[Federal Register Volume 59, Number 161 (Monday, August 22, 1994)]
[Unknown Section]
[Page 0]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 94-20486]


[[Page Unknown]]

[Federal Register: August 22, 1994]


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

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY
[Docket No. CP94-714-000]

 

Transcontinental Gas Pipe Line Corp.; Notice of Application

August 16, 1994.
    Take notice that on August 15, 1994, Transcontinental Gas Pipe Line 
Corporation (Transco), P.O. Box 1396, Houston, Texas 77251-1396, filed 
in Docket No. CP94-714-000 an application pursuant to Sections 7(c) and 
7(b) of the Natural Gas Act for (1) a certificate of public convenience 
and necessity authorizing certain river crossings, and (2) an order 
permitting and approving the abandonment of existing facilities at the 
same location, all as more fully set forth in the application which is 
on file with the Commission and open to public inspection.
    Transco states that it has three pipelines which cross the Amite 
River in Louisiana: (1) 30-inch diameter Main Line A, (2) 36-inch 
diameter Main Line B and (3) 36-inch Maine Line C. Transco states that 
all gas produced onshore and offshore Texas and Louisiana which flows 
through Transco's system to Transco's markets in the deep south, 
atlantic seaboard and eastern markets flows through the Amite River 
crossing (with the exception of the gas attached to Transco's mainline 
by way of the Southeast Louisiana Gathering System, which interconnects 
with Transco's mainline at Compressor Station No. 65, located 
approximately 11 miles north of the Amite River).
    Transco states that because of river scouring, bank washing and 
channel meander/realignment, Main Line A is exposed. It is indicated 
that Line A has been taken out of service because Transco is concerned 
that a significant flood event could occur and rupture the line. It is 
also indicated that Main Lines B and C are not yet exposed, but Transco 
is concerned that they would become exposed because the river is 
realigning in a southward direction.
    Transco states that it cannot perform these replacements pursuant 
to Section 2.55(b) of the Commission's Regulations because of the 
Commission's recent clarification of Section 2.55(b) in the order 
issued on May 12, 1994, in Arkla Energy Resources Company, Docket No. 
CP91-2069-000 (67 FERC 61,173), involving the issue of replacements 
outside of existing right-of-way. Transco states that it is imperative 
that it complete the new crossings in time to provide service during 
the upcoming winter heating season.
    Transco states that it proposes to install approximately 2,700 feet 
of new 36-inch diameter Main Line B by horizontal directional drilling 
under the Amite River, at the location of its existing pipeline 
crossing of the Amite River. Transco indicates that directionally 
drilled pipeline are more secure than the older pipelines which were 
installed by way of trenching the river bed. It is stated that 
approximately 225 feet of 36-inch diameter pipe would be conventionally 
installed from the entrance of the bore on the east side of the river 
and tied in to existing Main Lines A and B by means of a new manifold. 
It is also indicated that approximately 225 feet of 36-inch diameter 
pipe would be conventionally installed from the exit of the bore on the 
west bank of the river and tied into existing Main Lines A and B by 
means of a new manifold.
    Transco states that it also proposes to install approximately 2,700 
feet of new 36-inch diameter Main Line C by horizontal directional 
drilling under the Amite River. It is indicated that approximately 225 
feet of 36-inch diameter pipe will be conventionally installed from the 
entrance of the bore on the east side of the river and tied into 
existing Main Line Lines A, B, and C by means of the manifold mentioned 
above. It is also stated that approximately 225 feet of 36-inch 
diameter pipe would be conventionally installed from the exit of the 
bore on the west side of the river and tied into Main Lines A, B, and C 
by means of the manifold mentioned above.
    Transco states that proposed replacements would restore the long-
term integrity of Transco's transmission system at the Amite River 
crossings. It is stated that system capacity across the Amite River 
after installation of the two new river crossings would be 2,361,000 
Mcf per day compared with a current capacity of 2,369,000 Mcf per day. 
Transco states that the three existing pipelines would be retired and 
removed. Transco estimates the cost of installing both new lines at 
approximately $6,000,000, to be financed initially through short-term 
loans and funds on hand, with permanent financing to be undertaken at a 
later date. Transco estimates the cost of the removal work at $280,000.
    Transco states that issuance of a certificate and construction 
clearance by September 15, 1994, is justified for three reasons: (1) 
The need for security of gas service during the upcoming winter heating 
season, (2) historically, during the months of August and September, it 
is expected that the Amite River floodplain would be dryer than at any 
time of the year, and thus provide the most favorable conditions for 
the contractor's equipment, and (3) the de minimis impact on the 
environment of the crossing project.
    Any person desiring to be heard or to make any protest with 
reference to said application should on or before August 31, 1994, 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 permission for 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 Transco to appear or be represented at the 
hearing.
Lois D. Cashell,
Secretary.
[FR Doc. 94-20486 Filed 8-19-94; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6717-01-M