Federal Register / Vol. 62, No. 26 / Friday, February 7, 1997 / Notices 5813

Storage Project No. 11499. The Laurel

Branch Project would be located in

Bledsoe County, Tennessee, seven miles

northeast of Dunlap, Tennessee.

Since the July 1996 Scoping

Document I was issued for Armstrong

Energy Resources’ (AER) proposed

Laurel Branch Project No. 11499 and

Reynolds Creek Project No. 11500, AER

has decided not to pursue the Reynolds

Creek Project. AER, by letter filed

January 9, 1997 with the FERC, has

withdrawn its proposal, and

surrendered its preliminary permit for

the Reynolds Creek Pumped Storage

Project No. 11500. AER, in deciding to

pursue only the Laurel Branch Project,

has also defined the preferred

transmission line corridor and

alternative corridors for the project and

reduced the initial project boundary.

FERC and TVA staff will not prepare

an environmental impact statement

(EIS) only for the Laurel Branch Project

in accordance with the National

Environmental Policy Act (NEPA).

FERC will be a cooperating agency, with

the TVA and the U.S. Army Corps of

Engineers, in the preparation of the EIS.

Under the joint cooperative EIS

process, scoping and draft EIS

preparation will occur prior to the filing

of a final license application with FERC.

Participation by interested agencies and

members of the public in the early

initiation of the NEPA process is

essential because this process will not

be repeated upon the filing of a final

license application.

The EIS will objectively consider both

site-specific and cumulative

environmental impacts of the project

and reasonable alternatives. It will also

address economic, financial and

engineering analysis. A draft EIS will be

circulated to all interested parties for

review. Comments will also be

requested. FERC and TVA will also hold

a joint public meeting to elicit

comments on the draft EIS. All

comments filed on the draft EIS will be

analyzed by staff and will be considered

in a final EIS. The staffs’ conclusions

and recommendations will be presented

to the Tennessee Valley Authority, the

Corps of Engineers, and the Federal

Energy Regulatory Commission for

consideration in reaching final permit

and licensing decisions, respectively.

Scoping Process

The first scoping meeting was held at

the Bledsoe High School in Pikeville,

Tennessee, on August 6, 1996. FERC

and TVA will jointly conduct a second

public scoping meeting for Armstrong

Energy Resources’ revised proposal on

March 4, 1997. The second public

scoping meeting will be held at

Sequatchie County High School on the

west side of Highway #28 in Dunlap,

Tennessee. The March 4 meeting will

focus on the proposed changes to Laurel

Branch Project and the proposed

transmission corridor and alternative

corridors. Prior to the formal public

meeting, an Information Open House

will be held from 5:00 pm to 6:30 pm.

The formal public meeting will be held

from 6:30 pm to 9:30 pm, CDT, with

registration beginning at 5:00 pm. It will

not be necessary for participants to stay

for the whole meeting in order to have

their comments recorded. During both

the Information Open House or the

Public Meeting, oral comments can be

recorded in a private setting. Anyone

needing sign language interpretation or

other special arrangements, please

contact Ruth Horton at (423) 632–8521

no later than February 29, 1997.

The Information Open House is an

informal opportunity for questions and

information about the overall project

scope and environmental review

process. the public meeting is a formal

meeting where a panel of

representatives from the cooperating

agencies will receive public comments

concerning the proposed project and

transmission corridors. The meeting

will be recorded by a stenographer and

will become a part of the formal record

of the FERC and TVA proceeding.

Individuals presenting statements at the

meetings will be asked to sign in before

the meeting starts and to clearly identify

themselves for the record.

To help focus discussions at the

meetings, we have prepared a Revised

Scoping Document I to reflect changes

in AER’s proposal and to provide

information on (1) the proposed

transmission corridor and alternative

corridors; (2) the proposed Laurel

Branch Project; (3) the environmental

review process to be followed; and (4)

preliminary issues to be addressed. The

Revised Scoping Document I will be

mailed to agencies and interested

individuals. Revised Scoping Document

I will also be available at the scoping

meeting.

At the scoping meeting, FERC and

TVA staff will: (1) identify preliminary

environmental issues related to the

proposed project and the proposed

transmission facilities; (2) identify

preliminary resource issues that are not

important and do not require detailed

analysis; (3) identify reasonable

alternatives to be addressed in the EIS;

(4) solicit from the meeting participants

all available information, especially

quantified data, on the resource issues;

and (5) encourage statements from

experts and the public on issues that

should be analyzed in the EIS, including

points of view in opposition to, or in

support of, the staffs’ preliminary views.

