22056 Federal Register / Vol. 60, No. 86 / Thursday, May 4, 1995 / Notices

Copies of this filing were served upon

Dairyland and the Illinois Commerce

Commission.

Comment date: May 11, 1995, in

accordance with Standard Paragraph (E)

at the end of this notice.

12. PECO Energy Company

[Docket No. ER95–931–000]

Take notice that on April 21, 1995,

PECO Energy Company (PECO),

tendered for filing an Agreement

between PECO and CINergy Services,

Incorporated (CINergy) dated February

14, 1995.

PECO states that the Agreement sets

forth the terms and conditions for the

sale of system energy which it expects

to have available for sale from time to

time and the purchase of which will be

economically advantageous to CINergy.

In order to optimize the economic

advantage to both PECO and CINergy,

PECO requests that the Commission

waive its customary notice period and

permit the agreement to become

effective on April 24, 1995.

PECO states that a copy of this filing

has been set to CINergy and will be

furnished to the Pennsylvania Public

Utility Commission.

Comment date: May 11, 1995, in

accordance with Standard Paragraph (E)

at the end of this notice.

13. Alabama Power Company

[Docket No. ER95–912–000]

Take notice that on April 18, 1995,

Alabama Power Company tendered for

filing a Transmission Service Delivery

Point Agreement dated January 27,

1995, which reflects the addition of a

delivery point to Baldwin County

Electric Membership Cooperative. This

delivery point will be served under the

terms and conditions of the Agreement

for Transmission Service to Distribution

Cooperative Member of Alabama

Electric Cooperative, Inc., dated August

28, 1980 (designated FERC Rate

Schedule No. 147). The parties request

an effective date of July 4, 1995, for the

addition of the delivery point.

Comment date: May 11, 1995, in

accordance with Standard Paragraph (E)

at the end of this notice.

14. Northern States Power Company

(Minnesota); Northern States Power

Company (Wisconsin)

[Docket No. ER95–915–000]

Take notice that on April 13, 1995,

Northern States Power Company—

Minnesota (NSP–M) and Northern

States Power Company—Wisconsin

(NSP–W) jointly tendered and requested

the Commission to accept two

Transmission Service Agreements

which provide for Limited and

Interruptible Transmission Service to

Cenergy, Inc.

NSP requests that the Commission

accept for filing both Transmission

Agreements effective on April 17, 1995.

NSP requests a waiver of the

Commission’s notice requirements

pursuant to Part 35 of the Commission’s

regulations so the Agreement may be

accepted for filing effective on the date

requested.

Comment date: May 11, 1995, in

accordance with Standard Paragraph (E)

at the end of this notice.

Standard Paragraphs

E. 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,

825 North Capitol Street, NE.,

Washington, DC 20426, in accordance

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 the

comment date. 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

Lois D. Cashell,

Secretary.

[FR Doc. 95–10990 Filed 5–3–95; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 6717–01–M

[Docket Nos. CP93–685–000 and CP93–685–

001]

Tuscarora Gas Transmission

Company; Notice of Availability of the

Final Environmental Impact Report/

Environmental Impact Statement for

the Proposed Tuscarora Pipeline

Project

April 28, 1995.

The staffs of the Federal Energy

Regulatory Commission (FERC) and the

California State Lands Commission

(SLC) have prepared a Final

Environmental Impact Report/

Environmental Impact Statement (FEIR/

EIS) on the natural gas pipeline facilities

proposed by Tuscarora Gas

Transmission Company (Tuscarora) in

the above-referenced dockets.

The FEIR/EIS was prepared to satisfy

the requirements of the National

Environmental Policy Act and the

California Environmental Quality Act.

The FERC and the SLC staffs conclude

that approval of the proposed project,

with appropriate mitigating measures

including receipt of necessary permits

and approvals, has the potential to

significantly impact the environment.

The FEIR/EIS evaluates alternatives to

the proposal.

