Federal Register / Vol. 61, No. 1 / Tuesday, January 2, 1996 / Notices 65

3. Williams Energy Services Company

[Docket No. ER95–305–004]

Take notice that on December 4, 1995,

Williams Energy Service Company

tendered for filing a Notice of

Succession in the above-referenced

docket.

Comment date: January 9, 1996, in

accordance with Standard Paragraph E

at the end of this notice.

4. Rig Gas Inc., Texas-Ohio Power

Martketing, Inc.

[Docket No. ER95–480–003, Docket No.

ER94–1676–005 (Not Consolidated)]

Take notice that the following

information filings have been made with

the Commission and are on file and

available for inspection and copying in

the Commission’s Public Reference

Room:

On December 11, 1995, Rig Gas Inc.

filed certain information as required by

the Commission’s March 16, 1995, order

in Docket No. ER95–480–000.

On December 12, 1995, Texas-Ohio

filed certain information as required by

the Commission’s October 31, 1994,

order in Docket No. ER94–1676–000.

5. PacifiCorp Power Marketing, Inc.

[Docket No. ER95–1096–000]

Take notice that on December 14,

1995, PacifiCorp Power Marketing, Inc.,

tendered for filing an amendment in the

above-referenced docket.

Comment date: January 9, 1996, in

accordance with Standard Paragraph E

at the end of this notice.

6. Northwest Regional Transmission

Association

[Docket No. ER96–384–000]

Take notice that on November 14,

1995, Northwest Regional Transmission

Association tendered for filing a Notice

of Withdrawal in the above-referenced

docket.

Comment date: January 9, 1996, in

accordance with Standard Paragraph E

at the end of this notice.

7. Utility Management and Consulting

Inc.

[Docket No. ER96–525–000]

Take notice that on December 18,

1995, Utility Management and

Consulting Inc. supplemented its earlier

filing in this docket.

Comment date: January 8, 1996, in

accordance with Standard Paragraph E

at the end of this notice.

8. City of College Station, Texas

[Docket No. TX96–2–000]

Take notice that on December 15,

1995, the City of College Station, filed

with the Commission an application

requesting that the Commission order

the City of Bryan, Texas (Bryan) and the

Texas Municipal Power Agency (TMPA)

to provide transmission services

pursuant to Sections 211 and 212 of the

Federal Power Act, as amended.

The name of the affected parties are

as follows:

Affected State Regulatory Authority:

Public Utility Commission of Texas.

Affected Federal power marketing

agency: None.

Affected Electric Utilities:

City of Bryan, Texas

Texas Municipal Power Agency

Texas Utilities Electric Company

Texas Municipal Power Pool

Brazos Electric Power Cooperative, Inc.

Public Utilities Board of the City of

Brownsville, Texas

Lower Colorado River Authority

Medina Electric Power Cooperative, Inc.

Texas-New Mexico Power Company

South Texas Electric Cooperative, Inc.

West Texas Utilities Company

Central Power & Light Company

City of Austin, Texas

City Public Service Board of San

Antonio, Texas

Houston Lighting & Power Company

College Station currently receives

wholesale electric service at points of

delivery (PODs) on the transmission

systems of Bryan and TMPA, all located

within the load control area of the Texas

Municipal Power Pool (TMPP). College

Station seeks transmission services from

Bryan and TMPA for the delivery of

power and energy from the bulk power

facilities of Texas Utilities Electric

Company (TU Electric) to the PODs

located at the transmission substations

of College Station. In order to

implement such service, College

Station’s load must be transferred from

the TMPP control area and added to TU

electric’s control area by means of

remote control telemetry equipment.

The proposed date for initiating the

requested transmission service is

January 1, 1996. Termination of service

will be coincident with the term of

College Station’s Power Supply

Agreement with TU electric (up to 10

years).

The transmission service being

requested by College Station is firm

transmission service over the Bryan and

TMPA transmission systems at a level

and quantity sufficient for College

Station to meet its loads at the PODs,

estimated to be approximately 128 MW

during 1996.

