66798 Federal Register / Vol. 60, No. 247 / Tuesday, December 26, 1995 / Notices

1Order No. 497, 53 FR 22139 (June 14, 1988), III

FERC Stats. & Regs. ¶30,820 (1988); Order No. 497–

A, order on rehearing, 54 FR 52781 (December 22,

1989), III FERC Stats. & Regs. 30,868 (1989); Order

No. 497–B, order extending sunset date, 55 FR

53291 (December 28, 1990), III FERC Stats. & Regs.

¶ 30,908 (1990); Order No. 497–C, order extending

sunset date, 57 FR 9 (January 2, 1992), III FERC

Stats. & Regs. ¶30,934 (1991), rehearing denied, 57

FR 5815 (February 18, 1992), 58 FERC ¶ 61,139

(1992); Tenneco Gas v. FERC (affirmed in part and

remanded in part), 969 F. 2d 1187 (D.C. Cir. 1992);

Order No. 497–D, order on remand and extending

sunset date, III FERC Stats. & Regs. ¶ 30,958

(December 4, 1992), 57 FR 58978 (December 14,

1992); Order No. 497–E, order on rehearing and

extending sunset date, 59 FR 243 (January 4, 1994),

65 FERC ¶ 61,381 (December 23, 1993); Order No.

497–F, order denying rehearing and granting

clarification, 59 FR 15336 (April 1, 1994), 66 FERC

¶ 61,347 (March 24, 1994); and Order No. 497–G,

order extending sunset date, 59 FR 32884 (June 27,

1994), III FERC Stats. & Regs. ¶ 30,996 (June 17,

1994).

2Standards of Conduct and Reporting

Requirements for Transportation and Affiliate

Transactions, Order No. 566, 59 FR 32885 (June 27,

1994), III FERC Stats. & Regs. ¶ 30,997 (June 17,

1994); Order No. 566–A, order on rehearing, 59 FR

52896 (October 20, 1994), 69 FERC ¶ 61,044

(October 14, 1994); Order No. 566–B, order on

rehearing, 59 FR 65707, (December 21, 1994); 69

FERC ¶ 61,334 (December 14, 1994); appeal

docketed sub nom. Conoco, Inc. v. FERC, D.C. Cir

No. 94–1745 (December 13, 1994).

385.214 and 385.211 of the

Commission’s Rules of Practice and

Procedure. All such motions or protests

must be filed on or before December 29,

1995. 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 in the

Public Reference Room.

Lois D. Cashell,

Secretary.

[FR Doc. 95–31221 Filed 12–12–95; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 6717–01–M

[Docket No. MG96–4–000]

Wyoming Interstate Company, Ltd.;

Notice of Filing

December 19, 1995.

Take notice that on December 8, 1995,

Wyoming Interstate Company, Ltd.

(WIC) filed updated standards for

conduct under Order Nos. 497 et seq.1

and Order Nos. 566 et seq.2 to reflect

certain updated information as well as

a revision to Standard I, 18 CFR 161.3(i).

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, N.E., Washington, D.C.

20426, in accordance with Rules 211

and 214 of the Commission’s Rules of

Practice and Procedure (18 CFR 385.211

or 385.214). All such motions to

intervene or protest should be filed on

or before January 3, 1996. 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. 95–31222 Filed 12–22–95; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 6717–01–M

[Docket No. CP95–595–001]

Texas Eastern Transmission

Corporation; Notice of Amendment

December 19, 1995.

Take notice that on November 20,

1995, Texas Eastern Transmission

Corporation (Texas Eastern), 5400

Westheimer Court, Houston, Texas

77056–5310 filed in Docket No. CP95–

595–001 pursuant to section 7(c) of the

Natural Gas Act an amendment to its

application for a certificate of public

convenience and necessity filed June 30,

1995, in Docket No. CP95–595–000,

requesting authority to replace a

pipeline crossing of the Brazos River, in

order to modify the route alignment of

the crossing, all as more fully set forth

in the amendment, which is on file with

the Commission and open to public

inspection.

In its application in Docket No. CP95–

595–000, Texas Eastern proposed to

construct and operate 1.56 miles of new

24-inch diameter mainline between

Milepost (MP) 52.25 and MP 53.81 on

its Mainline No. 11 where it crosses the

Brazos River in Austin and Waller

Counties, Texas. Texas Eastern filed its

proposal because its existing main line

crossings of the Brazo River—the 24-

inch diameter Line No. 11 and 16-inch

auxiliary line—were exposed to the

forces of the river as the result of

erosion of the river bed in the vicinity

of Line No. 11. On October 6, 1995, the

Commission staff recommended in its

Environmental Assessment (EA) that

Texas Eastern use a designated

alternative route rather than Texas

Eastern’s proposed route, in order to

reduce the alleged environmental

impacts identified by the Commission

staff.

Texas Eastern states that it proposes

to modify the EA’s recommended route

and to tie back into Texas Eastern’s

existing line in as short a distance as is

practical, in lieu of adopting the route

recommended in the EA as ‘‘Alternative

2’’. Texas Eastern proposes to amend its

application to lay pipeline in new rightof-way for a distance of approximately

1,300 feet, thereby connecting the

directionally drilled river crossing of

approximately 2,900 feet with the

existing 24-inch Line No. 11. Texas

Eastern states that compared to

‘‘Alternative 2’’, its proposed route will

decrease new permanent right-of-way

required, reduce the overall length of

wetlands crossed, and decrease overall

estimated project costs by

approximately $1,000,000. Texas

Eastern asserts that is proposed

modifications will both facilitate an

expeditious replacement of the river

crossing and decrease environmental

impacts associated with the

construction activity.

Specifically, Texas Eastern now

proposes to replace, construct and

operate approximately 0.84 miles of 24-

inch diameter Line No. 11 mainline

crossing of the Brazos River in Austin

and Waller Counties, Texas, to remove

the existing 24-inch and 16-inch

diameter pipeline segments exposed in

the river, and to abandon, in place, the

remainder of the existing pipeline

which will be replaced. The pipeline

segment to be replaced is between MP

52.25 and MP 52.98 on Line No. 11.

Texas Eastern estimates that the project

will cost $2,425,854. Texas Eastern

states that the replacement segments

will have a design delivery capacity

equivalent to the facilities being

replaced.

Any person desiring to be heard or to

make any protest with reference to said

amendment should on or before

December 29, 1995, file with the Federal

Energy Regulatory Commission,

Washington, D.C. 20426, a motion to

intervene or a protest in accordance

with the requirements of the

Commission’s Rules of Practice and

Procedure (128 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. Any person who has heretofore

filed need not file again.

Lois D. Cashell,

Secretary.

[FR Doc. 95–31223 Filed 12–22–95; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 6717–01–M