42116 Federal Register / Vol. 62, No. 150 / Tuesday, August 5, 1997 / Notices

Company (Williston Basin), 200 North

Third Street, Suite 300, Bismarck, North

Dakota 58501, filed in Docket No. CP97–

660–000 a request pursuant to Sections

157.205 and 157.211 of the

Commission’s Regulations under the

Natural Gas Act (18 CFR 157.205 and

157.211) for authorization to utilize an

existing tap to effectuate natural gas

transportation deliveries to MontanaDakota Utilities Co. (Montana-Dakota),

for ultimate use by additional

residential customers in Roosevelt

County, Montana. Williston Basin

makes such request under its blanket

certificate issued in Docket No. CP82–

487–000, et al., pursuant to Section 7 of

the Natural Gas Act, all as more fully set

forth in the request on file with the

Commission and open to public

inspection.

Williston Basin states that it received

a request from Montana-Dakota, a local

distribution company, for authorization

to add additional residential customers

to an existing transmission line tap

located in Roosevelt County, Montana.

The estimated additional volume to be

delivered is 220 Mcf per year. Williston

Basin is proposing to use the existing

residential farm tap to effectuate

additional natural gas transportation

deliveries to Montana-Dakota for other

than right-of-way grantor use. Williston

Basin indicates that the volumes to be

delivered are within the contractual

entitlements of the customer, and that

the proposed volumes will be provided

under Williston Basins Rate Schedule

FT–1.

It is averred that the proposed service

will have no significant effect on

Williston Basin’s peak day or annual

requirements.

Any person or the Commission’s staff

may, within 45 days after issuance of

the instant notice by the Commission,

file pursuant to Rule 214 of the

Commission’s Procedural Rules (18 CFR

385.214) a motion to intervene or notice

of intervention and pursuant to

§ 157.205 of the Regulations under the

Natural Gas Act (18 CFR 157.205) a

protest to the request. If no protest is

filed within the time allowed therefor,

the proposed activity shall be deemed to

be authorized effective the day after the

time allowed for filing a protest. If a

protest is filed and not withdrawn

within 30 days after the time allowed

for filing a protest, the instant request

shall be treated as an application for

authorization pursuant to Section 7 of

the Natural Gas Act.

Linwood A. Watson, Jr.,

Acting Secretary.

[FR Doc. 97–20529 Filed 8–4–97; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 6717–01–M

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY

Federal Energy Regulatory

Commission

[Docket No. RP92–236–009]

Williston Basin Interstate Pipeline

Company; Notice of Compliance Filing

July 30, 1997.

Take notice that on July 25, 1997,

Williston Basin Interstate Pipeline

Company (Williston Basin), tendered for

filing certain revised tariff sheets to First

and Second Revised Volume Nos. 1 and

Original Volume Nos. 1–A, 1–B and 2 of

its FERC Gas Tariff.

Williston Basin states that the revised

tariff sheets were filed in compliance

with the Commission’s ‘‘Order on

Rehearing’’ issued July 19, 1996 and the

Commission’s ‘‘Order on Initial

Decision on Remanded Issue’’ issued

June 11, 1997 in Docket Nos. RP92–236–

000, et al., as more fully described in the

filing.

Any person desiring to protest said

filing should file a protest with the

Federal Energy Regulatory Commission,

888 First Street, N.E., Washington, D.C.

20426, in accordance with Section

385.211 of the Commission’s Rules and

Regulations. All such protests must be

filed in accordance with Section

154.210 of the Commission’s

Regulations. Protests will be considered

by the Commission in determining the

appropriate action to be taken, but will

not serve to make protestants parties to

the proceeding. Copies of this filing are

on file with the Commission and are

available for public inspection in the

Public Reference Room.

Linwood A. Watson, Jr.,

Acting Secretary.

[FR Doc. 97–20533 Filed 8–4–97; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 6717–01–M

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY

Federal Energy Regulatory

Commission

[Docket No. CP97–659–000]

Wisconsin Public Service Corporation;

Notice of Application

July 30, 1997.

Take notice that on July 22, 1997,

Wisconsin Public Service Corporation

(WPSC), 700 North Adams Street, P.O.

