[Federal Register Volume 66, Number 91 (Thursday, May 10, 2001)]
[Notices]
[Pages 23905-23906]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 01-11773]


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

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY

Federal Energy Regulatory Commission

[Docket Nos. CP01-176-000, CP01-177-000, CP01-178-000, CP01-179-000]


Georgia Straits Crossing Pipeline LP.; Notice of Applications

May 4, 2001.
    Take notice that on April 24, 2001, Georgia Straits Crossing 
Pipeline LP (GSX), P.O. 58900, Salt Lake City, Utah, 84158-0900, filed 
in Docket No. CP01-176-000 an application pursuant to Section 7(c) of 
the Natural Gas Act for authorization to construct and operate a new 
interstate natural gas transmission system consisting of approximately 
47 miles of related pipeline and related facilities in the state of 
Washington; in Docket No. CP01-177-000 an application for a blanket 
certificate authorizing Part 284 transportation; in Docket No. CP01-
178-000 an application for a blanket certificate authorizing certain 
routine activities under Subpart F of Part 157; and in Docket No. CP01-
179-000 an application for Section 3 siting authorization for export/
import facilities and a Presidential Permit authorizing the 
construction, operation and maintenance of interconnect facilities for 
imports and exports at two locations on the US/Canadian international 
border, all as more fully set forth in the application on file with the 
Commission and open to public inspection. This filing may be viewed on 
the web at http://www.ferc.fed.us/online/rims.htm (call 202-208-2222 
for assistance).
    GSX proposes the construct: (1) a 10,302 horsepower (ISO rated) 
compressor station at Cherry Point, Whatcom County, Washington, located 
adjacent to an existing industrial area approximately a mile from the 
Strait of Georgia shoreline; (2) approximately 32 miles of 20-inch 
pipeline generally paralleling existing pipeline corridors from Sumas 
to the proposed Cherry Point compressor station; (3) approximately 15 
miles of 16-inch pipeline from the Cherry Point compressor station to 
an offshore interconnect with a Canadian pipeline proposed to be built 
by GSX Canada Limited Partnership (GSX-Canada) from that interconnect 
to a delivery point into the distribution system of Central Gas British 
Columbia Inc. on Vancouver Island; (4) receipt point meter station 
facilities interconnecting with Westcoast Energy Inc. at the Canadian 
border and with Northwest Pipeline Corporation, both near Sumas; and 
(5) appurtenant facilities. GSX estimates the total cost of the 
proposed facilities at approximately $90.7-million.
    GSX states that the initial firm design capacity of its system will 
be approximately 94,000 Dth per day. It is indicated that as a result 
of an open season, Powerex Corporation (Powerex), an affiliate of 
British Columbia Hydro and Power Authority (BC hydro), executed a 
binding precedent agreement for all of the initial certificated design 
capacity for a 30-year term, at negotiated rates. GSX avers that 
Powerex requires the capacity to meet the obligations of BC Hydro to 
supply natural gas fuel to two new generating plants on Vancouver 
Island. Further, GSX states that its system is designed to facilitate 
relatively inexpensive expansions, by compression upgrades, to 
accommodate future market growth on Vancouver Island and in 
northwestern Washington state.
    GSX states that its proposal and that of GSX-Canada comprise the 
international Georgia Strait Crossing Project. GSX indicates that 
pursuant to the GSC Project Agreement between GSX and its sponsor, 
Williams Gas Pipeline Company (Williams), and GSX-Canada and its 
sponsor, British Columbia Hydro and Power Authority (BC Hydro), the 
owners have agreed to coordinate certain decisions regarding the 
construction and operation of GSX and GSX-Canada through a GSX 
Committee. GSX also states that subject to the owners and through the 
GSX Committee on matters within the committee's purview, GSX Operating 
Company, L.L.C., an wholly owned subsidiary of Williams, will design 
and engineer, manage the procurement and construction, operate and 
maintain and manage the day-to-day business affairs of both GSX and 
GSX-Canada pipeline, as a contractor for the owners.
    GSX proposes a pro forma Tariff which includes its proposed Rate 
Schedules FT-1 for firm service and IT-1 for interruptible service. GSX 
proposes traditional cost-of-service based rates for its initial 
recourse rates. GSX states that its proposed rates reflect a 70% debt, 
30% equity capital structure, 8% interest on debt, 14% return on equity 
and a 30 year depreciation life. GSX avers that its proposed rates are 
designed under the straight fixed variable methodology using a 
quantity/distance cost allocation to establish rates for two zones, one 
for mainland U.S. delivers and one for deliveries to GSX-Canada. GSX 
also states that the proposed initial recourse maximum daily 
reservation rates are $0.36546 per Dth of contract demand for service 
to mainland U.S. points and

