Federal Register / Vol. 62, No. 39 / Thursday, February 27, 1997 / Notices 8949

1Alliance Pipeline L.P.’s applications were filed

with the Commission under Sections 3 and 7 of the

Natural Gas Act and Part 157 of the Commission’s

regulations on December 24, 1996.

[Docket Nos. CP97–168–000 and CP97–169–

000]

Alliance Pipeline L.P.; Notice of Intent

To Prepare an Environmental Impact

Statement for the Proposed Alliance

Pipeline Project, Request for

Comments on Environmental Issues,

and Notice of Public Scoping Meetings

and Site Visit

February 21, 1997.

The staff of the Federal Energy

Regulatory Commission (FERC or

Commission) will prepare an

Environmental Impact Statement (EIS)

that will address the environmental

impacts of the construction and

operation of approximately 887 miles of

natural gas transmission pipeline, seven

compressor stations, metering and

delivery facilities, and other

appurtenant facilities proposed in the

Alliance Pipeline Project.1 This EIS will

be used by the Commission in its

decision-making process to determine

whether to approve the project.

Summary of the Proposed Project

Alliance Pipeline L.P. (Alliance)

wants to build new natural gas pipeline

transmission facilities in North Dakota,

Minnesota, Iowa and Illinois with an

initial capacity to transport 1.3 billion

cubic feet per day of natural gas from

Canada to interconnections with

existing natural gas pipeline systems in

the Chicago, Illinois area. Alliance

requests Commission authorization, in

Docket No. CP97–168–000, to construct

and operate the following facilities:

• 887 miles of 36-inch-diameter

mainline pipeline extending from the

border of the United States (U.S.) and

Canada near Sherwood, Renville

County, North Dakota, to a point near

Joliet, Will County, Illinois. Of the 887-

mile-long mainline, about 324 miles

would be in North Dakota, 252 miles

would be in Minnesota, 189 miles

would be in Iowa, and 122 miles would

be in Illinois.

• Seven new compressor stations

with a total of 320,000 horsepower (hp)

of compression:

—Towner Compressor Station (40,000

hp) in McHenry County, North

Dakota.

—Wimbledon Compressor Station

(40,000 hp) in Barnes County, North

Dakota.

—Fairmount Compressor Station

(40,000 hp) in Richland County,

North Dakota.

—Olivia Compressor Station (40,000 hp)

in Renville County, Minnesota.

—Albert Lea Compressor Station

(40,000 hp) in Freeborn County,

Minnesota.

—Manchester Compressor Station

(40,000 hp) in Delaware County, Iowa.

—Tampico Compressor Station (80,000

hp) in Whiteside County, Illinois.

• Five new meter stations located in

Grundy and Will Counties, Illinois, and

a new measurement and pressure

control station located in Grundy

County, Illinois.

• A total of 1.1 mile of 36-inchdiameter pipeline connecting Alliance’s

proposed meter stations with existing

natural gas pipeline facilities in Grundy

and Will Counties, Illinois.

• Associated pipeline facilities,

including 47 mainline block valves,

seven internal tool launchers/receivers,

and permanent access roads for access

to compressor stations and valves.

Communication and electric service

facilities associated with the compressor

stations may also be required.

In addition, Alliance requests in

Docket No. CP97–169–000 a

Presidential Permit authorizing

construction, operation and

maintenance of facilities at the

International Border for the importation

of natural gas. These facilities would

consist only of the portion of the

mainline extending across the border

and will be evaluated in the EIS as part

of the facilities described above.

In connection with the facilities

proposed by Alliance, a natural gas

liquids (NGL) extraction plant would be

constructed near Morris, Illinois by Aux

Sable Liquid Products L.P. The purpose

of the NGL plant would be to extract

ethane and other natural gas liquids that

may be present in Alliance’s gas stream.

For the purpose of comprehensive

environmental review, the NGL

extraction plant will be included within

the scope of the EIS.

Alliance also plans to construct a 982-

mile-long natural gas pipeline system in

Canada extending from gas production

areas in western Canada to the U.S./

Canadian border where it would

connect with Alliance’s proposed

facilities in the U.S. However,

environmental review of the Canadian

portion of the project will not be

included in our EIS.

The location of the project facilities is

shown in appendix 1.

