Federal Register / Vol. 60, No. 236 / Friday, December 8, 1995 / Notices 63033

work space will occupy 8.82 acres. Of

this east side work space only 0.54 acre

is presently forested (0.25 acres is

forested wetland). The remainder of the

work space on the east side is located

either on existing permanent right-ofway or in a cultivated field, both of

which have previously been cleared.

On the west side of the river (where

crossing segment fabrication and pretesting will occur) temporary work

space will occupy 22.94 acres. Of this

west side work space only 3.12 acres is

presently forested (2.56 acres is forested

wetland). The remainder of the work

space on the west side is located either

on existing permanent right-of-way or in

a cultivated field, both of which have

previously been cleared.

In summary, areas requiring

additional clearing for the installation of

Main Lines C and D are relatively

minor. Of these additional cleared areas

only 3.66 acres are forested and of those

only 2.81 acres are forested wetland.

2. Clearance has been received with

respect to endangered/threatened

species from the U.S. Fish and Wildlife

Service. The Alabama Natural Heritage

Program provided Transco with a list of

candidate and protected species within

the general area of the project. Transco

evaluated this list in the context of the

project to ensure that the project will

not impact these species; the evaluation

verified that the project will not impact

these species.

3. Clearance has been received from

the Alabama State Historical

Preservation Officer (‘‘SHPO’’) with

respect to cultural resources related to

the project area. There is a known

archaeological site on the east bank of

the Tombigbee River to the north of the

project area that will not be impacted by

this project; thus, the SHPO has no

concern with regard to this site. Transco

has contacted several Native American

groups. Transco states that it does not

consider in situ replacement a practical

option because such conventional

replacement would be subject to the

same erosive forces of the river.

4. Transco states that the proposed

installation and removals will improve

the visual or aesthetic value of the river

banks at the Tombigbee River crossing

by allowing native revegetation and

dynamics of the river to control the

natural succession of the banks at the

crossing. Transco will implement

measures to restore and stabilize the

construction work spaces and

abandoned rights-of-way.

Therefore, Transco states that in view

of (1) the essential need for the

Tombigbee River crossings to be able to

move gas from Transco’s production

areas to Transco’s market areas, and (2)

the de minimis environmental impact of

such project, Transco requests the

Commission to issue a certificate and

construction clearance by January 8,

1996 so that security of the Tombigbee

River crossings can be assured as soon

as possible. By this application, Transco

also seeks authorization to abandon in

place and by removal the portions of its

Main Lines C and D at the Tombigbee

River which will be replaced. Gas

transmission across the Tombigbee

River will be unaffected by these

abandonments. The cost of the Line C

removal work is estimated to be

$140,000. The cost of the Line D

removal work is estimated to be

$201,540.

It is further stated that on the west

bank at the location of the Tombigbee

River crossings, Transco has

interconnections on Main Lines C and D

that enable gas to flow into a meter and

regulator (M&R) station for downstream

delivery to a plant owned by American

Can Company (‘‘American Can’’), which

is north of the crossings on the west

bank. As a result of the replacements of

Lines C and D, as above described, a

reconfiguration of the American Can

interconnections will be necessary. One

new interconnection with the M&R

station will involve conventional

installation of approximately 1,200 feet

of 4-inch diameter pipe from the M&R

station west to a tap on the new segment

of Line C. This will effectuate delivery

of gas from of Line C to the M&R station.

A second new interconnection will

involve conventional installation of

approximately 30 feet of 4-inch

diameter pipe from a new tap on Line

D to a tee near the western terminus of

the above-described 1,200-foot 4-inch

line. This will effectuate delivery of gas

from Line D to the M&R station.

The estimated cost of installation of

the 1,200-foot line is $154,718. The

estimated cost of installation of the 30-

foot line is $83,924.

By this application, Transco also

seeks authorization to abandon by

removal the interconnections between

existing Main Lines C and D and the

M&R station. Gas supply to the

American Can plant will be unaffected

by these abandonments. The estimated

cost of removal of the interconnection

between Main Line C and the M&R

station is $5,000. The estimated cost of

removal of the interconnection between

Main Line D and the M&R station is

$12,000.