[[Page 23906]]

$0.51233 per Dth of contract demand for service to the GSX-Canada 
interconnect.
    GSX requests that the Commission issue a preliminary determination 
on the non-environmental aspects of the application by January 31, 2002 
and a final order granting the requested certificate authorization by 
May 31, 2002 so that the project may be completed by the late October 
2003 in-service date required to ensure Powerex's ability to meet the 
long-tern gas supply commitments of BC Hydro to the new electricity 
generation facilities on Vancouver Island.
    Any questions regarding the application should be directed to Gary 
K. Kotter, Manger, Certificates, GSX Pipeline, L.L.C., P.O. Box 58900, 
Salt Lake City, Utah 84158-0900, (801) 584-7117.
    There are two ways to become involved in the Commission's review of 
this project. First, any person wishing to obtain legal status by 
becoming a party to the proceedings for this project should, on or 
before May 25, 2001, file with the Federal Energy Regulatory 
Commission, 888 First Street, NE, Washington, D.C. 20426, a motion to 
intervene in accordance with the requirements of the Commission's Rules 
of Practice and Procedure (18 CFR 385.214 or 385.211) and the 
Regulations under the NGA (18 CFR 157.10). A person obtaining party 
status will be place on the service list maintained by the Secretary of 
the Commission and will receive copies of all documents filed by the 
applicant and by all other parties. A party must submit 14 copies of 
filings made with the Commission and must mail a copy to the applicant 
and to every other party in the proceeding.
    Only parties to the proceeding can ask for court review of 
Commission orders in the proceeding.
    However, a person does not have to intervene in order to have 
comments considered. The second way to participate is by filing with 
the Secretary of the Commission, as soon as possible, an original and 
two copies of comments in support of or in opposition to this project. 
The Commission will consider these comments in determining the 
appropriate action to be taken, but the filing of a comment alone will 
not serve to make the filer a party to the proceeding.The Commission's 
rules require that persons filing comments in opposition to the project 
provide copies of their protests only to the party or parties directly 
involved in the protest.
    Persons who wish to comment only on the environmental review of 
this project should submit an original and two copies of their comments 
to the Secretary of the Commission. Environmental commenters will be 
placed on the Commission's environmental mailing list, will receive 
copies of the environmental documents, and will be notified of meetings 
associated with the Commission's environmental review process. 
Environmental commenters will not be required to serve copies of filed 
documents on all other parties. However, the non-party commenters will 
not receive copies of all documents filed by other parties or issued by 
the Commission (except for the mailing of environmental documents 
issued by the Commission) and will not have the right to seek court 
review of the Commission's final order.
    The Commission may issue a preliminary determination on non-
environmental issues prior to the completion of its review of the 
environmental aspects of the project. The preliminary determination 
typically considers such issues as the need for the project and its 
economic effect on existing customers of the applicant, on other 
pipelines in the area, and on landowners and communities. For example, 
the Commission considers the extent to which the applicant may need to 
exercise eminent domain to obtain rights-of-way for the proposed 
project and balances that against the non-environmental benefits to be 
provided by the project. Therefore, if a person has comments on 
community and landowner impacts form this proposal, it is important 
either to file comments or to intervene as early in the process as 
possible.
    Also, comments protests, and interventions may be filed 
electronically via the internet in lieu of paper. See, CFR 
385.2001(a)(1)(iii) and the instructions on the Commission's web site 
at http://www.ferc.fed.us/efi/doorbell.htm.
    If the Commission decides to set the application for a formal 
hearing before an Administrative Law Judge, the Commission will issue 
another notice describing that process. At the end of the Commission's 
review process, a final Commission order approving or denying a 
certificate will be issued.

David P. Boergers,
Secretary.
[FR Doc. 01-11773 Filed 5-9-01; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6717-01-M