Federal Register / Vol. 63, No. 143 / Monday, July 27, 1998 / Notices 40111

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY

Federal Energy Regulatory

Commission

[Docket No. CP98–665–000]

Colorado Interstate Gas Company;

Notice of Request Under Blanket

Authorization

July 21, 1998.

Take notice that on July 10, 1998,

Colorado Interstate Gas Company (CIG),

P.O. Box 1087, Colorado Springs,

Colorado 80944, filed in Docket No.

CP98–665–000 a request pursuant to

Sections 157.205 and 157.216 and 211

of the Commission’s Regulations under

the National Gas Act (18 CFR 157.205,

157.216, and 211) for authorization to

remove an existing 6-inch meter run

formally used for receipt of gas from the

Roggen Processing Plant and to replace

it with a 2-inch meter tube to deliver gas

to Duke Energy Field Services, Inc.

(Duke) pursuant to CIG’s Blanket

Certificate issued in Docket No. CP83–

21–000, all as more fully set forth in the

request that is on file with the

Commission and open to public

inspection.

CIG states that the 6-inch meter

facility was originally installed to

receive gas from the Roggen Processing

Plant (closed in the summer of 1997)

which provided pipeline quality gas for

Duke’s gathering system compressor

station in Weld county, Colorado. CIG

now proposes to remove the existing 6-

inch meter tube and replace it with a 2-

inch meter tube to be used to deliver gas

for fuel gas at Duke’s gathering system

compressor station.

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 to

be 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protest is filed and not withdrawn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.

David P. Boergers,

Acting Secretary.

[FR Doc. 98–19957 Filed 7–24–98; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 6717–01–M

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY

Federal Energy Regulatory

Commission

[Docket No. CP98–664–000]

Columbia Gas Transmission

Corporation; Notice of Request Under

Blanket Authorization

July 21, 1998.

Take notice that on July 10, 1998,

Columbia Gas Transmission Corporation

(Columbia), 12801 Fair Lakes Parkway

Fairfax, Virginia 22030–0146, filed in

Docket No. CP98–664–000 a request

pursuant to Sections 157.205, 157.212

and 157.216 of the Commission’s

Regulations under the Natural Gas Act

(18 CFR 157.205, 157.212 and 157.216)

for authorization to upgrade an existing

point of delivery by abandoning and

replacing certain facilities in Henrico

County, Virginia, under Columbia’s

blanket certificate issued in Docket No.

CP83–76–000 pursuant to Section 7 of

the Natural Gas Act, all as more fully set

forth in the request that is on file with

the Commission and open to public

inspection.

Columbia states that it proposes to

upgrade its existing West Richmond

point of delivery for firm transportation

service and will provide the service

pursuant to Columbia’s blanket

certificate issued in Docket No. CP86–

240–000 under existing rate schedules

and within certificated entitlements.

Columbia states the proposed upgrade

of the existing West Richmond point of

delivery has been requested by the City

of Richmond (COR) to provide

additional firm transportation service

for residential and commercial

customers. Columbia states that COR

has not requested an increase in its total

firm entitlements in conjunction with

this upgrade request, and therefore,

there will be no impact on Columbia’s

existing peak day obligations to its other

customers as a result of the proposed

upgrade.

Columbia states that as part of the

upgrade, it proposes to abandon certain

facilities in order to increase the

Maximum Daily Delivery obligations by

4,000 Dth/Day and increase the

Maximum pressure at the existing West

Richmond point of delivery. Columbia

states that COR will install new

measurement and regulation facilities at

the current site and Columbia will

install electronic measurement at the

new station.

Columbia states that it will comply

with all of the environmental

requirements of Section 157.206(d) of

the Commission’s Regulations prior to

the construction of any facilities due to

the upgrade.

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 to

be 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.

David P. Boergers,

Acting Secretary.

[FR Doc. 98–19956 Filed 7–24–98; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 6717–01–M

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY

Federal Energy Regulatory

Commission

[Docket No. GP98–39–000]

Finney-Kearny County Gas Venture

and Westgate Greenland, L.P.; Notice

of Petition for Extension of Time

Pending Verification of Extent of

Refund Liability

July 21, 1998.

Take notice that, on July 7, 1998,

Finney-Kearny County Gas Venture

(Finney-Kearny) and Westgate

Greenland, L.P. (Westgate) filed a

petition requesting an extension of time

to make Kansas ad valorem tax refunds

to K N Interstate Gas Transmission

Company (KNI). Finney-Kearny and

Westgate assert that KNI has certain

factual data that they have requested

and that they need to verify whether

they owe KNI any Kansas ad valorem

tax refunds. Finney-Kearny and

Westgate do not describe the

information that they seek from KNI, but

state simply that KNI has not provided

the ‘‘full factual data’’ they previously

requested. Therefore, Finney-Kearny

and Westgate request that they be

granted an extension of time to make

refunds until the later of: 1) 90 days; or

2) 30 days after the date that KNI

submits the full factual data sought by

Finney-Kearny and Westgate. FinneyKearny and Westgate’s petition is on file

with the Commission and open to

public inspection.