Federal Register / Vol. 60, No. 77 / Friday, April 21, 1995 / Notices 19911

INTENT TO FILE COMPETING

APPLICATION,’’ ‘‘COMPETING

APPLICATION,’’ ‘‘COMMENTS,’’

‘‘REPLY COMMENTS,’’

‘‘RECOMMENDATIONS,’’ ‘‘TERMS

AND CONDITIONS,’’ or

‘‘PRESCRIPTIONS;’’ (2) set forth in the

heading the name of the applicant and

the project number of the application to

which the filing responds; (3) furnish

the name, address, and telephone

number of the person protesting or

intervening; and (4) otherwise comply

with the requirements of 18 CFR

385.2001 through 385.2005. All

comments, recommendations, terms and

conditions or prescriptions must set

forth their evidentiary basis and

otherwise comply with the requirements

of 18 CFR 4.34(b). Agencies may obtain

copies of the application directly from

the applicant. Any of these documents

must be filed by providing the original

and the number of copies required by

the Commission’s regulations to: The

Secretary, Federal Energy Regulatory

Commission, 825 North Capitol Street,

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

additional copy must be sent to

Director, Division of Project Review,

Office of Hydropower Licensing,

Federal Energy Regulatory Commission,

Room 1027, at the above address. A

copy of any protest or motion to

intervene must be served upon each

representative of the applicant specified

in the particular application. A copy of

all other filings in reference to this

application must be accompanied by

proof of service on all persons listed in

the service list prepared by the

Commission in this proceeding, in

accordance with 18 CFR 4.34(b) and

385.2010.

D9. Filing and Service of Responsive

Documents—The application is ready

for environmental analysis at this time,

and the Commission is requesting

comments, reply comments,

recommendations, terms and

conditions, and prescriptions.

The Commission directs, pursuant to

section 4.34(b) of the regulations (see

Order No. 533 issued May 8, 1991, 56

FR 23108, May 20, 1991) that all

comments, recommendations, terms and

conditions and prescriptions concerning

the application be filed with the

Commission within 60 days from the

issuance date of this notice (June 2,

1995 for Project No. 2474–004; June 5,

1995 for Project No. 2188–030). All

reply comments must be filed with the

Commission within 105 days from the

date of this notice (July 17, 1995 for

Project No. 2474–004; July 20, 1995 for

Project No. 2188–030).

Anyone may obtain an extension of

time for these deadlines from the

Commission only upon a showing of

good cause or extraordinary

circumstances in accordance with 18

CFR 385.2008.

All filings must (1) bear in all capital

letters the title ‘‘COMMENTS’’, ‘‘REPLY

COMMENTS’’,

‘‘RECOMMENDATIONS,’’ ‘‘TERMS

AND CONDITIONS,’’ or

‘‘PRESCRIPTIONS;’’ (2) set forth in the

heading the name of the applicant and

the project number of the application to

which the filing responds; (3) furnish

the name, address, and telephone

number of the person submitting the

filing; and (4) otherwise comply with

the requirements of 18 CFR 385.2001

through 385.2005. All comments,

recommendations, terms and conditions

or prescriptions must set forth their

evidentiary basis and otherwise comply

with the requirements of 18 CFR 4.34(b).

Any of these documents must be filed

by providing the original and the

number of copies required by the

Commission’s regulations to: The

Secretary, Federal Energy Regulatory

Commission, 825 North Capitol Street

NE., Washington, D.C. 20426. An

additional copy must be sent to

Director, Division of Project Review,

Office of Hydropower Licensing,

Federal Energy Regulatory Commission,

Room 1027, at the above address. Each

filing must be accompanied by proof of

service on all persons listed on the

service list prepared by the Commission

in this proceeding, in accordance with

18 CFR 4.34(b), and 385.2010.

Dated: April 17, 1995, Washington, D. C.

Lois D. Cashell,

Secretary.

[FR Doc. 95–9855 Filed 4–20–95; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 6717–01–P

[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:

• Increase the cushion gas of Zone 2

of the Storage Project from 16.8 Bcf to

17.2 Bcf;

• Construct four injection/withdrawal

wells with appurtenant facilities in

Zone 2 of the Storage Project;

• Upgrade existing compressors C6

and C7 by a total of 2,000 horsepower;

• Install an additional dehydration

unit;

• Add two air-cooled heat

exchangers; and

• 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
19912 Federal Register / Vol. 60, No. 77 / Friday, April 21, 1995 / Notices

1See, Consolidated Gas Supply Corporation, 28

FERC ¶ 62,072 (1984).

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 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.

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

§§ 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.
Federal Register / Vol. 60, No. 77 / Friday, April 21, 1995 / Notices 19913

Northern proposes to abandon inplace 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 inplace. 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 §§ 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

§ 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

[Docket No. CP95–318–000]

Williams Gas Processing—MidContinent Region Company; Petition

for Declaratory Order

April 17, 1995.

Take notice that on April 11, 1995,

Williams Gas Processing—Mid-