The FEIR/EIS assesses the potential

environmental effects of the

construction and operation of the

proposed Tuscarora Pipeline Project,

which includes the following facilities:

• One 229-mile, 20-inch-diameter

pipeline between Malin, Oregon and

Tracy, Nevada, (the Tuscarora

mainline). The Tuscarora mainline

would interconnect with the Pacific Gas

Transmission Company’s mainline at

Malin;

• One 4.42-mile, 4-inch-diameter

lateral between the Tuscarora mainline

and Alturas, California (the Alturas

Lateral);

• One 10.61-mile, 6-inch-diameter

lateral between the Tuscarora mainline

and a point near Susanville, California

(the Susanville Lateral);

• One 5.45-mile, 4-inch-diameter

lateral between the Tuscarora mainline

and the Sierra Army Depot near

Herlong, California (the Herlong

Lateral);

• Five meter stations located in

Alturas, Susanville, and Herlong (Sierra

Army Depot) California; and near

Spanish Springs and Tracy, Nevada; and

• Twelve mainline valves.

The project gas would be used to

generate electrical power at the Sierra

Pacific Company (SPPC) power plant in

Tracy, Nevada. A total of 113,050

dekatherms of gas per day (Dkt/d)

would be provided. Part of the supply

would also service municipal,

commercial, and industrial uses in the

areas around Reno, Nevada; the

California cities of Alturas and

Susanville; and at the Sierra Army

Depot in the Herlong area.

The FEIR//EIS will be used in

regulatory decision making process at

the FERC. While the period for filing

interventions in this case has expired,

motions to intervene out-of-time can be

filed with the FERC in accordance with

the Commission’s Rules of Practice and

Procedure, 18 CFR 385.214(d). Further,

anyone desiring to file a protest with the

FERC should do so in accordance with

18 CFR 385.211.

The SLC is expected to certify the

FEIR/EIS and act on the application of

the Tuscarora Gas Transmission

Company at its regularly scheduled

meeting in May or June. Interested

parties will be notified of the date, time,

and place of the meeting when it is

scheduled. The SLC will accept written
Federal Register / Vol. 60, No. 86 / Thursday, May 4, 1995 / Notices 22057

comments at the address below. If you

have any questions regarding the SLC

hearing, or wish to testify, please

contact Kirk Walter at the number

below.

The FEIR/EIS has been placed in the

public files of the FERC and the SLC

and is available for public inspection at

the following addresses:

Federal Energy Regulatory Commission,

Public Reference and Files

Maintenance Branch, 941 North

Capitol Street, NE., room 3104,

Washington, DC 20426, (202) 208–

1371.

California State Lands Commission, 100

Howe Avenue, suite 100-South,

Sacramento, CA 95825–8202, (916)

574–1900.

Copies of the FEIR/EIS have been

mailed to Federal, state and local

agencies, public interest groups,

interested individuals, newspapers, and

parties to this proceeding.

A limited number of copies of the

FEIR/EIS are available from either:

Ms. Alisa Lykens, Federal Energy

Regulatory Commission,

Environmental Project Manager,

Office of Pipeline Regulation, room

7312, 825 North Capitol Street, NE.,

Washington, DC 20426, (202) 208–

0766; or

Mr. Kirk Walter, California State Lands

Commission, Environmental Project

Manager, 100 Howe Avenue, suite

100-South, Sacramento, CA 95825–

8202.

Lois D. Cashell,

Secretary.

[FR Doc. 95–10951 Filed 5–3–95; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 6717–01–M

[Docket No. CP95–325–000, et al.]

Williston Basin Interstate Pipeline

Company, et al.; Natural Gas

Certificate Filings

April 25, 1995.

Take notice that the following filings

have been made with the Commission:

1. Williston Basin Interstate Pipeline

Company

[Docket No. CP95–325–000]

Take notice that on April 14, 1995,

Williston Basin Interstate Pipeline

Company (Williston Basin), Suite 300,

200 North Third Street, Bismarck, North

Dakota 58501, filed in Docket No. CP

95–325–000 a request pursuant to

Sections 157.205 and 157.211 of the

Commission’s Regulations under the

Natural Gas Act (18 CFR 157.205,

157,211) for authorization to construct

and operate four storage meter stations

in Unit 2 of the Baker Storage Field,

Montana under Williston Basin’s

blanket certificate issued in Docket No.

CP82–487–000 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.

