9026 Federal Register / Vol. 60, No. 32 / Thursday, February 16, 1995 / Notices

1Columbia Gas Transmission Corporation’s

applications were filed with the Commission under

Sections 7(b) and 7(c) of the Natural Gas Act.

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, N.E., Washington, D.C. 20426,

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

were sent to all those receiving this notice in the

mail.

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY

Golden Field Office; Notice of Federal

Assistance Award to Air Products and

Chemicals, Inc.

AGENCY: Department of Energy.

ACTION: Notice of financial assistance

award in response to an unsolicited

financial assistance application.

SUMMARY: The U.S. Department of

Energy (DOE), pursuant to the DOE

Financial Assistance Rules, 10 CFR

600.7, is announcing its intention to

enter into a cooperative agreement with

Air Products and Chemicals, Inc. (APC),

to conduct research and development

activities on a Sorption Enhanced

Reaction (SER) process for use with

Steam Methane Reforming (SMR). The

SER technology could change the basic

concept and engineering design of

existing hydrogen production systems

based upon SMR and, as a result, reduce

the cost of hydrogen.

ADDRESSES: Questions regarding this

announcement may be addressed to the

U.S. Department of Energy, Golden

Field Office, 1617 Cole Blvd., Golden,

Colorado 80401, Attention: John Motz,

Contract Specialist. The telephone

number is 303–275–4737.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: DOE has

evaluated, in accordance with § 600.14

of the Federal Assistance Regulations,

the unsolicited proposal entitled

‘‘Sorption Enhanced Reaction (SER)

Process for Production of Hydrogen’’

and recommends that the unsolicited

proposal be accepted for support

without further competition in

accordance with § 600.14 of the Federal

Assistance Regulations.

Under this cooperative agreement,

APC will develop an approach for

producing hydrogen through an SER

process used with SMR. The project is

expected to be conducted through a

three-phase effort over a period of five

years. The three overall activities

include Concept Feasibility (Phase I),

Engineering Development (Phase II),

and Process Development Unit

Demonstration (Phase III).

The objective of Phase I (two years in

duration) is to demonstrate the

feasibility of performing SMR at a low

temperature with a suitable material for

the production of hydrogen and to

develop the base design data for

engineering development and economic

evaluation. The objective of Phase II

(one year in duration) is to develop

engineering data and models for scaleup of SER-SMR technology and

continue laboratory efforts to develop

improved reaction materials. Lastly, the

objective of Phase III (two years in

duration) is to design, install, and

operate a Process Development Unit

(PDU) for the manufacture of hydrogen

using the SER concept. This PDU will

be used to develop performance data,

process optimization, and models for

scale-up. Additionally, detailed

economic analysis will be performed to

confirm the merits of the process.

Commercialization plans will be

developed in detail.

The proposal has been found to be

meritorious in the DOE evaluation. The

APC program represents a unique

approach to develop and demonstrate a

technology which could result in

reduced costs for hydrogen production

with the SER-SMR process. The team

proposed by APC has the technical

capabilities and commitment which

should provide a basis for a successful

project. The proposed project is not

eligible for financial assistance under a

recent, current, or planned solicitation.

This award will not be made for at least

14 days after publication to allow for

public comment.

The project cost over five years

(including three phases) is estimated to

be $8,940,000 total, with the DOE share

being $5,540,000.

Issued in Golden, Colorado, on January 30,

1995.

John W. Meeker,

Chief, Procurement, GO.

[FR Doc. 95–3950 Filed 2–15–95; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 6450–01–M

Federal Energy Regulatory

Commission

[Docket Nos. CP95–170–000 and CP95–181–

000]

Columbia Gas Transmission Corp.;

Notice of Intent To Prepare

Environmental Assessments for the

Proposed Coco Transmission Project

and Coco Storage Field Project and

Request for Comments on

Environmental Issues

February 9, 1995

The staff of the Federal Energy

Regulatory Commission (FERC or

Commission) will prepare

environmental assessments (EAs) that

will discuss the environmental impacts

of the construction and operation of the

facilities proposed in the Coco

Transmission Project and Coco Storage

Field Project.1 The EAs will be used by

the Commission in its decision-making

process to determine whether an

environmental impact statement is

necessary and whether to approve the

projects.

Summary of the Proposed Projects

The facilities proposed to be replaced

are currently in an unsafe condition due

to corrosion and old age. Replacement is

necessary this year in order to provide

service in the upcoming winter of 1995/

1996.

Coco Transmission Project (Docket

No. CP95–170–000):

Columbia Gas Transmission

Corporation (Columbia) proposes to

construct 6.8 miles of 30-inch-diameter

replacement pipeline in Kanawha

County, West Virginia. The new

pipeline would replace the two

deteriorating 20-inch-diameter Lines

X52–M1 and X52–M1–Loop, which are

in the same location. Columbia would

use the facilities to transport up to

606,000,000 cubic feet per day of

natural gas.