Land Requirements for Construction

Construction of the Alliance Pipeline

Project facilities would affect a total of

about 13,312 acres. Of this total, about

11,313 acres would be disturbed by

construction of the pipeline.

Approximately 814.1 miles (90 percent)

of the new pipeline be installed parallel

to various existing pipeline rights-ofway occupied by other pipelines.

Alliance’s pipeline would deviate from

the existing rights-of-way in several

locations to avoid environmental or

engineering constraints or reduce the

total length of new pipeline required.

Alliance would generally use a right-ofway width for construction of 105 feet,

with provisions for extra temporary

work areas for waterbody, highway and

railroad crossings, additional topsoil

storage, and pipe and equipment yards.

Following construction and

restoration of the right-of-way and

temporary work spaces, Alliance would

retain a 60-foot-wide permanent

pipeline right-of-way. Existing land uses

on the remainder of the disturbed areas,

as well as most land uses on the

permanent right-of-way, would be

allowed to continue following

construction. Total land requirements

for the permanent right-of-way would be

about 6,449 acres.

The extra work areas and

aboveground facilities, including

compressor and meter stations, internal

tool launchers/receivers, and permanent

access roads would affect approximately

1,999 acres of land during construction.

Mainline valves would be built within

or adjacent to the permanent right-ofway. No locations have been identified

for the communication and electrical

service facilities.

The NGL extraction plant would be

located on a 100-acre parcel currently

occupied by an abandoned synthetic

natural gas plant owned by Northern

Illinois Gas Company.

The EIS 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. The EIS we are preparing will

give the Commission the information to

do that. 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 EIS 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 EIS. All comments

received are considered during the

preparation of the EIS. We encourage

state and local government

representatives to notify their

constituents of this proposed action and

encourage them to comment.
8950 Federal Register / Vol. 62, No. 39 / Thursday, February 27, 1997 / Notices

Currently Identified Environmental

Issues

The EIS will discuss impacts that

could occur as a result of the

construction and operation of the

proposed project. We have already

identified a number of issues that we

think deserve attention based on a

preliminary review of the proposed

facilities and the environmental

information provided by Alliance.

These issues are listed below. Keep in

mind that this is a preliminary list. The

list of issues may be added to,

subtracted from, or changed based on

your comments and our analysis.

• Soils.

—Temporary and permanent impacts on

prime farmland soils.

—Mixing of topsoil and subsoil during

construction.

—Compaction of soil by heavy

equipment.

—Impacts on drain tiles and irrigation

systems.

—Erosion control and restoration of the

right-of-way.

• Water Resources.

—Crossing of 616 waterbodies, canals

and drainages.

—Crossing of 11 rivers or canals 100 feet

wide or greater, including the James,

Chippewa, Minnesota, Bois de Sioux,

Wapsipinicon, Mississippi, Rock, Fox

and Des Planes rivers, and the Illinois

and Michigan Canals.

—Potential for erosion and sediment

transport to the waterbodies.

—Effect of construction on groundwater

and surface water supplies.

—Impact on wetlands.

• Biological Resources.

—Effect on wildlife and fisheries

habitats.

—Effect on federally listed endangered

and threatened species.

• Cultural Resources.

—Impact on historic and prehistoric

sites.

—Native American and tribal concerns.

• Socioeconomics.

—Effect of the construction workforce

on demands for services in

surrounding areas.

—Impact on property values.

• Land Use.

—Impact on crop production and

grazing.

—Impact on residential areas.

—Effect on public lands and special use

areas, including: Rural Economic and

Community Development Services

areas, a state game refuge, and several

proposed segments of the North

Country National Scenic Trail in

North Dakota; a National Waterfowl

Production Area, Seven Mile Creek

County Park, East Minnesota River

State Game Refuge, Sakatah Singing

Hills River State Trail, and LyleAustin Wildlife Management Area in

Minnesota; Price Wildlife Habitat in

Iowa; and Camp Hauberg, Hennepin

Canal Parkway State Park, Fox River

Natural Area, and Illinois and

Michigan Canal National Heritage

Corridor and State Trail in Illinois.

—Impact on future land uses.

—Visual effect of the aboveground

facilities on surrounding areas.

• Air Quality and Noise.

—Impact on local air quality and noise

environment during construction.

