. If there is a
brush fire or an explosion and the gas shutoff from Texas does not work, the results
could be disastrous. Even if new gas can be prevented from coming into the
metering station in the event of a fire, the gas that is already in the station
remains.
• Sediments stirred up by these construction operations may obstruct
gills and filter-feeding structures of fishes and sedentary invertebrates.

The artificial reef near the proposed pipeline route has become a very sensitive
ecological area, which is critical not only to marine life, but also to the local
economy. Many charter boats and commercial party boats depend on this area, so
any damage to the reef will have economic impacts as well as environmental
impacts.There is no guarantee where the large amount of sand that will be blown
out from the sea bottom to form a shallow trench will be carried. Given the currents,
it will probably move to the west, but if a strong storm comes up, it could end up
anywhere, including on the reef.

Heavy metals whose existence near the proposed pipeline route have been
documented, including arsenic, cadmium, copper, lead and mercury, may be
disturbed from their current locations beneath the ocean floor during these
trenching operations, and may contaminate the reef and adjacent areas.

‚Attempts to document existing marine organisms have been inadequate, and should
be repeated during the summer months, when marine life is at its peak, by divers
utilizing GPS positioning to ensure full documentation.

3. The likelihood that Radon levels in delivered gas will rise as a result of this
pipeline.

The proposed pipeline is anticipated to supply NYC appliances and boilers with gas
from the Marcellus Shale, which is highly radioactive. Marcellus shale gas has been
estimated to contain up to 70 times as much radon as the gas from sources in Texas
and Louisiana which currently provide most of the supply for New York City’s gas.
The risk of higher radon levels is increased by the proximity of the Marcellus to NYC,
as there is not time for significant radioactive decay to occur within the small
number of hours (approximately 10) gas would be delivered.

* There is no safe level for inhaled radon, and radon is the leading cause of lung
cancer in non-smokers. The likelihood of inhaling radon while cooking or doing
laundry is increased by the small size of NYC kitchens, the typical lack of windows or
vents connected to the outside. By testimony previously provided to FERC by Sane
Energy Project, the majority of NYC kitchens have only a recirculating hood (which
blows fumes back into the kitchen) or a passive wall vent, many of which have been
disabled. NYC building code disallows through-the-wall venting in the majority of
situations for older building stock, which is the majority of construction in NYC.

The actionable level of indoor radon is 4 picocuries per liter. A Citizen’s Radon Test
performed on behalf of Sane Energy Project in the winter of early 2012 showed
current indoor radon levels mostly below the actionable level.
• Additionally,
the problem of radioactive agents plating out on the sides of pipelines from gas in
transit, causing hot pipes creates another environmental and disposal risk.

No official health impact study has ever been done to document.

32. Karen Glauber
6/25/12

I am writing to object to the proposed Williams/Transco Rockaway Lateral Project
on the basis of the following reasons:

1. The pipeline is a direct threat to the public health, safety, and property of
residents in the area, as well as the multitude of shoppers and businesses along
Flatbush Avenue and surrounding blocks in Brooklyn, as well as the fishermen,
boaters and visitors to the recreational areas of Jacob Riis Park, Floyd Bennett Field,
Breezy Point, and the wetlands and harbor areas of Jamaica Bay.

Gas pipelines are subject to leaks and explosions. Fear of an explosion from this
pipeline is well placed: Nationwide, pipeline accidents result in, on average, a death
every 3 weeks, and injuries or burns more than once a week. Siting a high-pressure,
large diameter pipeline such as this in a densely populated urban area, which
includes the crowded Kings Plaza Shopping Center, is inappropriate and subjects the
area to a risk out of proportion with the supposed benefits. The standard for
deciding the risk from a pipeline such as this should not be the percentage of
pipelines that explode, but the impact of the damage should it explode. In other EISs,
FERC has positively compared the chances of dying from a pipeline explosion to the
chances of dying in a car accident. While it’s true that one’s chances of dying in a car
accident are quite high compared with one’s chances of dying in a pipeline
explosion, car accidents normally do not destroy entire urban areas, blow up dozens
of buildings, injure or kill multitudes of people, or leave a crater 4 stories deep, as a
pipeline explosion of comparable size and pressure did in San Bruno, California in
2010.

2. The proposed pipeline threatens flourishing wetland areas and bird sanctuaries.

The pipe would traverse delicate underwater and wetland areas, bird sanctuaries,
and a wildlife sanctuary that has only recently been restored. Millions of dollars
were spent to restore this area. The construction of this pipeline, as well as a
potential explosion and emissions from its daily operations, put all of that at risk.

Floyd Bennett Field has a history of fires, including brush fires. Hydrants there are
relatively few, and many of the existing ones have been problematic. It does not
appear that there are adequate resources to deal with the potential for fires caused
by introducing a massive gas line into this area.

The metering station proposed will be remotely controlled from Texas. If there is a
brush fire or an explosion and the gas shutoff from Texas does not work, the results
could be disastrous. Even if new gas can be prevented from coming into the
metering station in the event of a fire, the gas that is already in the station remains.

Sediments stirred up by these construction operations may obstruct gills and filter-
feeding structures of fishes and sedentary invertebrates.

The artificial reef near the proposed pipeline route has become a very sensitive
ecological area, which is critical not only to marine life, but also to the local
economy. Many charter boats and commercial party boats depend on this area, so
any damage to the reef will have economic impacts as well as environmental
impacts.

There is no guarantee where the large amount of sand that will be blown out from
the sea bottom to form a shallow trench will be carried. Given the currents, it will
probably move to the west, but if a strong storm comes up, it could end up
anywhere, including on the reef.

Heavy metals whose existence near the proposed pipeline route have been
documented, including arsenic, cadmium, copper, lead and mercury, may be
disturbed from their current locations beneath the ocean floor during these
trenching operations, and may contaminate the reef and adjacent areas.

Attempts to document existing marine organisms have been inadequate, and should
be repeated during the summer months, when marine life is at its peak, by divers
utilizing GPS positioning to ensure full documentation.

3. The likelihood that Radon levels in delivered gas will rise as a result of this
pipeline.

The proposed pipeline is anticipated to supply NYC appliances and boilers with gas
from the Marcellus Shale, which is highly radioactive. Marcellus shale gas has been
estimated to contain up to 70 times as much radon as the gas from sources in Texas
and Louisiana which currently provide most of the supply for New York City’s gas.
The risk of higher radon levels is increased by the proximity of the Marcellus to NYC,
as there is not time for significant radioactive decay to occur within the small
number of hours (approximately 10) gas would be delivered.

* There is no safe level for inhaled radon, and radon is the leading cause of lung
cancer in non-smokers. The likelihood of inhaling radon while cooking or doing
laundry is increased by the small size of NYC kitchens, the typical lack of windows or
vents connected to the outside. By testimony previously provided to FERC by Sane

Energy Project, the majority of NYC kitchens have only a recirculating hood (which
blows fumes back into the kitchen) or a passive wall vent, many of which have been
disabled. NYC building code disallows through-the-wall venting in the majority of
situations for older building stock, which is the majority of construction in NYC.

The actionable level of indoor radon is 4 picocuries per liter. A Citizen’s Radon Test
performed on behalf of Sane

Energy Project in the winter of early 2012 showed current indoor radon levels
mostly below the actionable level.

Additionally, the problem of radioactive agents plating out on the sides of pipelines
from gas in transit, causing hot pipes creates another environmental and disposal
risk.

No official health impact study has ever been done to document either the current
radon level at point of delivery, the actual state of ventilation available in actual city
kitchens, nor the cumulative effects of exposure to radon over a lifetime of
residential gas appliances.

33. Kim N. Felter
6/24/12

Ms. Kimberly D. Bose,
Secretary Federal Energy Regulatory Commission
888 First Street, NE, Room 1A
Washington, DC 20426

June 24, 2012

RE: Opposition to the Williams/Transco Rockaway Lateral Docket: PF09-8-000

Dear Ms. Bose,

I am writing to object to the proposed Williams/Transco Rockaway Lateral Project
on the basis of the following reasons:

1. The pipeline is a direct threat to the public health, safety, and property of
residents in the area, as well as the multitude of shoppers and businesses along
Flatbush Avenue and surrounding blocks in Brooklyn, as well as the fishermen,
boaters and visitors to the recreational areas of Jacob Riis Park, Floyd Bennett Field,
Breezy Point, and the wetlands and harbor areas of Jamaica Bay.

2. The proposed pipeline threatens flourishing wetland areas and bird sanctuaries.

3. The likelihood that Radon levels in delivered gas will rise as a result of this
pipeline.

4. The pipeline is a larger threat to the public health, safety, property values and
economy of all regions of the Marcellus shale, including upstate New York,
Pennsylvania, Ohio, West Virginia and other areas, due to the inevitability that it will
increase the demand for hydrofracturing.

