```
[Federal Register Volume 63, Number 95 (Monday, May 18, 1998)]
[Notices]
[Pages 27274-27275]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 98-13066]

-----------------------------------------------------------------------

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

[[Page 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
```