33912 Federal Register / Vol. 61, No. 127 / Monday, July 1, 1996 / Notices

1Order No. 497, 53 FR 22139 (June 14, 1988), III

FERC Stats. & Regs. ¶30,820 (1988); Order No. 497–

A, order on rehearing, 54 FR 52781 (December 22,

1989), III FERC Stats. & Regs. 30,868 (1989); Order

No. 497–B, order extending sunset date, 55 FR

53291 (December 28, 1990), III FERC Stats. & Regs.

¶ 30,908 (1990); Order No. 497–C, order extending

sunset date, 57 FR 9 (January 2, 1992), III FERC

Stats. & Regs. ¶30,934 (1991), rehearing denied, 57

FR 5815 (February 18, 1992), 58 FERC ¶ 61,139

(1992); Tenneco Gas v. FERC (affirmed in part and

remanded in part), 969 F. 2d 1187 (D.C. Cir. 1992),

Order No. 497–D, order on remand and extending

sunset date, III FERC Stats. & Regs. Preambles

¶ 30,958 (December 4, 1992), 57 FR 58978

(December 14, 1992); Order No. 497–E, order on

rehearing and extending sunset date, 59 FR 243

(January 4, 1994), 65 FERC ¶ 61,381 (December 23,

1993), Order No. 497–F (order denying rehearing

and granting clarification), 66 FERC ¶ 61,347

(March 24, 1994).

2Standards of Conduct and Reporting

Requirements for Transportation and Affiliate

Transactions, Order No. 566, 59 FR 32885 (June 27,

1994), III FERC Stats. & Regs. ¶ 30,997 (June 17,

1994); Order No. 566–A, order on rehearing, 59 FR

52896 (October 20, 1994), 69 FERC ¶ 61,044

(October 14, 1994); Order No. 566–B, order on

rehearing, 59 FR 65707, (December 21, 1994); 69

FERC ¶ 61,334 (December 14, 1994).

of transportation credits in the above

referenced docket.

CIG states that this is the final report

and the appropriate refund has been

made to all affected customers.

CIG states that copies of the filing

were served upon all of the parties to

this proceeding and affected state

commissions and affected parties.

Any person desiring to protest said

filing should file a protest with the

Federal Energy Regulatory Commission,

888 First Street, NE., Washington, DC

20426, in accordance with Section

385.211 of the Commission’s Rules and

Regulations. All such protests must be

filed on or before July 2, 1996. Protests

will be considered by the Commission

in determining the appropriate action to

be taken but will not serve to make

protestant parties to the proceeding.

Copies of this filing are on file with the

Commission and are available for public

inspection in the Public Reference

Room.

Lois D. Cashell,

Secretary.

[FR Doc. 96–16629 Filed 6–28–96; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 6717–01–M

[Docket No. OR96–14–000]

Exxon Company, U.S.A., a division of

Exxon Corporation, v. Amerada Hess

Pipeline Company, et al.; Notice of

Complaint June 25, 1996.

Take notice that on June 19, 1996,

Exxon Company, U.S.A. (EUSA), a

division of Exxon Corporation, filed a

complaint against the seven Trans

Alaska Pipeline System (TAPS) owners,

Amerada Hess Pipeline Corporation,

ARCO Transportation Alaska, Inc., BP

Pipelines (Alaska) Inc., Exxon Pipeline

Company, Mobil Alaska Pipeline

Company, Phillips Alaska Pipeline

Corporation, and Unocal Pipeline

Company (TAPS Carriers), pursuant to

Sections 9, 13(1) and 15(1) of the

Interstate Commerce Act, 49 U.S.C.

App. Sections 9, 13(1), 15(1), and Rule

206 of the Commission’s Rules of

Practice and Procedures.

EUSA alleges that the TAPS Carriers

have violated sections 1(5), 3(1) and 6(7)

of the ICA, 49 U.S.C. App. Sections 1(5),

3(1), 6(1) and 6(7), by imposing certain

TAPS Quality Bank charges which are

unjust and unreasonable by

unjustifiably giving a preference to

shippers of heavier petroleum, thereby

unduly discriminating against shippers

of lighter petroleum, and by failing to

adhere to the TAPS Quality Banks

tariffs.

EUSA requests that the Commission

(1) Consolidate this proceeding with the

Quality Bank proceedings in Docket

Nos. OR89–2–009, et al.; (2) find that

the current Quality Bank methodology

violates sections 1(5), 3(1), 6(1), and 6(7)

of the ICA; (3) award damages to EUSA;

(4) prescribe as appropriate Quality

Bank methodology; and (5) amend the

TAPS Quality Bank tariffs to provide

expressly for EUSA and other shippers

to audit administration of the Quality

Bank methodology.

Any person desiring to be heard or to

protest the instant complaint 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 214

and 211 of the Commission’s Rules of

Practice and Procedure. All such

motions or protests must be filed on or

before July 19, 1996. 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. Answers to this complaint

shall be due on or before July 19, 1996.

Lois D. Cashell,

Secretary.

[FR Doc. 96–16628 Filed 6–28–96; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 6717–01–M

Federal Energy Regulatory

Commission

[Docket No. MG96–15–000]

Koch Gateway Pipeline Company;

Notice of Filing

June 25, 1996.

Take notice that on June 17, 1996,

Koch Gateway Pipeline Company

(Koch) submitted revised standards of

conduct under Order Nos. 497 et al.1

and Order Nos. 566 et seq.2

Koch states that the changes are the

result of its contracting with its

marketing affiliate, Koch Gas Services

Company, to act as its agent for Koch’s

merchant services.