5. There is a history of safety issues with the builder of this pipeline.

6. The proposed pipeline is a security and terrorist risk.

7. It’s the wrong choice for New York‚Äôs energy future.

8. Pipeline regulation and oversight in America is sorely inadequate and slanted in
support of industry’s interests rather than the expressed desires of American
citizens.

GIVEN THE ABOVE CONCERNS, THIS PROJECT PRESENTS AN UNACCEPTABLE
ADVERSE IMPACT, PUBLIC HEALTH RISK IN A VERY HIGHLY POPULATED AREA
AND SHOULD NOT GO FORWARD.

Sincerely,
Kim Felter

34. Linda DiGusta of “Sane Energy Project.”
6/24/12

Ms. Kimberly D. Bose,
Secretary Federal Energy Regulatory Commission
888 First Street, NE, Room 1A

Washington, DC 20426
June 24, 2012

RE: Opposition to the Williams/Transco Rockaway Lateral. Docket: PF09-8-000

Dear Ms. Bose,

On behalf of Sane Energy Project and our network of 3,694 supporters, I am writing
to object to the proposed Williams/Transco Rockaway Lateral Project on the basis
of the following reasons:

1. The pipeline is a direct threat to the public health, safety, and property of
residents in the area, as well as the multitude of shoppers and businesses along
Flatbush Avenue and surrounding blocks in Brooklyn, as well as the fishermen,
boaters and visitors to the recreational areas of Jacob Riis Park, Floyd Bennett Field,
Breezy Point, and the wetlands and harbor areas of Jamaica Bay. Gas pipelines are
subject to leaks and explosions. Fear of an explosion from this pipeline is well
placed: Nationwide, pipeline accidents result in, on average, a death every 3 weeks,
and injuries or burns more than once a week. Siting a high-pressure, large diameter
pipeline such as this in a densely populated urban area, which includes the crowded
Kings Plaza Shopping Center, is inappropriate and subjects the area to a risk out of
proportion with the supposed benefits. The standard for deciding the risk from a
pipeline such as this should not be the percentage of pipelines that explode, but the
impact of the damage should it explode. In other EISs, FERC has positively compared
the chances of dying from a pipeline explosion to the chances of dying in a car
accident. While it’s true that one’s chances of dying in a car accident are quite high
compared with one’s chances of dying in a pipeline explosion, car accidents
normally do not destroy entire urban areas, blow up dozens of buildings, injure or
kill multitudes of people, or leave a crater 4 stories deep, as a pipeline explosion of
comparable size and pressure did in San Bruno, California in 2010.

2. The proposed pipeline threatens flourishing wetland areas and bird sanctuaries.

The pipe would traverse delicate underwater and wetland areas, bird sanctuaries,
and a wildlife sanctuary that has only recently been restored. Millions of dollars
were spent to restore this area. The construction of this pipeline, as well as a
potential explosion and emissions from its daily operations, put all of that at risk.

Floyd Bennett Field has a history of fires, including brush fires. Hydrants there are
relatively few, and many of the existing ones have been problematic. It does not
appear that there are adequate resources to deal with the potential for fires caused
by introducing a massive gas line into this area.

The metering station proposed will be remotely controlled from Texas. If there is a
brush fire or an explosion and the gas shutoff from Texas does not work, the results
could be disastrous. Even if new gas can be prevented from coming into the
metering station in the event of a fire, the gas that is already in the station remains.

Sediments stirred up by these construction operations may obstruct gills and filter-
feeding structures of fishes and sedentary invertebrates.

The artificial reef near the proposed pipeline route has become a very sensitive
ecological area, which is critical not only to marine life, but also to the local
economy. Many charter boats and commercial party boats depend on this area, so
any damage to the reef will have economic impacts as well as environmental
impacts.

There is no guarantee where the large amount of sand that will be blown out from
the sea bottom to form a shallow trench will be carried. Given the currents, it will
probably move to the west, but if a strong storm comes up, it could end up
anywhere, including on the reef.

Heavy metals whose existence near the proposed pipeline route have been
documented, including arsenic, cadmium, copper, lead and mercury, may be
disturbed from their current locations beneath the ocean floor during these
trenching operations, and may contaminate the reef and adjacent areas.

Attempts to document existing marine organisms have been inadequate, and should
be repeated during the summer months, when marine life is at its peak, by divers
utilizing GPS positioning to ensure full documentation.

3. The likelihood that Radon levels in delivered gas will rise as a result of this
pipeline.

The proposed pipeline is anticipated to supply NYC appliances and boilers with gas
from the Marcellus Shale, which is highly radioactive. Marcellus shale gas has been
estimated to contain up to 70 times as much radon as the gas from sources in Texas
and Louisiana which currently provide most of the supply for New York City’s
gas. The risk of higher radon levels is increased by the proximity of the Marcellus to
NYC, as there is not time for significant radioactive decay to occur within the small
number of hours (approximately 10) gas would be delivered.

* There is no safe level for inhaled radon, and radon is the leading cause of lung
cancer in non-smokers. The likelihood of inhaling radon while cooking or doing
laundry is increased by the small size of NYC kitchens, the typical lack of windows or
vents connected to the outside. By testimony previously provided to FERC by Sane
Energy Project, the majority of NYC kitchens have only a recirculating hood (which
blows fumes back into the kitchen) or a passive wall vent, many of which have been
disabled. NYC building code disallows through-the-wall venting in the majority of
situations for older building stock, which is the majority of construction in NYC.

The actionable level of indoor radon is 4 picocuries per liter. A Citizen’s Radon Test
performed on behalf of Sane Energy Project in the winter of early 2012 showed
current indoor radon levels mostly below the actionable level.

35. Lisa Harrison
6/22/12

The job of government is to protect the public from the robber barons who want to
destroy our clean water, air, and newly restored, delicate wetlands for personal
profit. If the Rockaway pipeline is allowed to move forward, our government is an
abysmal failure!

36. Lise Brenner
6/25/12

Kimberly D. Bose,

Secretary Federal Energy Regulatory Commission
888 First Street, NE, Room 1A
Washington, DC 20426

June 25, 2012

RE: Opposition to the Williams/Transco Rockaway Lateral Docket: PF09-8-000

Dear Ms. Bose,

I am writing to object to the proposed Williams/Transco Rockaway Lateral Project
on the basis of the following reasons:



1. The pipeline is a direct threat to the public health, safety, and property of
residents in the area, as well as the multitude of shoppers and businesses along
Flatbush Avenue and surrounding blocks in Brooklyn, as well as the fishermen,
boaters and visitors to the recreational areas of Jacob Riis Park, Floyd Bennett Field,
Breezy Point, and the wetlands and harbor areas of Jamaica Bay. Gas pipelines are
subject to leaks and explosions. Fear of an explosion from this pipeline is well
placed: Nationwide, pipeline accidents result in, on average, a death every 3 weeks,
and injuries or burns more than once a week. Siting a high-pressure, large diameter
pipeline such as this in a densely populated urban area, which includes the crowded
Kings Plaza Shopping Center, is inappropriate and subjects the area to a risk out of
proportion with the supposed benefits. Pipeline explosions have destroyed entire
urban areas, blown up dozens of buildings, injured or killed multitudes of people,
and left craters 4 stories deep (ie the results of the pipeline explosion of comparable
size and pressure in San Bruno, California 2010).

2. The proposed pipeline threatens flourishing wetland areas and bird sanctuaries.
These are unique urban wildlife habitats, one of the great assets of New York City
and the Eastern seaboard.

The pipe would traverse delicate underwater and wetland areas, bird sanctuaries,
and a wildlife sanctuary that has only recently been restored. Millions of dollars
were spent to restore this area. The construction of this pipeline, as well as a
potential explosion and emissions from its daily operations, put all of that at risk.

Floyd Bennett Field has a history of fires, including brush fires. Hydrants there are
relatively few, and many of the existing ones have been problematic. It does not
appear that there are adequate resources to deal with the potential for fires caused
by introducing a massive gas line into this area.

The metering station proposed will be remotely controlled from Texas. If there is a
brush fire or an explosion and the gas shutoff from Texas does not work, the results
could be disastrous. Even if new gas can be prevented from coming into the
metering station in the event of a fire, the gas that is already in the station remains.

Sediments stirred up by these construction operations may obstruct gills and filter-
feeding structures of fishes and sedentary invertebrates.

The artificial reef near the proposed pipeline route has become a very sensitive
ecological area, which is critical not only to marine life, but also to the local
economy. Many charter boats and commercial party boats depend on this area, so
any damage to the reef will have economic impacts as well as environmental
impacts.

There is no guarantee where the large amount of sand that will be blown out from
the sea bottom to form a shallow trench will be carried. Given the currents, it will
probably move to the west, but if a strong storm comes up, it could end up
anywhere, including on the reef.

