30604 Federal Register / Vol. 61, No. 117 / Monday, June 17, 1996 / Notices

(SPS), tendered for filing pursuant to

Section 205 of the Federal Power Act

and Part 35 of the Commission’s

Regulations, an Interconnection

Agreement between the West Texas

Municipal Power Agency (WTMPA) and

SPS. The Interconnection Agreement

cancels and replaces the four individual

rate schedules SPS has with the

municipalities of Lubbock, Tulia,

Floydada, and Brownfield, Texas.

Subsequent to the filing of the

individual rate schedules with the

municipalities of Lubbock, Tulia,

Floydada, and Brownfield, Texas, the

four municipalities incorporated

WTMPA. SPS files the interconnection

Agreement to allow it to sell directly to

WTMPA, to harmonize its treatment of

each municipality, and to revise its

charges for emergency service. SPS

requests waiver of the Commission’s 60

day prior notice and filing requirements

to allow the Interconnection Agreement

to become effective June 1, 1996. SPS

states that a copy of this filing has been

served on the customer.

Comment date: June 24, 1996, in

accordance with Standard Paragraph E

at the end of this notice.

15. Virginia Electric and Power

Company

[Docket No. ER96–1970–000]

Take notice that on May 31, 1996,

Virginia Electric and Power Company

(the Company), tendered for filing a

letter agreement implementing the rate

schedules included in the

Interconnection and Operating

Agreement between the Company and

Old Dominion Electric Cooperative.

Copies of the filing were served upon

Old Dominion Electric Cooperative, the

Virginia State Corporation Commission

and the North Carolina Utilities

Commission.

Comment date: June 24, 1996, in

accordance with Standard Paragraph E

at the end of this notice.

16. New England Power Company

[Docket No. ER96–1971–000]

Take notice that on May 31, 1996,

New England Power Company, filed

Service Agreements and Certificates of

Concurrence with NorAm Energy

Services, Inc. marketers under NEP’s

FERC Electric Tariff, Original Volume

No. 5.

Comment date: June 24, 1996, in

accordance with Standard Paragraph E

at the end of this notice.

Standard Paragraph

E. 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, N.E., Washington, D.C.

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

the comment date. Protests will be

considered by the Commission in

determining the appropriate action to be

taken, but will not serve 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. 96–15253 Filed 6–14–96; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 6717–01–P

[Project Nos. 1494–124, et al.]

Hydroelectric Applications [Grand

River Dam Authority, et al.]; Notice of

Applications

Take notice that the following

hydroelectric applications have been

filed with the Commission and are

available for public inspection:

1 a. Type of Application: Request for

Commission Approval to Grant a Permit

for the Construction and Operation of a

Marina Facility.

b. Project No.: 1494–124.

c. Dated Filed: April 30, 1996.

d. Applicant: Grand River Dam

Authority (licensee).

e. Name of Project: Pensacola Project.

f. Location: The Duck Creek arm of

Grand Lake O’ The Cherokees, Delaware

County, Afton, Oklahoma.

g. Filed Pursuant to: Federal Power

Act, 16 U.S.C. § 791(a)–825(r).

h. Applicant Contact: Mr. Robert W.

Sullivan, Jr., Grand River Dam

Authority, P.O. Box 409, Drawer G,

Vinita, OK 74301, (918) 256–5545.

i. FERC Contact: Joseph C. Adamson,

(202) 219–1040.

j. Comment Date: July 15, 1996.

k. Description of Proposed Action:

The licensee requests Commission

approval to grant a permit to Mr. John

Mullen, d/b/a Thunder Bay Marina for

the construction and operation of a

marina facility. The proposed facility

includes the addition of 5 floating docks

containing 129 boat slips to an existing

facility, with 3 floating docks containing

80 boat slips, for a total of 8 floating

docks containing 209 boat slips.

1. This notice also consists of the

following standard paragraphs: B, C1,

and D2.

