2250 Federal Register / Vol. 61, No. 17 / Thursday, January 25, 1996 / Notices

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

[Docket No. RP96–35–002]

East Tennessee Natural Gas Company;

Notice of Compliance Filing

January 19, 1996.

Take notice that on January 2, 1996,

East Tennessee Natural Gas Company

(East Tennessee) in accordance with the

Commission’s ‘‘Order Accepting and

Suspending Tariff Sheets Subject to

Conditions and Granting Waiver’’ issued

in the above-referenced docket on

December 1, 1995 (‘‘December 1

Order’’), submitted for filing Substitute

First Revised Sheet No. 52, Substitute

Original Sheet No. 52 A, and First

Revised Sheet No. 61. East Tennessee

proposes that the filed tariff sheets

become effective as of December 2,

1995.

East Tennessee states that on

November 2, 1995, East Tennessee

failed to change its tariff to impose a

limit on the quantity of gas a customer

can take without scheduling it and to

include language in its tariff allowing it

to waive its Daily Variance charge on a

nondiscriminatory basis. In its

December 1 Order, the Commission

accepted and suspended the proposed

tariff sheets to be effective on December

2, 1995, subject to East Tennessee

refiling certain sheets to reflect minor

changes. The instant filing reflects the

changes required by the December 1

Order.

Any person desiring to protest with

reference to said filing should file a

protest with the Federal Energy

Regulatory Commission, 888 First Street

N.E., Washington, D.C. 20426, in

accordance with Section 211 of the

Commission’s Rules of Practice and

Procedure, 18 CFR 385.211. All such

protests must be filed as provided in

Section 154.210 of the Commission’s

Regulations. Protests will be considered

by the Commission in determining the

appropriate action to be taken, but will

not serve to make Protestants parties to

this proceeding. Copies of this filing are

on file and available for public

inspection.

Lois D. Cashell,

Secretary.

[FR Doc. 96–1119 Filed 1–24–96; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 6717–01–M

[Docket No. CP96–138–000]

El Paso Natural Gas Company; Notice

of Request Under Blanket

Authorization

January 19, 1996.

Take notice that on January 16, 1996,

El Paso Natural Gas Company (El Paso),

P.O. Box 1492, El Paso, Texas 79978,
Federal Register / Vol. 61, No. 17 / Thursday, January 25, 1996 / Notices 2251

filed in Docket No. CP96–138–000 a

request pursuant to Sections 157.205

and 157.212 of the Commission’s

Regulations under the Natural Gas Act

(18 CFR 157.205, 157.212) for

authorization to construct and operate a

delivery point to permit the firm

transportation and delivery of natural

gas to PNM Gas Services, a division of

Public Service Company of New

Mexico, under El Paso’s blanket

certificate issued in Docket No. CP82–

435–000 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.

El Paso proposes to construct and

operate a delivery point in San Juan

County, New Mexico on its existing 20-

inch Blanco-Fruitland First Loop Line

and 16-inch Blanco-Fruitland Second

Loop Line. El Paso states that PNM Gas

Services would use the gas delivered

from the proposed delivery point,

referred to as the 30th Street Meter

Station, to serve the residential,

commercial and industrial requirements

of its new and existing customers in the

Farmington, New Mexico area. The

proposed quantity of natural gas to be

transported on a firm basis to the 30th

Street Meter Station is up to 10,000 Mcf

per day and 1,800,000 Mcf annually. El

Paso states that the estimated cost of the

proposed delivery point is $81,100 and

that PNM Gas Services would reimburse

El Paso for the cost.

El Paso states that the volumes

proposed to be delivered at the 30th

Street Meter Station are within PNM

Gas Services’ certificated entitlements

and that it has sufficient capacity to

accomplish the deliveries of the

proposed gas volumes without

detriment or disadvantage to El Paso’s

other customers.

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. 96–1114 Filed 1–24–96; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 6717–01–M

Federal Energy Regulatory

Commission

[Docket No. ER96–747–000]

Minnesota Power & Light Company;

Notice of Filing

January 19, 1996.

Take notice that on December 18,

19995 Minnesota Power & Light

Company tendered for filing a signed

Service Agreement with LG&E Power

Marketing Inc., under its Wholesale

Coordination Sales Tariff to satisfy its

filing requirements under this tariff.

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, 888

First Street, NE., Washington, DC 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

January 26, 1996. Protests will be

considered by the Commission in

determining the appropriate action to be

taken, but will not service 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. 96–1117 Filed 1–24–96; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 6717–01–M

Federal Energy Regulatory

Commission

[Docket No. CP96–133–000]

Northern Natural Gas Company; Notice

of Request Under Blanket

Authorization

January 19, 1996.

Take notice that on January 11, 1996,

Northern Natural Gas Company

(Northern), 1111 South 103rd Street,

Omaha, Nebraska 68124–1000, filed a

prior notice request with the

Commission in Docket No. CP96–133–

000 pursuant to Section 157.205 of the

Commission’s Regulations under the

Natural Gas Act (NGA) for authorization

to upgrade an existing delivery point in

Renville County, Minnesota, under

Northern’s blanket certificate issued in

Docket No. CP82–401–000 pursuant to

Section 7 of the NGA, all as more fully

set forth in the request which is open to

the public for inspection.

Northern proposes to upgrade the

existing Buffalo Lake town border

station in Renville County to

accommodate increased interruptible

natural gas deliveries under Northern’s

currently effective throughput service

agreements to Sheehan’s Gas Company

(Sheehan) for use at their ethanol plant.

Northern would replace a 3-inch meter

with a 4-inch meter. Northern would

increase its natural gas deliveries to

Sheehan from the present peak day

quantity of 805 MMBtu to 1,805 MMBtu

and from the present annual quantity of

225,568 MMBtu to 545,568 MMBtu.

Northern states that it would pay the

estimated $31,000 for the proposed

upgrade of facilities at the Buffalo Lake

town border station.

Any person or the Commission’s staff

may, within 45 days after the

Commission has issued this notice, 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

NGA (18 CFR 157.205) a protest to the

request. If no protest is filed within the

allowed time, 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 NGA.

Lois D. Cashell,

Secretary.

[FR Doc. 96–1111 Filed 1–24–96; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 6717–01–M

[Docket No. ER96–8–000]

PacifiCorp; Notice of Filing

January 19, 1996.

Take notice that on December 18,

1995, PacifiCorp tendered for filing an

amendment in the above-referenced

docket.

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, 888

First Street, NE., Washington, DC 20426,

in accordance with Rules 211 and 214