Heavy metals whose existence near the proposed pipeline route have been
documented, including arsenic, cadmium, copper, lead and mercury, may be
disturbed from their current locations beneath the ocean floor during these
trenching operations, and may contaminate the reef and adjacent areas.

Attempts to document existing marine organisms have been inadequate, and should
be repeated during the summer months, when marine life is at its peak, by divers
utilizing GPS positioning to ensure full documentation. these are only 2 of myriad
potential problems with this (or any other) pipeline. Putting the largest urban
center in the United States at risk is not an acceptable option--putting ANY
population center at risk is not an acceptable option. Gas pipelines, in fact, are not
acceptable options.

Thank you

Lise Brenner
231 Jackson Street
Brooklyn, NY 11211

37. Liza Chiu
6/25/12

I believe as Sane Energy Project does, that this proposed Williams/Transco
Rockaway Lateral Project should not go forward based on the endangerment to
public health and safety and irreparable damage to the environment and local
ecology. As a citizen of NYC, and at large the world, I disagree with and denounce
any activity that supports the pursuit of money over any logical, perceivable gain
and benefit to LIFE. I would rather see our government support a policy to conserve
energy and resource (of which there are dwindling unreplenishable supplies) than
push through a development that has not been proven to be safe in the pursuit of
easy energy.

I'm willing to support this if the board and supporters who pushed this project
through (and all their family, friends, and loved ones)are willing to live on the very
lands where this project will pass through.

I have copied & pasted a summary of the letter that Sane Energy Project has sent to
Ms. Bose below, to further elaborate on the concerns I have.

1. The pipeline is a direct threat to the public health, safety, and property of
residents in the area, as well as the multitude of shoppers and businesses along
Flatbush Avenue and surrounding blocks in Brooklyn, as well as the fishermen,
boaters and visitors to the recreational areas of Jacob Riis Park, Floyd Bennett Field,
Breezy Point, and the wetlands and harbor areas of Jamaica Bay.

2. The proposed pipeline threatens flourishing wetland areas and bird sanctuaries.

3. The likelihood that Radon levels in delivered gas will rise as a result of this
pipeline.

4. The pipeline is a larger threat to the public health, safety, property values and
economy of all regions of the

Marcellus shale, including upstate New York, Pennsylvania, Ohio, West Virginia and
other areas, due to the inevitability that it will increase the demand for
hydrofracturing.

5. There is a history of safety issues with the builder of this pipeline.

6. The proposed pipeline is a security and terrorist risk.

7. It’s the wrong choice for New York’s energy future.

8. Pipeline regulation and oversight in America is sorely inadequate and slanted in
support of industry’s nterests rather than the expressed desires of American
citizens.

GIVEN THE ABOVE CONCERNS, THIS PROJECT PRESENTS AN UNACCEPTABLE
ADVERSE IMPACT, AND SHOULD NOT GO FORWARD.

38. Lois Pinetree- representing 65 people who signed a petition against the
pipeline.
6/25/12

KEEP the GAS INDUSTRY OUT OF OUR NATIONAL PARK!

Floyd Bennett Field—an urban oasis on the edge of Brooklyn, serving the people of
New York City—our treasure in the harbor. New York’s first municipal air field,
the cradle of aviation where Amelia Earhart, Charles Lindbergh and others
pioneered historic flights, highlighted at the newly renovated Ryan Visitor Center. A
place to re-build airplanes from the World War II era with Historic Aircraft
Restoration Project.

A place to grow vegetables and flowers while listening to birds sing from the fence
posts at Floyd Bennett Garden Association, the oldest and largest community garden
in the U.S.

A haven for a variety of birds and other creatures who nest in the Grasslands as well
as the two acre Wildlife Habitat—an area designed and planted solely by
community volunteers. A unique site to photograph birds, butterflies, snakes,
dragonflies, hummingbird moths, plants and flowers.

A place to keep beehives so that our pollinator friends may do their work so vital to
our planet.

A place to practice archery, bike, wind-glide, play cricket, fly kites and radio-control
planes, build model trains, explore the stars with telescopes, sail boats from the
Marina, camp, fish and kayak on Jamaica Bay. A place to exercise or ice skate at
Aviator Sports Center.

A place where groups of children come to camp and experience nature at Ecology
Village, many for the first time.

A place to hike and learn about our natural and historic environment with National
Park Service rangers, the Audubon Society, the American Littoral Society.

Or‚ a place to build a gas metering plant?

Williams Transco is planning to install such a plant in two historic airplane hangars
directly adjacent to our Community Gardens, Wildlife Habitat and beekeeping area.
This would bring unacceptable levels of noise from heating/cooling systems and
pollution from the burning of methane gas, driving away birds, bees and wildlife,
polluting our garden soil and the fresh air we now enjoy. An accident could destroy
everything we have worked so long and hard to create, and several accidents have
already occurred in March 2012 at a Williams gas plant in Pennsylvania, at Williams
pipelines in Alabama 2011 and Virginia 2008. Williams Transco is proceeding by
setting up equipment and fences before even filing an Environmental Impact
Statement.

The National Park System was established for the American people, NOT
for industry!

We hereby petition FERC, Williams Transco, the National Parks Service and our
elected officials to halt all construction of a gas metering station on the grounds of
Floyd Bennett Field.

Note: This petition has been signed by 65 people thus far. The names and
signatures are being submitted via Efile, since I was unable to attach them with
Ecomment.

Thank you,

Lois Pinetree
June 25, 2012

39. Lyna Hinkel on behalf of “350.orgNYC.”
6/24/12

On behalf of 350.orgNYC, I am writing to object to the proposed Williams/Transco
Rockaway Lateral Project on the basis of the following reasons:

1. The pipeline is a direct threat to the public health, safety, and property of
residents in the area, as well as the multitude of shoppers and businesses along
Flatbush Avenue and surrounding blocks in Brooklyn, as well as the fishermen,
boaters and visitors to the recreational areas of Jacob Riis Park, Floyd Bennett Field,
Breezy Point, and the wetlands and harbor areas of Jamaica Bay.

Gas pipelines are subject to leaks and explosions. Fear of an explosion from this
pipeline is well placed: Nationwide, pipeline accidents result in, on average, a death
every 3 weeks, and injuries or burns more than once a week. Siting a high-pressure,
large diameter pipeline such as this in a densely populated urban area, which
includes the crowded Kings Plaza Shopping Center, is inappropriate and subjects the
area to a risk out of proportion with the supposed benefits. The standard for
deciding the risk from a pipeline such as this should not be the percentage of
pipelines that explode, but the impact of the damage should it explode. In other EISs,
FERC has positively compared the chances of dying from a pipeline explosion to the
chances of dying in a car accident. While it’s true that one’s chances of dying in a car
accident are quite high compared with one’s chances of dying in a pipeline
explosion, car accidents normally do not destroy entire urban areas, blow up dozens
of buildings, injure or kill multitudes of people, or leave a crater 4 stories deep, as a
pipeline explosion of comparable size and pressure did in San Bruno, California in
2010.

2. The proposed pipeline threatens flourishing wetland areas and bird sanctuaries.

The pipe would traverse delicate underwater and wetland areas, bird sanctuaries,
and a wildlife sanctuary that has only recently been restored. Millions of dollars
were spent to restore this area. The construction of this pipeline, as well as a
potential explosion and emissions from its daily operations, put all of that at risk.

Floyd Bennett Field has a history of fires, including brush fires. Hydrants there are
relatively few, and many of the existing ones have been problematic. It does not
appear that there are adequate resources to deal with the potential for fires caused
by introducing a massive gas line into this area.

The metering station proposed will be remotely controlled from Texas. If there is a
brush fire or an explosion and the gas shutoff from Texas does not work, the results
could be disastrous. Even if new gas can be prevented from coming into the
metering station in the event of a fire, the gas that is already in the station remains.

Sediments stirred up by these construction operations may obstruct gills and filter-
feeding structures of fishes and sedentary invertebrates.

The artificial reef near the proposed pipeline route has become a very sensitive
ecological area, which is critical not only to marine life, but also to the local
economy. Many charter boats and commercial party boats depend on this area, so
any damage to the reef will have economic impacts as well as environmental
impacts.

There is no guarantee where the large amount of sand that will be blown out from
the sea bottom to form a shallow trench will be carried. Given the currents, it will
probably move to the west, but if a strong storm comes up, it could end up
anywhere, including on the reef.

Heavy metals whose existence near the proposed pipeline route have been
documented, including arsenic, cadmium, copper, lead and mercury, may be
disturbed from their current locations beneath the ocean floor during these
trenching operations, and may contaminate the reef and adjacent areas.

3. There is a history of safety issues with the builder of this pipeline.

Transco Williams is currently operating under a federal Corrective Action Order,
issued in December of 2011 in connection with a massive natural gas pipeline
explosion in Alabama.

