Right in the very beginning of the Coast Guard's final environmental impact statement on the Port Ambrose project, in the first Section, labelled 1.1 "purpose and need", it says:
"Because Liberty’s tie-in to the Transco LNYBL is located between the Rockaway Lateral and the Long Beach delivery point, it would be able to supplement supply during these periods of peak demand."
Two years ago, according to the Queens Chronicle, both Liberty Natural Gas and Williams Cos. said their "projects are not related" when asked about a "connection" between these two projects that were at that time being reviewed simlutaneously, yet by separate federal agencies. I had already been asking Williams and FERC about the relationship between the Rockaway project and Port Ambrose for months by the time Bianca's article was published. I spoke with her at length if I'm not mistaken. (I could be confusing her with another woman I had a conversation with that fall two years ago now.)
While it is somewhat satisfying to see the Coast Guard finally answer a question I have been asking for more than two and half years not just to the US. Coast Guard and MarAD repeatedly, but to FERC, to a wide variety of news reporters and papers and other state and federal agencies, it is also frustrating when thinking about all of the lying and misleading information that has been swirling around the Rockaway and Port Ambrose projects for years now.
It's also frustrating that right beneath this quote, which clearly states that it is Port Ambrose's interconnection location between the new Rockaway lateral and the Long Beach delivery point which actually would enable Port Ambrose to fulfill its purpose, there is then some mumbojumbo (which is legalese I guess for hey this is the reason both Liberty and Williams have refused to answer your question for so long and why no other agency managed to make them either) about how Liberty "could be considered a “shipper” bidding on supplying gas" regardless of the actual capacity of the pipe they aim to deliver into. Seeing as Liberty's supporting documents all discuss the benefits coming from a "shipper" that is able to deliver ADDITIONAL supplies that technicality seems like a moot point to me. As pointed out more than once, Libertys project maps like the one above should always have shown the rockaway expansion, even when the Rockaway project was just a proposal.
In the end it's hard to believe how few people there are who in any moment are capable or willing to speak the truth and stunning that there are still no reporters who can uncover it or identify it either. The only people who consistently have used facts when describing both the Rockaway Project and Port Ambrose as well as all the things that went wrong along the way still are ordinary citizens. I can count those people on one hand and name them too.
Oh and a "pulitzer prize" winning non-profit just published that Port Ambrose is an import/export project. Course the notice released on that project by two Federal Agencies says otherwise but what do I know about anything anyway?