[Federal Register Volume 59, Number 110 (Thursday, June 9, 1994)]
[Unknown Section]
[Page 0]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 94-13974]


[[Page Unknown]]

[Federal Register: June 9, 1994]


-----------------------------------------------------------------------

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY
[Docket No. CP94-561-000, et al.]

 

Columbia Gas Transmission Corporation, et al.; Natural Gas 
Certificate Filings

May 27, 1994
    Take notice that the following filings have been made with the 
Commission:

1. Columbia Gas Transmission Corp.

[Docket No. CP94-561-000]

    Take notice that on May 20, 1994, Columbia Gas Transmission 
Corporation (Columbia), 1700 MacCorkle Avenue, SE., Charleston, West 
Virginia 25314-1599, filed in Docket No. CP94-561-000 a request 
pursuant to Sec. 157.205 of the Commission's Regulations to construct 
and operate facilities to relocate an existing point of delivery to 
Corning Natural Gas Corporation (Corning) and to abandon approximately 
1 mile of 4-inch and 6-inch lateral pipeline located in Steuben County, 
New York under Columbia's blanket certificate issued in Docket No. 
CP83-76-000, pursuant to section 7 of the Natural Gas Act, all as more 
fully set forth in the request on file with the Commission and open to 
public inspection.
    Columbia proposes to relocate the Coopers Plains Measuring Station 
(Coopers Plains) serving Corning located at the terminus of Lines A-1 
and A-3 in Steuben County, New York by constructing and operating a new 
delivery point for Corning on Line A-5 in Steuben County, New York 
approximately 1.63 miles east of the interconnection of Lines A-1 and 
A-5. Additionally, Columbia proposes to abandon, in place and partially 
by removal, 2,787 feet of 4-inch pipeline and 1,235 feet of 6-inch 
pipeline of Line A-1, and 1,235 feet of 6-inch pipeline of Line A-3. 
Columbia states that Lines A-1 and A-3 are in need of replacement due 
to deteriorating condition. Columbia states that the relocation and 
replacement of the measuring station and the retirement of the 
pipelines, agreed to by Corning, is the least costly replacement 
alternative and avoids the environmental impact of a river crossing by 
either Columbia or Corning. Columbia indicates that the relocation of 
Coopers Plains involves the relocation of flow control and tie in 
facilities owned and operated by Corning. Columbia states that it would 
pay Corning a contribution in aid of construction of up to $37,000 to 
enable Corning complete the relocation of these facilities. Columbia 
states that the estimated cost of the abandonment of its facilities is 
$60,000.
    Comment date: July 11, 1994, in accordance with Standard Paragraph 
G at the end of this notice.

2. Columbia Gulf Transmission Co.

[Docket No. CP94-562-000]

    Take notice that on May 20, 1994, Columbia Gulf Transmission 
Company (Columbia Gulf), P.O. Box 683, Houston, Texas 77001, filed in 
Docket No. CP94-562-000 an abbreviated application pursuant to section 
7(b) of the Natural Gas Act, as amended, and Secs. 157.7 and 157.18 of 
the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission's (Commission) regulations 
thereunder, for permission to abandon a firm transportation service for 
Northern Natural Gas Company, a division of Enron Corp. (Northern), all 
as more fully set forth in the application which is on file with the 
Commission and open to public inspection.
    Columbia Gulf states that it proposes to abandon a transportation 
service originally authorized by Commission order issued May 6, 1977, 
in Docket No. CP77-8-000. Columbia Gulf indicates that under the 
arrangement with Northern, Columbia Gulf would receive gas from various 
points offshore, Louisiana into its existing offshore facilities and 
transport the gas to Columbia Gulf's facilities in Egan, Louisiana. 
Columbia Gulf further indicates that Northern pays a monthly demand 
charge for the service performed by Columbia Gulf. Columbia Gulf states 
that it has tendered to Northern, and Northern has executed, a service 
agreement effective February 1, 1994, providing that the remaining Part 
157 service will be provided under Part 284. Columbia Gulf indicates 
that no facilities are to be abandoned.
    Comment date: June 17, 1994, in accordance with Standard Paragraph 
F at the end of this notice.

