12942 Federal Register / Vol. 60, No. 46 / Thursday, March 9, 1995 / Notices

associated with the payment of price

differential costs under realigned gas

supply contracts or contract buyout

costs associated with continuing

realignment efforts during the period

November 1, 1994 through January 31,

1995. These GSR costs have arisen as a

direct result of customers’ elections

during restructuring to terminate their

sales entitlements under Order No. 636.

Southern submitted the following tariff

sheets to its FERC Gas Tariff, Seventh

Revised Volume No. 1, with the

proposed effective date of April 1, 1995.

Sixteenth Revised Sheet No. 15

Sixteenth Revised Sheet No. 17

Sixteenth Revised Sheet No. 18

First Alternate Sixteenth Revised Sheet No.

15

First Alternate Sixteenth Revised Sheet No.

17

Thirteenth Revised Sheet No. 29

Thirteenth Revised Sheet No. 30

Thirteenth Revised Sheet No. 31

Southern submits alternate sheets to

comply with the Commission’s

November 30, 1994 Order requiring

Southern to recover its Account No. 858

costs and Southern Energy LNG costs

through the same type of quarterly

mechanism as the one currently in place

for the recovery of Southern’s gas

supply realignment costs. Southern

notes that the instant filing is made

without prejudice to Southern’s request

for rehearing of the November 30, 1994

Order.

Southern states that copies of the

filing were served upon Southern’s

customers and interested state

commissions.

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. All such

motions or protests should be filed on

or before March 10, 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 Southern’s filing are on file with the

Commission and are available for public

inspection.

Lois D. Cashell,

Secretary.

[FR Doc. 95–5732 Filed 3–8–95; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 6717–01–M

[Docket No. CP95–221–000]

Southern Natural Gas Co.; Notice of

Request Under Blanket Authorization

March 3, 1995.

Take notice that on February 23, 1995,

Southern Natural Gas Company

(Southern), P.O. Box 2563, Birmingham,

Alabama 35202–2563, filed in Docket

No. CP95–221–000 a request pursuant to

§ 157.205 of the Commission’s

Regulations under the Natural Gas Act

(18 CFR 157.205) for authorization to

construct and operate a delivery point,

including measurement and

appurtenant facilities for service to

South Carolina Pipeline Corporation

(SCPC), in Jasper County, South

Carolina, under Southern’s blanket

certificate issued in Docket No. CP82–

406–000 pursuant to Section 7 of the

Natural Gas Act, all as more fully set

forth in the request which is on file with

the Commission and open to public

inspection.

Southern states that SCPC, in turn,

would provide natural gas service to

South Carolina Electric and Gas

Company for service to a new

residential retirement community

known as Sun City Hilton Head. The

estimated cost of construction, it is said,

is approximately $178,400 and the

Maximum Daily Delivery Quantity

would be 1,032 Mcf per day.

Southern states further that the

installation of the proposed facilities

would have no adverse effect on its

ability to provide its firm deliveries.

Any person or the Commission’s staff

may, within 45 days after issuance of

the instant notice by the Commission,

file pursuant to Rule 214 of the

Commission’s Procedural Rules (18 CFR

385.214) a motion to intervene or notice

of intervention and pursuant to

§ 157.205 of the Regulations under the

Natural Gas Act (18 CFR 157.205) a

protest to the request. If no protest is

filed within the time allowed therefor,

the proposed activity shall be deemed to

be authorized effective the day after the

time allowed for filing a protest. If a

protest is filed and not withdrawn

within 30 days after the time allowed

for filing a protest, the instant request

shall be treated as an application for

authorization pursuant to Section 7 of

the Natural Gas Act.

Lois D. Cashell,

Secretary.

[FR Doc. 95–5733 Filed 3–8–95; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 6717–01–M

[Docket No. RP95–197–000]

Transcontinental Gas Pipe Line Corp.;

Notice of Proposed Changes in FERC

Gas Tariff; Notice of Proposed

Changes in FERC Gas Tariff

March 3, 1995.

