Federal Register / Vol. 63, No. 1 / Friday, January 2, 1998 / Notices 63

10,740 (ISO) horsepower with three gas

turbine engines comprising 15,900 (ISO)

horsepower.

El Paso contends that the Bondad

Expansion Project has been designed to

permit El Paso to transport 116,500 Mcf

per day of additional quantities of gas

from receipt points along the Ignacio

Lines to an existing point near the

existing Blanco plant located in San

Juan County, New Mexico.

El Paso estimates the cost of

constructing the Bondad Expansion

Project to be $3.6 million. El Paso

proposes to place the proposed facilities

in service by October 1, 1998.

It is stated that based on the cost of

the proposed compression facilities, El

Paso has calculated a separate

incremental rate attributable to the cost

of service for the proposed Bondad

Expansion Project. It is stated that the

incremental reservation rate for the

proposed project, which is referred to as

the Bondad Facilities Reservation

Charge, is $0.67734 per dth, on a

monthly basis. El Paso proposes the

calculated incremental rate (the

recourse rate) as the tariff rate

applicable to firm transportation service

on the Bondad Expansion Project.

In addition, it is stated that El Paso

has calculated a separate incremental

fuel charge, referred to as the Bondad

Facilities Fuel Charge, in which

shippers receiving firm service on the

Bondad Expansion Project will be

assessed a proposed incremental fuel

charge of 0.75 percent of quantities of

gas transported.

El Paso states that in support of the

Bondad Expansion Project, it has

entered into final, firm Transportation

Service Agreements (TSAs) with Enron

Capital & Trade Resources Corp., Elm

Ridge Resources, Inc. and Conoco, Inc.,

for the transportation of an additional

116,500 mcf per day of gas from any

point of receipt on the Bondad System,

including the Ignacio Receipt Point, to

the Blanco Delivery Pont.

El Paso states that the executed firm

TSAs applicable at the Bondad

Expansion Project are subject to the

provisions of Rate Schedule FT–1

contained in El Paso’s Volume No. 1–A,

FERC Gas Tariff; however, pursuant to

Section 4.5 of the Tariff, the executed

TSAs each contain a separate negotiated

rate, rather than the proposed tariff rate,

applicable to the Bondad Expansion

Project. El Paso further states that the

rate negotiated with each of the three

shippers on the Project is a Total Daily

One-Part Rate per dth.

Any person desiring to participate in

the hearing process or to make any

protest with reference to said

application should on or before January

14, 1998, 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.

The Commission’s rules require that

protestors provide copies of their

protests or the party or parties directly

involved. 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.

A person obtaining intervene status

will be placed on the service list

maintained by the Secretary of the

Commission and will receive copies of

all documents filed by the applicant and

by every one of the intervenors. An

intervenor can file for rehearing of any

Commission order and can petition for

court review of any such order.

However, an intervenor must submit

copies of comments or any other filing

it makes with the Commission to every

other intervenor in the proceeding, as

well as 14 copies with the Commission.

A person does not have to intervene,

however, in order to have comments

considered. A person, instead, may

submit two copies of comments to the

Secretary of the Commission.

Commenters will be placed on the

Commission’s environmental mailing

list, will receive copies of

environmental documents and will be

able to participate in meetings

associated with the Commission’s

environmental review process.

Commenters will not be required to

serve copies of filed documents on all

other parties. However, commenters

will not receive copies of all documents

filed by other parties or issued by the

Commission and will not have the right

to seek rehearing or appeal the

Commission’s final order to a federal

court.

The Commission will consider all

comments and concerns equally,

whether filed by commenters or those

requesting intervenor status.

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

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 El Paso to appear or be

represented at the hearing.

Lois D. Cashell,

Secretary.

[FR Doc. 97–34175 Filed 12–31–97; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 6717–01–M

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY

Federal Energy Regulatory

Commission

[Docket No. CP90–1512–001]

Mountain Fuel Supply Company;

Notice of Petition To Amend

December 24, 1997.

Take notice that on December 19,

1997, Mountain Fuel Supply Company

(Mountain Fuel), 180 East First South

Street, Salt Lake City, Utah 84145, filed

in Docket No. CP90–1512–001 a petition

pursuant to Section 7(f) of the Natural

Gas Act to amend its certificate issued

in Docket No. CP90–1512, authorizing a

service area determination, all as more

fully set forth in the petition on file with

the Commission and open to public

inspection.

Mountain Fuel proposes to modify its

service area by adding Box Elder, Weber

Davis, Salt Lake, Tooele and Utah

Counties, all located in Utah, and the

remainder of Cache County, Utah, that

is not part of Mountain Fuel’s existing

service area. It is stated that the service

area presently consists of Franklin

County, Idaho, and most of Cache

County, Utah. It is explained that the

additional counties are located along the

Wasatch Front of northern Utah and

incorporate the Sunset, Porter’s Lane

(Centerville), Little Mountain and

Payson gate-station interconnects with

Questar Pipeline Company (Questar), an

interstate pipeline company, and the

Hunter Park interconnect with Kern

River Gas Transmission Company, an

interstate pipeline company.

