14276 Federal Register / Vol. 60, No. 51 / Thursday, March 16, 1995 / Notices

for ‘‘Experimental Investigation of

Vibration-Induced Bulk Solids

Transport and Segregation’’.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: U.S.

Department of Energy, Pittsburgh

Energy Technology Center, Acquisition

and Assistance Division, P.O. Box

10940, MS 921–143, Pittsburgh, PA

15236–0940, Attn.: Robyn L. Knapek,

Telephone: (412) 892–6201.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Grant No. DE–FG22–95PC95203

Title of Research Effort—‘‘Experimental

Investigation of Vibration-Induced

Bulk Solids Transport Segregation’’

Awardee—The Foundation at NJIT and

The New Jersey Institute of

Technology

Term of Assistance Effort—Twelve (12)

Months

Cost of Assistance Effort—The total

estimated value is $67,557,00. There

will be cost-sharing involved in this

transaction; financial assistance of

53.5% ($34,451.00) will be provided

by the U.S. Department of Energy.

Objective

In accordance with 10 CFR 600.14,

The Foundation at NJIT and The New

Jersey Institute of Technology has been

selected as the grant recipient as the

result of the evaluation of an unsolicited

proposal.

The objective of this project is to

analyze the effects of a number of

parameters on the behavior of particles

in vibration beds, with particular

attention paid to induced flows and

their influence on the motion of an

embedded large particle. With the help

of flow visualization technique and

computer simulation proposed, it is

anticipated that various flow behavior

would be revealed, and this may shed

light on the possible mechanisms for

particle segregation.

The benefits include a study of the

effects (quantitative as well as

qualitative) on convective transport and

segregation due to various parameters

(wall conditions, surface particle

properties, size ratio, etc.).

This proposed project, resulting from

the submission of an unsolicited

proposal, represents a unique or

innovative idea, method, or approach

which would not be eligible for

financial assistance under a recent,

current, or planned solicitation. The

DOE has determined that a competitive

solicitation would be inappropriate.

This award will not be made for at least

14 days to allow for public comment.

Dale A. Siciliano,

Contracting Officer.

[FR Doc. 95–6521 Filed 3–15–95; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 6450–01–M

Federal Energy Regulatory

Commission

Pacific Gas Transmission Co.; Notice

of Amendment

[Docket No. CP93–618–004]

March 10, 1995.

Take notice that on March 3, 1995,

Pacific Gas Transmission Company

(PGT), 160 Spear Street, San Francisco,

California, 94105–1570, filed an

application in Docket No. CP93–618–

004. In this case, PGT is seeking an

amendment to a Certificate of Public

Convenience and Necessity issued in

Docket Nos. CP93–618, et al. under

Section 7(c) of the Natural Gas Act, and

Part 157, Subpart A of the commission’s

Regulations. The Certificate that PGT

seeks to amend was issued by the

Commission’s Order of January 12,

1995, in the above dockets. PGT wants

to partially increase the size of the

Medford Extension, one of the two

pipeline extensions approved by the

January 12, 1995, Order. PGT’s proposal

is more fully set forth in the amendment

which is on file with the Commission

and open to public inspection.

PGT now seeks to construct and

operate about 22 miles of 16-inch

pipeline on the Medford Extension,

from the interconnection with PGT’s

mainline to Klamath Falls, Oregon,

rather that 12-inch pipeline for that

segment. The remainder of the 86.5

miles of the Medford Extension, which

continues on to Medford, Oregon,

would be a 12-inch pipeline, as

previously approved. The increased

diameter pipe would allow for

additional capacity on the Medford

Extension so PGT can provide up to

90,000 MMBtu per day of additional

firm transportation service to Diamond

Energy, Inc. (Diamond Energy).

Diamond Energy, a subsidiary of

Mitsubishi Corp., and the City of

Klamath Falls have plans to jointly

build a gas-fired electric generation

station which would be operational in

1998.

PGT states that it seeks to take

advantage of the short-term opportunity

to install the larger pipe when the

Medford Extension is initially

constructed this summer. PGT says that

this will avoid unnecessary future

environmental disruptions and higher

project costs associated with the future

construction of pipeline looping or

compressor facilities in three years time.

