35208 Federal Register / Vol. 63, No. 124 / Monday, June 29, 1998 / Notices

1See 80 FERC ¶61,264 (1997); order denying

reh’g issued January 28, 1998, 82 FERC ¶ 61,058

(1998).

2Public Service Company of Colorado v. FERC,

92 F.3d 1478 (D.C. 1996), cert. denied, Nos. 96–954

and 96–1230 (65 U.S.L.W. 3751 and 3754, May 12,

1997).

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY

Federal Energy Regulatory

Commission

[Docket No. SA98–85–000]

Charles B. Wilson, Jr., Inc., et al.;

Notice of Petition for Dispute

Resolution

June 23, 1998.

Take notice that, on June 15, 1998,

Charles B. Wilson, Jr., Inc., Powell

Petroleum, Inc., Billy R. Powell, Bronco,

Ltd., Charles Bruce Wilson, III and Lea

Wilson (collectively: Applicants) filed a

petition requesting the Commission to

resolve the dispute they have with

Colorado Interstate Gas Company (CIG)

as to whether Applicants owe CIG any

Kansas ad valorem tax refunds.

Applicants request that the Commission

find that they have no Kansas ad

valorem tax refund liability to CIG for

the period from 1983 to 1988, based on

a 1988 Settlement Agreement between

Applicants and CIG (1988 Settlement).

Applicants’ petition is on file with the

Commission and open to public

inspection. The Commission, by order issued

September 10, 1997, in Docket No.

RP97–369–000 et al.,1 on remand from

the DC Circuit Court of Appeals,2

required first sellers to refund the

Kansas ad valorem tax reimbursements

to the pipelines, with interest, for the

period from 1983 to 1988. In its January

28, 1998 Order Clarifying Procedures

[82 FERC ¶ 61,059 (1998)], the

Commission stated that producers (i.e.,

first sellers) could file dispute

resolution requests with the

Commission, asking the Commission to

resolve the dispute with the pipeline

over the amount of Kansas ad valorem

tax refunds owed.

Applicants state that the CIG has

attempted to collect Kansas ad valorem

tax refunds from them for the period

from 1983 to 1988. Applicants contend

that these efforts are a breach of their

1988 Settlement with CIG, because the

1988 Settlement released Applicants

and CIG from all claims against each

other relating to Applicants’ gas

purchase agreement with CIG.

Applicants also state that they will be

establishing an interest bearing escrow

account in which they will place the

involved principal and interest

(excluding royalty refunds). Applicant

requests that in the event the 1988

Settlement does not resolve the issue

refund liability, then Applicant requests

that Commission grant an adjustment

relieving Applicant from such refund

liability. Applicants also request that

the Commission establish a briefing

schedule so that Applicants can fully

advise the Commission of their position. Any person desiring to be heard or to

make any protest with reference to said

petition should on or before 15 days

after the date of publication in the

Federal Register of this notice, file with

the Federal Energy Regulatory

Commission, 888 First Street, NE,

Washington, DC 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, 385.211,

385.1105, and 385.1106). 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. 98–17201 Filed 6–26–98; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 6717–01–M

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY

Federal Energy Regulatory

Commission

[Project Nos. 2375–013, Maine and 8277–

008, Maine]

International Paper Company Otis

Hydroelectric Company; Notice of

Availability of Final Environmental

Assessment

June 23, 1988.

In accordance with the National

Environmental Policy Act of 1969 and

the Federal Energy Regulatory

Commission’s (Commission)

regulations, 18 CFR Part 380 (Order No.

486, 52 FR 47897), the Office of

Hydropower Licensing has reviewed the

applications for major new licenses for

the Riley-Jay-Livermore Project and Otis

Hydroelectric Project located on the

Androscoggin River in Franklin,

Androscoggin, and Oxford Countries,

near the Towns of Canton, Jay,

Livermore, and Livermore Falls, Maine,

and has prepared a final Environmental

Assessment (EA) for re-licensing the

projects. In the EA, the Commission

staff has analyzed the potential

environmental impacts of the projects

and has concluded that approval of the

projects, with appropriate mitigative

measures, would not constitute a major

federal action significantly affecting the

quality of the human environment.