Box 19001, Green Bay, Wisconsin

54307–9001 filed an application

pursuant to Section 7(f) of the Natural

Gas Act (NGA), requesting a

determination of a service area within

which WPSC may, without further

Commission authorization, enlarge or

expand its facilities, all as more fully

described in the application that is on

file with the Federal Energy Regulatory

Commission (Commission) and open to

public inspection.

WPSC states that it is a public utility

engaged in, among other things, the

business of distributing natural gas to

customers for residential, commercial,

and industrial use. WPSC requests a

service area determination consisting of

16 miles of 8-inch diameter pipeline

and the associated right of way from the

Great Lakes Gas Transmission Limited

Partnership pipeline at the Watersmeet

city gate in the town of Watersmeet,

Michigan, to a proposed WPSC city gate

station in Conover, Wisconsin. WPSC

will hold a 21.67 percent interest in

both the Watersmeet city gate station

and the proposed 8-inch diameter

pipeline. Wisconsin Electric Power

Company (WEPCO) will hold the

remaining interest in the facilities.

In addition to the service area

determination, WPSC also requests: (a)

A finding that WPSC qualifies as a local

distribution company (LDC) for

purposes of Section 311 of the Natural

Gas Policy Act of 1978 (NGPA); (b) a

waiver of the Commission’s regulatory

requirements, including reporting and

accounting requirements ordinarily

applicable to natural gas companies

under the NGA and NGPA; and (c) such

further relief as the Commission may

deem appropriate.

Any person desiring to be heard or to

make any protest with reference to said

application should on or before August

20, 1997, file with the Federal Energy

Regulatory Commission, Washington

D.C. 20426, a motion to intervene or a

protest in accordance with the

requirements of the Commission’s Rules

211 or 214 of Practice and Procedure (18

CFR 385.211 or 385.214) and the

Regulations under the Natural Gas Act

(18 CFR 157.10). All Protests filed with

the Commission will be considered by

it in determining the appropriate action

to be taken but will not serve to make

the protestants parties to the

proceeding. Any person wishing to

become a party to a proceeding or to

participate as a party in any hearing

therein must file a motion to intervene

in accordance with the Commission’s

Rules.

Take further notice that, pursuant to

the authority contained in and subject to

jurisdiction conferred upon the Federal

Energy Regulatory Commission by

Sections 7 and 15 of the Natural Gas Act

and the Commission’s Rules of Practice

and Procedure, a hearing will be held

without further notice before the

Commission or its designee on this

application if no motion to intervene is
Federal Register / Vol. 62, No. 150 / Tuesday, August 5, 1997 / Notices 42117

1Michigan Gas Storage Company’s application

was filed with the Commission under Section 7 of

the Natural Gas Act and Part 157 of the

Commission’s regulations.

2The appendices referenced in this notice are not

being printed in the Federal Register. Copies are

available from the Commission’s Public Reference

and Files Maintenance Branch, 888 First Street,

N.E., Washington, D.C. 20426, or call (202) 208–

1371. Copies of the appendices were sent to all

those receiving this notice in the mail.

filed within the time required herein, if

the Commission on its own review of

the matter finds that a grant of the

certificate is required by the public

convenience and necessity. If motion for

leave to intervene is timely filed or if

the Commission and its own motion

believes that a formal hearing is

required, further notice of such hearing

will be duly given.

Under the procedure herein provided

for, unless otherwise advised, it will be

unnecessary for WPSC to appear or be

represented at the hearing.

Linwood A. Watson, Jr.,

Acting Secretary.

[FR Doc. 97–20528 Filed 8–4–97; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 6717–01–M

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY

Federal Energy Regulatory

Commission

[Docket No. CP97–563–000]

Michigan Gas Storage Company;

Notice of Intent To Prepare an

Environmental Assessment for the

Proposed Cranberry Lake Lateral 63

East Project and Request for

Comments on Environmental Issues

July 30, 1997.

The staff of the Federal Energy

Regulatory Commission (FERC or

Commission) will prepare an

environmental assessment (EA) that will

discuss the environmental impacts of

the construction and operation of the

facilities proposed in the Cranberry

Lake Lateral 63 East Project.1 This EA

will be used by the Commission in its

decision-making process to determine

whether the project is in the public

convenience and necessity.