Coco Storage Field Project (Docket

No. CP95–181–000):

Columbia proposes to construct 10.9

miles of various 4- to 20-inch-diameter

replacement pipeline and appurtenant

facilities within the existing Coco ‘‘A’’

Storage Field in Kanawha County, West

Virginia. The new pipeline would

replace 15.7 miles of deteriorating

pipeline, ranging in size from 4- to 16-

inch-diameter, including two looped

segments of mainline, and gathering

lines for wells.

Columbia would also replace and

install appurtenant facilities consisting

of wellhead piping and measurement

facilities for 29 existing wells; install an

on-line pigging system on the new 10-

and 20-inch-diameter pipelines; and

install fluid gathering facilities and

about 12 miles of 1- and 2-inch-diameter

pressurized methanol pipeline injecting

system that would connect to each well.

The locations of these facilities are

shown in appendix 1.2

Land Requirements for Construction

The proposed project would be built

within and adjacent to existing rights-ofway. Columbia intends to use a

construction right-of-way that would

vary between 25 and 120 feet during

construction. Following construction,

50 feet would be maintained as

permanent right-of-way, and the rest

would revert back to the landowner.
Federal Register / Vol. 60, No. 32 / Thursday, February 16, 1995 / Notices 9027

3According to the applicant, the project will not

affect any waters of the United States. We will

report any potential impacts, or their absence,

under this heading.

1Texas Eastern Transmission Corporation’s

application was filed with the Commission under

Section 7 of the Natural Gas Act and Part 157 of

the Commission’s regulations.

The EPA 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 Eas. All comments

received are considered during the

preparation of the Eas. State and local

government representatives are

encouraged to notify their constituents

of these proposed actions and encourage

them to comment on their areas of

concern.

The Eas will discuss impacts that

could occur as a result of the

construction and operation of the

proposed projects under these general

headings:

• Geology and soils.

• Water resources, fisheries.

• Land use

• Cultural resources and wetlands.3

• Vegetation and wildlife.

• Endangered and threatened species.

• Public safety.

• Haardous waste.

We will also evaluate possible

alternatives to the proposed projects or

portions of the projects, 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 Eas. Depending on

the comments received during the

scoping process, the Eas may be

published and mailed to Federal, state,

and local agencies, public interest

groups, interested individuals, affected

landowners, newspapers, libraries, and

the Commissions official service list for

each proceeding. A comment period

will be allotted for review if the Eas are

published. We will consider all

comments on the Eas 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 facilities and the

environmental information provided by

Columbia. 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:

Coco Transmission Project (Docket

No. CP95–170–000):

• The project would cross four

perennial streams and five wetlands.

• The project would cross or be near

cultural resources/archaeological sites.

Coco Storage Filed Project (Docket

No. CP95–181–000):

• The project would cross six

perennial streams at 13 locations, and

18 wetlands.

• The project would cross or be near

cultural resources/archaeological sites.

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 locations/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 Street,

NE., Washington, D.C. 20426.

• Reference Docket No. CP95–170–

000 and/or CP95–181–000;

• Send a copy of your letter to:

For the Coco Transmission Project

(Docket No. CP95–170–000): Mr. Jeff

Shenot, EA Project Manager, Federal

Energy Regulatory Commission, 825

North Capitol Street NE., Room 7312,

Washington, D.C. 20426; and/or.

For the Coco Storage Field Project

(Docket No. CP95–181–000): Ms. Medha

Kochhar, EA Project Commission,

Federal Energy Regulatory Commission,

825 North Capitol Street NE., Room

7312, Washington, D.C. 20426; and

• Mail your comments so that they

will be received in Washington, D.C. on

or before March 20, 1995.

If you wish to receive a copy of the

EA, you should request one from Mr.

Shenot or Ms. Kochhar, for Docket Nos.

CP95–170–000 and CP95–181–000,

respectively, at the above addresses.

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

385.214) attached as appendix 2.

The dates for filing of timely motions

to intervene for the Coco Transmission

Project (Docket No. CP95–170–000) and

Coco Storage Field Project (Docket

No.CP95–181–000) are February 16,

1995 and February 23, 1995,

respectively. After these dates, parties

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.

Jeff Shenot, Coco Transmission Project

EA Manager, at (202) 219–0295, or from

Medha Kochhar, Coco Field Project EA

Manager, at (202) 208–2270.

Lois D. Cashell,

Secretary.

[FR Doc. 95–3900 Filed 2–15–95; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 6717–01–M

[Docket No. CP95–75–000]

Texas Eastern Transmission

Corporation; Intent to Prepare an

Environmental Assessment for the

Proposed MS–1 Pipeline Project and

Request for Comments on

Environmental Issues

February 10, 1995.

The staff of the Federal Energy

Regulatory Commission (FERC or the

Commission) will prepare an

environmental assessment (EA) that will

discuss the environmental impacts of

the construction and operation of

facilities proposed in the MS–1 Pipeline

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 to approve the

project.

Summary of the Proposed Project

Texas Eastern Transmission

Corporation (Texas Eastern) wants to