We are interested in your thoughts on

the issues to be addressed, especially

the proposed transmission line corridor

and alternative corridors. Your

comments previously expressed on

Scoping Document I relative to the

Laurel Branch Project will be

considered and need not be repeated for

the Revised Scoping Document I.

Persons choosing not to speak at the

meetings, but who have views on the

issues or information relevant to the

issues, may submit written statement for

inclusion in the public record at the

meetings. In addition, written scoping

comments may be filed with the

Secretary, Federal Energy Regulatory

Commission, 888 First Street, NE,

Washington, D.C. 20425, and with Linda

Oxendine, Senior Specialist, Tennessee

Valley Authority, 400 West Summit Hill

Drive, WT8C–K, Knoxville, TN 37902.

All written correspondence should be

filed no later than March 31, 1997, in

order to be included in the final scoping

document, and clearly show the

following captions on the first page:

Laurel Branch Pumped Storage Project,

FERC Project No. 11499–000.

For Further Information on This

Process, please contact Eddie R. Crouse,

FERC, (202) 219–2794, or Linda

Oxendine, TVA, (423) 632–3440.

Lois D. Cashell,

Secretary.

[FR Doc. 97–3037 Filed 2–6–97; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 6717–01–M

[Docket No. RP97–55–002]

Great Lakes Gas Transmission LImited

Partnership; Notice of Proposed

Changes in FERC Gas Tariff

February 3, 1997.

Take notice that on January 29, 1997,

Great Lakes Gas Transmission Limited

Partnership (Great Lakes) tendered for

filing, as part of its FERC Gas Tariff, the

following tariff sheets proposed to

become effective June 1, 1997:

Second Revised Volume No. 1

Substitute Third Revised Sheet No. 4

Substitute Second Revised Sheet No. 4A

Substitute Second Revised Sheet No. 5

Substitute Seventh Revised Sheet No. 7

Substitute First Revised Sheet No. 8

Sub 1st Rev First Revised Sheet No. 9

Substitute First Revised Sheet No. 11

Substitute Second Revised Sheet No. 13

Substitute First Revised Sheet No. 17

Substitute First Revised Sheet No. 20

Substitute First Revised Sheet No. 23

Substitute First Revised Sheet No. 25

Substitute First Revised Sheet No. 26

Substitute Second Revised Sheet No. 41

Substitute First Revised Sheet No. 49
5814 Federal Register / Vol. 62, No. 26 / Friday, February 7, 1997 / Notices

