11964 Federal Register / Vol. 60, No. 42 / Friday, March 3, 1995 / Notices

1CNG’s application was filed with the

Commission under section 7 of the Natural Gas Act

and Part 157 of the Commission’s regulations.

2The appendices referenced in this notice are not

being printed in the Federal Register. Copies are

available from the Commission’s Public Reference

and Files Maintenance Branch, Room 3104, 941

North Capitol Street, NE., Washington, DC 20426,

or call (202) 208–1371. Copies of the appendices

were sent to all those receiving this notice in the

mail.

participate in any aspect of the hearing

process.

Persons wishing to become a formal

‘‘party’’ to BPA’s rate proceeding must

notify the Hearing Officer and BPA in

writing of their request. Petitions to

intervene shall state the name and

address of the person and the person’s

interests in the outcome of the hearing.

Petitioners may designate no more than

two representatives upon whom service

of documents will be made. BPA

customers and customer groups whose

rates are subject to revision in the

hearing will be granted intervention

based on a petition filed in conformance

with this section. Other petitioners must

explain their interests in sufficient

detail to permit the Hearing Officer to

determine whether they have a relevant

interest in the hearing. Intervention

Petitions will be available for inspection

in BPA’s Public Information Center; 1st

Floor; 905 NE. 11th; Portland, Oregon.

Any opposition to a Petition to

Intervene must be filed with the Hearing

Officer and served on all parties by

March 9, 1995. All timely applications

will be ruled on by the Hearing Officer.

Late interventions are strongly

disfavored and may not be accepted.

Opposition to an untimely Petition to

Intervene shall be filed and served

within two days after service of the

petition. Interventions are subject to

§ 1010.4 of BPA’s Procedures.

Because of the complexity of the

issues in this rate case, in part

occasioned by continuing contract

negotiations between BPA and its

customers, as well as BPA’s

‘‘reinvention’’ and Competitiveness

Project, BPA anticipates that it will need

to meet with customers and other

interested third parties during the rate

case on a very frequent, and possibly

extended, basis. To comport with the

rate case procedural rule prohibiting ex

parte communications, BPA will

provide necessary notice of meetings

involving rate case issues for

participation by all rate case parties.

Parties should be aware, however, that

such meetings may be held on very

short notice and they should be

prepared to devote the necessary

resources to participate fully in every

aspect of the rate proceeding.

Consequently, parties should be

prepared to attend meetings every day

during the course of the rate case.

Issued in Portland, Oregon on February 24,

1995.

Randall W. Hardy,

Administrator and Chief Executive Officer.

[FR Doc. 95–5176 Filed 3–2–95; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 6450–01–P

Federal Energy Regulatory

Commission

[Docket No. CP95–109–000]

CNG Transmission Corp.; Notice of

Intent To Prepare an Environmental

Assessment for the Proposed TL–470,

Extension 5 Project and Request for

Comments on Environmental Issues

February 27, 1995.

The staff of the Federal Energy

Regulatory Commission (FERC or

Commission) will prepare an

environmental assessment (EA) that will

discuss the environmental impacts of

the construction and operation of the

facilities proposed by CNG

Transmission Corporation (CNG) for its

TL–470, Extension 5 Project.1 This EA

will be used by the Commission in its

decision-making process to determine

whether an environmental impact

statement is necessary and whether or

not to approve the project.

Summary of the Proposed Project

CNG requests Commission

authorization to construct and operate

about 4.73 miles of 30-inch-diameter

natural gas pipeline loop in Rotterdam

Township, Schenectady County, New

York.

The proposed loop would be

constructed parallel and adjacent to

CNG’s existing facilities and would

begin at a new gate station on CNG’s

system near Gregg Road and end at a

new gate station near Burdeck Street.

CNG indicates that the proposed

facility would enable it to deliver

additional natural gas to Niagara

Mohawk Power Corporation’s

distribution system serving the Albany,

New York area.

The location of the project facility is

shown in appendix 1.2

Land Requirements for Construction

CNG proposes to use a 75-foot-wide

right-of-way for construction. Since

CNG proposes to construct its pipeline

near the edge of its existing, maintained

right-of-way, only about 50 feet of

additional right-of-way width would be

cleared for construction. Following

construction, 25 feet of the additional

width would be restored and allowed to

revert back to its former use. Therefore,

only about 25 feet of additional

permanent right-of-way width would be

required.

Additional working space would be

required adjacent to the planned

construction right-of-way at bored road

crossings, the Delaware and Hudson

Railroad crossing, stream and wetland

crossings, and in agricultural areas

where topsoil would be segregated.

An approximate 600-foot by 600-foot

(8.3 acres) pipeyard would be used for

the construction trailer and storage of

pipe.

Four existing roads or farm lanes

would be used as access roads.

The EA Process

The National Environmental Policy

Act (NEPA) requires the Commission to

take into account the environmental

impacts that could result from an action

whenever it considers the issuance of a

Certificate of Public Convenience and

Necessity. NEPA also requires us to

discover and address concerns the

public may have about proposals. We

call this ‘‘scoping’’. The main goal of the

scoping process is to focus the analysis

in the EA on the important

environmental issues. By this Notice of

Intent, the Commission requests public

comments on the scope of the issues it

will address in the EA. All comments

received are taken into account during

the preparation of the EA. State and

local government representatives are

encouraged to notify their constituents

of this proposed action and encourage

them to comment on their areas of

concern.

The EA will discuss impacts that

could occur as a result of the

construction and operation of the

proposed project under these general

headings:

• Geology and soils

• Water resources, fisheries and

wetlands

• Vegetation and wildlife

• Land use

• Cultural resources

• Hazardous waste

• Endangerd and threatened species

• Public safety

We will also evaluate possible

alternatives to the proposed project or

portions of the project, and make

recommendations on how to lessen or

avoid impacts on the various resource

areas.

