1656 Federal Register / Vol. 66, No. 6 / Tuesday, January 9, 2001 / Notices

1The Commission issued the original license for

the project to Henry Ford and Son, Inc., in 1921.

See First Annual Report of the Federal Power

Commission, pp. 110, 195. It issued a new license

for the project to Niagara Mohawk Power Company

in 1977. 57 FPC 817. The new license expires at the

end of March 2, 2011. Recently, the Commission

approved a transfer of the project license to Erie

Boulevard Hydropower, L.P. 88 FERC ¶ 62,082

(1999), reh’g denied, 90 FERC ¶ 61,148 (2000).

or protests must be filed in accordance

with 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 the proceedings.

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 in the Public Reference

Room. This filing may be viewed on the

web at http://www.ferc.fed.us/online/

rims.htm (call 202–208–2222 for

assistance). Comments and protests may

be filed electronically via the internet in

lieu of paper. See, 18 CFR

385.2001(a)(1)(iii) and the instructions

on the Commission’s web site at http:/

/www.ferc.fed.us/efi/doorbell.htm.

David P. Boergers,

Secretary.

[FR Doc. 01–523 Filed 1–8–01; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 6717–01–M

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY

Federal Energy Regulatory

Commission

[Docket No. RP99–507–009]

El Paso Natural Gas Company; Notice

of Proposed Changes in FERC Gas

Tariff

January 3, 2001.

Take notice that on December 22,

2000, El Paso Natural Gas Company (El

Paso) tendered for filing and acceptance

by the Federal Energy Regulatory

Commission (Commission) the

following tariff sheets in its FERC Gas

Tariff, Second Revised Volume No. 1–A,

to become effective February 1, 2001:

First Revised Sheet No. 219C

Original Sheet No. 219D

El Paso states that the above tariff

sheets are being filed to implement the

Topock Delivery Rights Capacity

Allocations required by the

Commission’s order issued October 25,

2000 at Docket No. RP99–507.

Any person desiring to be heard or to

protest said filing should file a motion

to intervene or a protest with the

Federal Energy Regulatory Commission,

888 First Street, N.W., Washington, D.C.

20426, in accordance with Sections

385.214 or 385.211 of the Commission’s

Rules and Regulations. All such motions

or protests must be filed in accordance

with 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 the proceedings.

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 in the Public Reference

Room. This filing may be viewed on the

web at http://www.ferc.fed.us/online/

rims.htm (call 202–208–2222 for

assistance). Comments and protests may

be filed electronically via the internet in

lieu of paper. See, 18 CFR

385.2001(a)(1)(iii) and the instructions

on the Commission’s web site at http:/

/www.ferc.fed.us/efi/doorbell.htm.

David P. Boergers,

Secretary.

[FR Doc. 01–524 Filed 1–8–01; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 6717–01–M

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY

Federal Energy Regulatory

Commission

[Project No. 13–016]

Erie Boulevard Hydropower L.P. Green

Island Power Authority; Notice of

Transfer of Ownership Pursuant to an

Order of Condemnation and

Designation of New Licensee

January 3, 2001.

On July 14, 2000, as supplemented

September 7, 2000, the Green Island

Power Authority (Authority) filed a

notice, in accordance with section 14(a)

of the Federal Power Act (FPA), 16

U.S.C. 807(a), stating that on July 11,

2000, the Supreme Court of the State of

New York entered an order of

condemnation whereby the property

that constitutes the licensed Green

Island Project No. 13 was vested in the

Authority. Project No. 13 is located on

the Hudson River, at the U.S. Army

Corps of Engineers’ Troy Lock and Dam

in Albany County, New York.1

Section 14(a) of the FPA states that

‘‘the right of the United States or any

State or municipality to take over,

maintain, and operate any project

licensed under this Act at any time by

condemnation proceedings upon

payment of just compensation is hereby

expressly reserved.’’ The Authority’s

filing demonstrate that it is

‘‘municipality’’ as defined in Section

3(8) of the FPA (16 U.S.C. 796(8)); that

it has fulfilled the conditions of the

condemnation court’s order, which

therefore vests the project’s property in

it; and that it intends to operate the

project as the licensee.

In accordance with Section 14(a) of

the FPA, the Authority is recognized as

the licensee for Project No. 13.

David P. Boergers,

Secretary.

[FR Doc. 01–519 Filed 1–8–01; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 6717–01–M

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY

Federal Energy Regulatory

Commission

[Docket No. RP01–198–000]

Florida Gas Transmission Company;

Notice of Filing of Report of Cash-Out

Activity

January 3, 2001.

Take notice that on December 22,

2000 Florida Gas Transmission

Company (FGT) tendered for filing

schedules detailing certain information

related to the Cash-Out mechanism from

October 1, 1999 through September 30,

2000. No tariff changes are proposed

therein.

FGT states that it has experienced a

revenue deficiency of $882,959 in the

current Settlement Period. A total of

$515,000 of this deficiency is related to

the Cash-Out Mechanism. As shown on

Schedule A, page 2 of 3, lines 1–14,

even though the price paid by FGT was

less than the price received by FGT for

each month in the Settlement Period,

the weighted average price paid by FGT

for the Settlement Period was $3.1184

while the weighted average price

received by FGT was $2.8874. This was

a result of shippers generally

overburning during periods of lower

prices, thus using FGT as a source of

supply, and underburning during

periods of higher prices, when FGT’s

cash out indices made FGT a relatively

attractive market for gas.

Also, FGT states that the revenue

deficiency attributable to the Cash-Out

Mechanism, there is a revenue

deficiency of $367,959 associated with

the Fuel Resolution Mechanism as

shown on Schedule A, page 1, lines 7–

12. FGT believes this deficiency is

primarily attributable to a $1.47

negative differential in the weighted

average prices used in the deferred fuel

account balances ($3.903/MMBtu paid

for over retained fuel versus $2.437/

MMBtu received for under retained fuel,

as detailed on Schedule A, page 2 of 3,