3. Questar Pipeline Co.

[Docket No. CP94-563-000]

    Take notice that on May 23, 1994, Questar Pipeline Company (Questar 
Pipeline), 79 South State Street, Salt Lake City, Utah 84111, filed in 
Docket No. CP94-563-000 an application pursuant to Section 7(b) of the 
Natural Gas Act for permission and approval to abandon natural gas 
transportation services contained in its FERC Gas Tariff, Original 
Volume No. 3 for: (1) Columbia Gas Transmission Corporation (Columbia), 
under Questar's Rate Schedule X-23, which was authorized in Docket Nos. 
CP80-7 et al, and, (2) Northwest Pipeline Corporation (Northwest), 
under Questar's Rate Schedule X-19, which was authorized in Docket Nos. 
CP78-538-000 and CP78-434-000, all as more fully set forth in the 
application on file with the Commission and open to public inspection.
    Questar says that Columbia, Northwest, and Questar have all 
mutually agreed to cancel the transportation services certificated as 
Rate Schedules X-23 and X-19. Questar further indicates that it does 
not propose to abandon any facilities in conjunction with the requested 
abandonment.
    Comment date: June 17, 1994, in accordance with Standard Paragraph 
F at the end of this notice.

4. Texas Eastern Transmission Corp.

[Docket No. CP94-564-000]

    Take notice that on May 23, 1994, Texas Eastern Transmission 
Corporation (Texas Eastern), 5400 Westheimer Court, P.O. Box 1642, 
Houston, Texas 77251-1642, filed in Docket No. CP94-564-000 a request 
pursuant to Secs. 157.205 and 157.211 of the Commission's Regulations 
under the Natural Gas Act (18 CFR 157.205, 157.212) for authorization 
to modify an existing receipt point in order to use it additionally for 
deliveries, under Texas Eastern's blanket certificate issued in Docket 
No. CP82-535-000 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.
    Texas Eastern proposes to reverse its existing check valve at 
Louisiana Intrastate Gas Corporation's (LIG) meter station located on 
Texas Eastern's Line No. 14 in St. Landry Parish, Louisiana. It is 
stated that this modification would enable the meter station to be used 
for deliveries of to LIG as well as receipt. The cost of the proposed 
modification is estimated at $150. It is asserted that the modification 
would have no effect on Texas Eastern's peak day or annual deliveries. 
Texas Eastern states that the proposed modification can be accomplished 
without detriment or disadvantage to Texas Eastern's other customers.
    Comment date: July 11, 1994, in accordance with Standard Paragraph 
G at the end of this notice.

5. Pacific Gas Transmission Co.

[Docket No. CP94-566-000]

    Take notice that on May 24, 1994, Pacific Gas Transmission Company 
(PGT), 160 Spear Street, San Francisco, California 94105-1570, filed in 
Docket No. CP94-566-000 a request pursuant to Secs. 157.205 and 157.212 
of the Commission's Regulations under the Natural Gas Act (18 CFR 
157.205, 157.212) for authorization to install a new tap and meter set 
near Rathdrum, Idaho, for delivery of gas to Washington Water Power 
Company (WWP) and upgrade the existing Rathdrum Meter Station in 
Rathdrum, Idaho under PGT's blanket certificate issued in Docket No. 
CP82-530-000 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.
    PGT proposes to construct a new tap and meter station adjacent to 
PGT's existing meter station near Rathdrum, Idaho to serve WWP. PGT 
states that it entered into an interruptible (backhaul) transportation 
service agreement with WWP on December 15, 1993, to provide 25 MMBtu 
per day to PGT's existing delivery point at Rathdrum and 48,000 MMBtu 
per day to PGT's proposed Rathdrum Turbine Generating Meter Station. 
PGT also states that the generator would be used for peaking service 
(approximately 10 days per year). PGT and WWP anticipate that the 
scheduled date for delivery of gas from this new point would be 
September 1, 1994.
    PGT also proposes to increase the flow capacity of its existing 
meter station near Rathdrum which serves WWP. PGT states that the 
current meter capacity is 1.7 MMcf per day; however, recent deliveries 
have been as high as 2 MMcf per day. PGT proposes to increase the meter 
capacity to 5.5 MMcf per day. PGT also states that the proposed changes 
will not impact PGT's peak day and annual deliveries to other customers 
and is not an increase in WWP's contract demands.
    Comment date: July 11, 1994, 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, 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 385.214 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 Sec. 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. 94-13974 Filed 6-8-94; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6717-01-P