Federal Register / Vol. 62, No. 248 / Monday, December 29, 1997 / Notices 67635

1ANR Pipeline 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 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.

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. 97–33658 Filed 12–24–97; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 6717–01–M

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY

Federal Energy Regulatory

Commission

[Docket No. CP97–563–001]

Michigan Gas Storage Company;

Notice of Petition To Amend

December 19, 1997.

Take notice that on November 25,

1997, Michigan Gas Storage Company

(MGSCo), 212 West Michigan Avenue,

Jackson, Michigan 49201, filed with the

Commission, pursuant to Section 7 of

the Natural Gas Act (NGA), a petition to

amend the order issued on September

19, 1997, in Docket No. CP97–563–000

to slightly modify the construction

authorized in the Cranberry Lake

Storage Field, Clare County, Michigan,

all as more fully set forth in the

application for amendment, which is

open to the public for inspection.

Michigan Gas Storage Company

(MGSCo) notified the Commission on

November 25, 1997, that MGSCo has

now developed an alternative,

functionally equivalent piping

configuration for the Cranberry Lake

Storage Field in Clare County,

Michigan, which varies slightly from

what the Director, Office of Pipeline

Regulation authorized on September 19,

1997, in Docket No. CP97–563–000.

Specifically, MGSCo states that the

existing 6-inch diameter (approximately

125 feet) and 4-inch diameter

(approximately 625 feet) pipe on Lateral

63 East between wells C715 and C350 is

in good condition and does not need to

be replaced with the originally proposed

2-inch diameter pipe. This segment of

the pipe only required minor repairs to

the pipe coating.

Instead, MGSCo now proposes to cut

and remove the 1,690 feet of existing 6-

inch diameter pipe between wells C353

and C715 on Lateral 63 East, rather than

replacing it with the 8-inch diameter

pipe authorized in the September 19,

1997, order. MGSCo states that it can

install the pig launcher at the eastern

cut end of this segment. Gas would then

flow westward from the storage wells

along this section of lateral through 8-

inch diameter pipe.

MGSCo also states that gas flowing

through the existing 6-inch and 4-inch

diameter segment (east of the 1,690 feet

of removed pipe) on Lateral 63 East

would flow northward through the

existing 4-inch diameter tie-line

between Laterals 62 East and 63 East.

MGSCo further states that these minor

modifications could save $80,000 in

material and labor costs, as well as

avoid the cutting of trees in a 15-foot by

300-foot temporary work area.

Any person desiring to be heard or to

make any protest with reference to said

petition to amend should on or before

December 29, 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 384.214 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.

Linwood A. Watson, Jr.,

Acting Secretary.

[FR Doc. 97–33655 Filed 12–24–97; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 6717–01–M

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY

Federal Energy Regulatory

Commission

[Docket No. CP98–2–000]

ANR Pipeline Company; Notice of

Intent To Prepare an Environmental

Assessment for the Proposed Kent

County Replacement Project and

Request for Comments on

Environmental Issues

December 19, 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 replacement of about 0.96 mile of

22-inch-diameter pipeline proposed in

the Kent County Replacement 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

ANR Pipeline Company (ANR)

proposes to replace about 0.96 mile of

22-inch-diameter pipeline to maintain

compliance with the U.S. Department of

Transportation pipeline safety

regulations. There would be no increase

in the capacity of ANR’s system as a

result of this proposal. ANR seeks

authority to construct and operate:

• 0.96 mile of 22-inch-diameter

replacement pipeline in Kent County,

Michigan.

No nonjurisdictional facilities would

be constructed as a result of this

proposal.

The location of the project facilities is

shown in appendix 1.2

Land Requirements for Construction

Construction of the proposed facilities

would require about 8.6 acres of land,

including a 75-foot-wide construction

right-of-way, additional temporary work

spaces, and a staging area. Following

construction, no new permanent rightof-way would be required. All of the

right-of-way would be restored and

allowed to revert to its former use.

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