17782 Federal Register / Vol. 60, No. 67 / Friday, April 7, 1995 / Notices

filing additional information in the

above-referenced docket.

Comment date: April 14, 1995, in

accordance with Standard Paragraph E

at the end of this notice.

5. Central Illinois Light Company

[Docket No. ER95–602–000]

Take notice that on March 27, 1995,

Central Illinois Light Company (CILCO),

tendered for filing with the Commission

a substitute tariff for the Coordination

Sales Tariff filed on February 15, 1995.

This substitute tariff has been filed for

the purpose of reflecting maximum

weekly prices for certain service, a

change in the late payment and

arbitration provisions, and to remove a

load factor limitation.

CILCO is requesting a waiver of the

notice period to allow the revised tariff

to be effective on April 3, 1995.

Copies of the filing were served on all

parties and the Illinois Commerce

Commission.

Comment date: April 14, 1995, in

accordance with Standard Paragraph E

at the end of this notice.

6. Southwestern Electric Power

Company

[Docket No. ER95–660–000]

Take notice that on March 22, 1995,

Southwestern Electric Power Company

tendered for filing an amendment in the

above-referenced docket.

Comment date: April 13, 1995, in

accordance with Standard Paragraph E

at the end of this notice.

7. Southwestern Electric Power

Company

[Docket No. ER95–737–000]

Take notice that on March 14, 1995,

Southwestern Electric Power Company

(SWEPCO), submitted a Service

Agreement, dated February 21, 1995,

establishing the City of Ruston, Lincoln

Parish, Louisiana (the City of Ruston) as

a customer under the terms of

SWEPCO’s Coordination Sales Tariff

CST–1 )(CST–1 Tariff).

SWEPCO requests an effective date of

March 1, 1995, and, accordingly, seeks

waiver of the Commission’s notice

requirements. Copies of this filing were

served upon the City of Ruston and the

Louisiana Public Service Commission.

Comment date: April 14, 1995, in

accordance with Standard Paragraph E

at the end of this notice.

8. Duke Power Company

[Docket No. ER95–760–000]

Take notice that on March 17, 1995,

Duke Power Company (Duke), filed an

application to sell up to 2500 MW of

capacity and energy from its owned

generation assets at negotiated rates,

including Rate Schedule MR providing

for sales by Duke of both firm and nonfirm power. In support of its

application, Duke, on its own behalf and

as agent for its wholly-owned

subsidiary, Nantahala Power and Light

Company, filed a Comparable Access

Transmission Tariff, Offering Network

Firm Transmission Service, Point to

Point Firm Transmission Service, Point

to Point Limited Transmission Service

and Point to Point Non-Firm

Transmission Service, including pro

forma transmission service agreements.

Duke requests that Rate Schedule MR

and Duke’s Comparable Access

Transmission Tariff take effect on May

16, 1995.

Comment date: April 14, 1995, in

accordance with Standard Paragraph E

at the end of this notice.

9. Prairie Wind Energy Partners

[Docket No. QF95–198–00]

On March 23, 1995, Prairie Wind

Energy Partners (Applicant) tendered for

filing a supplement to its filing in this

docket. No determination has been

made that the submittal constitutes a

complete filing.

The supplement provides additional

information pertaining primarily to the

technical data and the ownership

structure of the small power production

facility.

Comment date: April 21, 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. 95–8541 Filed 4–6–95; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 6717–01–P

[Project No. 6939–059 West Virginia]

City of Jackson, Ohio and Certain Ohio

Municipalities; Notice of Availability of

Final Environmental Assessment

April 3, 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

486, 52 FR 47897), the Commission’s

Office of Hydropower Licensing has

reviewed a non-capacity related

amendment of license for the Belleville

Hydroelectric Project, No. 6939–059.

The Belleville Hydroelectric Project is

located on the Ohio River in Wood

County, West Virginia. The application

is to relocate a transmission line to

connect the project to a substation near

Rutland, Ohio. The final environmental

assessment (FEA) finds that approving

the application would not constitute a

major federal action significantly

affecting the quality of the human

environment.

The FEA was written by staff in the

Office of Hydropower Licensing,

Federal Energy Regulatory Commission.

Copies of the EA 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. Copies can also be obtained

by calling the project manager, Rebecca

Martin at (202) 219–2650.

Lois D. Cashell,

Secretary.

[FR Doc. 95–8537 Filed 4–6–95; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 6717–01–M

[Docket No. CP95–286–000]

Koch Gateway Pipeline Co.; Notice of

Request Under Blanket Authorization

April 3, 1995.

Take notice that on March 28, 1995,

Koch Gateway Pipeline Company

(Koch), P.O. Box 1478, Houston, Texas

77251–1478, filed in Docket No. CP95–

286–000 a request pursuant to Sections

157.205 and 157.211 of the

Commission’s Regulations under the

Natural Gas Act (18 CFR 157.205,

157.211) for authorization to construct

and operate approximately 5 miles of

12-inch pipeline including one meter

station and appurtenant facilities, all

located in Mobile County, Alabama, to

permit the delivery of natural gas to Bay

Gas Storage Company (Bay Gas) and

Clarke-Mobile Utilities (Clarke-Mobile),

under Koch’s blanket certificate issued

in Docket No. CP82–430–000 pursuant

to Section 7 of the Natural Gas Act, all

as more fully set forth in the request that
Federal Register / Vol. 60, No. 67 / Friday, April 7, 1995 / Notices 17783

is on file with the Commission and open

to public inspection.

