16122 Federal Register / Vol. 60, No. 60 / Wednesday, March 29, 1995 / Notices

5. Citizens Utilities Co.

[Docket No. ES95–25–000]

Take notice that on March 17, 1995,

Citizens Utilities Company (Citizens),

filed an application under § 204 of the

Federal Power Act seeking authorization

to issue not more than 900,000 shares of

common stock series B of Citizens

pursuant to the provisions of Citizens

Non-Employee Directors’ Deferred Fee

Equity Plan. Also, Citizens requests

exemption from the Commission’s

competitive bidding and negotiated

placement regulations.

Comment date: April 17, 1995, in

accordance with Standard Paragraph E

at the end of this notice.

6. Appalachian Power Co.

[Docket No. FA91–64–001]

Take notice that on March 21, 1995,

Appalachian Power Company (APCo),

tendered for filing its compliance report

in the above-referenced docket. The

compliance report was filed in response

to the January 12, 1995, Letter Order in

this docket, which order APCo to refund

to its wholesale customers the time

value of money related to the

accounting and billing of certain railcar

maintenance costs during the period

January 1991 through January 12, 1992.

APCo states that a copy of the filing

was served upon its wholesale

customers, the Virginia State

Corporation Commission, the Public

Service Commission of West Virginia

and the Tennessee Public Service

Commission.

Comment date: April 5, 1995, in

accordance with Standard Paragraph E

at the end of this notice.

7. Air Products and Chemicals, Inc.

[Docket No. QF84–166–001]

On March 20, 1995, Air Products and

Chemicals, Inc. (Air Chemicals)

tendered for filing an amendment to its

filing in this docket.

The amendment pertains to

information relating to the ownership

structure and technical aspects of Air

Products’ cogeneration facility. No

determination has been made that the

submittal constitutes a complete filing.

Comment date: April 10, 1995, in

accordance with Standard Paragraph E

at the end of this notice.

8. Scott Paper Co.

[Docket No. QF86–557–001]

On March 16, 1995, Scott Paper

Company tendered for filing an

amendment to its filing in this docket.

No determination has been made that

the submittal constitutes a complete

filing.

The amendment provides additional

information pertaining to the ownership

and technical characteristics of the

facility.

Comment date: April 11, 1995, in

accordance with Standard Paragraph E

at the end of this notice.

Standard Paragraphs

E. 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 Rules 211 and 214 of the

Commission’s Rules of Practice and

Procedure (18 CFR 385.211 and 18 CFR

385.214). All such motions or protests

should be filed on or before the

comment date. 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. 95–7660 Filed 3–28–95; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 6717–01–P

[Project No. 2290–006–CA]

Southern California Edison Company;

Notice of Availability of Draft

Environmental Assessment

March 23, 1995.

In accordance with the National

Environmental Policy Act of 1969 and

the Federal Energy Regulatory

Commission’s (Commission’s)

regulations, 18 CFR Part 380 (Order No.

486, 52 FR 47897), the Office of

Hydropower Licensing has reviewed the

application for new license for an

existing licensed hydropower project on

the Kern River owned and operated by

the Southern California Edison

Company: the Kern River No. 3 Project

No. 2290, located in Kern and Tulare

Counties, California. Subsequently, the

Commission’s staff prepared a Draft

Environmental Assessment (DEA) that

discusses the relicensing of the project.

In the DEA, staff evaluates the

potential environmental impacts that

would result from the continued

operation of the project. Staff concludes

that relicensing the project with

appropriate enhancement measures

would not constitute a major federal

action significantly affecting the quality

of the human environment.

Copies of the DEA are available for

review in the Public Reference Branch,

Room 3104, of the Commission’s offices

at 941 North Capitol Street, NE.,

Washington, DC 20426.

Any comments should be filed within

45 days from the date of this notice and

should be addressed to Lois D. Cashell,

Secretary, Federal Energy Regulatory

Commission, 825 North Capitol Street,

NE., Washington, DC 20426. Please affix

Project No. 2290 to the first page of all

comments.

For further information, please

contact Kathleen Sherman,

Environmental Coordinator, at (202)

219–2834.

Lois D. Cashell,

Secretary.

[FR Doc. 95–7659 Filed 3–28–95; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 6717–01–M

[Docket No. CP94–151–001, et al.]

Panhandle Eastern Pipe Line

Company, et al.; Natural Gas

Certificate Filings

March 21, 1995

Take notice that the following filings

have been made with the Commission:

1. Panhandle Eastern Pipe Line Co.

[Docket No. CP94–151–001]

Take notice that on March 16, 1995,

Panhandle Eastern Pipe Line Company

(Panhandle), P.O. Box 1642, Houston,

Texas 77251–1642, filed in Docket No.

CP94–151–001 a petition to amend the

application filed in Docket No. CP94–

151–000 to abandon by transfer to its

affiliate, Panhandle Field Services

Company (Field Services) the majority

of the facilities for which

refunctionalization from gathering to

transmission was denied by the

Commission’s order issued February 14,

1995, pursuant to Section 7(b) of the

Natural Gas Act, all as more fully set

forth in the petition which is on file

with the Commission and open to

public inspection.

Panhandle states that in the February

14, 1995, order the Commission

approved the refunctionalization from

gathering to transmission of 50 of 168

facilities. Panhandle also notes that

among the 50 refunctionalized facilities

were six meters located on facilities the

Commission determined to be gathering.

Panhandle also states that it is

requesting rehearing of the

Commission’s determination that six of

the remaining facilities are gathering.

Panhandle is then requesting

authorization to abandon by transfer to

Field Services a total of 116 facilities,

including the six above-mentioned