Copies of the EA are available for

review in the Public Reference Branch,

Room 2–A, of the Commission’s offices

at 888 First Street, NE., Washington DC

20426.

For further information, please

contact Monte J. TerHaar at (202) 219–

2768 or Patti-Leppert Slack at (202)

219–2767.

Linwood A. Watson, Jr.,

Acting Secretary.

[FR Doc. 98–17186 Filed 6–26–98; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 6717–01–M

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY

Federal Energy Regulatory

Commission

[Project Nos. 1984–056 Wisconsin and

11162–002 Wisconsin]

Wisconsin River Power Company,

Wisconsin Power and Light Company;

Notice of Availability of Draft

Environmental Assessment

June 23, 1998.

In accordance with the National

Environmental Policy Act of 1969 and

the Federal Energy Regulatory

Commission’s (Commission’s)

regulations, 18 CFR Part 380 (Order No.

486, 52 FR 47897), the Office of

Hydropower Licensing has reviewed the

application for new major license for the

Petenwell-Castle Rock Hydroelectric

Project located on the Wisconsin River

in Woods, Juneau, and Adams Counties

near Necedah, Wisconsin, and the

application for original major license for

the Prairie du Sac Hydroelectric Project

located on the Wisconsin River in Sauk

and Columbia Counties near Prairie du

Sac, Wisconsin, and has prepared a

Draft Environmental Assessment (DEA)

for the proposed licensing actions. In

the DEA, the Commission’s staff has

analyzed the potential environmental

impacts of the proposed licenses, and

has concluded that approval of the

proposed licenses, with appropriate

measures, would not constitute major

federal actions significantly affecting the

quality of the human environment.

Copies of the DEA are available for

review in the Public Reference Branch,

Room 2A of the Commission’s offices at

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

20426.

Comments should be filed within 45

days from the date of this notice and

should be addressed to David P.

Boergers, Acting Secretary, Federal
Federal Register / Vol. 63, No. 124 / Monday, June 29, 1998 / Notices 35209

1Etowah LNG Company, L.L.C.’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, DC 20426, or call (202) 208–

1371. Copies of the appendices were sent to all

those receiving this notice in the mail.

Energy Regulatory Commission, 888

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

20426. Please affix Project No. 1984–056

to all comments on the Petenwell-Castle

Rock Project, and Project No. 11162–002

to all comments on the Prairie du Sac

Project. For further information, please

contact Peter A. Leitzke at (202) 219–

2803.

Linwood A. Watson, Jr.,

Acting Secretary.

[FR Doc. 98–17185 Filed 6–26–98; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 6717–01–M

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY

Federal Energy Commission

[Docket No. CP98–363–000]

Etowah LNG Company, L.L.C.; Notice

of Intent To Prepare an Environmental

Assessment for the Proposed Etowah

LNG Project; Request for Comments

on Environmental Issues; and Notice

of Site Visit, Public Scoping Meeting,

and Technical Conference

June 23, 1998.

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 construction and operation of the

liquefied natural gas (LNG) storage plant

and associated pipeline facilities

proposed in the Etowah LNG 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.

If you are a landowner receiving this

notice, you may be contacted by an

Etowah LNG Company, L.L.C. (Etowah)

representative about the acquisition of

an easement to construct, operate, and

maintain the proposed facilities. Etowah

would seek to negotiate a mutually

acceptable agreement. However, if the

project is approved by the Commission,

that approval conveys with it the right

of eminent domain. Therefore, if

easement negotiations fail to produce an

agreement, Etowah could initiate

condemnation proceedings in

accordance with state law. A fact sheet

addressing a number of typically asked

questions, including the use of eminent

domain, is attached to this notice as

appendix 1.2

Summary of the Proposed Project

Etowah seeks authority to construct

and operate an LNG storage plant and

associated pipeline facilities in Polk

County, Georgia. The proposed LNG

plant would be located approximately

4.5 miles northeast of Rockmart, Georgia

and 40 miles northwest of Atlanta,

Georgia. The purpose of the facilities is

to meet winter peak shaving

requirements, including those of Atlanta

Gas Light Company (AGLC) and the City

of Austell Gas System.