Williston Basin proposes to install

and operate four two-way (injection/

withdrawal) storage meter stations and

related facilities in Unit 2 of the Baker

Storage Field. The constructed facilities

at each storage meter site will consist of

a 6′ x 12′ building which will house an

orifice meter run, a chart recorder and

minor auxiliary metering devices. The

land is located completely within

Williston Basin’s existing right-of-way.

Estimated project cost is $36,300.

Williston Basin states that the proposed

facilities will have no significant effect

on peak day or annual requirements.

With the installation of these

proposed metering facilities, Williston

Basin states that it will be able to

provide more detailed injection and

withdrawal data from selected storage

well groups. This will allow Williston

Basin to obtain greater accuracy and

detail in gathering reservoir and surface

facility data, will give more accurate

reservoir modeling and will create

greater operating efficiency in Unit 2.

Until this time, the metering of gas

storage injection and withdrawal

volumes for the twelve storage wells

extending over seven square miles in

Unit 2 has been provided by one storage

meter located at the Cabin Creek

Compressor Station.

Comment date: June 9, 1995, in

accordance with Standard Paragraph (G)

at the end of this notice.

2. Columbia Gas Transmission

Corporation

[Docket No. CP95–334–000]

Take notice that on April 19, 1995,

Columbia Gas Transmission Corporation

(Columbia), P.O. Box 1273, Charleston,

West Virginia, 25325–1273, filed in

Docket No. CP95–334–000 an

abbreviated joint application pursuant

to Section 7(b) of the Natural Gas Act,

as amended, and Sections 157.7 and

157.18 of the Federal Energy Regulatory

Commission’s (Commission)

Regulations thereunder, for permission

and approval to abandon a natural gas

transportation service for Penn Fuel

Gas, Inc. (Penn Fuel), all as more fully

set forth in the application which is on

file with the Commission and open to

public inspection.

Columbia states that it proposes to

abandon a transportation service

initiated to implement a storage

agreement for annual storage of up to

850,000 Mcf of natural gas by National

Gas Storage Corporation (Storage

Corporation) for Penn Fuel. Columbia

indicates that it provides its service

under its Rate Schedule X–98. Columbia

further states that the service was

authorized in Docket No. CP80–234. It

is indicated that National Fuel Gas

Supply Corporation (Supply

Corporation) agreed to transport the gas

from Penn Fuel’s account to and from

Storage Corporation. It is further

indicated that Columbia, Penn Fuel, and

Supply Corporation entered into a

agreement whereby Columbia agreed to

transport base gas and injection and

withdrawal volumes from Penn Fuel’s

Rate Schedule CDS entitlement to

Supply Corporation for transportation

and redelivery to Storage Corporation,

and to transport storage withdrawal

volumes delivered by Supply

Corporation to Columbia for delivery to

existing points of delivery to Penn Fuel.

Columbia states that Rate Schedule

X–98 allowed it to transport, on a best

efforts basis, summer injection volumes

of from 2,000 to 7,000 Mcf per day for

delivery to Supply Corporation for Penn

Fuel’s account, and to transport from

2,000 to 10,000 Mcf per day for Penn

Fuel during winter withdrawal periods.

Columbia advises that delivery of the

summer injection volumes was at

existing points of interconnection

between Columbia and Supply

Corporation near Emporium, Cameron

County, Pennsylvania. Columbia

indicates that the withdrawal volumes

were received at the same points of

interconnection and redelivered to Penn

Fuel at existing delivery points between

Columbia and Penn Fuel. Columbia

avers that it is currently providing

alternative service under a Part 284

storage service transportation agreement

for Penn Fuel as filed in ST94–2317–

000. It is indicated that volumes were

last transported under Rate Schedule X–

98 in November 1994 and that there are

no outstanding balances.

Comment date: May 16, 1995, in

accordance with Standard Paragraph (F)

at the end of this notice.

3. Florida Gas Transmission Company

[Docket No. CP95–339–000]

Take notice that on April 21, 1995,

Florida Gas Transmission Company

(FGT), 1400 Smith Street, Houston,

Texas 77002, filed in Docket No. CP95–

339–000 a request pursuant to

§§ 157.205 and 157.216 of the

Commission’s Regulations under the

Natural Gas Act (18 CFR 157.205 and

157.216) for permission and approval to

abandon a meter station and .1 of a mile

of pipeline. FGT makes such request

under its blanket certificates issued in