[Federal Register Volume 60, Number 77 (Friday, April 21, 1995)]
[Notices]
[Pages 19911-19913]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 95-9858]



-----------------------------------------------------------------------

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY
[Docket No. CP71-319-000, et al.]


Colorado Interstate Gas Co., et al.; Natural Gas Certificate 
Filings

April 12, 1995.
    Take notice that the following filings have been made with the 
Commission:

1. Colorado Interstate Gas Company

[Docket No. CP71-319-000]

    Take notice that on April 4, 1995, Colorado Interstate Gas Company 
(CIG), P.O. Box 1087, Colorado Springs, Colorado 80944, filed in Docket 
No. CP71-319-000 an application pursuant to Section 7(c) of the Natural 
Gas Act for authorization to amend the order of November 18, 1971 to 
allow CIG to increase the maximum allowable operating pressure (MAOP) 
of its Oregon Basin Lateral (Lateral), all as more fully set forth in 
the application on file with the Commission and open to public 
inspection.
    It is stated that by order of November 18, 1971, at Docket No. 
CP71-319, CIG was authorized, in part, to construct and operate the 
Lateral, a 19.7 mile six-inch diameter lateral in Park and Big Horn 
Counties, Wyoming. Because of negotiations with a shipper, CIG now 
needs to increase the capacity of the Lateral by installing compression 
under its blanket certificate. This additional compression will result 
in the need to increase the MAOP of the Lateral. CIG avers that the 
increase in the MAOP would be consistent with Part 192 of 49 CFR.
    Comment date: May 3, 1995, in accordance with Standard Paragraph F 
at the end of this notice.

2. Washington Natural Gas Company, as Project Operator

[Docket No. CP95-300-000]

    Take notice that on April 5, 1995, Washington Natural Gas Company 
(Washington Natural), as Project Operator of the Jackson Prairie 
Storage Project, 815 Mercer Street, Seattle, Washington 98109 filed an 
abbreviated application pursuant to Section 7(c) of the Natural Gas Act 
and Part 157 of the Commission's Regulations for a certificate of 
public convenience and necessity authorizing Washington Natural to 
construct facilities and to inject additional cushion gas to increase 
the maximum daily deliverability of the Jackson Prairie Storage Project 
(Storage Project) located in Lewis County, Washington from 450 Mmcf/d 
to 550 Mmcf/d, all as more fully set forth in the application which is 
on file with the Commission and open to public inspection.
    To increase the deliverability of the Storage Project, Washington 
Natural requests Commission authority to:
    <bullet> Increase the cushion gas of Zone 2 of the Storage Project 
from 16.8 Bcf to 17.2 Bcf;
    <bullet> Construct four injection/withdrawal wells with appurtenant 
facilities in Zone 2 of the Storage Project;
    <bullet> Upgrade existing compressors C6 and C7 by a total of 2,000 
horsepower;
    <bullet> Install an additional dehydration unit;
    <bullet> Add two air-cooled heat exchangers; and
    <bullet> Make miscellaneous station piping modifications.
    Washington Natural says the estimated cost of the new facilities 
and the cushion gas will be $5,375,000 which will be shared equally 
among the three partners in the Storage Project: Washington Natural, 
Washington Water Power Company (Water Power), and 
[[Page 19912]] Northwest Pipeline Corporation (Northwest).
    Washington Natural states that each of the three partners in the 
Storage Project is entitled to one-third of the proposed increased 
deliverability. Washington Natural says there will be no change in the 
seasonal working capacity of the Storage Project. Further, Washington 
Natural says that Northwest will file an application in the near future 
to provide the increased deliverability to subscribing customers under 
Northwest's SGS rate schedules.
    Comment date: May 3, 1995, in accordance with Standard Paragraph F 
at the end of this notice.

3. ANR Pipeline Company

[Docket No. CP95-301-000]

    Take notice that on April 5, 1995, ANR Pipeline Company (ANR), 500 
Renaissance Center, Detroit, Michigan 48243, filed in Docket No. CP95-
301-000 an application pursuant to Section 7(b) of the Natural Gas Act 
for permission and approval to abandon two transportation services 
performed for Panhandle Eastern Pipeline Company (Panhandle), all as 
more fully set forth in the application on file with the Commission and 
open to public inspection.
    ANR proposes to abandon two transportation services performed for 
Panhandle which are designated as Rate Schedules X-92 and X-93 and 
contained in Original Volume No. 2 of its FERC Gas Tariff. The 
transportation services were authorized in Docket No. CP78-545. It is 
stated that no facilities are proposed to be abandoned.
    Comment date: May 3, 1995, in accordance with Standard Paragraph F 
at the end of this notice.

4. CNG Transmission Corporation

[Docket No. CP95-302-000]

    Take notice that on April 5, 1995, CNG Transmission Corporation 
(CNG), 445 West Main Street, Clarksburg, West Virginia 26302, filed an 
application pursuant to Section 7(b) of the Natural Gas Act and Part 
157 of the Commission's Regulations for an order authorizing the 
abandonment of a certificated exchange of gas<SUP>1 in CNG's production 
area in West Virginia with Pennzoil Products, Inc. (Pennzoil), pursuant 
to CNG's Rate Schedule No. X-50, to be effective January 1, 1995. CNG's 
application is on file with the Commission and open to public 
inspection.

    \1\See, Consolidated Gas Supply Corporation, 28 FERC 62,072 
(1984).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    CNG states that due to the fact that CNG is no longer purchasing 
gas from Pennzoil, the exchange of natural gas production between the 
parties is no longer needed. CNG states that pursuant to the provisions 
of a Letter Agreement between CNG and Pennzoil, the parties have agreed 
to cancel and terminate Rate Schedule X-50 for the exchange of natural 
gas at certain delivery and receipt points in the State of West 
Virginia. The original term of the Exchange Agreement was to continue 
until January 1, 1992, and from year to year thereafter until 
terminated by either party on six months' notice.
    CNG states that no customers' service will be affected by the 
cancellation of Rate Schedule No. X-50. CNG states that no facilities 
are involved in the abandonment of this rate schedule.
    Comment date: May 3, 1995, in accordance with Standard Paragraph F 
at the end of this notice.

5. Columbia Gas Transmission Corporation

[Docket No. CP95-305-000]

    Take notice that on April 6, 1995, Columbia Gas Transmission 
Corporation (Columbia), 1700 MacCorkle Avenue, S.E., Charleston, West 
Virginia 25314, filed in Docket No. CP95-305-000 an application 
pursuant to Sections 7(b) and 7(c) of the Natural Gas Act for 
authorization to abandon certain pipeline facilities and to construct 
and operate other pipeline facilities to replace those being abandoned 
in Madison County, Ohio, and to increase the pressure on another part 
of the system, all as more fully set forth in the application on file 
with the Commission and open to public inspection.
    Columbia proposes to abandon approximately 1.2 miles of 18-inch 
pipeline and appurtenances on Line A of its mainline system and to 
construct and operate 1.2 miles of 20-inch pipeline and appurtenances 
as replacement facilities. It is stated that the existing facilities 
were installed in 1941 and have deteriorated to the point where they 
can no longer provide adequate service to existing customers at current 
levels. It is further stated that the proposed replacement would enable 
Columbia to ensure continued service to its customers and the integrity 
of the line.
    Columbia also proposes to increase the maximum allowable operating 
pressure on a 23.8 mile segment of its Line A from 400 psig to 500 
psig. It is stated that this increase would involve a segment of 
pipeline from the Mt. Sterling gate valve to the Howell Measuring 
Station. It is asserted that the increased pressure would allow 
Columbia to take advantage of the increased capabilities of the new 
pipeline. Columbia asserts that it does not propose any new or 
additional service as a result of the pipeline replacement or pressure 
increase. Columbia further asserts that the proposal would not result 
in any abandonment of service to existing customers.
    The construction cost is estimated at $778,200, which would be 
generated from internal sources. It is estimated that the increase in 
pressure would cost an additional $30,000.
    Comment date: May 3, 1995, in accordance with Standard Paragraph F 
at the end of this notice.

6. Koch Gateway Pipeline Company

[Docket No. CP95-309-000]

    Take notice that on April 7, 1995, Koch Gateway Pipeline Company 
(Gateway), P.O. Box 1478, Houston, Texas 77251-1478, filed in Docket 
No. CP95-309-000 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 operate as a jurisdictional facility, a 
delivery tap placed in service under Section 311(a) of the Natural Gas 
Policy Act under Gateway'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 is on file with the Commission and 
open to public inspection.
    Gateway proposes to provide transportation services under its 
blanket transportation certificate through an existing delivery tap 
serving Entex, Inc., a local distribution company, in Rusk County, 
Texas, after receiving the proposed certification.
    Comment date: May 30, 1995, in accordance with Standard Paragraph G 
at the end of this notice.

7. Northern Natural Gas Company

[Docket No. CP95-312-000]

    Take notice that on April 10, 1995, Northern Natural Gas Company 
(Northern), P.O. Box 3330, Omaha, Nebraska, 68103-0330, filed in Docket 
No. CP95-312-000 an abbreviated application pursuant to Section 7(b) of 
the Natural Gas Act, as amended, and Secs. 157.7 and 157.18 of the 
Federal Energy Regulatory Commission's (Commission) Regulations 
thereunder, for permission to abandon one field area compressor unit 
and appurtenant facilities located in Reagan County, Texas, and an 
entire compression station located in Pecos County, Texas, all as more 
fully set forth in the application which is on file with the Commission 
and open to public inspection. [[Page 19913]] 
    Northern proposes to abandon in-place a single staged 1,080 
horsepower compressor unit (Big Lake Unit No. 1) located at its Big 
Lake compressor station (Big Lake Station) in Reagan County, Texas. 
Northern indicates that currently the Big Lake Station consists of four 
compressor units totaling 4,360 horsepower. Northern indicates that the 
installation of blind flanges or weld caps during abandonment will be 
completed, as required, so as not to affect the operation of the 
remaining units at the Big Lake Station.
    Northern advises that it proposes to abandon in its entirety the 
Pecos County No. 2 Station (Pecos Station), which currently consists of 
three compressor units, totaling 3,000 horsepower, and to move two of 
those units to a new facility to be constructed during the summer 1995, 
the Jal Compressor Station located in Lea County, New Mexico. Northern 
states that the new facility will be constructed on Northern's 16 inch 
transmission branchline approximately 26 miles north of the existing 
Kermit Compressor Station in Winkler County, Texas, and will be 
installed pursuant to Northern's blanket authority granted on September 
1, 1982, in Docket No. CP82-401. Northern proposes to abandon the 
remaining unit at the Pecos Station in-place. Northern further 
indicates that all gas and service piping to the Pecos Station will be 
disconnected and sealed off either by the installation of blind flanges 
or weld caps.
    Northern avers that it intends to utilize the remaining Pecos 
Station unit and the Big Lake unit No. one, or parts from these units, 
in the future at other locations within Northern's field area as the 
need for these units may arise. Northern states that in certain 
instances, the units proposed to be abandoned may be salvaged rather 
than utilized elsewhere on Northern's pipeline system. Northern 
indicates that it will seek, to the extent applicable, the required 
Commission authority in order to install and operate these compressor 
facilities at a new location if these facilities are to be utilized in 
the future. Northern further states that the Big Lake compressor Unit 
No. 1 and the Pecos Station are not required due to reduced 
deliverability in the systems located upstream of the compressor units. 
Northern advises that the abandonment of the Big Lake unit and the 
Pecos Station will not result in the abandonment of service to any of 
Northern's existing customers or producers, nor will the proposed 
abandonment adversely impact capacity since this compression is no 
longer needed by Northern to receive the remaining gas supplies 
available from upstream gathering systems.
    Comment date: May 3, 1995, in accordance with Standard Paragraph F 
at the end of this notice.

8. Texas Gas Transmission Corporation

[Docket No. CP95-313-000]

    Take notice that on April 10, 1995, Texas Gas Transmission 
Corporation (Texas Gas), 3800 Frederica Street, Owensboro, Kentucky 
42301, filed in Docket No. CP95-313-000 a request pursuant to 
Secs. 157.205 and 157.212 of the Commission's Regulations under the 
Natural Gas Act (18 CFR 157.205 and 157.212) for authorization to 
upgrade an existing delivery point through which it delivers gas to 
Indiana Gas Company, Inc. (Indiana Gas) in Parke County, Indiana, under 
Texas Gas's blanket certificate issued in Docket No. CP82-407-000 
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.
    It is stated that Indiana Gas has requested that Texas Gas increase 
the measurement capability at the Hercules Powder Meter Station to 
allow Indiana Gas to serve, in addition to existing requirements, new 
load attributable to the Wabash River Coal Gasification Project. Texas 
Gas proposes to upgrade the meter station by replacing the dual 2-inch 
meter runs, two 2-inch side valves and related piping with a dual 4-
inch station at this point. It is stated that Indiana Gas will 
reimburse Texas Gas for the cost of upgrading the measurement 
facilities, which is estimated to be $92,700.
    It is further stated that Indiana Gas has informed Texas Gas that 
it will not require any increase in existing firm contract quantities 
to accommodate service at the delivery point as the new load will be 
served with interruptible and capacity release volumes.
    Comment date: May 30, 1995, in accordance with Standard Paragraph G 
at the end of this notice.

Standard Paragraphs

    F. Any person desiring to be heard or to make any protest with 
reference to said application should on or before the comment date, 
file with the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, Washington, D.C. 
20426, a motion to intervene or a protest in accordance with the 
requirements of the Commission's Rules of Practice and Procedure (18 
CFR 385.214 or 385.211) and the Regulations under the Natural Gas Act 
(18 CFR 157.10). All protests filed with the Commission will be 
considered by it in determining the appropriate action to be taken but 
will not serve to make the protestants parties to the proceeding. Any 
person wishing to become a party to a proceeding or to participate as a 
party in any hearing therein must file a motion to intervene in 
accordance with the Commission's Rules.
    Take further notice that, pursuant to the authority contained in 
and subject to the jurisdiction conferred upon the Federal Energy 
Regulatory Commission by Sections 7 and 15 of the Natural Gas Act and 
the Commission's Rules of Practice and Procedure, a hearing will be 
held without further notice before the Commission or its designee on 
this application if no motion to intervene is filed within the time 
required herein, if the Commission on its own review of the matter 
finds that a grant of the certificate and/or permission and approval 
for the proposed abandonment are required by the public convenience and 
necessity. If a motion for leave to intervene is timely filed, or if 
the Commission on its own motion believes that a formal hearing is 
required, further notice of such hearing will be duly given.
    Under the procedure herein provided for, unless otherwise advised, 
it will be unnecessary for applicant to appear or be represented at the 
hearing.
    G. 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 Sec. 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. 95-9858 Filed 4-20-95; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6717-01-P