The primary components of the LNG

plant would include:

• A 750,000-barrel double-wall metal

LNG storage tank with a gas-equivalent

capacity of 2.5 billion cubic feet;

• A pretreatment and liquefaction

system with a capacity of 15 million

cubic feet per day (MMcfd);

• A boil-off recompression system;

• A vaporization and sendout system

with a design capacity of 300 MMcfd

with standby vaporization capacity of

up to 200 MMcfd;

• Measurement facilities;

• Associated control and hazardprotection sustems; and

• A trucking system capable of

loading 20,000 gallons per hour..

Etowah also proposes to construct:

• Approximately 12.5 miles of 12.75-

inch-diameter pipeline (Etowah

pipeline) in Polk County, Georgia. The

Etowah pipeline would be adjacent to

and overlap an existing utility right-ofway for 83 percent of its route; and

• A 1.3-mile-long permanent access

road and new bridge extending from the

plant site northward to Davis Town

Road.

The LNG storage tank would be

approximately 149 feet in height and

250 in diameter. The LNG tank area

would be surrounded by an earthen

berm that would slope towards an

impoundment basin that together form

the spill containment system. The

proposed project facilities would be

designed, constructed, operated, and

maintained to comply with the U.S.

Department of Transportation Federal

Safety Standards for Liquefied Natural

Gas Facilities (49 Code of Federal

Regulations [CFR] Part 193). The

facilities constructed at the site would

also meet the National Fire Protection

Association 59A LNG standards.

The following related

nonjurisdictional facilities would be

constructed:

• AGLC would construct and operate

approximately 16.8 miles of 24-inchdiameter pipeline (Etowah-Mars Hill

Road pipeline) in Polk, Paulding, and

Cobb Counties, Georgia connecting the

LNG plant to AGLC’s distribution

system. The Etowah-Mars Hill Road

pipeline would be adjacent to and

overlap an existing utility right-of-way

for 95 percent of its route; and

• Georgia Power would construct and

operate an approximately 0.9-mile-long

115 kilovolt (kV) overhead electric

powerline collocated with AGLC’s

pipeline, and a 0.4-acre 115 kV to 4,160

volt substation connecting the LNG

plant to the new Georgia Power electric

powerline in Polk County, Georgia.

All natural gas received at the LNG

facility for liquefaction and storage

would be shipped from Southern

Natural Gas Company’s (Southern)

system through the Etowah pipeline.

Vaporized natural gas would be

transported from the LNG facility either

through the Etowah pipeline to

Southern’s system or through the

Etowah-Mars Hill Road pipeline to

AGLC’s system.

The location of the project facilities is

shown in appendix 2.2 If you are

interested in obtaining procedural

information, please write to the

Secretary of the Commission.

Land Requirements for Construction

Construction of the LNG plant would

affect approximately 50 acres of an 833-

acre site owned by Etowah. An

additional 7.8 acres would be disturbed

during construction of the permanent

access road to the site. The 57.8 acres

of land for the plant site and access road

would be permanently affected by the

project.

Construction of the proposed Etowah

pipeline would affect approximately

132.3 acres of land, including temporary

extra work areas. Following

construction, about 50.5 acres of land

would be maintained as new permanent

right-of-way.

Construction of the related

nonjurisdictional facilities would affect

approximately 106.4 acres of land. Of

this, about 0.4 acre would be required

for the substation, 4.2 acres would be

required for the powerline, and 101.8

acres would be required for the EtowahMars Hill Road pipeline. Following

construction, about 4.6 acres would be

required for the substation and

permanent right-of-way for the

powerline and 61.1 acres would be

required for the permanent right-of-way

for the Etowah-Mars Hill Road pipeline.

The EA Process/Environmental Issues

The National Environmental Policy

Act (NEPA) requires the Commission to

take into account the environmental