Sub 1st Rev First Revised Sheet No. 53

Sub 1st Rev Original Sheet No. 54

Substitute Second Revised Sheet No. 55

Sub 1st Rev First Revised Sheet No. 59

Sub 1st Rev First Revised Sheet No. 60

Substitute Second Revised Sheet No. 63

Substitute Third Revised Sheet No. 65

Substitute First Revised Sheet No. 84

Substitute First Revised Sheet No. 86

Substitute First Revised Sheet No. 87

Substitute First Revised Sheet No. 89

Original Volume No. 2

Substitute Fourth Revised Sheet No. 68

Substitute Fourth Revised Sheet No. 68–A

Substitute Third Revised Sheet No. 68–B

Substitute Second Revised Sheet No. 68–D

Substitute Second Revised Sheet No. 68–G

Substitute Second Revised Sheet No. 68–M

Substitute Third Revised Sheet No. 100

Substitute Third Revised Sheet No. 101

Substitute Second Revised Sheet No. 102

Substitute Second Revised Sheet No. 106

Substitute Second Revised Sheet No. 107

Substitute Second Revised Sheet No. 145–A

Substitute Second Revised Sheet No. 145–B

Substitute Second Revised Sheet No. 146

Substitute Fourth Revised Sheet No. 147

Substitute Fourth Revised Sheet No. 148

Substitute Eighteenth Revised Sheet No. 151

Substitute Ninth Revised Sheet No. 152

Substitute Third Revised Sheet No. 153

Substitute Second Revised Sheet No. 155

Substitute Third Revised Sheet No. 161

Substitute Second Revised Sheet No. 167

Substitute Second Revised Sheet No. 168

Substitute Second Revised Sheet No. 169

Substitute Second Revised Sheet No. 170

Substitute Second Revised Sheet No. 172

Substitute Second Revised Sheet No. 216

Substitute Second Revised Sheet No. 217

Substitute Second Revised Sheet No. 218

Substitute Second Revised Sheet No. 219

Substitute Second Revised Sheet No. 220

Substitute Second Revised Sheet No. 222

Substitute Fifteenth Revised Sheet No. 223

Substitute Second Revised Sheet No. 225

Substitute Second Revised Sheet No. 227

Substitute Second Revised Sheet No. 233

Substitute Second Revised Sheet No. 234

Substitute Second Revised Sheet No. 239

Substitute Second Revised Sheet No. 240

Substitute Second Revised Sheet No. 241

Substitute Second Revised Sheet No. 242

Substitute Second Revised Sheet No. 243

Substitute Fifteenth Revised Sheet No. 245

Substitute Sixth Revised Sheet No. 246

Substitute Second Revised Sheet No. 247

Substitute Second Revised Sheet No. 249

Substitute Second Revised Sheet No. 255

Substitute Second Revised Sheet No. 256

Substitute Second Revised Sheet No. 262

Substitute Second Revised Sheet No. 263

Substitute Second Revised Sheet No. 264

Substitute Second Revised Sheet No. 265

Substitute Second Revised Sheet No. 266

Substitute Second Revised Sheet No. 268

Substitute Ninth Revised Sheet No. 269

Substitute Seventh Revised Sheet No. 270

Substitute Second Revised Sheet No. 272

Substitute Second Revised Sheet No. 274

Substitute Second Revised Sheet No. 281

Substitute Second Revised Sheet No. 282

Substitute Second Revised Sheet No. 289

Substitute Fifth Revised Sheet No. 290

Substitute Fifth Revised Sheet No. 291

Substitute Second Revised Sheet No. 292

Substitute Fifteenth Revised Sheet No. 294

Substitute Seventh Revised Sheet No. 295

Substitute Second Revised Sheet No. 297

Substitute Second Revised Sheet No. 299

Substitute Second Revised Sheet No. 306

Substitute Second Revised Sheet No. 307

Substitute Second Revised Sheet No. 599

Substitute Second Revised Sheet No. 600

Substitute Third Revised Sheet No. 601

Substitute Second Revised Sheet No. 602

Substitute Ten Revised Sheet No. 603

Substitute Seventh Revised Sheet No. 604

Substitute Fourth Revised Sheet No. 615

Substitute Second Revised Sheet No. 616

Substitute Second Revised Sheet No. 617

Substitute Second Revised Sheet No. 618

Substitute Second Revised Sheet No. 620

Substitute Second Revised Sheet No. 627

Substitute Second Revised Sheet No. 628

Substitute Twenty-Ninth Revised Sheet No.

1000

Great Lakes states that the above

named tariff sheets are being filed to

replace those filed on November 1, 1996

in this docket, and are intended to

provide a comprehensive and current

version of Great Lakes’ proposal to

convert its rates and tariff from a

volumetric (Mcf) to a thermal (Dth)

basis. The revised tariff sheets reflect

portions of Great Lakes’ original

November 1, 1996 proposal and

incorporate certain revisions filed with

the Commission on December 31, 1996

and additional revisions first being

proposed in the instant 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 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 are available for

public inspection in the Commission’s

Public Reference Room.

Lois D. Cashell,

Secretary.

[FR Doc. 97–3038 Filed 2–6–97; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 6717–01–M

[Docket No. CP96–671–001]

National Fuel Gas Supply Corporation;

Notice of Application

February 3, 1997.

Take notice that on January 30, 1996,

National Fuel Gas Supply Corporation

(National Fuel), 10 Lafayette Square,

Buffalo, New York 14203, filed an

amendment to its application in Docket

No. CP96–671–000 pursuant to Sections

7(b) and (c) of the Natural Gas Act for

a certificate of public convenience and

necessity authorizing the construction

and operation of facilities in order to

create additional firm transportation

capacity of 48,000 Dth per day from the

Niagara import point to the

interconnection between National Fuel

and Transcontinental Gas Pipe Line

Corporation (Transco) at Leidy and

Wharton, Pennsylvania, (1997 Niagara

Expansion Project), and permission and

approval to abandon certain facilities,

all as more fully set forth in the

application which is on file with the

Commission and open to public

inspection.

National Fuel States that the purpose

of the amendment is to: (1) revise the

horsepower and other specifications of

the proposed new compressor unit at

the Ellisburg Compressor Station; (2)

submit the Precedent Agreement

between National Fuel and Union

Pacific Fuels, Inc. for the remaining

3,656 Dth/d of unsubscribed firm winter

capacity; and (3) request authorization

to replace the meter facilities at the

Strickler Road Station.

National Fuel proposes to install a

high speed compressor with 3,200 hp at

its Ellisburg Compressor Station instead

of the originally proposed 2,250 Cooper

GMVH–10 compressor, because the

latter is no longer available. National

Fuel also states that the change in the

proposed Ellisburg compressor unit is

not anticipated to have any significant

impact on the cost of the project.

Any person desiring to be heard or to

make any protest with reference to said

amendment should on or before

February 13, 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 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