PGT says that the additional cost of the

larger pipe is estimated to be $2.3

million, including AFUDC. The

increased costs of the 16-inch pipe

would be held out of the rate base of the

Medford Extension until after service to

Diamond Energy begins.

PGT proposes to recover the

incremental cost-of-service of the

increased pipe size through surcharges

to its existing FTS-1 Rate Schedule.

Diamond Energy would pay the FTS-1

rate for mainline service and a surcharge

for service on the Medford Extension.

PGT says that the surcharge that

Diamond Energy would pay is a

negotiated rate based on the avoided

costs of Diamond Energy; Diamond

Energy would not have to build its own

pipeline to PGT. The negotiated

reservation surcharge is $0.090388 for

the first 45,000 MMBtu per day of

service and $0.035477 for the second

45,000 MMBtu per day of service.

PGT says that incremental revenues

from the rates paid by Diamond Energy

will reduce costs of WP Natural Gas, a

division of The Washington Water

Power Company (Wash. Water), the only

other customer on the Medford

Extension. In the January 12, 1995,

Order the Commission approved a

special deferred cost recovery account/

rate mechanism for Wash. Water. PGT

says that Wash. Water’s obligations

under the deferred cost recovery

mechanism will be reduced and

shortened in time from 30 years to 18

years. PGT says it will include this

revenue crediting information in its

annual reports/filings containing the

adjusted Wash. Water rate and related

information on any deferred balance.

PGT proposes to recover the cost of

Medford Extension based upon a

straight-line depreciation schedule

which is equal to the length of the

transportation agreements for each

extension. For service to Wash. Water

over the Medford Extension the term of

the contracts is 30 years, (there are two

contracts between PGT and Wash.

Water). For service to Diamond Energy

over the Medford Extension the term of

the contract is 27 years. Diamond

Energy would begin service in

November, 1998, three years after Wash.

Water begins service.

PGT states that copies of its

amendment have been sent to all

interested state regulatory agencies and

all parties on the official service list in

Docket No. CP93–618, et al. PGT asks

for expeditious approval of its proposal

by June 1, 1995, so that the Medford

Extension can be in-service by

November, 1995. Otherwise, it will

withdraw its request to install the 22

miles of 16-inch pipe and only build the

approved 12-inch pipeline extension.

Any person desiring to be heard or to

protest said amendment should file a

motion to intervene or protest with the

Federal Energy Regulatory Commission,
Federal Register / Vol. 60, No. 51 / Thursday, March 16, 1995 / Notices 14277

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 24, 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

to the proceeding or to participate as a

party in any hearing therein must file a

motion to intervene in accordance with

the Commission’s Rules. However, any

person who has already filed an

intervention(s) in Docket No. CP93–618,

et al., need not file again.

Lois D. Cashell

Secretary.

[FR Doc. 95–6455 Filed 3–15–95; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 6717–01–M

[Docket No. ER94–1480–000, et al.]

Louisville Gas & Electric Company, et

al.; Electric Rate and Corporate

Regulation Filings

March 9, 1995.

Take notice that the following filings

have been made with the Commission:

1. Louisville Gas & Electric Company

[Docket No. ER94–1480–000]

Take notice that on February 15, 1995,

Louisville Gas & Electric Company

tendered for filing an amendment in the

above-referenced docket.

Comment date: March 23, 1995, in

accordance with Standard Paragraph E

at the end of this notice.

2. Electric Clearinghouse Inc.

[Docket No. ER94–968–004]

Take notice that on March 6, 1995,

Electric Clearinghouse Inc. (ECI)

tendered for filing a revised summary of

ECI’s activity for the quarter ending

December 31, 1994.

3. Long Island Lighting Company

[Docket No. ER94–1599–000]

Take notice that on March 3, 1995,

Long Island Lighting Company (LILCO),

tendered for filing an amendment to its

filing in this docket.

Copies of this filing have been served

by LILCO on Northeast Utilities Service

Company and the New York State

Public Service Commission.

Comment date: March 23, 1995, in

accordance with Standard Paragraph E

at the end of this notice.