2 a. Type of Application: As-Built

Exhibits.

b. Project No: 5376–034.

c. Date Filed: October 12, 1995 and

April 16, 1996.

d. Applicant: Horseshoe Bend

Hydroelectric Co.

e. Name of Project: Horseshoe Bend

Project.

f. Location: On the Payette River in

Boise County, Idaho.

g. Filed Pursuant to: Federal Power

Act, 16 U.S.C. § 791(a)–825(r).

h. Applicant Contact: Mr. David

O’Day, Project Manager, Horseshoe

Bend Hydroelectric Co., P.O. Box 2797,

Boise, ID 83701, (208) 345–7515.

i. FERC Contact: Paul Shannon, (202)

219–2866.

j. Comment Date: July 17, 1996.

k. Description of Filing: Horseshoe

Bend Hydroelectric Company filed asbuilt exhibits A, F, and G for the

Commission’s approval in accordance

with article 35 of the project’s license.

The exhibit A is a written project

description. The exhibit F includes

drawings of the constructed project

features. The exhibit G includes

drawings of the project boundary as

described by surveyed bearings and

distances. The as-built project boundary

is more detailed and slightly different

than the project boundary approved in

the license.

Interested parties can request a copy

of the as-built exhibits by calling the

applicant contact from item (h) of this

notice.

l. This notice also consists of the

following standard paragraphs: B, C1,

and D2.

3 a. Type of Application: Surrender of

Exemption (5 MW or Less).

b. Project No.: 6789–003.

c. Date Filed: May 14, 1996.

d. Applicant: Robert A. Lodi.

e. Name of Project: Advance Mills

Hydroelectric Project.

f. Location: On the North Rivanna

River in Albemarle County, Virginia.

g. Filed Pursuant to: Federal Power

Act, 16 USC §§ 791(a)–825(r).

h. Contact: Mr. Robert A. Lodi, 1785

Frays Mill Road, Ruckersville, VA

22968, (804) 975–0113.

i. FERC Contact: Mr. Lynn R. Miles,

(202) 219–2671.

j. Comment Date: July 22, 1996.

k. Description of the Proposed Action:

The existing project, for which the

exemption is being surrendered,

consists of: (1) a 12-foot-high concrete

dam; (2) a reservoir with a gross storage

capacity of 12 acre feet; (3) a raceway

approximately 200 feet in length; (4) a

building containing the project’s

electrical controls; (5) two turbine/

generators with a total capacity of 65

kilowatts; and (6) related facilities.
Federal Register / Vol. 61, No. 117 / Monday, June 17, 1996 / Notices 30605

The exemptee is requesting surrender

of the exemption because the project is

not economically feasible.

l. This notice also consists of the

following standard paragraphs: B, C1,

and D2.

4 a. Type of Application: Amendment

of Preliminary Permit.

b. Project No.: 11524–001.

c. Date filed: May 1, 1996.

d. Applicant: Mokelumne River Water

and Power Authority.

e. Name of Project: Middle bar.

f. Location: Partially on lands

administered by the Bureau of Land

Management, on the Mokelumne River,

in Amador and Calaveras Counties,

California. Township 5 N, Range 11 E,

and Section 16.

g. Filed Pursuant to: Federal Power

Act 16 USC §§ 791(a)–825(r).

h. Applicant Contact: Mr. Henry M.

Hirata, Secretary, Mokelumne River

Water and Power Authority, P.O. Box

1810, 1810 E. Hazelton Avenue,

Stockton, CA 95201, (209) 468–3000.

i. FERC Contact: Michael Spencer at

(202) 219–2846.

j. Comment Date: August 8, 1996.

k. Description of Amended Project:

The proposed project would utilize the

upper reach of Pardee Reservoir for the

Lower Mokelumne Project No. 2916 and

consist of: (1) a 420-foot- high concrete

arch dam; (2) a reservoir with a storage

capacity of 434,000 acre-feet; (3) a

powerhouse containing a generating

unit with a capacity of 80 MW and an

average annual generation of 227 GWh;

and (4) a 3-mile-long transmission line.

