[Federal Register Volume 61, Number 17 (Thursday, January 25, 1996)]
[Notices]
[Pages 2249-2250]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 96-1121]



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

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY
[Docket No. RP96-92-000]


Amoco Production Company vs. ANR Pipeline Company; Notice of 
Complaint and Request for Refunds

January 19, 1996.
    Take notice that, on December 22, 1995, Amoco Production Company 
(Amoco), 501 Westlake Park Blvd., Houston, Texas 77079, filed a 
complaint and request for refunds, pursuant to sections 4 and 5 of the 
Natural Gas Act and Rules 206 and 212 of the Commission's Rules of 
Practice and Procedure (18 CFR 385.206 and 385.212), against ANR 
Pipeline Company (ANR) regarding the charges ANR assesses to the 
Mooreland Plant owners for the transportation of gas used to replace 
[make-up] gas removed at the Mooreland Plant as plant fuel and 
shrinkage resulting from processing, i.e., Plant Thermal Reduction 
(PTR), all as more fully set forth in the application, which is on file 
with the Commission and open to public inspection.
    The Mooreland Plant is located in Oklahoma and is operated by 
Amoco. Amoco asserts that ANR owns and operates an extensive gathering 
system behind the Mooreland Plant, which gathers gas from hundreds of 
wells but does not perform a transportation service with respect to 
field production delivered to the inlet of the Mooreland Plant.
    Amoco claims that ANR has classified certain of its pipeline 
facilities upstream of the Mooreland Plant as transmission facilities 
(including a portion of ANR pipeline that connects the rest of ANR's 
gathering system to the Mooreland Plant and a portion of ANR's 
Mooreland Compression Station which is used to 

[[Page 2250]]
compress gathered gas to allow it to enter the plant). Amoco contends 
that these facilities are not transportation facilities, but rather an 
integral part of ANR's Mooreland Area gathering system.
    Amoco alleges that ANR's improper classification of these pipeline 
facilities as transportation facilities has, in effect, allowed ANR to 
rebundle transportation and gathering rates for behind-the-plant 
services and improperly charge the Mooreland Plant owners 
transportation rates for the PTR make-up volumes sourced upstream of 
the Mooreland Plant. Amoco further alleges that ANR does not provide a 
transportation service to the Mooreland Plant owners, but requires the 
plant owners to pay transportation charges for ``fictional'' 
transportation to the tailgate of the Mooreland Plant, a practice that 
(according to Amoco) permits ANR to double or triple charge the plant 
owners for transportation of the same gas volumes.
    Amoco asserts that, to make shippers receiving make-up gas at the 
plant tailgate or Southwest Area pool responsible for the 
transportation charges on ANR's transmission system downstream of the 
Mooreland Plant, to ensure that gathering and transportation rates are 
not rebundled and charged to the Mooreland Plant owners, and to prevent 
ANR from overcharging the Mooreland Plant owners for the delivery of 
the same gas volumes through some other interpretation of its tariff, 
the Mooreland Plant owners should be permitted to physically deliver 
PTR make-up volumes (in-kind) at the tailgate of the plant, or through 
ANR's Southwest Area pool.
    Amoco requests the Commission to find that ANR does not perform a 
transportation service upstream of the Mooreland Plant, and to find 
that ANR's facilities upstream of the inlet to the plant that are used 
to bring gas to the inlet of the plant for processing only perform a 
gathering function and, as such, should be classified as gathering 
facilities. Amoco also requests the Commission to find that ANR has 
already charged producers or downstream shippers to transport PTR make-
up volumes, to find that ANR cannot also charge the Mooreland Plant 
owners again for the same service provided to others, and to require 
ANR to cease charging the Moreland Plant owners transportation rates on 
gas volumes that only move on ANR's behind-the-plant gathering system. 
Amoco also requests the Commission to find that the Mooreland Plant 
owners should be permitted to physically deliver PTR make-up volumes 
(in-kind) at the tailgate of the plant, or through ANR's Southwest area 
pool.
    Amoco further requests the Commission to direct ANR to refund (with 
interest), to the Mooreland Plant owners, all transportation charges 
assessed on PTR make-up volumes since the effective date of ANR's 
unbundled gathering and transportation rates in Docket No. RP94-43, and 
to grant such other relief as the Commission may find appropriate.
    Any person desiring to be heard, or to make any protest with 
reference to said application should, on or before February 20, 1996, 
file with the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, Washington, D.C. 
20426, a motion to intervene or 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 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.
    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, or if the Commission on its own review of the matter 
finds that a grant of the certificate is required by the public 
convenience and necessity. If a motion for leave to intervene is timely 
filed, or 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 Amoco and ANR to appear or be represented at 
the hearing.
Lois D. Cashell,
Secretary.
[FR Doc. 96-1121 Filed 1-24-96; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6717-01-M