That explosion, On December 3, 2011, created a large crater and propelled a 47-
foot, 3-inch piece of buried pipe more than 200 feet away. The releasing gas ignited
and continued to burn for several hours, causing damage to one of the adjoining
pipelines and scorching approximately eight acres of surrounding property.

On March 5, 2012 the Williams Partners subsidiary, Transcontinental Gas Pipeline
Co. LLC was fined $50,000 by PHMSA for failure to follow its own, internal policies
related to controlling external corrosion in natural gas pipelines running through
the New York City borough of Staten Island.

4. It’s the wrong choice for New York’s energy future.

Building new gas infrastructure wrongly invests in dirty fossil fuel when New York
City can and should ramp up investment in clean sustainable energy infrastructure
instead. For all the danger, cost, and environmental destruction of extraction and
transport, the supply of gas will be short-lived, with recent studies projecting only
20% of earlier reserves, a mere 11-year supply. According to the peer reviewed
2010 Stanford University study, using technologies already available, the world can
run solely on renewable energy by 2050. With this in mind, it is a poor investment
to shackle ourselves to polluting methane and explosive pipelines.

GIVEN THE ABOVE CONCERNS, THIS PROJECT PRESENTS AN UNACCEPTABLE
ADVERSE IMPACT, AND SHOULD NOT GO FORWARD.

Sincerely,

Lyna Hinkel

201 W 80th St
New York, NY 10024
40. Marion Stein of “Sane Energy Project.”
6/24/12

Dear Ms. Bose,

On behalf of Sane Energy Project and our network of 3,694 supporters, I am writing
to object to the proposed

Williams/Transco Rockaway Lateral Project on the basis of the following reasons:

1. The pipeline is a direct threat to the public health, safety, and property of
residents in the area, as well as the multitude of shoppers and businesses along
Flatbush Avenue and surrounding blocks in Brooklyn, as well as the fishermen,
boaters and visitors to the recreational areas of Jacob Riis Park, Floyd Bennett Field,
Breezy Point, and the wetlands and harbor areas of Jamaica Bay.

Gas pipelines are subject to leaks and explosions. Fear of an explosion from this
pipeline is well placed: Nationwide, pipeline accidents result in, on average, a death
every 3 weeks, and injuries or burns more than once a week. Siting a high-pressure,
large diameter pipeline such as this in a densely populated urban area, which
includes the crowded Kings Plaza Shopping Center, is inappropriate and subjects the
area to a risk out of proportion with the supposed benefits. The standard for
deciding the risk from a pipeline such as this should not be the percentage of
pipelines that explode, but the impact of the damage should it explode. In other EISs,
FERC has positively compared the chances of dying from a pipeline explosion to the
chances of dying in a car accident. While it’s true that one’s chances of dying in a car
accident are quite high compared with one’s chances of dying in a pipeline
explosion, car accidents normally do not destroy entire urban areas, blow up dozens
of buildings, injure or kill multitudes of people, or leave a crater 4 stories deep, as a
pipeline explosion of comparable size and pressure did in San Bruno, California in
2010.

2. The proposed pipeline threatens flourishing wetland areas and bird sanctuaries.

The pipe would traverse delicate underwater and wetland areas, bird sanctuaries,
and a wildlife sanctuary that has only recently been restored. Millions of dollars
were spent to restore this area. The construction of this pipeline, as well as a
potential explosion and emissions from its daily operations, put all of that at risk.

Floyd Bennett Field has a history of fires, including brush fires. Hydrants there are
relatively few, and many of the existing ones have been problematic. It does not
appear that there are adequate resources to deal with the potential for fires caused
by introducing a massive gas line into this area.

The metering station proposed will be remotely controlled from Texas. If there is a
brush fire or an explosion and the gas shutoff from Texas does not work, the results
could be disastrous. Even if new gas can be prevented from coming into the
metering station in the event of a fire, the gas that is already in the station remains.

Sediments stirred up by these construction operations may obstruct gills and filter-
feeding structures of fishes and sedentary invertebrates.

The artificial reef near the proposed pipeline route has become a very sensitive
ecological area, which is critical not only to marine life, but also to the local
economy. Many charter boats and commercial party boats depend on this area, so
any damage to the reef will have economic impacts as well as environmental
impacts.

There is no guarantee where the large amount of sand that will be blown out from
the sea bottom to form a shallow trench will be carried. Given the currents, it will
probably move to the west, but if a strong storm comes up, it couldend up anywhere,
including on the reef.

Heavy metals whose existence near the proposed pipeline route have been
documented, including arsenic, cadmium, copper, lead and mercury, may be
disturbed from their current locations beneath the ocean floor during these
trenching operations, and may contaminate the reef and adjacent areas.

Attempts to document existing marine organisms have been inadequate, and should
be repeated during the summer months, when marine life is at its peak, by divers
utilizing GPS positioning to ensure full documentation.

3. The likelihood that Radon levels in delivered gas will rise as a result of this
pipeline.

The proposed pipeline is anticipated to supply NYC appliances and boilers with gas
from the Marcellus Shale, which is highly radioactive. Marcellus shale gas has been
estimated to contain up to 70 times as much radon as the gas from sources in Texas
and Louisiana which currently provide most of the supply for New York City’s
gas. The risk of higher radon levels is increased by the proximity of the Marcellus to
NYC, as there is not time for significant radioactive decay to occur within the small
number of hours (approximately 10) gas would be delivered.

* There is no safe level for inhaled radon, and radon is the leading cause of lung
cancer in non-smokers. The likelihood of inhaling radon while cooking or doing
laundry is increased by the small size of NYC kitchens, the typical lack of windows or
vents connected to the outside. By testimony previously provided to FERC by Sane
Energy Project, the majority of NYC kitchens have only a recirculating hood (which
blows fumes back into the kitchen) or a passive wall vent, many of which have been
disabled. NYC building code disallows through-the-wall venting in the majority of
situations for older building stock, which is the majority of construction in NYC.

The actionable level of indoor radon is 4 picocuries per liter. A Citizen’s Radon
Test performed on behalf of Sane Energy Project in the winter of early 2012 showed
current indoor radon levels mostly below the actionable level.

Additionally, the problem of radioactive agents plating out on the sides of pipelines
from gas in transit, causing hot pipes, creates another environmental and disposal
risk.

No official health impact study has ever been done to document either the current
radon level at point of delivery, the actual state of ventilation available in actual city
kitchens.

41. Mark Pezzati

I am writing to voice my opposition to the construction of the proposed 3.17-mile,
26-inch "Rockaway Lateral" consisting of 2.79 miles of offshore pipeline and 0.38
miles of onshore pipeline.

While it appears that the proposed route does for the most part avoid residential
areas I am concerned that it would severely impact sensitive environmental areas as
well as endanger those who use this high-traffic recreation area.

The majority of the onshore portion of the pipeline route is located within the
Gateway National Recreation Area which is prime habitat for an enormous number
of migratory birds which rely on this area while making passage up and down the
eastern seaboard during the spring and fall. This sensitive habitat is no place for
either the disruptive process of installation or the dangers which a high pressure
26-inch gas pipeline would bring. Because of the Williams Company's dismal track
record in regards to pipeline accidents and safely concerns it makes no sense to
allow the company access to this environmentally sensitive area.

Beyond the wildlife concerns mentioned above I am also concerned that this
proposed route passes through high-traffic recreation areas used by millions of New
Yorkers during the summer months. Not only would the route pass beneath a pitch-
and-putt golf course located within the Jacob Riis Park, but it would also run near
Fort Tilden to the west and a parking lot within Jacob Riis Park to the east. These
areas are popular with New York City residents who flock here for swimming at the
beaches as well as a multitude of outdoor activities year round. Installing a 26-inch
gas pipeline in this location is a recipe for disaster considering the wide swath
which a pipeline explosion would have for the millions people who use the area.

This project as it now stands does not appear to address the issues mentioned
above. Because of this I believe that FERC should deny the Williams Company a
permit to proceed with these plans if they an application file to do so.

42. Martha Cameron and Charlotte Phillips on behalf of “Brooklyn for Peace,” a
network of 6,000 supporters.
6/25/12

Ms. Kimberly D. Bose, Secretary

Federal Energy Regulatory Commission
888 First Street, NE, Room 1A
Washington, DC 20426

June 24, 2012
RE: Opposition to the Williams/Transco Rockaway Lateral Docket: PF09-8-000

Dear Ms. Bose,

On behalf of Brooklyn For Peace and our network of 6,000 supporters, we are
writing to object to the proposed Williams/Transco Rockaway Lateral Project, for
the following reasons:

As documented in the excellent letter submitted to the Commission by Clare
Donohue of the Sane Energy Project, a letter that our organization endorses in its
entirety, the proposed pipeline, which will carry natural gas, including fracked gas
from the Marcellus Shale, is a direct public health and safety threat to the residents
of the area immediately around the pipeline, to New York City residents as a whole,
and to the people living in the area from which the fracked gas is drawn. It is also a
direct threat to a precious wetlands area precious because wetlands, which act as
nurseries to marine life and sanctuaries to many bird species, are disappearing from
the planet at an alarming rate.

