Federal Register / Vol. 62, No. 179 / Tuesday, September 16, 1997 / Notices 48639

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY

Federal Energy Regulatory

Commission

[Docket Nos. RP97–275–007 and TM97–2–

59–005]

Northern Natural Gas Company; Notice

of Proposed Changes in FERC Gas

Tariff

September 10, 1997.

Take notice that on September 5,

1997, Northern Natural Gas Company

(Northern), tendered for filing to become

part of Northern’s FERC Gas Tariff, Fifth

Revised Volume No. 1, the following

tariff sheets proposed to become

effective on June 1, 1997:

2nd Substitute Fifth Revised Sheet No. 61

2nd Substitute Fifth Revised Sheet No. 62

2nd Substitute Fifth Revised Sheet No. 63

2nd Substitute Fifth Revised Sheet No. 64

Northern states that the reason for this

filing is to correct the unaccounted-for

gas percent stated in the footnote of

Substitute Fifth Revised Sheets Nos. 61–

64, as filed on July 16, 1997, from 0.99

percent (0.0099) to 0.93 percent

(0.0093).

Northern states that copies of the

filing were served upon Northern’s

customers and interested State

Commissions.

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. All protests will be

considered by the Commission in

determining the appropriate action to be

taken in this proceeding, 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 inspection.

Linwood A. Watson, Jr.,

Acting Secretary.

[FR Doc. 97–24453 Filed 9–15–97; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 6717–01–M

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY

Federal Energy Regulatory

Commission

[Docket No. CP97–722–000]

Northwest Pipeline Corporation; Notice

of Request Under Blanket

Authorization

September 10, 1997.

Take notice that on September 2,

1997, Northwest Pipeline Corporation

(Northwest), 295 Chipeta Way, Salt Lake

City, Utah 84158, filed in Docket No.

CP97–722–000 a request pursuant to

§§ 157.205, and 157.216 of the

Commission’s Regulations under the

Natural Gas Act (18 CFR 157.205 and

157.216) for approval to abandon certain

delivery facilities in Montrose County,

Colorado and a related transportation

service, under Northwest’s blanket

certificate issued in Docket No. CP82–

433–000 pursuant to Section 7 of the

Natural Gas Act, all as more fully set

forth in the request that is on file with

the Commission and open to public

inspection.

Northwest states that it plans to

abandon its Uravan Lateral Line and

Umetco Meter Station and to abandon

the related transportation service. The

Uravan Lateral Line consists of

approximately 12 miles of 4-inch

pipeline extending from Northwest’s

Nucla Lateral to a point of termination

at the Umetco Meter Station. The

Umetco Meter Station consists of two 4-

inch meters, two 1-inch regulators and

appurtenances.

Service to the Umetco Meter Station

has been according to a Direct Sales

Contract (Contract) dated April 1, 1978,

as amended, between Northwest and

Umetco Minerals Corporation (Umetco).

The primary term of the Contract

extended until March 31, 1980 and

month to month thereafter subject to

termination upon one month written

notice by either party. On August 25,

1992, Northwest notified Umetco that it

was terminating the Contract effective

October 31, 1992. No deliveries have

been provided at the Umetco Meter

Station since May, 1992. Since Umetco

is the only customer served by the

Uravan Lateral Line and Umetco Meter

Station and the facilities are no longer

needed, Northwest proposes to abandon

the Uravan Lateral Line in place and to

remove the Umetco Meter Station. On

December 16, 1992, Umetco confirmed

that it had no objection to Northwest’s

proposed abandonment of the delivery

facilities. The cost of abandoning the

Uravan Lateral Line and the Umetco

Meter Station is estimated at $15,000.

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. 97–24450 Filed 9–15–97; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 6717–01–M

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY

Federal Energy Regulatory

Commission

[Docket No. CP97–683–000]

Ozark Gas Transmission; Notice of

Application

September 10, 1997.

Take notice that on August 6, 1997,

Ozark Gas Transmission System

(Ozark), 1000 Louisiana, Suite 5800,

Houston, Texas 77002, filed in Docket

No. CP97–683–000 an application

pursuant to Section 7(c) of the Natural

Gas Act (NGA) for authorization to

construct and operate a receipt point in

Franklin County, Arkansas, all as more

fully set forth in the application on file

with the Commission and open to

public inspection.

Ozark proposes to install and operate

a receipt point in Franklin County in

order to receive natural gas production

into its system. Ozark states that the

proposed receipt point would allow

Ozark to receive an additional 1,500

Dekaterm equivalent of natural gas per

day into its system. Ozark would install

approximately 4,500 feet of 4.5-inch

diameter pipe and the necessary

metering and tie-in facilities on its

pipeline system. Ozark also states that it

would finance the estimated $71,600

construction cost of the proposed

receipt point with funds on hand.