Summary of the Proposed Project

Michigan Gas Storage Company

(MGSCo) proposes to replace and

upgrade 1.3 miles of its Cranberry Lake

Lateral 63 East. To accomplish this

activity MGSCo proposes to: (1) Remove

0.6 mile of 6-inch-diameter piping and

replace it in the same trench with 8-

inch-diameter piping; (2) abandon in

place 0.1 mile of 4-inch-diameter

piping; (3) install a 2-inch-diameter pipe

within the abandoned 4-inch-diameter

pipe; (4) upgrade the existing 0.6 mile

of 8-inch-diameter pipeline to make it

piggable by removing stab-in branch

connections at well laterals as well as

any other obstructions from the pipe

interior; and (5) install a pig launcher

and pig receiver at either end of the

reconfigured 8-inch-diameter piping

segment. The resulting lateral would

consist of about 1.2 miles of 8-inchdiameter and 0.1 mile of 2-inchdiameter piping.

All of the facilities are located in

Clare County, Michigan. The proposed

project would allow for more efficient

and safe operation of MGSCo’s

Cranberry Lake Storage Field.

The proposed facilities would cost

about $257,400.

The general location of the project

facilities is shown in appendix 1.2 If you

are interested in obtaining procedural

information, please write to the

Secretary of the Commission.

Land Requirements for Construction

Replacement and upgrading of the

Cranberry Lake Lateral 63 East,

including temporary work spaces,

would require about 3.5 acres. Of the 3.5

acres, about 1.7 acres exist as a twotrack sand road which has no

vegetation. Of the remaining 1.8 acres,

about 1.7 acres of land would require

tree trimming and vegetation removal

and about 0.1 acre of land would require

tree removal.

MGSCo would utilize its abandoned

Plant 1 Compressor Station for receiving

and distributing materials during

construction. The total acreage for the

lay-down area is about 3 acres. This area

has been previously devoted to

industrial used and no further

disturbance is required

The EA Process

The National Environmental Policy

Act (NEPA) requires the Commission to

take into account the environmental

impacts that could result from an action

whenever it considers the issuance of a

Certificate of Public Convenience and

Necessity. NEPA also requires us to

discover and address concerns the

public may have about proposals. We

call this ‘‘scoping’’. The main goal of the

scoping process is to focus the analysis

in the EA on the important

environmental issues. By this Notice of

Intent, the Commission requests public

comments on the scope of the issues it

will address in the EA. All comments

received are considered during the

preparation of the EA. State and local

government representatives are

encouraged to notify their constituents

of this proposed action and encourage

them to comment on their areas of

concern.

The EA will discuss impacts that

could occur as a result of the

construction and operation of the

proposed project under these general

headings:

• Geology and soils

• Land use

• Water resources, fisheries, and

wetlands

• Cultural resources

• Vegetation and wildlife

• Endangered and threatened species

• Public safety

We will also evaluate possible

alternatives to the proposed project or

portions of the project, and make

recommendations on how to lessen or

avoid impacts on the various resource

areas.

Our independent analysis of the

issues will be in the EA. Depending on

the comments received during the

scoping process, the EA may be

published and mailed to Federal, state,

and local agencies, public interest

groups, interested individuals, affected

landowners, newspapers, libraries, and

the Commission’s official service list for

this proceeding. A comment period will

be allotted for review if the EA is

published. We will consider all

comments on the EA before we make

our recommendations to the

Commission.

Currently Identified Environmental

Issues

We have already identified several

issues that we think deserve attention

based on a preliminary review of the

proposed facilities and the

environmental information provided by

MGSCo. This preliminary list of issues

may be changed based on your

comments and our analysis.

• Cranberry Lake Lateral 63 East is

located near the Kirkland’s Warbler

National Wildlife Refuge.

• Cranberry Lake Lateral 63 East is

located within the Gladwin Forest

Area of the Au Sable State Forest.

Public Participation

You can make a difference by sending

a letter addressing your specific

comments or concerns about the project.

You should focus on the potential

environmental effects of the proposal,

alternatives to the proposal (including

alternative routes), and measures to

avoid or lessen environmental impact.

The more specific your comments, the

more useful they will be. Please follow

the instructions below to ensure that

your comments are received and

properly recorded: