Federal Register / Vol. 61, No. 87 / Friday, May 3, 1996 / Notices 19923

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 EA. All comments

received are considered during the

preparation of the EA. State and local

government representatives are

encouraged to notify their constituents

of this proposed action and encourage

them to comment on their areas of

concern.

The EA will discuss impacts that

could occur as a result of the

construction and operation of the

proposed project under these general

headings:

• geology and soils

• water resources, fisheries, and wetlands

• vegetation and wildlife

• public safety

• land use

• endangered and threatened species

• cultural resources

We will also evaluate possible

alternatives to the proposed project or

portions of the project, 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 EA. Depending on

the comments received during the

scoping process, the EA may be

published and mailed to Federal, state,

and local agencies, public interest

groups, interested individuals, affected

landowners, newspapers, libraries, and

the Commission’s official service list for

this proceeding. A comment period will

be allotted for review if the EA is

published. We will consider all

comments on the EA 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:

• Eleven residences are near the

construction rights-of-way.

• Waterbodies would be crossed at 19

locations by new and retirement

construction. One of these, the Pocatalico

River, has been designated as a high quality

stream and is over 100 feet wide at two

proposed wet ditch crossings.

• Construction and abandonment activity

would disturb 23 wetlands.

• Cultural resources have been identified.

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 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, 888 First Street, N.E.,

Washington, D.C. 20426;

• Reference Docket No. CP96–127–

000;

• Send a copy of your letter to: Ms.

Elizabeth Secrest, EA Project Manager,

Federal Energy Regulatory Commission,

888 First Street, N.E., Room 72–50,

Washington, D.C. 20426; and

• Mail your comments so that they

will be received in Washington, D.C. on

or before June 6, 1996.

If you wish to receive a copy of the EA,

you should request one from Ms. Secrest

at the above address.

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) (see appendix 2).

The date for filing of timely motions

to intervene in this proceeding has

passed. Therefore, parties now 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 Ms.

Elizabeth Secrest, EA Project Manager,

at (202) 208–0918.

Linwood A. Watson, Jr.,

Acting Secretary.

[FR Doc. 96–11050 Filed 5–2–96; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 6717–01–M

[FERC Docket No. CP95–35–000; PRPB

Docket No. 94–62–1219–JPM]

Puerto Rico Planning Board;

EcoEle ́ctrica, L.P.; Notice of

Availability of the Final Environmental

Impact Statement/Environmental

Impact Statement for the Proposed

EcoEle ́ctrica LNG Import Terminal and

Cogeneration Project in Guayanilla,

Puerto Rico

April 29, 1996.

The staff of the Federal Energy

Regulatory Commission (FERC) and the

Puerto Rico Planning Board (PRPB) have

prepared this joint final environmental

impact statement/environmental impact

statement (FEIS/EIS) on the natural gas

facilities proposed by EcoEle ́ctrica, L.P.

(EcoEle ́ctrica) in the above dockets.

The FEIS/EIS was prepared to satisfy

the requirements of the National

Environmental Policy Act and Puerto

Rico’s law requiring an EIS under the

Puerto Rico Environmental Quality

Board Regulations (article 4[c] of Law

No. 9). The FERC and PRPB staffs

conclude that approval of the proposed

project, with appropriate mitigation

measures including receipt of necessary

permits and approvals, would have

limited adverse environmental impact.

The Joint EIS evaluates alternatives to

the proposal.

The joint EIS assesses the potential

environmental effects of the

construction and operation of the

proposed EcoEle ́ctrica LNG Import

Terminal and Cogeneration project,

which includes the following facilities:

• A marine terminal for unloading

liquefied natural gas (LNG) tankers, two

1,000,000-barrel LNG storage tanks, and

an LNG vaporization system.

• A 461-megawatt (±10%) electric

cogeneration facility that would use the

vaporized LNG as a fuel source. The

power plant facility would consist of

two gas turbines fueled by natural gas

and one steam generator. The gas

turbines could also use propane (LPG)

as a secondary fuel and low sulfur

number 2 oil as an emergency fuel.

• A desalination facility that could

generate up to 4,000,000 gallons of

potable water per day. The multistage

flash system would use the surplus heat

from power production to produce
19924 Federal Register / Vol. 61, No. 87 / Friday, May 3, 1996 / Notices

1NE Hub Partners, L.P.’s application was filed

with the Commission under section 7 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, 888 First 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.

freshwater. The power plant would

require up to 1,000,000 gallons per day

for operating needs. The surplus would

be sold for public use.

• Other facilities necessary for the

operation of the cogeneration facility

include a 2.3-mile-long, 230-kilovolt

(kV) transmission line connecting the

plant substation to an existing Puerto

Rico Electric Power Authority (PREPA)

substation; a 3.5-mile-long, 8-inchdiameter pipeline to supply LPG to the

cogeneration facility; a 2.0-mile-long,

12-inch-diameter water pipeline for

connecting to an existing offsite water

supply or to outside delivery systems; a

1.2-mile-long 24-inch-diameter natural

gas pipeline stub; and a 1.1-mile-long,

nominal 24-inch-diameter natural gas

pipeline to serve the PREPA Costa Sur

Power Plant.

The joint EIS has been placed in the

public files of the FERC and is available

for public inspection at:

Federal Energy Regulatory Commission,

Public Reference and Files

Maintenance Branch, 888 First Street,

NE, Room 2E, Washington, DC 20426,

(202) 208–1371

Puerto Rico Planning Board, P.O. Box

41119, Santurce, Puerto Rico 00940–

1119, (809) 727–4444

Copies have been mailed to Federal,

Commonwealth, and local agencies,

public interest groups, interested

individuals, public libraries,

newspapers, and parties to this

proceeding.

A limited number of copies of the

joint EIS are available from either:

Mr. Chris Zerby, Federal Energy

Regulatory Commission, Office of

Pipeline Regulation, Room 72–55, 888

First Street, NE, Washington, DC

20426, (202) 208–0111

Mrs. Maria Gordillo, Puerto Rico

Planning Board, P.O. Box 41119,

Santurce, Puerto Rico 00940–1119,

(809) 727–4444

Additional information about this

project is available from Mr. Chris

Zerby, FERC EIS Project Manager, at

(202) 208–0111. Information concerning

the involvement of the Puerto Rico

Planning Board can be obtained from

Mrs. Maria Gordillo, PRPB EIS Project

Manager, at (809) 727–4444.

Linwood A. Watson, Jr.,

Acting Secretary.

[FR Doc. 96–11052 Filed 5–2–96; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 6717–01–M

[Docket No. CP96–53–000]

NE Hub Partners, L.P.; Notice of Intent

To Prepare an Environmental

Assessment for the Proposed NE Hub

Tioga Storage Project and Request for

Comments on Environmental Issues

April 29, 1996.

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 the

facilities proposed in the NE Hub Tioga

Storage Project.1 This EA will be used

by the Commission in its decisionmaking process to determine whether an

environmental impact statement is

required and whether or not to approve

the project.

Summary of the Proposed Project

On November 7, 1995, NE Hub

Partners, L.P. (NE Hub) filed an

application requesting, among other

things, authority to construct and

operate a high deliverability natural gas

salt cavern storage facility. In

conjunction with the storage facilities,

NE Hub said that it, along with other

partners, intended to develop a

nonjurisdictional commercial salt

business and possibly other

nonjurisdictional business ventures at

the site (i.e. compressed air storage for

electric generation and petroleum

storage). The project involves the

construction of two gas storage caverns

with a capacity of up to 3 billion

standard cubic feet per cavern. Leaching

of the storage caverns in the existing

underground salt formation would

require the withdrawal of 2,400 gallons

of fresh water per minute from the

Cowanesque Reservoir over about 28

months. After the water is pumped from

a developing cavern, a portion of the

brine water would be injected into an

underground formation through brine

disposal wells and the remainder would

be shipped out by railroad cars to an

evaporation plant. When completed, NE

Hub indicated that the storage caverns

would be connected to pipelines owned

by CNG Transmission Corporation

(CNG), Tennessee Gas Pipeline

Company (Tennessee), and North Penn

Gas Pipeline Company (North Penn).

In its application and subsequent

responses to staff data requests, NE Hub

has said that it intended to begin

construction of certain bringing

facilities, including cavern leaching

wells, brine disposal wells, and piping,

in June 1996, prior to Commission

action on its certificate application. NE

Hub asserts that Commission

jurisdiction should not attach until the

cavern leaching process commences.

Any facilities needed to start that

process (ie., freshwater intake and pump

station; freshwater pipeline; a brining

facility consisting of pumps, storage

tanks, injection pumps, booster pumps,

separators, centrifuges and support

facilities; brine pipeline; cavern

leaching wells; brine disposal wells; and

possibly a rail loading facility) will be

built prior to Commission certification.

We intend to review the

environmental impacts of the following

of NE Hub’s activities which involve

construction and operation:

• Two cavern leaching/storage wells used to

leach two caverns (first cavern available for

the 1997–1998 winter heating season and

the second cavern available for the 1999–

2000 winter heating season);

• Four segments of 26-inch-diameter

transmission pipeline totalling 12.2 miles;

• 7.1 miles of 4-inch-diameter fuel gas lines;

• Approximately 2.5 miles of 24-inchdiameter gas storage pipeline;

• Three meter stations;

• Six compressors (18,750 horsepower total)

for two storage caverns;

• Three gas heaters;

• A methanol injection system;

• Two gas withdrawal separators;

• One dehydrator;

• Other related gas facilities;

• A freshwater intake pumping station at

Cowanesque Reservoir;

• 2.2 miles of 12-inch-diameter freshwater

pipeline to transport water to the brining

operation;

• Three brine disposal wells;

• Freshwater injection pumps;

• Freshwater and brine holding tanks;

• A leaching plant;

• Brine pumps;

• 19.2 miles of 12-inch-diameter water

injection/brine disposal pipeline;

• Five storage tanks for process fluids;

• A rail car loading system to ship either the

brine or crystallized salt; and potentially,

• An unspecified diameter/length pipeline

and an evaporate plant to dispose of the

brine and other facilities to the extent

needed for brine disposal.

NE Hud’s interconnections with CNG,

Tennessee, and North Penn would

require the construction of a hot tap,

meter, pressure regulator, valves, and

other related facilities at each delivery

site.

The general location of the project

facilities and specific locations for the

know facilities on new sites are shown

in appendix 1.2