Oversight of pipelines and private energy corporations is very poor in this country,
as evidenced by highly publicized spills such as the BP blowout in the Gulf of Mexico,
the 19,000 barrels of dilbit that leaked into the Kalamazoo in 2010, the 40,000
gallons of oil that went into Montana’s Yellowstone River last summer, or the Suncor
leak into the South Platte River last November that has left high concentrations of
benzene in Denver’s drinking water.

As Kate Sheppard notes in Mother Jones: “The federal government has 88
inspectors overseeing 2.3 million miles of gas and oil pipelines. Between 2000 and
2009, there were 2,800 pipeline accidents, causing 160 deaths and more than $3.2
billion in damages. Since then we have added another 541 accidents, 34 deaths, and
$46 million in damages and 12 more inspectors.

But the main reason to oppose the Williams/Transco pipeline is this: building
infrastructure for the fossil fuel industry promotes climate change and undermines
efforts to transition to renewable energy.

Climate change is an existential threat to every living being on the planet. There is
no question in the scientific community that climate change is caused by human
activity, in particular the release of greenhouse gases into the atmosphere through
the burning of fossil fuels. And all industry hype to the contrary, natural gas is not
clean energy. It is a fossil fuel, one that releases methane into the atmosphere, a
greenhouse gas that is 21 times more potent than CO2. Furthermore, the total
carbon footprint of fracked gas, including the truck traffic involved in transporting
frack sand from Ohio, carrying wastewater to (totally inadequate) treatment
facilities, etc., is even greater than the carbon footprint of dirty coal.

We can no longer afford to pretend that climate change is not happening. As
reported just yesterday in the New York Times, the U.S. Geological Survey has found
that sea levels are rising on the U.S. East Coast three times faster than the global
average. We are facing a planetary emergency. Yet instead of protecting the people
and making every effort to mitigate the effects of climate change, our government is
instead promoting the interests of a private industry that is awash in profits and
subsidies.

Martha Cameron
Climate Action Committee, Brooklyn For Peace

Charlotte Phillips, M.D.
Chair, Brooklyn For Peace

43. Maryl Mendillo of “Sane Energy Project.”
6/25/12

Dear Ms. Bose,

On behalf of Sane Energy Project and our network of 3,694 supporters, I am writing
to object to the proposed

Williams/Transco Rockaway Lateral Project on the basis of the following reasons:

1. The pipeline is a direct threat to the public health, safety, and property of
residents in the area, as well as the multitude of shoppers and businesses along
Flatbush Avenue and surrounding blocks in Brooklyn, as well as the fishermen,
boaters and visitors to the recreational areas of Jacob Riis Park, Floyd Bennett Field,
Breezy Point, and the wetlands and harbor areas of Jamaica Bay.

Gas pipelines are subject to leaks and explosions. Fear of an explosion from this
pipeline is well placed: Nationwide, pipeline accidents result in, on average, a death
every 3 weeks, and injuries or burns more than once a week. Siting a high-pressure,
large diameter pipeline such as this in a densely populated urban area, which
includes the crowded Kings Plaza Shopping Center, is inappropriate and subjects the
area to a risk out of proportion with the supposed benefits. The standard for
deciding the risk from a pipeline such as this should not be the percentage of
pipelines that explode, but the impact of the damage should it explode. In other EISs,
FERC has positively compared the chances of dying from a pipeline explosion to the
chances of dying in a car accident. While it’s true that one’s chances of dying in a car
accident are quite high compared with one’s chances of dying in a pipeline
explosion, car accidents normally do not destroy entire urban areas, blow up dozens
of buildings, injure or kill multitudes of people, or leave a crater 4 stories deep, as a
pipeline explosion of comparable size and pressure did in San Bruno, California in
2010.

2. The proposed pipeline threatens flourishing wetland areas and bird sanctuaries.

The pipe would traverse delicate underwater and wetland areas, bird sanctuaries,
and a wildlife sanctuary that has only recently been restored. Millions of dollars
were spent to restore this area. The construction of this pipeline, as well as a
potential explosion and emissions from its daily operations, put all of that at risk.

Floyd Bennett Field has a history of fires, including brush fires. Hydrants there are
relatively few, and many of the existing ones have been problematic. It does not
appear that there are adequate resources to deal with the potential for fires caused
by introducing a massive gas line into this area.

The metering station proposed will be remotely controlled from Texas. If there is a
brush fire or an explosion and the gas shutoff from Texas does not work, the results
could be disastrous. Even if new gas can be prevented from coming into the
metering station in the event of a fire, the gas that is already in the station remains.

Sediments stirred up by these construction operations may obstruct gills and filter-
feeding structures of fishes and sedentary invertebrates.

The artificial reef near the proposed pipeline route has become a very sensitive
ecological area, which is critical not only to marine life, but also to the local
economy. Many charter boats and commercial party boats depend on this area, so
any damage to the reef will have economic impacts as well as environmental
impacts.

There is no guarantee where the large amount of sand that will be blown out from
the sea bottom to form a shallow trench will be carried. Given the currents, it will
probably move to the west, but if a strong storm comes up, it could end up
anywhere, including on the reef.

Heavy metals whose existence near the proposed pipeline route have been
documented, including arsenic, cadmium, copper, lead and mercury, may be
disturbed from their current locations beneath the ocean floor during these
trenching operations, and may contaminate the reef and adjacent areas.

Attempts to document existing marine organisms have been inadequate, and should
be repeated during the summer months, when marine life is at its peak, by divers
utilizing GPS positioning to ensure full documentation.

3. The likelihood that Radon levels in delivered gas will rise as a result of this
pipeline.

The proposed pipeline is anticipated to supply NYC appliances and boilers with gas
from the Marcellus Shale, which is highly radioactive. Marcellus shale gas has been
estimated to contain up to 70 times as much radon as the gas from sources in Texas
and Louisiana which currently provide most of the supply for New York City’s gas.
The risk of higher radon levels is increased by the proximity of the Marcellus to NYC,
as there is not time for significant radioactive decay to occur within the small
number of hours (approximately 10) gas would be delivered.

* There is no safe level for inhaled radon, and radon is the leading cause of lung
cancer in non-smokers. The likelihood of inhaling radon while cooking or doing
laundry is increased by the small size of NYC kitchens, the typical lack of windows or
vents connected to the outside. By testimony previously provided to FERC by
SaneEnergy Project, the majority of NYC kitchens have only a recirculating hood
(which blows fumes back into the kitchen) or a passive wall vent, many of which
have been disabled. NYC building code disallows through-the-wall venting in the
majority of situations for older building stock, which is the majority of construction
in NYC.

44. Michele Fox
6/24/12

Dear Ms. Bose,

On behalf of Sane Energy Project and our network of 3,694 supporters, I am writing
to object to the proposed

Williams/Transco Rockaway Lateral Project on the basis of the following reasons:

1. The pipeline is a direct threat to the public health, safety, and property of
residents in the area, as well as the multitude of shoppers and businesses along
Flatbush Avenue and surrounding blocks in Brooklyn, as well as the fishermen,
boaters and visitors to the recreational areas of Jacob Riis Park, Floyd Bennett Field,
Breezy Point, and the wetlands and harbor areas of Jamaica Bay.

Gas pipelines are subject to leaks and explosions. Fear of an explosion from this
pipeline is well placed: Nationwide, pipeline accidents result in, on average, a death
every 3 weeks, and injuries or burns more than once a week. Siting a high-pressure,
large diameter pipeline such as this in a densely populated urban area, which
includes the crowded Kings Plaza Shopping Center, is inappropriate and subjects the
area to a risk out of proportion with the supposed benefits. The standard for
deciding the risk from a pipeline such as this should not be the percentage of
pipelines that explode, but the impact of the damage should it explode. In other EISs,
FERC has positively compared the chances of dying from a pipeline explosion to the
chances of dying in a car accident. While it’s true that one’s chances of dying in a car
accident are quite high compared with one’s chances of dying in a pipeline
explosion, car accidents normally do not destroy entire urban areas, blow up dozens
of buildings, injure or kill multitudes of people, or leave a crater 4 stories deep, as a
pipeline explosion of comparable size and pressure did in San Bruno, California in
2010.

2. The proposed pipeline threatens flourishing wetland areas and bird sanctuaries.

The pipe would traverse delicate underwater and wetland areas, bird sanctuaries,
and a wildlife sanctuary that has only recently been restored. Millions of dollars
were spent to restore this area. The construction of this pipeline, as well as a
potential explosion and emissions from its daily operations, put all of that at risk.

Floyd Bennett Field has a history of fires, including brush fires. Hydrants there are
relatively few, and many of the existing ones have been problematic. It does not
appear that there are adequate resources to deal with the potential for fires caused
by introducing a massive gas line into this area.