Koch proposes to install the pipeline

and appurtenant facilities to

accommodate two delivery taps for

service to Bay Gas, an intrastate storage

company, and Clarke-Mobile, a local

distribution company. Koch states that

the tap for Bay Gas will provide a

connection to Bay Gas’ facilities and the

tap for Clarke-Mobile will permit

deliveries at a higher pressure than is

available from the existing

interconnection with Clarke-Mobile.

It is stated that Koch would use the

delivery taps for the delivery of up to

73,000 Mcf of gas on a peak day to Bay

Gas and up to 30,000 Mcf of gas on a

peak day to Clarke-Mobile. It is stated

that these volumes are within both

customers’ existing daily entitlements. It

is asserted that deliveries to both Bay

Gas and Clarke-Mobile would be made

under Koch’s ITS and FTS rate

schedules. It is further asserted that the

tap proposed for Bay Gas would be bidirectional and would be used for the

receipt by Koch of up to 202,000 Mcf of

gas on a peak day from Bay Gas.

The total construction cost is

estimated at $1.68 million, of which

Koch will receive $1 million as

contribution-in-aid of construction.

Koch states that it has sufficient

capacity to render the proposed service

without detriment or disadvantage to its

other existing customers and that its

tariff does not prohibit the addition of

delivery taps.

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 section

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. 95–8535 Filed 4–6–95; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 6717–01–M

[Docket No. CP95–287–000]

Mojave Pipeline Company; Request

Under Blanket Authorization

April 3, 1995.

Take notice that on March 28, 1995,

Mojave Pipeline Company (Mojave),

5001 E. Commercenter Drive,

Bakersfield, California 93309, filed in

Docket No. CP95–287–000 a request

pursuant to Sections 157.205 and

157.211 of the Commission’s

Regulations under the Natural Gas Act

(18 CFR 157.205, 157.211) to construct

and operate a sale tap under Mojave’s

blanket certificate issued in Docket Nos.

CP89–1–000 and CP89–2–000 pursuant

to Section 7 of the Natural Gas Act, all

as more fully set forth in the request that

is on file with the Commission and open

to public inspection.

Mojave proposes to construct a sales

tap and metering and appurtenant

facilities onto its existing 42-inch line in

Kern County, California to transport

natural gas on behalf of TehachapiCummings County Water District

(Tehachapi-Cummings). Mojave states

these facilities would be used to

transport up to 3,000 MMBtu per day on

behalf of Tehachapi-Cummings

pursuant to Mojave’s FT–1 and IT–1 rate

schedules. Mojave states that the service

rendered to Tehachapi-Cummings

through the proposed facilities will have

no material impact on Mojave’s peak

day or annual 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 Section

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 therefore,

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. 95–8536 Filed 4–6–95; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 6717–01–M

[Docket No. RP94–251–003]

National Fuel Gas Supply Corporation;

Request for Waiver

April 3, 1995.

Take notice that on March 29, 1995,

National Fuel Gas Supply Corporation

(National) tendered for filing a request

for an extension of a waiver granted by

the Commission related to Section

21.1(a) of its FERC Gas Tariff.

National states that on June 16, 1994,

the Commission issued a Letter Order in

the above-referenced docket granting

waiver of Section 21.1(a) of its tariff to

allow National to file a report on or

before June 1, 1995, to reflect the

balances of its Account Nos. 191, 858

and 186 related to the flowthrough of

costs by Columbia Gas Transmission

Corporation (Columbia) and CNG

Transmission Corporation.

National states that it is filing to

extend the waiver of Section 21.1(a) of

its tariff to the extent the Commission

grants Columbia an extension of the

close-out period for its Account No. 191,

as requested by Columbia in Docket No.

RP94–273–000.

Any person desiring to protest said

filing should file a protest with the

Federal Energy Regulatory Commission,

825 North Capitol Street, NE.,

Washington, DC, 20426, in accordance

with Rule 211 of the Commission’s

Rules of Practice and Procedure (18 CFR

385.211). All such protest should be

filed on or before April 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. 95–8538 Filed 4–6–95; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 6717–01–M

[Docket Nos. RP95–88–001, RP95–112–006,

RP93–148–004, RP95–62–000, RP95–63–

000, RP95–64–000, and RP95–90–000]

Tennessee Gas Pipeline Co.; Notice of

Proposed Tariff Revisions

April 3, 1995.

Take notice that on March 30, 1995,

Tennessee Gas Pipeline Company

(Tennessee), tendered for filing

proposed tariff revisions in response to

various rate and tariff issues discussed

at a March 6–9, 1995 technical

conference convened by the

Commission in the above-referenced

dockets. Tennessee further states that

the filing contains (1) A response to