Ozark states that the natural gas

volumes it would receive via the

proposed receipt point are within

certificated volumes on Ozark’s system,

and the addition of receipt point

facilities would be consistent with
48640 Federal Register / Vol. 62, No. 179 / Tuesday, September 16, 1997 / Notices

Ozark’s open access tariff and blanket

transportation certificate. Ozark also

states that it has filed its request in this

proceeding in compliance with the

Stipulation and Agreement issued in

Docket No. CP78–532–000, et al. [(22

FERC ¶ 61,334 at 61,578 (1983)].

Any person desiring to be heard or to

make any protest with reference to said

application should on or before October

1, 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

of Practice and Procedure (18 CFR

385.214 or 385.211) and the Regulations

under the NGA (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

the jurisdiction conferred upon the

Federal Energy Regulatory Commission

by Sections 7 and 15 of the NGA 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

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 a motion

for leave to intervene is timely filed, or

if the Commission on 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 Ozark to appear or be

represented at the hearing.

Linwood A. Watson, Jr.,

Acting Secretary.

[FR Doc. 97–24448 Filed 9–15–97; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 6717–01–M

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY

Federal Energy Regulatory

Commission

[Docket No. RP97–517–000]

Paiute Pipeline Company; Notice of

Proposed Changes in FERC Gas Tariff

September 10, 1997.

Take notice that on September 8,

1997, Paiute Pipeline Company (Paiute)

tendered for filing as part of its FERC

Gas Tariff, Second Revised Volume No.

1–A, the following tariff sheet, to

become effective October 8, 1997:

First Revised Sheet No. 116

Paiute states that the purpose of this

filing is to comply with the

Commission’s Order No. 636–C, Order

on Remand, issued February 27, 1997 in

Docket Nos. RM91–11–006, et al. Paiute

states that it has revised its right-of-firstrefusal tariff provisions to reduce the

term cap for matching a competitive bid

from twenty years to five years,

consistent with the requirements of

Order No. 636–C.

Any person desiring to be heard or

protest this filing should file a motion

to intervene or protest with the Federal

Energy Regulatory Commission, 888

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

20426, in accordance with Sections

385.214 and 385.211 of the

Commission’s Rules and Regulations.

All such motions or 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. Any person wishing to

become a party must file a motion to

intervene. 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. 97–24458 Filed 9–15–97; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 6717–01–M

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY

Federal Energy Regulatory

Commission

[Docket No. TM98–1–9–001]

Tennessee Gas Pipeline Company;

Notice of Proposed Changes in FERC

Gas Tariff

September 10, 1997.

Take notice that on September 5,

1997, Tennessee Gas Pipeline Company

(Tennessee) tendered for filing as part of

its FERC Gas Tariff, Fifth Revised

Volume No. 1, the following tariff

sheets:

Sub Seventeenth Revised Sheet No. 20

Sub Eighteenth Revised Sheet No. 21A

Sub Twenty-Fourth Revised Sheet No. 22

Sub Eighteenth Revised Sheet No. 22A

Sub Fifth Revised Sheet No. 23A

Sub Third Revised Sheet No. 23C

Tennessee states that the purpose of

the filing is to correct an error reflected

in the August 29, 1997 filing in this

docket. This filing correctly reflects the

$.0022 ACA surcharge in the maximum

effective commodity rates.

Any person desiring to protest this

filing should file a protest with the

Federal Energy Regulatory Commission,

888 First Street, Washington, D.C.

20426, in accordance with 385.211 of

the Commission’s Regulations. All such

protests must be filed as provided in

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

available for public inspection in the

Public Reference Room.

Linwood A. Watson, Jr.,

Acting Secretary.

[FR Doc. 97–24460 Filed 9–15–97; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 6717–01–M

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY

Federal Energy Regulatory

Commission

[Docket No. RP97–513–000]

Texaco Natural Gas Inc. v. Sea Robin

Pipeline Company; Notice of

Complaint

September 10, 1997.

Take notice that on September 4,

1997, pursuant to Rule 206 of the

Commission’s Rules of Practice and

Procedure, 18 CFR § 385.206, Texaco

Natural Gas Inc. (Texaco) tendered for

filing a complaint against Sea Robin

Pipeline Company (Sea Robin).

Texaco alleges that Sea Robin failed to

follow its tariff provision in allocating

capacity on a net present value basic

and that Sea Robin failed to provide

notice in a timely fashion to all shippers

that Sea Robin instead intended to

allocate capacity on a first-come, firstserved basis.

Texaco requests that the Commission

order Sea Robin to allocate capacity on

its system in future months based on the

net present value procedure in its tariff.