Our independent analysis of the

issues will be in the EA. Depending on

the comments received during the

scoping process, the EA may be

published and mailed to Federal, state,

and local agencies, public interest

groups, interested individuals, affected

landowners, newspapers, libraries, and
Federal Register / Vol. 60, No. 42 / Friday, March 3, 1995 / Notices 11965

the Commission’s official service list for

this proceeding. A comment period will

be allotted for review if the EA is

published. We will consider all

comments on the EA before we

recommend that the Commission

approve or not approve the project.

Currently Identified Environmental

Issues

We have already identified several

issues that we think deserve attention

based on a preliminary review of the

proposed facility and the environmental

information provided by CNG. Keep in

mind that this is a preliminary list. The

list of issues may be added to,

subtracted from, or changed based on

your comments and our analysis. Issues

are:

• The proposed loop would cross

Poentic Kill, Plotter Kill and six other

small, unnamed streams or drains.

Poentic Kill is a state-protected stream.

• About 2.2 acres of wetlands would

be affected by the project.

• About 15 acres of upland forest

would be disturbed.

• The Plotter Kill Nature Preserve

would be crossed.

Public Participation

You can make a difference by sending

a letter addressing your specific

comments or concerns about the project.

You should focus on the potential

environmental effects of the proposal,

alternatives to the proposal (including

alternative routes), and measures to

avoid or lessen environmental impact.

The more specific your comments, the

more useful they will be. Please follow

the instructions below to ensure that

your comments are received and

properly recorded:

• Address your letter to: Lois Cashell,

Secretary, Federal Energy Regulatory

Commission, 825 North Capitol St., NE.,

Washington, DC 20426;

• Reference Docket No. CP95–109–

000;

• Send a copy of your letter to: Mr.

Howard J. Wheeler, EA Project Manager,

Federal Energy Regulatory Commission,

825 North Capitol St., NE., Room 7312,

Washington, DC 20426; and

• Mail your comments so that they

will be received in Washington, DC on

or before April 5, 1995.

If you wish to receive a copy of the

EA, you should request one from Mr.

Wheeler at the above address.

Becoming an Intervenor

In addition to involvement in the EA

scoping process, you may want to

become an official party to the

proceeding or become an ‘‘intervenor’’.

Among other things, intervenors have

the right to receive copies of caserelated Commission documents and

filings by other intervenors. Likewise,

each intervenor must provide copies of

its filings to all other parties. If you

want to become an intervenor you must

file a Motion to Intervene according to

Rule 214 of the Commission’s Rules of

Practice and Procedure (18 CFR

358.214) attached as appendix 2.

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 scoping

comments considered.

Additional information about the

proposed project is available from Mr.

Howard Wheeler, EA Project Manager,

at (202) 208–2299.

Lois D. Cashell,

Secretary.

[FR Doc. 95–5224 Filed 3–2–95; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 6717–01–M

[Docket No. CP94–38–000]

Ouachita River Gas Storage Company,

L.L.C.; Notice of Availability of the

Environmental Assessment for the

Proposed Ouachita River Gas Storage

Project

February 27, 1995.

The staff of the Federal Energy

Regulatory Commission (FERC or

Commission) has prepared an

environmental assessment (EA) on the

natural gas pipeline facilities proposed

by Ouachita River Gas Storage

Company, L.L.C. (Ouachita) in the

above-referenced docket.

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

proposed underground gas storage

facility and related hub facilities

including:

• About 5 miles of 6-, 8-, and 12-inchdiameter field gathering lines

(designated as Lines FG–1, FG–2, and

FG–3) in Lincoln and Union Parishes,

Louisiana;

• About 2.6 miles of dual 24-inchdiameter header pipeline (designated as

Lines B and C) and four meter stations

in Ouachita Parish, Louisiana;

• About 23.9 miles of 24-inchdiameter bi-directional flow

transmission pipeline (Line A) in

Lincoln, Union, and Ouachita Parishes,

Louisiana;

• About 4.5 miles of 16-inch-diameter

bi-directional flow transmission

pipeline (line D) and one meter station

in Ouachita Parish, Louisiana;

• A 6,260-horsepower (hp) Remote

Compressor Station in Ouachita Parish,

Louisiana;

• A 12,520-hp Central Compressor

Station in Section 30–T19N–R1W,

Union Parish, Louisiana; and

• Drill 11 injection/withdrawal wells

and 2 observation wells in Lincoln and

Union Parishes, Louisiana.

The purpose of the proposed facilities

would be to provide about 27 billion

cubic feet of working gas capacity with

an estimated peak withdrawal capacity

of 550 MMcf of gas a day and an

estimated peak injection capacity of 250

MMcf of gas a day via the hub facilities.

The hub facilities near Monroe,

Louisiana would be interconnected with

certain interstate and intrastate

pipelines.

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, 941 North Capitol Street, NE.,

room 3104, 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: Mr. Herman Der,

Environmental Project Manager,

Environmental Review and Compliance

Branch I, Office of Pipeline Regulation,

room 7312, 825 North Capitol Street,

NE., Washington, DC 20426, (202) 208–

0896.

Any person wishing to comment on

the EA may do so. Written comments

must reference Docket No. CP94–38–

000, and be addressed to: Office of the

Secretary, Federal Energy Regulatory

Commission, 825 North Capitol Street,

NE., Washington, DC. 20426.

Comments should be filed as soon as

possible, but must be received no later

than April 3, 1995, to ensure

consideration prior to a Commission

decision on this proposal. A copy of any

comments should also be sent to Mr.

Herman Der, Environmental Project

Manager, room 7312, at the above

address.