—Impact on local and regional air

quality and local noise environment

from operation of new compressor

stations and the NGL extraction plant.

• Reliability.

—Assessment of hazards associated

with natural gas pipelines, and

natural gas liquids extraction

operations.

• Cumulative Impact.

—Assessment of the combined effect of

the proposed project with other

projects, including other natural gas

transmission lines, which have been

or may be proposed in the same

region and similar time frames.

We will also evaluate possible

alternatives to the proposed project or

portions of the project, and make

recommendations on how to lessen or

avoid impacts on the various resource

areas.

Our independent analysis of the

issues will be presented in a Draft EIS

which will be mailed to Federal, state,

and local agencies, public interest

groups, interested individuals, affected

landowners, newspapers, libraries, and

the Commission’s official service lists

for these proceedings. A 45-day

comment period will be allotted for

review of the Draft EIS. We will

consider all comments on the Draft EIS

and revise the document, as necessary,

before issuing a Final EIS. The Final EIS

will include our response to all

comments received.

Public Participation and Scoping

Meetings

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 (including

alternative locations and routes), and

measures to avoid or lessen

environmental impact. The more

specific your comments, the more useful

they will be. Please follow the

instructions below to ensure that your

comments are received and properly

recorded:

• Reference Docket Nos. CP97–168–

000 and CP97–169–000.

• Send two copies of your comments

to: Lois Cashell, Secretary, Federal

Energy Regulatory Commission, 888

First Street, NE, Washington, DC 20426.

• Label one copy for the attention of

the Environmental Review and

Compliance Branch, PR–11.1.

• Please mail your comments so that

they will be received in Washington, DC

on or before March 28, 1997.

In addition to or in lieu of sending

written comments, you are invited to

attend one of the four public scoping

meetings being held in the project area.

Meetings will be held at the following

times and locations:

March 17, 1997

7:00 pm—Chieftain Motor Lodge,

(701) 652–3131, Highway 281,

Carrington, North Dakota

March 18, 1997

7:00 pm—Mankato Civic Center, (507)

389–3000, One Civic Center Plaza,

Mankato, Minnesota

March 19, 1997

7:00 pm—Falcon Civic Center, (319)

334–2606, 1305 5th Avenue, N.E.,

Independence, Iowa

March 20, 1997

7:00 pm—Days Inn, (815) 875–3371,

(formerly Lincoln Inn), 2238 North

Main Street, Princeton, Illinois

The purpose of the scoping meetings

is to obtain information from state and

local governments and from the public.

Federal agencies have formal channels

for participating in the process as

cooperating agencies (including separate

meetings, where appropriate). Federal

agencies are expected to file their

written comments directly with the

FERC and not use the scoping meetings

for this purpose.

Alliance will be present at the scoping

meetings to describe their proposal.

Interested groups and individuals are

encouraged to attend the meetings and

present oral comments on the

environmental issues which they

believe should be addressed in the Draft

EIS. A transcript will be made of the

meetings and the comments will be

made part of the Commission’s record in

this proceeding.

We are asking a number of federal

agencies to indicate whether they wish

to cooperate with us in the preparation

of the EIS. These agencies may choose

to participate once they have evaluated

the proposal relative to their agencies’
Federal Register / Vol. 62, No. 39 / Thursday, February 27, 1997 / Notices 8951

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, Room 2A, or call

(202) 208–1371. Copies of the appendices were 2A,

or call (202) 208–1371. Copies of the appendices

were sent to all those receiving this notice in the

mail. 1 78 FERC ¶ 61,112 (1997).

responsibilities. The list of agencies is

provided in appendix 2.2

On the above dates we will also be

conducting limited site visits to the

project area in the vicinity of each

scoping meeting location. Anyone

interested in participating in the site

visit may contact the Commission’s

Office of External Affairs, identified at

the end of this notice, for more details

and must provide their own

transportation.

Becoming an Intervenor

In addition to involvement in the EIS

scoping process, you may want to

become an official party to the

proceedings, known as an ‘‘intervenor.’’

Among other things, intervenors have

the right to receive copies of caserelated Commission documents and

filings by other intervenors. Likewise,

each intervenor must provide copies of

its filings to all other parties on the

Commission’s service lists for these

proceedings. 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 3).

The date for filing of timely motions

to intervene in these proceedings has

passed, having ended January 29, 1997.