Any person desiring to be heard or to

make any protest with reference to said

application should on or before

December 14 1995, file with the Federal

Energy Regulatory Commission,

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 or 385.211)

and the Regulations under the Natural

Gas Act (18 157.10). 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

proceedings. 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.

Take further notice that, pursuant to

the authority contained in and subject to

the jurisdiction conferred upon the

Federal Energy Regulatory Commission

by Sections 7 and 15 of the Natural Gas

Act and Commission’s Rules of Practice

and Procedure, a hearing will be held

without further notice before the

Commission or its designee on this

application if not motion to intervene is

filed within the time required herein, if

the Commission on its own review of

the matter finds that a grant of the

certificate is required by the public

convenience and necessity. If a motion

for leave to intervene is timely filed, or

if the Commission on its own motion

believes that a formal hearing is

required, further notice of such hearing

will be duly given.

Under the procedure herein provided

for, unless otherwise advised, it will be

unnecessary for Transco to appear or be

represented at the hearing.

Lois D. Cashell,

Secretary.

[FR Doc. 95–29915 Filed 12–7–95; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 6717–01–M

[Docket No. CP96–10–001]

Transwestern Pipeline Company;

Notice of Amendment to Application

December 4, 1995.

Take notice that on November 29,

1995, Transwestern Pipeline Company

(Transwestern), P.O. Box 1188, Houston,

Texas 77251–1188 filed an amendment

(Amendment) to its original application

in Docket No. CP96–10–000, which was

filed pursuant to Section 7(c) of the

Natural Gas Act, the purpose of which

is to conform Transwestern’s

application to the following: (1) The

Purchase and Sale Agreement and

Ownership and Operating Agreement

executed November 3, 1995 between

Transwestern and Northwest Pipeline

Corporation (Northwest); and (2)

Northwest’s application for

abandonment authorization filed on
63034 Federal Register / Vol. 60, No. 236 / Friday, December 8, 1995 / Notices

November 13, 1995 in Docket No. CP96–

60–000, all as more fully set forth in the

application which is on file with the

Commission and open to public

inspection.

Transwestern states that on

September 22, 1995, Transwestern and

Northwest executed a Letter of Intent

(LOI) providing for the purchase by

Transwestern and the sale by Northwest

of a 77.7 percent ownership interest in

Northwest’s south-end mainline

extension facilities extending from the

Ignacio Compressor Station near

Ignacio, Colorado to the Blanco Hub

near Bloomfield, New Mexico (the La

Plata Facilities). It is stated that the LOI

provides that the exact level of interest

and capacity was subject to change in

order to permit Northwest to serve

changes in receipt and delivery points

which were made by Northwest’s

customers as of October 20, 1995.

Transwestern states that in its

application, Northwest would retain

24,000 Dth/d of south flow delivery

capacity, but Transwestern did not

specify a specific amount of north flow

delivery capacity which would be

retained by Northwest. It is stated that

in the Sales Agreement, Northwest and

Transwestern agreed that Northwest

would retain 23,811 Dth/d of south flow

delivery capacity and 212,788 Dth/d of

north flow delivery capacity, subject to

adjustment to reflect in-kind fuel

reimbursement. Under the terms of the

Sales Agreement, Transwestern will

acquire all capacity on the facilities not

specifically retained by Northwest,

which will include approximately

276,300 Dth/d of north to south capacity

through the La Plata A compressor.

Inasmuch as Transwestern’s application

listed such figure as 276,000 Dth/d,

Transwestern amends that figure to

reflect that it will hold 276,300 Dth/d of

north to south capacity through the La

Plata A compressor.

In the text of its application,

Transwestern stated that it would take

assignment of seven firm transportation

contracts subscribing a total of 201,000

Dth/d of capacity. However, since the

actual capacity subscribed under the

seven firm contracts to be assigned is

201,900 Dth/d, Transwestern proposes

to amend the application to reflect the

actual figure.