The metering station proposed will be remotely controlled from Texas. If there is a
brush fire or an explosion and the gas shutoff from Texas does not work, the results
could be disastrous. Even if new gas can be prevented from coming into the
metering station in the event of a fire, the gas that is already in the station remains.

Sediments stirred up by these construction operations may obstruct gills and filter-
feeding structures of fishes and sedentary invertebrates.

The artificial reef near the proposed pipeline route has become a very sensitive
ecological area, which is critical not only to marine life, but also to the local
economy. Many charter boats and commercial party boats depend on this area, so
any damage to the reef will have economic impacts as well as environmental
impacts.

There is no guarantee where the large amount of sand that will be blown out from
the sea bottom to form a shallow trench will be carried. Given the currents, it will
probably move to the west, but if a strong storm comes up, it could end up
anywhere, including on the reef.

Heavy metals whose existence near the proposed pipeline route have been
documented, including arsenic, cadmium, copper, lead and mercury, may be
disturbed from their current locations beneath the ocean floor during these
trenching operations, and may contaminate the reef and adjacent areas.

Attempts to document existing marine organisms have been inadequate, and should
be repeated during the summer months, when marine life is at its peak, by divers
utilizing GPS positioning to ensure full documentation.

3. The likelihood that Radon levels in delivered gas will rise as a result of this
pipeline.

The proposed pipeline is anticipated to supply NYC appliances and boilers with gas
from the Marcellus Shale, which is highly radioactive. Marcellus shale gas has been
estimated to contain up to 70 times as much radon as the gas from sources in Texas
and Louisiana which currently provide most of the supply for New York City’s gas.
The risk of higher radon levels is increased by the proximity of the Marcellus to NYC,
as there is not time for significant radioactive decay to occur within the small
number of hours (approximately 10) gas would be delivered.

* There is no safe level for inhaled radon, and radon is the leading cause of lung
cancer in non-smokers. The likelihood of inhaling radon while cooking or doing
laundry is increased by the small size of NYC kitchens, the typical lack of windows or
vents connected to the outside. By testimony previously provided to FERC by Sane
Energy Project, the majority of NYC kitchens have only a recirculating hood (which
blows fumes back into the kitchen) or a passive wall vent, many of which have been
disabled. NYC building code disallows through-the-wall venting in the majority of
situations for older building stock, which is the majority of construction in NYC.

The actionable level of indoor radon is 4 picocuries per liter. A Citizen’s Radon Test
performed on behalf of Sane Energy Project in the winter of early 2012 showed
current indoor radon levels mostly below the actionable level.

Thank you,
Michele Fox

45. Myra Malkin
6/25/12

RE: Opposition to the Williams/Transco Rockaway Lateral Docket: PF09-8-000

This is a shockingly risky and utterly irresponsible project that is a threat to
public health and safety. The area involved is densely populated and heavily used,
full of homes, stores, businesses, and recreational sites, not to mention wetlands and
bird sanctuaries. We know that gas pipelines are associated with leaks and
explosions , that means deaths, injuries, burns. The pipeline will be a target for
terrorists; it will be vulnerable to cyber attacks. There will be danger from radon.
The risks far outweigh the supposed benefits. I hope you have read the comments
which note that, although, one’s chances of dying in a car accident are quite high
compared with one’s chances of dying in a pipeline explosion, car accidents
normally do not destroy entire urban areas, blow up dozens of buildings, injure or
kill multitudes of people, or leave a crater 4 stories deep, as a pipeline explosion of
comparable size and pressure did in San Bruno, California in 2010.

Moreover, the pipeline builder has a terrible safety record. It is in this to
make money; its indifference to public safety is clear. Since December, 2011, it has
been operating under a federal Corrective Action order, because of a huge pipeline
explosion in Alabama that damaged eight acres of property. Before that, it was
operating under another Corrective Action order because of a Virginia explosion.
And let’s be realistic: the regulation of pipelines in this country is utterly
inadequate; the industry has succeeding in co-opting the regulatory agencies. A
federal investigation into the San Bruno explosion deemed it a failure of the entire
system with inadequate actions at every stage of the pipeline’s construction,
inspection, maintenance, and emergency response.

This project is appallingly dangerous, and should be opposed.

46. National Parks Conservation Association
6/24/12

Reference FERC Project # PF09-8-000


Kimberly D. Bose, Secretary
Federal Energy Regulatory Commission
888 First Street NE, Room 1A
Washington D.C. 20426


Secretary Rose,

The National Parks Conservation Association supports the Rockaway Delivery
Lateral Project, however we are particularly concerned about one aspect; the
location of the proposed Metering & Regulating Facility. In sum, we recognize the
entire project is, for the most part, simply the expansion of a pipeline already under
Flatbush Avenue, and that in completing the project significant gains will be made
with respect to cleaning up the region’s air.

We understand that in connecting Transco’s offshore lateral pipeline to National
Grid’s distribution system in southern Brooklyn, the project will advance the
region’s clean energy goals by delivering up to 647 thousand dekatherms per day
(MDth/d) of natural gas (including 100 MDth/d of new incremental supply). The
resulting increase in the availability of cheaper, cleaner-burning, and domestically-
produced natural gas will not only decrease our country’s dependence on foreign
oil, and regionally it will advance the 2009 New York State Energy Plan and New
York City’s PlaNYC 2030 goals.

From what we know at this time, we also believe that this project will have a
minimal impact on the land and water resources because it will be conducted
primarily by expanding an existing natural gas pipeline currently under Flatbush
Avenue, and even where the connection will cross Far Rockaway, it will do so
predominantly under an existing NYC street.

NPCA is however very concerned about, an objects to, the placement of the Metering
& Regulating Facility in one of the historic hangers in Floyd Bennett Field (FBF)
within Gateway National Recreation Area. We strongly believe that instead, the
Metering Station be placed on another site within FBF, one that is already a hard
surface, but away from “Hanger Row”. Furthermore, we believe any mitigation
funds, lease fees, or other similar support tied to this effort, should instead be used
to restore the remaining four hangers in the two southern-most buildings for the
use of the public. In this light, we direct the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission
to read The Path Forward a public document that reflects these sentiments and
was the culmination of a major effort to capture the publics’ thoughts on the future
of Floyd Bennett Field. A copy may be found
at: http://www.rpa.org/2010/04/envisioning-gateway-floyd-bennett-field-and-
beyond.html

In conclusion, we hope that this project will continue as has been planned, with the
exception of the location of Metering Station as discussed above. In addition, NPCA
would like to be considered an Intervenor and would hope to be so included in the
process at the appropriate time.




Sincerely yours,





47. Nina Sweeny
6/14/12

This is absolutely disgusting. Our oceans are getting more and more polluted, and to
do something like this is one of the most shameful things you can do to our waters
and our areas. Rockaway is finally hitting a resurgence, and to do something like
this would potentially harm or destroy so much of our progress.

I'm from West Virginia originally, and my mother still lives there. When I visit, the
amount of gas being drilled is appalling. Roads that used to be pretty and peaceful,
now have lumbering trucks at all hours of the day and night. Transient workers set
up trailers and campers in lovely residential areas. The land is being blown up and
our water supplies endangered.

DO NOT BRING THIS MESS TO ROCKAWAY OR JAMAICA BAY.

This plan has so much less to do with providing energy, and more to do with finding
more money for the gas companies, and the lobbyists and politicians that feed off of
them. You would in effect be asking everyone in our area to accept a dirtier, more
polluted way of life.

Shame on anyone that supports this travesty.

48. Pam Katz of “Sane Energy Project.”
6/24/12

Dear Ms. Bose,

On behalf of Sane Energy Project and our network of 3,694 supporters, I am writing
to object to the proposed

Williams/Transco Rockaway Lateral Project on the basis of the following reasons:

1. The pipeline is a direct threat to the public health, safety, and property of
residents in the area, as well as the multitude of shoppers and businesses along
Flatbush Avenue and surrounding blocks in Brooklyn, as well as the fishermen,
boaters and visitors to the recreational areas of Jacob Riis Park, Floyd Bennett Field,
Breezy Point, and the wetlands and harbor areas of Jamaica Bay.

Gas pipelines are subject to leaks and explosions. Fear of an explosion from this
pipeline is well placed: Nationwide, pipeline accidents result in, on average, a death
every 3 weeks, and injuries or burns more than once a week. Siting a high-pressure,
large diameter pipeline such as this in a densely populated urban area, which
includes the crowded Kings Plaza Shopping Center, is inappropriate and subjects the
area to a risk out of proportion with the supposed benefits. The standard for
deciding the risk from a pipeline such as this should not be the percentage of
pipelines that explode, but the impact of the damage should it explode. In other EISs,
FERC has positively compared the chances of dying from a pipeline explosion to the
chances of dying in a car accident. While it’s true that one’s chances of dying in a car
accident are quite high compared with one’s chances of dying in a pipeline
explosion, car accidents normally do not destroy entire urban areas, blow up dozens
of buildings, injure or kill multitudes of people, or leave a crater 4 stories deep, as a
pipeline explosion of comparable size and pressure did in San Bruno, California in
2010.