The amended project would be operated

as a peaking plant. The amended project

would also relocate the powerhouse for

PG&E’s Project No. 137. Six county

roads would need to be modified or

reconstructed for the project.

No new access road will be needed to

conduct the studies. The applicant

estimates that the cost of the studies to

be conducted under the preliminary

permit would be $2,484,000.

l. Purpose of Project: Project power

would be sold.

m. This notice also consists of the

following standard paragraphs: A8, A10,

B, C, and D2.

5 a. Type of Application: Preliminary

Permit.

b. Project No.: 11579–000.

c. Date filed: May 1, 1996.

d. Applicant: SOCAL Energy Limited

Partnership.

e. Name of Project: Boulder Valley

Pumped Storage Project.

f. Location: Partially on lands

administered by the Bureau of Land

Management, approximately 30 miles

northeast of San Diego, in San Diego

County, California. BLM lands are

located in sections 1, 2, 11, and 12 in

T14S, R1W.

g. Filed Pursuant to: Federal Power

Act, 16 U.S.C. § 791(a)–825(r).

h. Applicant Contact: Ms. Carol H.

Cunningham, Consolidated Pumped

Storage, Inc., 680 Washington Blvd.,

Fifth Floor, Stamford, CT 06901, (203)

425–8850.

i. FERC Contact: Mr. Michael

Strzelecki, (202) 219–2827.

j. Comment Date: August 15, 1996.

k. Description of Project: The

applicant is exploring two alternative

schemes for the proposed pumped

storage project. Both alternatives would

use the city of San Diego’s existing San

Vicente reservoir and dam as a lower

reservoir. The first alternative would

also consist of: (1) a 235-foot-high dam

and 93-acre upper reservoir; (2) a 20-

foot-diameter, 12,300-foot-long tunnel;

(3) a powerhouse containing an

unspecified number of turbines with a

total installed capacity of 500 MW; (4)

a 0.5-mile-long transmission line

interconnecting with an existing San

Diego Gas & Electric Company

transmission line; and (5) appurtenant

facilities.

The second alternative would also

consist of: (1) a 180-foot-high dam, a

240-foot-high dam, and a 100-acre upper

reservoir; (2) a 30-foot-diameter, 3,000-

foot-long tunnel; (3) a powerhouse

containing two generating units with a

total installed capacity of 400 MW; (4)

a 0.5-mile-long transmission line

interconnecting with an existing San

Diego Gas & Electric Company

transmission line; and (5) appurtenant

facilities.

No new access roads will be needed

to conduct the studies.

l. This notice also consists of the

following standard paragraphs: A5, A7,

A9, A10, B, C, and D2.

6 a. Type of Application: Surrender of

License.

b. Project No.: 9085–015.

c. Date Filed: May 24, 1996.

d. Applicant: Richard Balagur.

e. Name of Project: Great Falls Project.

f. Location: On the Ompompanoosuc

River, in Orange County, Vermont.

g. Filed Pursuant to: Federal Power

Act, 16 USC Section 791(a)–825(r).

h. Applicant Contact: Richard

Balagur, RR 1, Box 68, Thetford Center,

VT 05075, (802) 785–4514.

i. FERC Contact: Regina Saizan, (202)

219–2673.

j. Comment Date: July 31, 1996.

k. Description of Application: The

licensee seeks to surrender the license

for this unconstructed project because

it’s no longer feasible to build.

l. This notice also consists of the

following standard paragraphs: B, C1,

and D2.

Standard Paragraphs

A5. Preliminary Permit—Anyone

desiring to file a competing application

for preliminary permit for a proposed

project must submit the competing

application itself, or a notice of intent to

file such an application, to the

Commission on or before the specified

comment date for the particular

application (see 18 CFR 4.36).

Submission of a timely notice of intent

allows an interested person to file the

competing preliminary permit

application no later than 30 days after

the specified comment date for the

particular application. A competing

preliminary permit application must

conform with 18 CFR 4.30(b) and 4.36.