Take notice that on March 1, 1995,

Transcontinental Gas Pipe Line

Corporation (Transco), tendered for

filing certain tariff sheets to Third

Revised Volume No. 1 and Original

Volume No. 2 of its FERC Gas Tariff.

The proposed changes would generate

additional jurisdictional revenues of

approximately $132 million annually

based upon the 12 month period ended

November 30, 1994, as adjusted. The

proposed effective date of the filing is

April 1, 1995.

Transco states that the principal

causes of the rate increase are (1) an

increase in rate base resulting from

additional plant and higher working

capital requirements and a reduction in

Accumulated Deferred Income Taxes;

(2) an increase in operation and

maintenance expenses; and (3) an

increase in Transco’s cost of capital

resulting from an increase in the equity

component of the capital structure used

(this filing is based on the Transco

pipeline capital structure) and in the

cost of equity from the pre-filed rate of

14.45 percent to the proposed rate of

return on equity of 15.25 percent.

Transco states that since its last rate

case filing the Commission approved, in

a series of orders in Transco’s

restructuring proceeding under Order

No. 636 in Docket Nos. RS92–86 and

RP92–137, the basic rate design and cost

allocation methods which are reflected

in this filing. Specifically, the instant

filing reflects, among other things,

continuation of the following

Commission-approved methods: (1)

straight fixed-variable (SFV) rate design

for Transco’s firm transportation rates;

(2) the unbundling of system storage

pursuant to order No. 636 reflected in

Transco Rate Schedule ESS contract

storage service; (3) the roll-in of

Transco’s Mobile Bay facilities; (4)

separately-stated gathering charges; (5) a

tracking mechanism to recover costs

incurred by Transco on CNG

Transmission Corporation in rendering

Transco’s Rate Schedule GSS service;

and (6) a tracking mechanism to recover

stranded Account No. 858 costs

incurred by Transco under

arrangements with upstream pipelines.

Transco states that the instant filing

also reflects the continuation of other

rate design and cost allocation

methodologies which are being litigated

in Transco Docket Nos. RP92–137, et al.
Federal Register / Vol. 60, No. 46 / Thursday, March 9, 1995 / Notices 12943

These methodologies are (1) Transco’s

IT-feeder rate design; (2) a systemwide

cost of service; (3) interruptible

transportation (IT) rates designed on a

100 percent load factor basis; (4)

Transco’s so-called volumetric costs

being recovered on the basis of the same

charge being applied to each dekatherm

of throughput (rather than on a distancesensitive basis); and (5) a single

separately-stated gathering charge

applicable to all non-Tilden gathering

facilities and a different gathering

charge applicable to sue of the Tilden

facilities.

Transco states that changes reflected

in the instant filing compared to the prefiled methods in place on the Transco

system are principally: (1) elimination

of the Non-Gas Demand Charge under

Rate Schedule FS; (2)

refunctionalization of certain jointly

owned transmission facilities to the

gathering function pursuant to

Commission orders issued since

Transco’s last rate case filing; (3)

elimination of the IT revenue crediting

mechanism based upon Transco’s

allocation of almost $87 million to

interruptible transportation and

gathering services which reflects the

trend of Transco’s operating experience

under Order No. 636; (4) elimination of

a reverse South Georgia adjustment due

to the fact that as of September 1995

Transco will have flowed back to

ratepayers the entirety of its formerlyoverfunded deferred taxes; (5)

elimination of revenue credits to cost of

service for the transportation of

liquefiables (because such transactions

are herein reflected as part of the

projection of IT throughput); (6) reduced

FASB No. 106 expense resulting, in

part, from flowback of a regulatory

liability created during the Docket No.

RP92–137 rate period; and (7)

miscellaneous tariff revisions as

described in the Statement of Nature,

Reasons, and Basis.