2. The proposed pipeline threatens flourishing wetland areas and bird sanctuaries.

The pipe would traverse delicate underwater and wetland areas, bird sanctuaries,
and a wildlife sanctuary that has only recently been restored. Millions of dollars
were spent to restore this area. The construction of this pipeline, as well as a
potential explosion and emissions from its daily operations, put all of that at risk.

Floyd Bennett Field has a history of fires, including brush fires. Hydrants there are
relatively few, and many of the existing ones have been problematic. It does not
appear that there are adequate resources to deal with the potential for fires caused
by introducing a massive gas line into this area.

The metering station proposed will be remotely controlled from Texas. If there is a
brush fire or an explosion and the gas shutoff from Texas does not work, the results
could be disastrous. Even if new gas can be prevented from coming into the
metering station in the event of a fire, the gas that is already in the station remains.

Sediments stirred up by these construction operations may obstruct gills and filter-
feeding structures of fishes and sedentary invertebrates.

The artificial reef near the proposed pipeline route has become a very sensitive
ecological area, which is critical not only to marine life, but also to the local
economy. Many charter boats and commercial party boats depend on this area, so
any damage to the reef will have economic impacts as well as environmental
impacts.

There is no guarantee where the large amount of sand that will be blown out from
the sea bottom to form a shallow trench will be carried. Given the currents, it will
probably move to the west, but if a strong storm comes up, it could end up
anywhere, including on the reef.

Heavy metals whose existence near the proposed pipeline route have been
documented, including arsenic, cadmium, copper, lead and mercury, may be
disturbed from their current locations beneath the ocean floor during these
trenching operations, and may contaminate the reef and adjacent areas.

Attempts to document existing marine organisms have been inadequate, and should
be repeated during the summer months, when marine life is at its peak, by divers
utilizing GPS positioning to ensure full documentation.

3. The likelihood that Radon levels in delivered gas will rise as a result of this
pipeline.

The proposed pipeline is anticipated to supply NYC appliances and boilers with gas
from the Marcellus Shale, which is highly radioactive. Marcellus shale gas has been
estimated to contain up to 70 times as much radon as the gas from sources in Texas
and Louisiana which currently provide most of the supply for New York City’s gas.
The risk of higher radon levels is increased by the proximity of the Marcellus to NYC,
as there is not time for significant radioactive decay to occur within the small
number of hours (approximately 10) gas would be delivered.

* There is no safe level for inhaled radon, and radon is the leading cause of lung
cancer in non-smokers. The likelihood of inhaling radon while cooking or doing
laundry is increased by the small size of NYC kitchens, the typical lack of windows or
vents connected to the outside. By testimony previously provided to FERC by
SaneEnergy Project, the majority of NYC kitchens have only a recirculating hood
(which blows fumes back into the kitchen) or a passive wall vent, many of which
have been disabled. NYC building code disallows through-the-wall venting in the
majority of situations for older building stock, which is the majority of construction
in NYC.

49. Phyllis Rosenblatt

Re: Opposition to the Williams/Transco Rockaway Lateral Docket : PF09-87-000.

I am writing to object to the proposed Williams/Transco Rockaway Lateral Project
for the following reasons;

1- The pipeline is a direct threat to the public health, safety, and property of
residents in the area, as well as the multitude of shoppers and businesses along
Flatbush Ave. and surrounding blocks in Brooklyn as well as the fishermen, boaters
and visitors to the recreational areas of Jacob Riis Park, Floyd Bennett Field, Breezy
Point, and the wetlands and harbor areas of Jamaica Bay. Pipeline explosions are a
statistical reality and as such make this plan equal to a terrorist attack. This is not
only not acceptable, it is bewildering why it is being pursued as a fuel option.

2.The proposed pipeline threatens flourishing wetland areas and bird sanctuaries.

3. The likelihood that Radon levels in delivered gas will rise as a result of this
pipeline. There is no safe level for radon. Period.

4. The pipeline line is a larger threat to the public health, safety, property values and
economy of all regions of the Marcellus shale, including upstate New York,
Pennsylvania, Ohio, West Virginia and other areas due to the inevitability that it will
increase the demand for hydrofracking.

5. There is a major set of safety issues with the builder of this pipeline.

6. The security risk of this proposed pipeline makes terrorists look like agents of the
builders. Or the builders themselves.

7. Without question, it is the wrong choice for New York's energy future.

8. Pipeline regulation and oversight disregards the expressed desires of American
citizens and slants in favor of support for the industry's interests rather than health
of anyone except those who think they can breathe money and don't think about any
future whatsoever.

GIVEN THE ABOVE CONCERNS, THIS PROJECT PRESENTS AND UNACCEPTABLE
ADVERSE INPACT AND SHOULD NOT GO FORWARD.

Sincerely,

Phyllis Rosenblatt

50. Rayda Vega
6/25/12

RE: Opposition to the Williams/Transco Rockaway Lateral Docket: PF09-8-000

June 25, 2012

1The Rockaway Lateral pipeline is a direct threat to the public health, safety, and
property of residents in the area, as well as the multitude of shoppers and
businesses along Flatbush Avenue and surrounding blocks in Brooklyn, as well as
the fishermen, boaters and visitors to the recreational areas of Jacob Riis Park, Floyd
Bennett Field, Breezy Point, and the wetlands and harbor areas of Jamaica Bay. Gas
pipelines are subject to leaks and explosions. Fear of an explosion from this pipeline
is well placed: Nationwide, pipeline accidents result in, on average, a death every 3
weeks, and injuries or burns more than once a week.

The proposed pipeline threatens flourishing wetland areas and bird sanctuaries.

The likelihood that Radon levels in delivered gas will rise as a result of this pipeline.

The pipeline is a larger threat to the public health, safety, property values and
economy of all regions of the Marcellus shale, including upstate New York,
Pennsylvania, Ohio, West Virginia and other areas, due to the inevitability that it will
increase the demand for hydrofracturing. The proposed pipeline will not bring clean
energy to New York City. This pipeline would bring fracked Marcellus shale gas to
market.

The proposed pipeline is a security and terrorist risk.

The proposed pipeline is a significant security risk, and a potential target for
terrorists. • Like all pipelines, this one is vulnerable to Stuxnet cyber attacks,
which could disable necessary systems or remotely affect pressures within the
pipeline, causing accidents, leaks or explosions. • Airplanes leaving or
approaching JFK airport could be affected by any explosion, fire, or terrorist actions
associated with the pipeline.

Rayda Vega

315 West 57th Street
NYC 10019

51. Regina Avraham
6/24/12

This is unbelievable! After all the exposure by environmental experts about the
dangers to water, soil, air and health, the gas companies still continue to get
politicians to agree to their greedy ventures.

The pipeline is a direct threat to the public health, safety, and property of residents
in the area, as well as the multitude of shoppers and businesses along Flatbush
Avenue and surrounding blocks in Brooklyn, as wel as the fishermen, boaters and
visitors to the recreational areas of Jacob Riis Park, Floyd Bennett Field, Breezy
Point, and the wetlands and harbor areas of Jamaica Bay. Gas pipelines are subject
to leaks and explosions.

The likelihood that Radon levels in delivered gas will rise as a result of this pipeline.

The proposed pipeline is anticipated to supply NYC appliances and boilers with gas
from the Marcellus Shale, which is highly radioactive. Marcellus shale gas has been
estimated to contain up to 70 times as much radon as the gas from sources in Texas
and Louisiana which currently provide most of the supply for New York City’s gas.

Please watch Josh Fox's documentaries. Please read the conclusions of experts who
KNOW what is happening in other parts of the country where people are dying.

Don't close your eyes to facts that are being distorted and hidden by the same PR
company that gave us 'healthy' cigarettes, and are no promoting 'clean' gas
extraction.

Please. Please. Think.

52. Ryan Enschede
6/25/12

I am writing to object to the proposed Williams/Transco Rockaway Lateral Project
on the basis of the following reasons:

1. The pipeline is a direct threat to the public health, safety, and property of
residents in the area, as well as the multitude of shoppers and businesses along
Flatbush Avenue and surrounding blocks in Brooklyn, as well as the fishermen,
boaters and visitors to the recreational areas of Jacob Riis Park, Floyd Bennett Field,

Breezy Point, and the wetlands and harbor areas of Jamaica Bay.

2. The proposed pipeline threatens flourishing wetland areas and bird sanctuaries.

3. The likelihood that Radon levels in delivered gas will rise as a result of this
pipeline.

4. The pipeline is a larger threat to the public health, safety, property values and
economy of all regions of the

Marcellus shale, including upstate New York, Pennsylvania, Ohio, West Virginia and
other areas, due to the inevitability that it will increase the demand for
hydrofracturing.