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 or

214 of the Commission’s Rules of

Practice and Procedure (18 CFR 385.211

or 385.214). All such motions to

intervene or protest should be filed on

or before July 10, 1996. 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. 96–16627 Filed 6–28–96; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 6717–01–M

Federal Energy Regulatory

Commission

[Docket No. CP96–573–000]

Northwest Pipeline Corporation; Notice

of Application

June 25, 1996.

Take notice that on June 17, 1996,

Northwest Pipeline Corporation
Federal Register / Vol. 61, No. 127 / Monday, July 1, 1996 / Notices 33913

(Northwest), 295 Chipeta Way, Salt Lake

City, Utah 84108–0900, filed in Docket

No. CP96–573–000 an application

pursuant to Section 7(b) of the Natural

Gas Act and Section 157.18 of the

Commission’s regulations for an order

permitting and approving an

abandonment by removal the following

five inactive receipt point meter

stations.

• Klondike Receipt Meter Station

located in Grand County, Utah

• Amoco Wheeler Receipt Meter

Station located in La Plata County,

Colorado

• C. C. Company Receipt Meter

Station located in Grand County, Utah

• Papoose Canyon Receipt Meter

Station located in Dolores County,

Colorado

• Unicon Producing Company (UPC)

Durango Receipt Meter Station located

in La Plata County, Colorado

Northwest states that at each meter

station it plans to remove all above

ground facilities except for the valve

taps; that the removed facilities will be

scrapped, except for a 70 barrel tank at

the Amoco Wheeler Receipt Meter

Station and the meters which will be

used at other locations; that the

accounting treatment for the

abandonments will be as proposed in its

Exhibit Y to the application; and that

the sites will be restored to original

conditions; all as more fully set forth in

the application which is on file with the

Commission and open for public

inspection.

Any person desiring to be heard or to

make any protest with reference to said

application should on or before July 16,

1996, file with the Federal Energy

Regulatory Commission, 888 First

Street, NE. Washington, DC 20426, a

motion to intervene or a protest in

accordance with the requirements of the

Commission’s Rules of Practice and

Procedure (18 CFR 385.211 and

385.214) 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 in any proceeding

herein 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

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 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 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 Northwest to appear or

to be represented at the hearing.

Lois D. Cashell,

Secretary.

[FR Doc. 96–16626 Filed 6–28–95; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 6717–01–M

[Docket No. RP96–281–000]

Williams Natural Gas Company; Notice

of Proposed Changes in FERC Gas

Tariff

June 25, 1996.

Take notice that on June 19, 1995,

Williams Natural Gas Company (WNG),

tendered for filing to become part of its

FERC Gas Tariff, Second Revised

Volume No. 1, the following tariff

sheets, to be effective on July 1, 1996:

Thirteenth Revised Sheet No. 6A

Second Revised Sheet No. 6B

Third Revised Sheet No. 204

Fifth Revised Sheet No. 205

WNG states that this filing is being

made pursuant to part 154 of the

Commission’s regulations and as

contemplated in WNG’s abandonment

of facilities filing in Docket No. CP94–

196. In that filing WNG stated that tariff

sheets reflecting the abandonment

would be filed upon the Commission’s

issuance of an order approving the

abandonment.

WNG states that a copy of its filing

was served on all participants listed on

the service list maintained by the

Commission in Docket No. CP94–196

and on all jurisdictional customers and

interested state commissions.

Any person desiring to be heard or to

protest this 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 sections 385.214 and

385.211 of the Commission’s Rules and

Regulations. All such motions or

protests must be filed as provided in

section 154.210 of the Commission’s

Regulations. Any person wishing to

become a party must file a motion to

intervene. 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 proceedings. Copies of this filing are

on file with the Commission and are

available for public inspection in the

Public Reference Room.

Lois D. Cashell,

Secretary.

[FR Doc. 96–16630 Filed 6–28–96; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 6717–01–M

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION

AGENCY

[FRL–5530–1]

Sustainable Development Challenge

Grant Program

AGENCY: U.S. Environmental Protection

Agency (EPA).

ACTION: Solicitation of Proposals for FY

1996; Request for Comments on Program

Design for Full Implementation in FY

1997.

SUMMARY: The U.S. Environmental

Protection Agency (EPA) announces and

solicits applications for a new

competitive grant program, the

Sustainable Development Challenge

Grant (SDCG) program, one of President

Clinton’s ‘‘high priority’’ actions

described in the March 16, 1995 report,

‘‘Reinventing Environmental

Regulation.’’ The EPA expects to fund a

limited number of pilot projects in FY

1996 through the new SDCG program.

EPA is also asking for comments on the

program design to help develop a full

scale program for FY 1997. The

Sustainable Development Challenge

Grant program is intended to

‘‘encourage community, business, and

government to work cooperatively to

develop flexible, locally-oriented

approaches that link place-based

environmental management with

sustainable development and

revitalization.’’ The SDCG program will

challenge communities to invest in a

sustainable future that links

environmental protection and economic

prosperity to provide equitable

opportunities for health, safety and

well-being. These grants are intended to:

catalyze community-based and regional

projects to promote sustainable

development; build partnerships to

increase community long-term capacity

to protect the environment; and leverage

public and private investments to

enhance environmental quality by

enabling sustainable community efforts

to continue beyond EPA funding.

This document includes: background

information on the Sustainable

Development Challenge Grant program;

a description of the program; the