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. However, you do not need

intervenor status to have your scoping

comments considered.

Environmental Mailing List

This notice is being sent to

individuals, organizations, and

government entities interested and/or

potentially affected by the proposed

project.

Anyone offering scoping comments

will be automatically kept on our

environmental mailing list for this

project. If you do not want to offer

comments at this time but still want to

keep informed and receive copies of the

Draft and Final EISs, please return the

Environmental Mailing List Information

(appendix 4). If you do not return the

card you will be taken off the mailing

list.

Additional information about the

proposed project is available from Paul

McKee in the Commission’s Office of

External Affairs at (202) 208–1088.

Lois D. Cashell,

Secretary.

[FR Doc. 97–4914 Filed 2–26–97; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 6717–01–M

Notice of Plan To Provide Additional

Recreation Facilities

February 21, 1997.

Take notice that the following

hydroelectric application has been filed

with the Commission and is available

for public inspection:

a. Type of Filing: Plan to Provide

Additional Recreation Facilities.

b. Project Name and No: Mottville

Hydroelectric Project, FERC Project No.

401–019.

c. Date Filed: July 19, 1996.

d. Licensee: Indiana Michigan Power

Company.

e. Location: St. Joseph River in St.

Joseph County, Michigan near Mottville.

f. Filed pursuant to: Federal Power

Act, 16 U.S.C. § 791(a)–825(r).

g. Licensee Contact: William

Vineyard, Associate Manager, Fossil and

Hydro, Operations, American Electric

Power Service Corporation, 1 Riverside

Plaza, Columbus, Ohio 43215–2373,

(614) 223–1702.

h. FERC Contact: Steve Naugle, (202)

219–2805.

i. Comment Date: March 31, 1997.

j. Description of the filing: The

licensee proposes to add the following

recreation improvements at the project:

(1) reservoir and tailwater boat launch

facilities, a parking area, and associated

road and pathway extensions at

Mottville Canoe Park; and (2) parking

and picnic areas and fishing access at

the project powerhouse.

k. This notice also consists of the

following standard paragraphs: B, C1,

D2.

B. Comments, Protests, or Motions to

Intervene—Anyone may submit

comments, a protest, or a motion to

intervene in accordance with the

requirements of Rules of Practice and

Procedure, 18 CFR 385.210, .211, .214.

In determining the appropriate action to

take, the Commission will consider all

protests or other comments filed, but

only those who file a motion to

intervene in accordance with the

Commission’s Rules may become a

party to the proceeding. Any comments,

protests, or motions to intervene must

be received on or before the specified

comment date for the particular

application.

C1. Filing and Service of Responsive

Documents—Any filings must bear in

all capital letters the title

‘‘COMMENTS’’, RECOMMENDATIONS

FOR TERMS AND CONDITIONS’’,

‘‘PROTEST’’, or ‘‘MOTION TO

INTERVENE’’, as applicable, and the

Project Number of the particular

application to which the filing refers.

Any of the above-named documents

must be filed by providing the original

and the number of copies provided by

the Commission’s regulations to: The

Secretary, Federal Energy Regulatory

Commission’s regulations to: The

Secretary, Federal Energy Regulatory

Commission, 888 First Street, N.E.,

Washington, D.C. 20426. A copy of any

motion to intervene must also be served

upon each representative of the

Applicant specified in the particular

application.

D2. Agency Comments—Federal,

state, and local agencies are invited to

file comments on the described

application. A copy of the application

may be obtained by agencies directly

from the Applicant. If an agency does

not file comments within the time

specified for filing comments, it will be

presumed to have no comments. One

copy of an agency’s comments must also

be sent to the Applicant’s

representatives.

Lois D. Cashell,

Secretary.

[FR Doc. 97–4809 Filed 2–26–97; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 6717–01–M

[Docket No. RP–97–225–000]

Williams Natural Gas Company; Notice

of Technical Conference

February 21, 1997.

In the Commission’s order issued on

February 7, 1997,1 in the abovecaptioned proceeding, the Commission

held that the filing raises issues for

which a technical conference is to be

convened.

The conference to address the issues

has been scheduled for Tuesday, March

11, 1997 at 10:00 a.m. in a room to be

designated at the offices of the Federal

Energy Regulatory Commission, 888

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

20426.