NATURAL GAS PIPELINE COMPANY OF AMERICA LLC, Plaintiff,
v.
TRACT TX-WA-009.050, 1.22 ACRES OF LAND, MORE OR LESS, et al., Defendants.
PE:20-CV-00003-DC
United States District Court, W.D. Texas, Pecos Division
April 27, 2022
ORDER
DAVID COUNTS, UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE
BEFORE THE COURT are Plaintiff Natural Gas Pipeline Company of America LLC's (“NGPL”) Motion for Summary Judgment as to Award of Just Compensation to Remaining Defendants (hereafter, “Motion for Summary Judgment as to Just Compensation”) (Doc. 89) and Motion for Refund of Plaintiff's Cash Security for Tracts TX-RV-026.000, TX-RV-019.000 and TX-WA-005.050 (hereafter, “Motion for Refund”) (Doc. 90). After due consideration, NGPL's Second Motion for Summary Judgment shall be GRANTED IN PART, and NGPL's Motion for Refund shall be GRANTED. (Docs. 89, 90).
I. Background
On October 17, 2019, the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission (“FERC”) issued NGPL, a natural gas company as defined by § 2(a) of the Natural Gas Act (“NGA”), 15 U.S.C. § 717(a)(6), a Certificate of Public Convenience and Necessity (hereafter, “Certificate”) for the construction of a natural gas pipeline in West Texas. (Docs. 1-3; 1 at 10; 86 at 1). According to NGPL, this pipeline, as part of the Lockridge Extension Pipeline Project (“Project”), is to provide sufficient capacity for the transportation of natural gas of 500, 000 dekatherms daily. (Doc. 1 at 9). This 30-inch-diameter pipeline is to traverse the Permian Basin over a length of
16.84 miles and interconnect with the Trans-Pecos Pipeline. Id.; (Doc. 1-3 at 1). On January 13, 2020, NGPL filed its Verified Complaint for Condemnation (hereafter, “Complaint”) pursuant to the NGA, 15 U.S.C. § 717f(h). (Doc. 1). Through its Complaint, NGPL sought the condemnation via eminent domain of various tracts of land as necessary to proceed with the construction of the pipeline. (Doc. 1 at 15-25). The Project is to extend across Ward, Reeves, and Pecos Counties in Texas. Id. at 9; (see also Doc. 1-3 at 1).
On February 7, 2020, NGPL filed its first Motion for Partial Summary Judgment (“First Motion for Summary Judgment”), seeking the condemnation of or the right to immediately possess all unsigned tracts of land outstanding. (See Doc. 41). Before the instant motions were filed, NGPL had only acquired voluntary easements from all known Defendant landowners, but had yet to do so from three unknown, unsigned landowners (“unknown Defendant landowners”) who owned fractional minority interests in three separate tracts of land. (Doc. 86 at 2). In the First Motion for Summary Judgment, NGPL also included appraisals of the approximate market value of each of the partial tracts which would be condemned by NGPL's actions. (Doc. 41-2) The unsigned tracts of land were as follows:
-
Tract No.
Landowners;County
Appraisal
Amount
TX-WA- 005.050
Unknown Heirs, Successors and Assigns of N.S. Hall and Bessie Juanita Hall
Ward
$406
TX-RV- 019.000
Unknown Heirs, Successors and Assigns of Arthur Clement Russell; Unknown Heirs, Successors and Assigns of Robert Reid Russell; Unknown Heirs, Successors and Assigns of Elizabeth Sophia C. Russell; Unknown Heirs, Successors and Assigns of Madeline J. Russell
Reeves
$102
TX-RV- 026.000
Unknown Heirs, Successors and Assigns of Virginia C. O'Bryan; Unknown Heirs, Successors and Assigns of Martha B. Williamson
Reeves
$10, 811
(Doc. 41-2 at 2-3). NGPL sought in its First Motion for Summary Judgment the confirmation of NGPL's “right to acquire the[se] [e]asements by eminent domain” under the NGA; the award of
“immediate possession of the[se] [e]asements to NGPL to enable commencement of on-site construction and construction related activities”; and the establishment of the “type, amount[, ] and terms of security to . . . secure payment of just compensation to [the unknown] Defendant[ landowner]s.” (Doc. 41 at 22-23). In so requesting, NGPL made its motion under Federal Rules of Civil Procedure 56 and 65, as well as pursuant to § 717f(h) of the NGA. (Id. at 10-11).
The Court granted NGPL's First Motion for Summary Judgment on April 8, 2020, granting NGPL “access and possession of the [e]asements condemned pursuant to the FERC Certificate.” (Doc. 86 at 10). The Court further ordered NGPL to deposit with the Court $16, 978.50-the total appraisal amount of the three properties plus a fifty percent increase-to represent a security for the three unsigned tracts' value. Id. at 9-10. NGPL so did on April 13, 2020. (See Doc. 90-1 at 3). On July 1, 2020, NGPL notified the Court that it had settled with the previously unsigned interest owners of the tract of land described as TX-RV-026.000, and requested the Court's dismissal of those Defendant landowners. (Doc. 87). The next day, on July 2, 2020, the Court dismissed those owners of TX-RV-026.000 from this action. (Doc. 88).
On October 14, 2021, NGPL filed its instant Second Motion for Summary Judgment, requesting that the Court grant summary judgment concerning the amount of just compensation for the unsigned owners of the remaining tracts, known as TX-WA-005.050 and TX-RV-019.000. (Doc. 89 at 10-11). NGPL seeks either nominal damages, citing the unknown Defendant landowners' failure to appear, or an adjudication that just compensation for the two remaining unsigned owners is the appraisal value as evinced in NGPL's First Motion for Summary Judgment. Id. Also on October 14, 2021, NGPL filed its Motion for Refund, seeking as to the two remaining unknown owners the return of either the remainder of the security deposit...