Mountain Fuel asserts that the

additions to the service area are

required to improve its operating

flexibility for meeting customer

requirements in its northern Utah and
64 Federal Register / Vol. 63, No. 1 / Friday, January 2, 1998 / Notices

southern Idaho distribution area. It is

stated that Mountain Fuel has recently

experienced operational problems

because of declines in the Btu content

of gas received from Questar at its

Hyrum Gate Station, which has been the

only source of gas serving customers in

the existing service area. It is explained

that Mountain Fuel requires additional

supply sources for gas with higher Btu

content to provide reliable service to its

customers.

Any person desiring to be heard or to

make any protest with reference to said

petition to amend should on or before

January 5, 1998, 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.

Lois D. Cashell,

Secretary.

[FR Doc. 97–34173 Filed 12–31–97; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 6717–01–M

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY

Federal Energy Regulatory

Commission

[Docket No. CP98–144–000]

Natural Gas Pipeline Company of

America; Notice of Request Under

Blanket Authorization

December 24, 1997.

Take notice that on December 18,

1997, Natural Gas Pipeline Company of

America (Natural), 701 East 22nd Street,

Lombard, Illinois 60148, filed in Docket

No. CP98–144–000 a request pursuant to

Sections 157.205 and 157.212(a) of the

Commission’s Regulations under the

Natural Gas Act (18 CFR 157.205 and

157.212(a)) seeking NGA Section 7(c)

certification to retain and operate an

existing 3-inch tap and dual 2-inch

meter originally authorized under

NGPA Section 311 to deliver gas to

Land O’Lakes, Inc. in Beaver County,

Oklahoma, under the blanket certificate

issued in Docket No. CP82–402–000, all

as more fully set forth in the request

which is on file with the Commission

and open to public inspection.

Natural states that it seeks NGA

certification in order that it may be used

to provide Part 284 Subpart G

transportation. Natural’s proposed

quantities to be delivered at the existing

point of delivery are 1,300 MMBtu/day.

Natural states that the end use of gas is

for Land O’Lakes, Inc. Natural states

that it can provide the quantities of

natural gas without detriment or

disadvantage to its peak day and annual

delivery capacity. Natural notes that the

total volume of gas to be delivered after

the facilities are certificated will not

exceed the total volume originally

capable of being delivered. Natural

states that the facilities were placed inservice on November 2, 1997. Natural

contends that it is currently providing

interruptible transportation service by

means of the subject facilities under

Rate Schedule ITS.

Natural asserts that it obtained the

appropriate environmental clearances

from the Oklahoma Historical Society,

the United States Department of Interior

Fish and Wildlife Service, the

Oklahoma Archaeological Survey, and

the Department of the Army Corps of

Engineers for its proposed construction.

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 Section

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

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.

Lois D. Cashell,

Secretary.

[FR Doc. 97–34174 Filed 12–31–97; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 6717–01–M

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY

Federal Energy Regulatory

Commission

[Docket No. EC98–21–000, et al.]

Alabama Power Company, et al.;

Electric Rate and Corporate Regulation

Filings

December 23, 1997.

Take notice that the following filings

have been made with the Commission:

1. Alabama Power Company

[Docket No. EC98–21–000]

Take notice that on December 4, 1997,

Alabama Power Company (Alabama

Power), filed an application, pursuant to

Section 203 of the Federal Power Act,

for approval of the sale of a 44kV

transmission substation to the City of

Hartford, Alabama (City). The facilities

are located in the City of Hartford,

Geneva County, Alabama. The total

purchase price of the facilities to be sold

and conveyed is $221,668.00.

Comment date: January 20, 1998, in

accordance with Standard Paragraph E

at the end of this notice.

2. GPU Power, Inc.

[Docket No. EG98–20–000]

Take notice that on December 12,

1997, GPU Power, Inc. (GPU Power or

Applicant), of One Upper Pond Road,

Parsippany, New Jersey 07054, filed

with the Federal Energy Regulatory

Commission an application for

determination of exempt wholesale

generator status pursuant to Part 365 of

the Commission’s Regulations.

Applicant states that, through its

wholly-owned subsidiary, GPU Power

Ireland, Inc., it intends to develop a base

load peat-fired power plant to be located

in East Midlands, Ireland (the Facility).

Applicant further states that all

electricity produced by the Facility will

be sold at wholesale to Electricity

Supply Board, a statutory corporation

with principal offices at 27 Lower

Fitzwilliam Street, Dublin 2, Ireland.

Comment date: January 16, 1998, in

accordance with Standard Paragraph E

at the end of this notice. The

Commission will limit its consideration

of comments to those that concern the

adequacy or accuracy of the application.

3. Zhejiang Yong-Ke Thermal Power

Corporation, Ltd.

[Docket No. EG98–21–000]

On December 15, 1997, Zhejiang

Yong-Ke Thermal Power Corporation

Ltd. (ZY), by EDC Shaoxing Power Ltd.,

c/o Enserch Development Corp., 1817

Wood Street, Dallas TX 75201, filed