Comment date: January 22, 1996, in

accordance with Standard Paragraph E

at the end of this notice.

Standard Paragraph

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,

888 First 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. 95–31548 Filed 12–29–95; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 6717–01–P

[Docket Nos. CP95–668–000 and CP95–668–

001]

CNG Transmission Corporation and

Texas Eastern Transmission

Corporation; Notice of Availability of

the Environmental Assessment for the

Proposed South Oakford Project

December 26, 1995.

The staff of the Federal Energy

Regulatory Commission (FERC or

Commission) has prepared an

environmental assessment (EA) on the

natural gas facilities proposed by CNG

Transmission Corporation (CNG) and

Texas Eastern Transmission Corporation

(Texas Eastern) in the above-referenced

dockets.

The EA was prepared to satisfy the

requirements of the National

Environmental Policy Act. The staff

concludes that approval of the proposed

project, with appropriate mitigating

measures, would not constitute a major

Federal action significantly affecting the

quality of the human environment.

The EA assesses the potential

environmental effects of the

construction and operation of the South

Oakford Project. The proposed facilities

include:

• 10,000 hp of electric motor-driven

compression and related facilities at the

South Oakford Compressor Station in

Westmoreland County, Pennsylvania;

• A pig receiver and barrel drip at the

Earhart Gate;

• 3,158 feet of 30-inch-diameter

storage suction pipeline (Line JP–296)

between the South Oakford Compressor

Station and the South Oakford Gate;

• 3,158 feet of 16-inch-diameter

storage discharge pipeline (Line JP–297)

between the South Oakford Compressor

Station and the South Oakford Gate;
66 Federal Register / Vol. 61, No. 1 / Tuesday, January 2, 1996 / Notices

• A drip on the new suction pipeline;

and

• Facilities to interconnect new Lines

JP–296 and JP–297 to existing Lines JP–

250 and JP–40, respectively, at the

South Oakford Gate.

The EA also addresses the potential

environmental effects of the proposed

abandonment of facilities including:

• All buildings, parking lots,

driveways, equipment, piping, and

7,980 horsepower (hp) of compression

at the Jeannette Compressor Station;

• A pig receiver and barrel drip at the

Huff Gate near the Jeannette Compressor

Station (to be removed and installed at

Earhart Gate);

• 75 feet of Line JP–40 within the

Earhart Gate; and

• A 20-inch mainline gate setting

(250–IM) for Line JP–250 at the Earhart

Gate.

The purpose of the proposed facilities

would be to improve safety, reliability,

and flexibility in the operation of the

Oakford Storage Field. There would be

no increase in the amount of gas stored

in the Oakford Storage Field as a result

of construction of the proposed

facilities. Presently, the Jeannette

Compressor Station delivers gas out of

the Oakford Storage Field, recovers

migrating gas, and re-injects recovered

gas into the storage pool. With the

addition of the proposed compression

and related facilities at the existing

South Oakford Compressor Station, the

recovery operation performed by the

Jeannette Compressor Station would

continue with facilities consolidated at

one location.

The EA has been placed in the public

files of the FERC and is available for

public inspection at: Federal Energy

Regulatory Commission, Public

Reference and Files Maintenance

Branch, 888 First Street NE.,

Washington, DC 20426, (202) 208–1371.

Copies of the EA 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 EA

are available from: Ms. Jennifer Goggin,

Environmental Project Manager,

Environmental Review and Compliance

Branch II, Office of Pipeline Regulation,

888 First Street NE., PR 11.2,

Washington, DC 20426, (202) 208–2226.

Any person wishing to comment on

the EA may do so. Written comments

must reference Docket No. CP95–668–

000 and be addressed to: Office of the

Secretary, Federal Energy Regulatory

Commission, 888 First Street NE.,

Washington, DC 20426.

Comments should be filed as soon as

possible, but must be received no later

than January 26, 1996, to ensure

consideration prior to a Commission

decision on this proposal. A copy of any

comments should also be sent to Ms.

Jennifer Goggin, Environmental Project

Manager, at the above address.