A7. Preliminary Permit—Any

qualified development applicant

desiring to file a competing

development application must submit to

the Commission, on or before a

specified comment date for the

particular application, either a

competing development application or a

notice of intent to file such an

application. Submission of a timely

notice of intent to file a development

application allows an interested person

to file the competing application no

later than 120 days after the specified

comment date for the particular

application. A competing license

application must conform with 18 CFR

4.30(b) and 4.36.

A8. Preliminary Permit—Public

notice of the filing of the initial

preliminary permit application, which

has already been given, established the

due date for filing competing

preliminary permit applications or

notices of intent. Any competing

preliminary permit or development

application or notice of intent to file a

competing preliminary permit or

development application must be filed

in response to and in compliance with

the public notice of the initial

preliminary permit application. initial

preliminary permit application. No

competing applications or notices of

intent to file competing applications

may be filed in response to this notice.

A competing license application must

conform with 18 CFR 4.30(b) and 4.36.

A9. Notice of intent—A notice of

intent must specify the exact name,

business address, and telephone number

of the prospective applicant, and must

include an unequivocal statement of

intent to submit, if such an application

may be filed, either a preliminary

permit application or a development

application (specify which type of
30606 Federal Register / Vol. 61, No. 117 / Monday, June 17, 1996 / Notices

application). A notice of intent must be

served on the applicant(s) named in this

public notice.

A10. Proposed Scope of Studies under

Permit—A preliminary permit, if issued,

does not authorize construction. The

term of the proposed preliminary permit

would be 36 months. The work

proposed under the preliminary permit

would include economic analysis,

preparation of preliminary engineering

plans, and a study of environmental

impacts. Based on the results of these

studies, the Applicant would decide

whether to proceed with the preparation

of a development application to

construct and operate the project.

B. Comments, Protests, or Motions to

Intervene—Anyone may submit

comments, a protest, or a motion to

intervene in accordance with the

requirements of Rules of Practice and

Procedure, 18 CFR 385.210, .211, .214.

In determining the appropriate action to

take, the Commission will consider all

protests or other comments filed, but

only those who file a motion to

intervene in accordance with the

Commission’s Rules may become a

party to the proceeding. Any comments,

protests, or motions to intervene must

be received on or before the specified

comment date for the particular

application.

C. Filing and Service of Responsive

Documents—Any filings must bear in

all capital letters the title

‘‘COMMENTS’’, ‘‘NOTICE OF INTENT

TO FILE COMPETING APPLICATION’’,

‘‘COMPETING APPLICATION’’,

‘‘PROTEST’’, ‘‘MOTION TO

INTERVENE’’, as applicable, and the

Project Number of the particular

application to which the filing refers.

Any of the above-named documents

must be filed by providing the original

and the number of copies provided by

the Commission’s regulations to: The

Secretary, Federal Energy Regulatory

Commission, 888 First Street, N.E.,

Washington, D.C. 20426. An additional

copy must be sent to Director, Division

of Project Review, Federal Energy

Regulatory Commission, at the abovementioned address. A copy of any

notice of intent, competing application

or motion to intervene must also be

served upon each representative of the

Applicant specified in the particular

application.

C1. Filing and Service of Responsive

Documents—Any filings must bear in

all capital letters the title

‘‘COMMENTS’’,

‘‘RECOMMENDATIONS FOR TERMS

AND CONDITIONS’’, ‘‘PROTEST’’, OR

‘‘MOTION TO INTERVENE’’, as

applicable, and the Project Number of

the particular application to which the

filing refers. Any of the above-named

documents must be filed by providing

the original and the number of copies

provided by the Commission’s

regulations to: The Secretary, Federal

Energy Regulatory Commission, 888

First Street, N.E., Washington, D.C.

20426. A copy of any motion to

intervene must also be served upon each

representative of the Applicant

specified in the particular application.