Finally, the instant filing proposes on

a prospective only basis the following

changes to the pre-filed methods: (1) a

new Rate Schedule ICTS (Interconnect

Transfer Service) that provides shorthaul transfer service between pipeline

interconnects or third-party facilities

connected to TGPL; (2) a new Rate

Schedule GMS (Gas Management

Service) that provides for the borrowing

or parking of gas at designated pooling

points; and (3) elimination of the ‘‘atrisk’’ certificate condition governing

Transco’s Mobile Bay facilities. These

changes are proposed to be effective

prospectively only after Commission

approval.

Transco also has included in

Statement Q a pro forma tariff sheet

reflecting market-based IT rates for nonIT-feeder transactions. If the

Commission, in response to

interventions in this docket, sets the

issue of Transco’s IT rate design for

hearing in this docket, the pro forma

tariff sheet gives notice of Transco’s

position on IT rate design, i.e., that rates

for non-IT-feeder IT service should be

marked-based.

Transco states that copies of the filing

have been served upon Transco’s

customers and interested State

Commissions.

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, N.E. Washington,

D.C. 20426, in accordance with Sections

385.214 and 385.211 of the

Commission’s Rules and Regulations.

All such motions or protests should be

filed on or before March 10, 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 pubic inspection in the

Public Reference Room.

Lois D. Cashell,

Secretary.

[FR Doc. 95–5734 Filed 3–8–95; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 6717–01–M

[Docket No. RP93–34–008]

Transwestern Pipeline Co.; Notice of

Proposed Changes in FERC Gas Tariff

March 3, 1995.

Take notice that on February 28, 1995,

Transwestern Pipeline Company

(Transwestern), tendered for filing as

part of its FERC Gas Tariff, Second

Revised Volume No. 1, the following

tariff sheets, with a proposed effective

date of April 1, 1995:

111th Revised Sheet No. 5

7th Revised Sheet No. 5A.05

On November 23, 1993, Transwestern

filed a Stipulation and Agreement

(Settlement) to resolve all issues in

Docket No. RP93–34–000. On March 30,

1994, the Commission issued an order

approving the beforementioned

Settlement. The Settlement became

effective on April 1, 1994.

Under the terms of the Settlement

Transwestern agreed to a four-year

phase-in period to reach a Field Area

Services (‘‘FAS’’) rate that reflects the

unbundling resulting from the net

allocation to FAS of $84 million of gross

plant. As part of the four-year phase-in

mechanism under which the costs

allocated to FAS are increased, there is

a corresponding phase-in under which

costs allocated to Transwestern’s FTS–

1 service from East of Thoreau to

California are decreased.

Transwestern states that the purpose

of the instant filing is to file tariff sheets

in compliance with the terms of the

Settlement.

Transwestern also states that copies of

the filing were served on its gas utility

customers, interested state

commissions, and all parties to this

proceeding.

Any person desiring to protest said

filing should file a protest with the

Federal Energy Regulatory Commission,

825 North Capitol Street NE.,

Washington, D.C., 20426, in accordance

with Rule 211 of the Commission’s

Rules of Practice and Procedure. All

such protests should be filed on or

before March 10, 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.

Copies of this filing are on file with the

Commission and are available for public

inspection.

Lois D. Cashell,

Secretary.

[FR Doc. 95–5735 Filed 3–8–95; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 6717–01–M

[Docket No. RP95–183–000]

West Texas Gas, Inc.; Notice of

Petition for Waiver

March 3, 1995.

Take notice that on February 28, 1995,

West Texas Gas, Inc. (WTG), filed with

the Federal Energy Regulatory

Commission a request for waiver of

Sections 154.304 and 154.308 of the

Commission’s Regulations, to the extent

necessary to permit a 15–day extension

of time within which to file its

Quarterly PGA filing in the referenced

docket, which is currently due to be

filed on March 1, 1995, to be effective

April 1, 1995.

WTG states that because of its small

size, WTG has not had a chance to

compile all of the information necessary

to file WTG’s Quarterly PGA filing by

March 1. WTG requests that the

Commission grant an extension of the

filing deadline to March 15, 1995.

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,

D.C. 20426 in accordance with § 385.211