Comments will be considered by the

Commission but will not serve to make

the commentor a party to the

proceeding. Any person seeking to

become a party to the proceeding must

file a motion to intervene pursuant to

Rule 214 of the Commission’s Rules of

Practice and Procedure (18 CFR

385.214).

The date for filing timely motions to

intervene in this proceeding has passed.

Therefore, parties now seeking to file

late interventions must show good

cause, as required by section

385.214(b)(3), why this time limitation

should be waived. Environmental issues

have been viewed as good cause for late

intervention. You do not need

intervenor status to have your

comments considered.

Additional information about this

project is available from Ms. Jennifer

Goggin, Environmental Project Manager.

Lois D. Cashell,

Secretary.

[FR Doc. 95–31532 Filed 12–29–95; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 6717–01–M

FEDERAL TRADE COMMISSION

[File No. 961–0014]

Johnson & Johnson; Consent

Agreement With Analysis To Aid

Public Comment

AGENCY: Federal Trade Commission.

ACTION: Consent agreement.

SUMMARY: In settlement of alleged

violations of federal law prohibiting

unfair acts and practices and unfair

methods of competition, this consent

agreement, accepted subject to final

Commission approval, would require

the New Brunswick, New Jersey-based

manufacturer of health care products to

divest the Cordis Neuroscience

Business, which develops cranial shunts

used in the treatment of hydrocephalus.

The Commission had alleged that

Johnson & Johnson’s acquisition of

Cordis Corporation would reduce

competition in the market for

neurological shunts by giving two firms

control of 85 percent of the market.

DATES: Comments must be received on

or before March 4, 1996.

ADDRESSES: Comments should be

directed to: FTC/Office of the Secretary,

Room 159, 6th St. and Pa. Ave., NW.,

Washington, DC 20580.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Ann

Malester, Federal Trade Commission, S–

2035, 6th and Pennsylvania Avenue,

NW, Washington, DC 20580, (202) 326–

2682. Michael R. Moiseyev, Federal

Trade Commission, S.–2025, 6th and

Pennsylvania Avenue, NW, Washington,

DC 20580. (202) 326–3106.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Pursuant

to Section 6(f) of the Federal Trade

Commission Act, 38 Stat. 721, 15 U.S.C.

46 and Section 2.34 of the Commission’s

Rules of Practice (16 CFR 2.34), notice

is hereby given that the following

consent agreement containing a consent

order to cease and desist, having been

filed with and accepted, subject to final

approval, by the Commission, has been

placed on the public record for a period

of sixty (60) days. Public comment is

invited. Such comments or views will

be considered by the Commission and

will be available for inspection and

copying at its principal office in

accordance with Section 4.9(b)(6)(ii) of

the Commission’s Rules of Practice (16

CFR 4.9(b)(6)(ii)).

Agreement Containing Consent Order

The Federal Trade Commission

(‘‘Commission’’), having initiated an

investigation of the proposed merger of

Johnson & Johnson, a corporation, and

Cordis Corporation (‘‘Cordis’’), a

corporation, and it now appearing that

Johnson & Johnson, hereinafter

sometimes referred to as ‘‘Proposed

Respondent,’’ is willing to enter into an

agreement containing an order to divest

certain assets, and providing for certain

other relief:

It is hereby agreed by and between

Proposed Respondent Johnson &

Johnson, by its duly authorized officers

and attorneys, and counsel for the

Commission that:

1. Proposed Respondent Johnson &

Johnson is a corporation organized,

existing, and doing business under and

by virtue of the laws of the state of New

Jersey with its principal executive

offices located at One Johnson &

Johnson Plaza, New Brunswick, New

Jersey 08933.

2. Proposed Respondent admits all the

jurisdictional facts set forth in the draft

of complaint here attached.

3. Proposed Respondent waives:

a. Any further procedural steps;

b. The requirement that the

Commission’s decision contain a

statement of findings of fact and

conclusions of law;

c. All rights to seek judicial review or

otherwise to challenge or contest the

validity of the order entered pursuant to

this agreement; and

d. Any claims under the Equal Access

to Justice Act.