D2. Agency Comments—Federal,

state, and local agencies are invited to

file comments on the described

application. A copy of the application

may be obtained by agencies directly

from the Applicant. If an agency does

not file comments within the time

specified for filing comments, it will be

presumed to have no comments. One

copy of an agency’s comments must also

be sent to the Applicant’s

representatives.

Dated: June 10, 1996, Washington, D.C.

Lois D. Cashell,

Secretary.

[FR Doc. 96–15254 Filed 6–14–96; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 6717–01–P

[Docket No. CP96–213–001, et al.]

Columbia Gas Transmission

Corporation, et al.; Natural Gas

Certificate Filings

June 11, 1996.

Take notice that the following filings

have been made with the Commission:

1. Columbia Gas Transmission

Corporation

[Docket No. CP96–213–001]

Take notice that on June 7, 1996,

Columbia Gas Transmission Corporation

(Columbia), a Delaware corporation,

having its principal place of business at

1700 MacCorkle Avenue, S.E.,

Charleston, West Virginia 25314–1599,

filed an abbreviated application

pursuant to Section 7(c) of the Natural

Gas Act, to amend its application for a

certificate of public convenience and

necessity previously filed with the

Commission on February 28, 1996, in

Docket No. CP96–213–000, for its

Market Expansion Project as

supplemented on March 18, 1996 and

April 30, 1996.

Columbia’s February 28, 1996

application sought a certificate of public

convenience and necessity authorizing

construction to provide 506,795

dekatherms per day (dth/d) of

additional daily firm entitlements to its

customers over a three-year period

beginning in 1997. Specifically,

Columbia sought authority to: (i)

increase the performance capabilities of

certain existing storage fields; (ii)

construct and operate, upgrade, and

replace certain natural gas facilities; (iii)

abandon certain natural gas facilities

and certain base storage gas; and (iv)

such other authorizations and/or

waivers as may be deemed necessary to

implement Columbia’s Project.

By this amendment, Columbia now

proposes to withdraw certain proposed

facility projects including 45.5 miles of

pipeline and 14,130 horsepower of

compression located in southern

Pennsylvania, and in lieu of such

projects, to lease firm capacity from

Texas Eastern Transmission Corporation

(Texas Eastern).

After the filing of Columbia’s

application, Texas Eastern proposed to

Columbia that Texas Eastern expand a

portion of its pipeline system in

Pennsylvania in order to make available

to Columbia an amount of firm capacity

(141,500 dekatherms (Dth) per day)

pursuant to a Lease at less cost to

Columbia and its customers than

Columbia’s cost to expand its southern

Pennsylvania Line 1804 system, which

construction has been previously

identified in Columbia’s application as

Projects 4.3, 4.4, 4.5, 4.12, 4.13, 4.15,

4.16, 5.2, 5.3, 5.11, 5.12, 5.13 and 5.14.

Columbia requests Commission

approval of the lease arrangement with

Texas Eastern to treat the lease as an

operating lease, and to recover its costs

pursuant to its TCRA. The lease costs to

be paid by Columbia to Texas Eastern

are proposed to be recovered by

Columbia as an operating cost under

Account 858.

Under the terms of a lease agreement

entered into by Texas Eastern and

Columbia, Texas Eastern will: i)

construct, own, operate, and maintain

certain facilities on its pipeline system

in southern Pennsylvania and make

available the resulting 141,500 Dth/d of

capacity to Columbia on a firm basis.

The lease provides that Texas Eastern

will lease capacity to Columbia on a

phased-in basis commencing November

1, 1997, consistent with the phased

implementation of Columbia’s Project,

up to a total of 141,500 Dth/d of firm

transportation capacity, plus such

additional capacity as needed to

accommodate retainage, as follows:

Phase-in date of capacity in (Dth/d)

and monthly charge

1. November 1, 1997 36,000 $242,310

2. November 1, 1998 85,800 540,750

3. November 1, 1999 141,500 807,670

and continuing through the remainder

of the term of the Lease.

In addition, Columbia will reimburse

Texas Eastern for its monthly operation

and maintenance costs associated with