Federal Register / Vol. 62, No. 177 / Friday, September 12, 1997 / Notices 48083

1Texas Gas Transmission Corporation’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,

NE., Washington, DC 20426, or call (202) 208–1371.

Copies of the appendices were sent to all those

receiving this notice in the mail.

tariff as required by the Commission in

its Order On Compliance Tariff Rates

and Generic Clarification of

Implementation Procedures, 80 FERC

¶ 61,143 (1997).

Comment date: September 19, 1997,

in accordance with Standard Paragraph

E at the end of this notice.

45. New Century Services, Inc.

[Docket No. OA97–691–001]

Take notice that on August 15, 1997,

New Century Services, Inc., on behalf of

Cheyenne Light, Fuel and Power

Company, Public Service Company of

Colorado, and Southwestern Public

Service Company, filed a compliance

open access transmission tariff in

accordance with the Order on

Compliance Tariff Rates and Generic

Clarification of Implementation

Procedures (Order) issued in Docket

Nos. OA96–18–000, et al., issued on

July 31, 1997.

Comment date: September 19, 1997,

in accordance with Standard Paragraph

E at the end of this notice.

46. Mid-Georgia Cogen L.P.

[Docket No. QF96–26–001]

On August 19, 1997, Mid-Georgia

Cogen L.P.(Applicant), c/o GPU

International, Inc., One Upper Pond

Road, Parsippany, New Jersey 07054,

submitted for filing an application for

recertification of a facility as a

qualifying cogeneration facility

pursuant to Section 292.207(b) of the

Commission’s Regulations. No

determination has been made that the

submittal constitutes a complete filing.

According to the Applicant, the 323

MW natural gas-fired, topping-cycle

cogeneration facility is located near

Cathleen, Houston, Georgia. The

Commission previously certified the

facility as a qualifying cogeneration

facility in Mid-Georgia Cogen, L.P., 74

FERC ¶ 62,162 (1996). According to the

application, the instant recertification is

requested to assure that the facility will

remain a qualifying facility following a

change in the ownership of Mid-Georgia

Cogen L.P.

Comment date: September 29, 1997,

in accordance with Standard Paragraph

E at the end of this notice.

Standard Paragraph

E. Any person desiring to be heard or

to protest said 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 Rules 211

and 214 of the Commission’s Rules of

Practice and Procedure (18 CFR 385.211

and 18 CFR 385.214). All such motions

or protests should be filed on or before

the comment date. 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.

Lois D. Cashell,

Secretary.

[FR Doc. 97–24215 Filed 9–11–97; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 6717–01–P

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY

Federal Energy Regulatory

Commission

[Project No. 2584–003 New York]

Rochester Gas & Electric Corp.; Notice

of Availability of Final Environmental

Assessment

September 8, 1997.

In accordance with the National

Environmental Policy Act of 1969 and

the Federal Energy Regulatory

Commission’s (Commission)

regulations, 18 CFR Part 380 (Order No.

486, 52 FR 47897), the Office of

Hydropower Licensing has reviewed the

application for new license for the

Station 26 Hydroelectric Project, located

on the Genesee River, in City of

Rochester, Monroe County, New York,

and has prepared a Final Environmental

Assessment (FEA) for the project.

Copies of the FEA are available in the

Public Reference Branch, Room 2–A, of

the Commission’s offices at 888 First

Street, N.E., Washington, D.C. 20426.

Lois D. Cashell,

Secretary.

[FR Doc. 97–24184 Filed 9–11–97; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 6717–01–M

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY

Federal Energy Regulatory

Commission

[Docket No. CP97–656–000]

Texas Gas Transmission Corporation;

Notice of Intent To Prepare an

Environmental Assessment for the

Proposed North Louisiana Expansion

Project and Request for Comments on

Environmental Issues

September 8, 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 an

additional 4,600 horsepower (hp) of

compression at the existing Haughton

Compression Station, proposed in the

North Louisiana Expansion 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

Texas Gas Transmission Corporation

(Texas Gas) proposes to expand the

capacity of its facilities in Louisiana to

transport an additional 105,000 million

British thermal units per day of firm

natural gas service to a new customer.

Texas Gas seeks authority to construct

and operate a 4,600 hp Dresser-Rand

reciprocating compressor unit and

associated equipment at its existing

Haughton Compressor Station in Bossier

Parish, Louisiana.

The 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

Texas Gas owns the 28.54 acre

Haughton Compressor Station site.

Construction and operation of the

proposed project would require a total

of 10.5 acres, all of which would be

within the existing site.

