27274 Federal Register / Vol. 63, No. 95 / Monday, May 18, 1998 / Notices

matter finds that the abandonment is

required by the public convenience and

necessity. If a petition for leave to

intervene is timely filed, or if the

Commission on its motion believes that

a formal hearing is required, further

notice of such hearing will be duly

given.

Under the procedure herein provide

for, unless otherwise advised, it will be

unnecessary for Applicant to appear or

be represented at the hearing.

David P. Boergers,

Acting Secretary.

[FR Doc. 98–13067 Filed 5–15–98; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 6717–01–M

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY

Federal Energy Regulatory

Commission

[Docket Nos. CP98–527–000; CP96–385–

000; CP96–386–000, et al. and CP97–127–

000]

Mountaineer Gas Company,

Complainant, v. Columbia Natural

Resources, Inc., Respondent,

Columbia Natural Resources, Inc.,

Columbia Gas Transmission

Corporation, Columbia Gas

Transmission Corporation; Notice of

Complaint

May 12, 1998.

Take notice that on May 4, 1998,

Mountaineer Gas Company

(Mountaineer), 414 Summer Street,

Charleston, West Virginia 25332, filed a

complaint in Docket No. CP98–527–000

pursuant to Section 5 of the Natural Gas

Act (NGA) and Rule 206 of the

Commission’s Rules of Practice and

Procedure. Mountaineer requests that

the Commission institute an

investigation into certain

representations made by Columbia

Natural Resources, Inc. (CNR) (or on its

behalf), in Docket No. CP96–385–000

and in Docket No. CP96–386–000, et al.,

which led to Commission approval of

the abandonment of certain Columbia

Gas Transmission Corporation

(Columbia) gathering facilities by sale to

CNR; and to re-open those aspects of

Docket No. CP97–127–000 involving

Groups 16, 17 and 18 in order to prevent

further transfers of gathering facilities to

CNR.

Mountaineer explains that in Docket

No. CP96–386–000, et al., Columbia

filed for permission and approval to

abandon, by sale to CNR, certain

certificated facilities as a necessary

component of the transfer to CNR of a

larger, 18 system, group of gathering

facilities. Mountaineer states that the

application indicated that two distinct

types of services were being provided by

Columbia through such facilities; the

first service consisting of a conventional

gathering function and the second

service consisting of the transportation,

by displacement, of gas received on

Columbia’s transmission system under

firm transportation rates schedules to

certificated points of delivery on the

gathering system. Mountaineer further

states that the services then rendered by

Columbia through the gathering

facilities, whether conventional service

or the displacement delivery service for

Mountaineer and other local

distribution companies, were subject to

the Commission’s open access

transportation regulations. Mountaineer

states that it withdrew its protest of

Columbia’s proposed abandonment after

reaching an agreement in principle with

CNR on the continuation of the

displacement delivery service to

Mountaineer previously rendered by

Columbia, as part of an overall

November 22, 1996 settlement of

various Columbia rate and service

issues.

Mountaineer states that concurrently

with Columbia’s abandonment

application, CNR filed in Docket No.

CP96–385–000, a petition requesting the

Commission to disclaim jurisdiction

over the gathering facilities to be

transferred from Columbia. Mountaineer

states that in said petition, CNR stated

that it intended to provide substitute

nonjurisdictional alternatives to the

service provided by Columbia.

Mountaineer states that in early 1998,

a dispute arose between Mountaineer

and CNR concerning Mountaineer’s

request for a new point of delivery on

the gathering facilities transferred to

CNR. Mountaineer states that the

purpose of the new delivery point was

to permit Mountaineer to compete for a

service to a new, large-volume

consumer. Mountaineer states that CNR

subsequently denied Mountaineer’s

request, leaving Mountaineer to believe

that the primary, if not exclusive, basis

for CNR’s denial of transportation access

was to eliminate Mountaineer as a

competitor for this new market, so that

CNR’s sales function could render the

service instead. Mountaineer states that

CNR now maintains that the

commitment it made during the

abandonment proceedings in Docket No.

CP96–386–000, et al., such as, to

continue open access transportation

principles, applies solely to the

gathering service it renders, and not to

the displacement delivery service

rendered for Mountaineer.

Mountaineer maintains that denial of

open access transportation service will

have serious implications for

Mountaineer and its consumers.

Mountaineer states that CNR’s position,

if unchecked, will lead to a result where

the only access CNR will provide

Mountaineer for new requirements is for

small-volume accounts that CNR’s sales

function finds economically

unattractive.

Mountaineer states that recent

correspondence with CNR reveals that,

from the inception of the abandonment

process, CNR never intended to extend

open access transportation principles to

the displacement delivery service

provided to Mountaineer. Mountaineer

alleges that through its affiliate,

however, CNR caused an abandonment

application to be submitted that

represented the contrary. Mountaineer

maintains that CNR’s petition did not

disclose its intention to limit open

access principles to gathering services

only. Mountaineer alleges that CNR’s

misrepresentation of, or failure to

disclose, its intent not to apply open

access principles to Mountaineer’s

transportation service represents a clear

violation of Section 157.5 of the

regulations and that the facts and

circumstances of this violation warrant

an investigation.

Mountaineer further requests that the

Commission reopen certain aspects of

the abandonment application filed in

Docket No. CP97–127–000. Mountaineer

states that as a result of the auction

conducted by Columbia concerning the

facilities abandoned in Docket No.