5. There is a history of safety issues with the builder of this pipeline.

6. The proposed pipeline is a security and terrorist risk.

7. It’s the wrong choice for New York‚Äôs energy future.

8. Pipeline regulation and oversight in America is sorely inadequate and slanted in
support of industry’s interests rather than the expressed desires of American
citizens.

GIVEN THE ABOVE CONCERNS, THIS PROJECT PRESENTS AN UNACCEPTABLE
ADVERSE IMPACT, AND SHOULD NOT GO FORWARD.

53. Sara Cohn
6/25/12

RE: Opposition to the Williams/Transco Rockaway Lateral

Dear Ms. Bose,

I am writing as a brooklyn resident and long time NY resident, who is extremely
concerned about the proposed methane pipeline. Jacob Riis is a pristine escape to
many New yorkers! please please ! support your constituents right to a beautiful
home, we can find better ways to solve the energy solutions. Please see below for a
much more detailed description of why this pipeline does not weight well when
comparing cost and benefit to NYC. thank you so much for your time!



Williams/Transco Rockaway Lateral Project on the basis of the following reasons:

1. The pipeline is a direct threat to the public health, safety, and property of
residents in the area, as well as the multitude of shoppers and businesses along
Flatbush Avenue and surrounding blocks in Brooklyn, as well as the fishermen,
boaters and visitors to the recreational areas of Jacob Riis Park, Floyd Bennett Field,
Breezy Point, and the wetlands and harbor areas of Jamaica Bay.

Gas pipelines are subject to leaks and explosions. Fear of an explosion from this
pipeline is well placed: Nationwide, pipeline accidents result in, on average, a death
every 3 weeks, and injuries or burns more than once a week.

2. The proposed pipeline threatens flourishing wetland areas and bird sanctuaries.

The pipe would traverse delicate underwater and wetland areas, bird sanctuaries,
and a wildlife sanctuary that has only recently been restored. Millions of dollars
were spent to restore this area. The construction of this pipeline, as well as a
potential explosion and emissions from its daily operations, put all of that at risk.

Floyd Bennett Field has a history of fires, including brush fires. Hydrants there are
relatively few, and many of the existing ones have been problematic. It does not
appear that there are adequate resources to deal with the potential for fires caused
by introducing a massive gas line into this area.

The metering station proposed will be remotely controlled from Texas. If there is a
brush fire or an explosion and the gas shutoff from Texas does not work, the results
could be disastrous. Even if new gas can be prevented from coming into the
metering station in the event of a fire, the gas that is already in the station remains.

Sediments stirred up by these construction operations may obstruct gills and filter-
feeding structures of fishes and sedentary invertebrates.

The artificial reef near the proposed pipeline route has become a very sensitive
ecological area, which is critical not only to marine life, but also to the local
economy. Many charter boats and commercial party boats depend on this area, so
any damage to the reef will have economic impacts as well as environmental
impacts.

There is no guarantee where the large amount of sand that will be blown out from
the sea bottom to form a shallow trench will be carried. Given the currents, it will
probably move to the west, but if a strong storm comes up, it could end up
anywhere, including on the reef.

Heavy metals whose existence near the proposed pipeline route have been
documented, including arsenic, cadmium, copper, lead and mercury, may be
disturbed from their current locations beneath the ocean floor during these
trenching operations, and may contaminate the reef and adjacent areas.

Attempts to document existing marine organisms have been inadequate, and should
be repeated during the summer months, when marine life is at its peak, by divers
utilizing GPS positioning to ensure full documentation.

3. The likelihood that Radon levels in delivered gas will rise as a result of this
pipeline.

The proposed pipeline is anticipated to supply NYC appliances and boilers with gas
from the Marcellus Shale, which is highly radioactive. Marcellus shale gas has been
estimated to contain up to 70 times as much radon as the gas from sources in Texas
and Louisiana which currently provide most of the supply for New York City’s gas.
The risk of higher radon levels is increased by the proximity of the Marcellus to NYC,
as there is not time for significant radioactive decay to occur within the small
number of hours (approximately 10) gas would be delivered.

* There is no safe level for inhaled radon, and radon is the leading cause of lung
cancer in non-smokers. The likelihood of inhaling radon while cooking or doing
laundry is increased by the small size of NYC kitchens, the typical lack of windows or
vents connected to the outside.

By testimony previously provided to FERC by SaneEnergy Project, the majority of
NYC kitchens have only a recirculating hood (which blows fumes back into
thekitchen) or a passive wall vent, many of which have been disabled. NYC building
code disallows through-the-wall venting in the majority of situations for older
building stock, which is the majority of construction in NYC.

The actionable level of indoor radon is 4 picocuries per liter. A Citizen’s Radon
Test performed on behalf of Sane Energy Project in the winter of early 2012 showed
current indoor radon levels mostly below the actionable level.

Additionally, the problem of radioactive agents plating out on the sides of pipelines
from gas in transit, causing hot pipes‚creates another environmental and disposal
risk.

54. Sharon Shoenfeld
6/24/12

To Whom It May Concern:

I am very much opposed to the proposed gas pipeline. It would bring gas
from the Marcellus Shale. Marcellus Shale gas is radioactive. It has been estimated
to contain at least 70 times as much radioactivity as the gas from other sources
which currently provide most of the supply for New York City, and this gas comes
from fracking which is a horrifyingly damaging and dangerous practice. In addition
Tranco Williams has a poor safety record, and it is dangerous to put a gas pipeline
near a crowded area like Kings Plaza. And Floyd Bennett Field has a history of fires,
including brush fires, and there are few hydrants there and many of the existing
ones are problematic.

Thank you,

Sharon Shoenfeld

2481 West First Street, 1st Floor
Brooklyn, NY 11223

55. Marion Stein
6/25/12- #2

I concur completely with the letter from the Sane Energy Project. Please add this to
your records.

Marion M. Stein

56. Stephanie Low
6/24/12

Dear Ms Bose,

As a tax-payer and resident of New York City, I strenuously oppose the
Williams/Transco Rockaway Lateral Project for the following reasons:

The pipeline is a direct threat to the public health, safety, and property of residents
in the area, as well as the multitude of shoppers and businesses along Flatbush
Avenue and surrounding blocks in Brooklyn, as well as the fishermen, boaters and
visitors to the recreational areas of Jacob Riis Park, Floyd Bennett Field, Breezy
Point, and the wetlands and harbor areas of Jamaica Bay.

There is a history of safety issues with the builder of this pipeline.

The proposed pipeline is a security and terrorist risk.

According to the Pipeline Safety Trust, a not-for-profit in Bellingham, WA, that
promotes fuel transportation safety, "if you look at all the pipelines in the country,
there's a significant incident‚ somewhere--about every other day. And someone ends
up in the hospital or dead about every nine or 10 days."

Ms Bose, do not permit this pipeline in such a highly populated area. The risks are
too great. Will you accept personal or agency responsibility for the potential deaths
of any of our residents? I think not, but that, precisely, is what you are doing should
you move forward with this permit. Do not go forward lightly; do not go forward
with this ill-advised project at all.

Most sincerely,

Stephanie Low

57. Trish Gough
6/24/12

Ms. Kimberly D. Bose,

Secretary Federal Energy Regulatory Commission
888 First Street NE, Room 1A
Washington, DC 20426

RE: Opposition to the Williams/Trasco Rockaway Lateral

Dear Ms. Bose,

On behalf of Sane Energy Project, I am writing to object to the proposed
Williams/Transco Rockaway Lateral Project. This pipeline is a direct threat to the
public health, safety, and property of residents of this area.

Gas pipelines are subject to leaks and explosions. To have this pipeline located in
such a densely populated area is wholly inappropriate and subjects the area to a risk
out of proportion with the supposed benefits. The proposed pipeline threatens
flourishing wetland areas and bird sanctuaries. Only recently has this wetlands
been restored; a new pipeline would put this all at risk.

It is very likely that radon levels in delivered gas will rise as a result of this pipeline.
There is no safe level for inhaled radon, and radon is the leading cause of lung
cancer in non smokers.

The pipeline is a larger threat to the public health, safety, property values and
economy of all regions of the Marcellus shale. It will not bring "clean" energy to
New York City. It will bring fracked shale gas to market.

The proposed pipeline is a security and terrorist risk. It's the wrong choice for New
York's energy future.

Finally, there is a history of safety issues with the builder of this pipeline. Transco
Williams is currently operating under a federal Corrective Action Order in
connection with a massive natural gas pipeline explosion in Alabama.

Given my stated concerns, this project presents an unacceptable adverse impact and
SHOULD NOT GO FORWARD.

Very truly yours,

Trish Gough

432 East 120th Street 1E
NY, NY 10029


Sign up to vote on this title
UsefulNot useful