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
48084 Federal Register / Vol. 62, No. 177 / Friday, September 12, 1997 / Notices

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

• Water resources, fisheries and

wetlands

• Vegetation and wildlife

• Endangered and threatened species

• Public safety

• Land use

• Curtural resources

• Air quality and noise

• Hazardous waste

We will also evaluate possible

alternatives to the proposed 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 one issue

that we think deserves attention based

on a preliminary review of the proposed

facilities and the environmental

information provided by Texas Gas.

Additional issues may be included

based on your comments and our

analysis.

• Noise levels at the nearest noisesensitive areas would exceed a daynight sound level of 55 dBA (decibels of

the A-weighted scale) with the

construction of the additional

compressor unit.

Also, we have made a preliminary

decision to not address the impacts of

the nonjurisdictional facilities. We will

briefly describe their location and status

in the EA.

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, and

measures to avoid or lessen

environmental impact. The more

specific your comments, the more useful

they will be. Please carefully follow

these instructions to ensure that your

comments are received in time and

properly recorded:

• Send two copies of your letter to:

Lois Cashell, Secretary, Federal Energy

Regulatory Commission, 888 First St.,

NE., Room 1A, Washington, DC 20426;

• Label one copy of the comments for

the attention of the Environmental

Review and Compliance Branch, PR–

11.2;

• Reference Docket No. CP97–656–

000; and

• Mail your comments so that they

will be received in Washington, DC on

or before October 6, 1997.

Becoming an Intervenor

In addition to involvement in the EA

scoping process, you may want to

become an official party to the

proceeding or become an ‘‘intervenor.’’

Among other things, intervenors have

the right to receive copies of caserelated Commission documents and

filing by other intervenors. Likewise,

each intervenor must provide copies of

its filings to all other parties. If you

want to become an intervenor you must

file a motion to intervene according to

Rule 214 of the Commission’s Rules of

Practice and Procedure (18 CFR

385.214) (see appendix 2).

The date for filing timely motions to

intervene in this proceeding has passed.

Therefore, parties now seeking to file

late interventions must show good

cause, as required by section

385.214(b)(3), why this time limitation

should be waived. Environmental issues

have been viewed as good cause for late

intervention. You do not need

intervenor status to have your

comments considered.

Lois D. Cashell,

Secretary.

[FR Doc. 97–24181 Filed 9–11–97; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 6717–01–M

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY

Office of Hearings and Appeals

Notice of Issuance of Decisions and

Orders; Week of July 28 Through

August 1, 1997

During the week of July 28 through

August 1, 1997, the decisions and orders

summarized below were issued with

respect to appeals, applications,

petitions, or other requests filed with

the Office of Hearings and Appeals of

the Department of Energy. The

following summary also contains a list

of submissions that were dismissed by

the Office of Hearings and Appeals.

Copies of the full text of these

decisions and orders are available in the

Public Reference Room of the Office of

Hearings and Appeals, Room 1E–234,

Forrestal Building, 1000 Independence

Avenue, SW, Washington, D.C. 20585–

0107, Monday through Friday, between

the hours of 1:00 p.m. and 5:00 p.m.,

except federal holidays. They are also

available in Energy Management:

Federal Energy Guidelines, a

commercially published loose leaf

reporter system. Some decisions and

orders are available on the Office of

Hearings and Appeals World Wide Web

site at http://www.oha.doe.gov.

Dated: September 3, 1997.

George B. Breznay,

Director, Office of Hearings and Appeals.

Decision List No. 44—Week of July 28

Through August 1, 1997

Appeals

The Cincinnati Enquirer, 7/29/97, VFA–

0307

The Cincinnati Enquirer (Appellant)

filed an Appeal concerning its request

under the Freedom of Information Act

(FOIA). The Appellant had requested

documentation for all sole-source

contracts at the Fernald Environmental

Management Project (FEMP). The DOE’s

Ohio Field Office (DOE/OFO) released

some documents but found that other

documents were owned by FEMP’s

management and operating contractor,

Fluor Daniel Fernald (FDF). On appeal,

the Appellant argued that FDF is an

agency and that the withheld

documents are agency records. The DOE

rejected both of these arguments and

found that the documents were not

subject to release under DOE

regulations. Accordingly, the Appeal

was denied.

Personnel Security Hearings

Personnel Security Hearing, 7/31/97

VSO–0146

An Office of Hearings and Appeals

Hearing Officer issued an opinion

regarding the eligibility of an individual

employed by a contractor at a DOE

facility to maintain an access

authorization under the provisions of 10

CFR Part 710. The individual’s access

authorization had been suspended

because the individual had consumed

alcohol habitually to excess in the past.

The Hearing Officer found that the

individual had mitigated the concerns

raised by the DOE with respect to his

alcohol use by presenting documentary

and testimonial evidence indicating that