CP97–127–000, CNR is the prospective

purchaser of the facilities in Groups 16,

17 and 18, all of which serve

Mountaineer. Mountaineer states that

the purchase and sale transaction for

these groups has not yet reached closing

and accordingly, the facilities have not

yet been transferred from Columbia to

CNR. Mountaineer states that these

three facility groups provide

Mountaineer with displacement

delivery service to 26 town border

stations, 18 unmeasured points of

delivery for over 160 consumers and

over 1700 mainline tap consumers.

Mountaineer maintains that given CNR’s

disclosure that it will not abide by open

access principles for transportation

service to Mountaineer, reopening is

require by the public interest.

Any person desiring to be heard or to

make any protest with reference to said

petition should on or before June 11,

1998, file with the Federal Energy

Regulatory Commission, 888 First

Street, N.E., 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).

All protests filed with the Commission
Federal Register / Vol. 63, No. 95 / Monday, May 18, 1998 / Notices 27275

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 the

proceeding or to participate as a party

in any hearing therein must file a

motion to intervene in accordance with

the Commission’s Rules. Answers to the

complaint shall be due on or before June

11, 1998.

David P. Boergers,

Acting Secretary.

[FR Doc. 98–13066 Filed 5–15–98; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 6717–01–M

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY

Federal Energy Regulatory

Commission

[Docket No. RP98–215–000]

Natural Gas Pipeline Company of

America; Notice of Proposed Changes

in FERC Gas Tariff

May 12, 1998.

Take notice that on May 7, 1998,

Natural Gas Pipeline Company of

America (Natural) tendered for filing as

part of its FERC Gas Tariff, Sixth

Revised Volume No. 1, certain tariff

sheets to be effective July 1, 1998.

Natural states that the purpose of this

filing is to modify Rate Schedule NSS to

provide customers more flexibility in

contracting for service by pipeline leg.

Natural requested any waivers which

may be required to permit the tendered

tariff sheets to become effective on July

1, 1998.

Naturla states that copies of the filing

have been mailed to its customers and

interested state regulatory agencies.

Any persons desiring to be heard or

to protest this filing should file a motion

to intervene or a protest with the

Federal Energy Regulatory Commission,

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

20426, in accordance with Sections

385.214 and 385.211 of the

Commission’s Rules and Regulations.

All such motions or 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 proceedings.

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.

David P. Boergers,

Acting Secretary.

[FR Doc. 98–13072 Filed 5–15–98; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 6717–02–M

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY

Federal Energy Regulatory

Commission

[Docket No. OA96–161–003]

Puget Sound Energy, Inc.; Notice of

Filing

May 12, 1998.

Take notice that on August 14, 1997,

Puget Sound Energy, Inc. tendered for

filing Revision Sheets to its Open

Access Transmission Tariff, FERC

Electric Tariff, Original Vol. 7 pursuant

to the Commission’s Order on

Compliance Tariff Rates and Generic

Clarification of Implementation

Procedures, issued July 31, 1997.

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, inaccordance 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

May 19, 1998. 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.

David P. Boergers,

Acting Secretary.

[FR Doc. 98–13070 Filed 5–15–98; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 6717–01–M

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY

Federal Energy Regulatory

Commission

[Docket Nos. ER98–441–000 and ER98–

1019–000; ER98–495–000, ER98–1614–000,

and ER98–2145–000; ER98–496–000 and

ER98–2160–000; ER98–441–001, ER98–495–

001, and ER98–496–001 (consolidated)]

Southern California Edison Company

California Independent System Corp.,

Pacific Gas & Electric Company, San

Diego Gas & Electric Company,

Southern California Edison Company,

Pacific Gas & Electric Company, San

Diego Gas & Electric Company; Notice

of Informal Settlement Conference

May 12, 1998.

Take notice that an informal

settlement conference will be convened

in the subject proceedings on Monday,

May 18, 1998, at 10:00 AM, through

Wednesday, May 20, 1998. The

conference will be held at the offices of

the Federal Energy Regulatory

Commission, 888 First Street, N.E.,

Washington, D.C. 20426.

Any party, as defined by 18 CFR

385.102(c), or any participant, as

defined by 18 CFR 385.102(b), may

attend. Persons wishing to become a

party must move to intervene and

receive intervenor status pursuant to

section 385.214 of the Commission’s

regulations.

For additional information, please

contact Paul B. Mohler at (202) 208–

1240, or by e-mail at

paul.mohler@ferc.fed.us.

David P. Boergers,

Acting Secretary.

[FR Doc. 98–13068 Filed 5–15–98; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 6717–01–M

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY

Federal Energy Regulatory

Commission

[Docket No. RP98–99–001]

Tennessee Gas Pipeline Company;

Notice of Pro Forma Compliance Filing

May 12, 1998.

Take notice that on May 7, 1998,

Tennessee Gas Pipeline Company

(Tennessee) tendered for filing the

following pro forma tariff sheets:

Pro Forma Sheet No. 231

Pro Forma Sheet No. 232

Pro Forma Sheet No. 232A

Pro Forma Sheet No. 234

Pro Forma Sheet No. 235

Tennessee states that the proposed

pro forma tariff sheets are filed in

compliance with the Commission’s