Transwestern states that its

application reflected a total estimated

purchase price of $21 million, which

included Transwestern’s payment of a

portion of the cost of certain necessary

modifications to be constructed prior to

closing. The application stated that the

total cost of such modifications was $4.9

million. It is stated that in the Sales

Agreement, the list of modifications was

amended, which resulted in a reduction

in the total cost to construct such

facilities from $4.9 million to $3.9

million. In addition, it is stated that the

Sales Agreement contains minor

revisions to the property description

and net book value contemplated by the

LOI, which in turn also affected the

purchase price.

In addition, under the Sales

Agreement, Transwestern is also

required to reimburse Northwest for

77.7 percent of the reasonable cost

incurred by Northwest prior to closing

to overhaul the La Plata A compressor

station, with Transwestern’s cost not to

exceed $300,000. Transwestern states

that such cost is to be added to the

purchase price to be paid by

Transwestern at closing for the La Plata

Facilities.

Transwestern contends that the Sales

Agreement further obligates

Transwestern to pay 100 percent of the

cost for Northwest to install, prior to

closing, a regulator at the

interconnection of the La Plata Facilities

at El Paso-Blanco. It is stated that the

regulator will become a part of the La

Plata facilities to be acquired by

Transwestern at closing, but is not

included as part of the necessary

modification. Transwestern states that

the total cost for such regulator is

estimated to be $346,000.

Transwestern also seeks to have the

application amended to reflect the

revised estimated purchase cost of $20.6

million. In addition, Transwestern states

that the depreciation expense and other

taxes have been reduced to reflect the

lower purchase price for the La Plata

Facilities.

Any person desiring to be heard or to

make any protest with reference to said

amendment should on or before

December 26, 1995, file with the Federal

Energy Regulatory Commission,

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 or 385.211)

and the Regulations under the Natural

Gas Act (18 CFR 157.10). 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.

Take further notice that, pursuant to

the authority contained in and subject to

jurisdiction conferred upon the Federal

Energy Regulatory Commission by

Sections 7 and 15 of the Natural Gas Act

and the Commission’s Rules of Practice

and procedure, a hearing will be held

with further notice before the

Commission or its designee on this

application if no motion to intervene is

filed within the time required herein, if

the Commission on its own review of

the matter finds that a grant of the

certificate is required by the public

convenience and necessity. If a motion

for leave to intervene is timely filed, or

if the Commission on its own motion

believes that a formal hearing is

required, further notice of such hearing

will be duly given.

Under the procedure herein provided

for, unless otherwise advised, it will be

unnecessary for Transwestern to appear

or be represented at the hearing.

Lois D. Cashell,

Secretary.

[FR Doc. 95–29914 Filed 12–7–95; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 6717–01–M

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION

AGENCY

[FRL–5343–4]

Agency Information Collection

Activities Under OMB Review;

Approval of State Coastal Nonpoint

Pollution Control Programs Under

CZARA Section 6217

AGENCY: Environmental Protection

Agency (EPA).

ACTION: Notice.

SUMMARY: In compliance with the

Paperwork Reduction Act (44 U.S.C.

3501 et seq.), this notice announces that

the extension for the currently approved

Information Collection Request (ICR) for

the Approval of State Coastal Nonpoint

Pollution Control Programs under

CZARA Section 6217 described below

has been forwarded to the Office of

Management and Budget (OMB) for

review and comment. The ICR extension

describes the nature of the information

collection and its expected burden and

cost.

DATES: Comments must be submitted on

or before January 8, 1996, to Sandy

Farmer, Mail Code 2136, Regulatory

Management Division, U.S.

Environmental Protection Agency, 401

M St., SW., Washington, DC 20460.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION OR A COPY

CALL: Sandy Farmer at EPA, (202) 260–

2740, and refer to EPA ICR No. 1569.03.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Title:

Approval of State Coastal Nonpoint

Pollution Control Programs under

CZARA Section 6217 (OMB Control No.

2040–0153; EPA ICR No. 1569.03). This