4. Mid-American Resources, Inc.

[Docket No. ER95–78–000]

Take notice that on February 27, 1995,

Mid-American Resources, Inc. tendered

for filing an amendment in the abovereferenced docket.

Comment date: March 23, 1995, in

accordance with Standard Paragraph E

at the end of this notice.

5. Southern California Edison Company

[Docket No. ER95–361–000]

Take notice that on February 24, 1995,

Southern California Edison Company

(Edison) submitted supplemental

information regarding its filing in the

above captioned docket.

Copies of this filing were served upon

the Public Utilities Commission of the

State of California and all interested

parties.

Comment date: March 23, 1995, in

accordance with Standard Paragraph E

at the end of this notice.

6. Westcoast Power Marketing Inc.

[Docket No. ER95–378–000]

Take notice that on February 21, 1995,

Westcoast Power Marketing Inc.

tendered for filing supplemental

information to its January 3, 1995 filing

in the-above-referenced docket.

Comment date: March 23, 1995, in

accordance with Standard Paragraph E

at the end of this notice.

7. The Empire District Electric

Company

[Docket No. ER95–446–000b

Take notice that The Empire District

Electric Company (EDE), on March 2,

1995, tendered for filing proposed

changes in its Transmission Peaking

Service Contract between EDE and the

Kansas Electric Power Cooperative, Inc.

(KEPCo).

This filing is to amend Docket No.

ER95–446–000.

Copies of the filing were served upon

the Arkansas Public Service

Commission, Kansas Corporation

Commission, the Missouri Public

Service Commission, Oklahoma

Corporation Commission, and KEPCo.

Comment date: March 23, 1995, in

accordance with Standard Paragraph E

at the end of this notice.

8. NorAm Energy Services, Inc.

[Docket No. ER95–512–000]

Take notice that on February 27, 1995,

NorAm Energy Services, Inc. tendered

for filing a Notice of Withdrawal in the

above-referenced docket.

Comment date: March 23, 1995, in

accordance with Standard Paragraph E

at the end of this notice.

9. New England Power Company

[Docket No. ER95–554–000]

Take notice that on March 3, 1995,

New England Power Company tendered

for filing supplemental information to

its February 6, 1995 filing in the abovereferenced docket.

Comment date: March 23, 1995, in

accordance with Standard Paragraph E

at the end of this notice.

10. Oklahoma Gas and Electric

Company

[Docket No. ER95–644–000]

Take notice that on February 24, 1995,

Oklahoma Gas and Purchase Company

(OG&E) tendered for filing a

Supplemental Power Purchase

Agreement with the Oklahoma

Municipal Power Authority (OMPA).

Comment date: March 23, 1995, in

accordance with Standard Paragraph E

at the end of this notice.

11. New England Power Company

[Docket No. ER95–645–000]

Take notice that on February 24, 1995,

New England Power Company (NEP)

tendered for filing an amendment to its

FERC Rate Schedule No. 439. NEP states

that the effect of the amendment does

not increase or decrease the rates to be

charged.

Comment date: March 23, 1995, in

accordance with Standard Paragraph E

at the end of this notice.

12. PacifiCorp

[Docket No. ER95–646–000]

Take notice that on February 24, 1995,

PacifiCorp tendered for filing a Power

Sales Agreement (Agreement) dated

September 20, 1994 between PacifiCorp

and City of Anaheim, California

(Anaheim).

PacifiCorp requests an effective date

of May 1, 1995 be assigned to the

Agreement.

Copies of this filing were supplied to

Anaheim, the Public Utilities

Commission of the State of California,

the Washington Utilities and

Transportation Commission and the

Public Utility Commission of Oregon.

Comment date: March 23, 1995, in

accordance with Standard Paragraph E

at the end of this notice.

13. San Diego Gas & Electric Company

[Docket No. ER95–647–000]

Take notice that on February 24, 1995,

San Diego Gas & Electric Company

(SDG&E) tendered for filing an

Interchange Agreement (Agreement)

between SDG&E and LG&E Power

Marketing Inc., (LPM).

SDG&E requests that the Commission

allow the Agreement to become effective