[Federal Register Volume 59, Number 199 (Monday, October 17, 1994)]
[Unknown Section]
[Page 0]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 94-25615]


[[Page Unknown]]

[Federal Register: October 17, 1994]


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

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY#
[Docket No. CP94-267-001, et al.]

 

NorAm Gas Transmission Company, et al.; Natural Gas Certificate 
Filings

October 6, 1994.
    Take notice that the following filings have been made with the 
Commission:

1. NorAm Gas Transmission Co.

[Docket No. CP94-267-001]

    Take notice that on October 4, 1994, NorAm Gas Transmission Company 
(NGT), formerly Arkla Energy Resources Company, 1600 Smith Street, 
Houston, Texas 77002, filed in Docket No. CP94-267-001 an amendment to 
its original application filed in Docket CP94-267-000 pursuant to 
Section 7(c) of the Natural Gas Act for authorization to replace and 
rearrange existing mainline pipeline, abandon minor storage and gas 
supply facilities, and make certain mainline enhancements to its 
pipeline system in Arkansas, Louisiana, and Texas, all as more fully 
set forth in the application on file with the Commission and open to 
public inspection.
    NGT indicates that in its original application, it proposed to 
install two 2,250 h.p. slow speed reciprocal compressor units on its 
Line F in the existing Ruston Storage Compressor yard and rearrange and 
upgrade its Ruston Storage Compressor to perform both storage and 
mainline compression service, as part of its proposed mainline 
enhancements, at an estimated cost of $11.0 million.
    NGT is amending its application to reflect a change in its proposed 
mainline enhancements. NGT states that it is amending its application 
to modify the compression facilities that were originally proposed to 
be installed and rearranged in its Ruston Storage Compressor yard. NGT 
explains that it now proposes to install one 2,200 h.p. MEP compressor 
unit on Line F in its existing Ruston Storage Compressor yard to 
provide injection/withdrawal service and rearrange its existing Ruston 
Storage Compressor to perform mainline compression service, at a 
revised estimated cost of $4.6 million.
    Comment date: October 27, 1994, in accordance with Standard 
Paragraph F at the end of this notice.

2. Transwestern Pipeline Co.

[Docket No. CP94-751-001]

    Take notice that on October 3, 1994, Transwestern Pipeline Company 
(Transwestern), Post Office Box 1188, Houston, Texas 77251-1188 filed 
an amendment (Amendment) to its original application in Docket No. 
CP94-751-000, which was filed pursuant to Section 7(b) of the Natural 
Gas Act for an order granting permission and approval to abandon 
certain facilities. Transwestern states that the Amendment incorporates 
the corrected and revised attachments to the original application for 
abandonment, all as more fully set forth in the amendment which is on 
file with the Commission and open to public inspection.
    It is stated that in the process of analyzing Transwestern's system 
in response to the May 27, 1994, series of gathering orders issued by 
the Commission and while preparing for further proceedings in 
Transwestern's refunctionalization proceeding in Docket No. CP94-254-
000, it was discovered that certain field facilities, including 
compressors, plants, meters, dehydrators and miscellaneous associated 
facilities are no longer used and useful or are uneconomical or 
otherwise unnecessary for continued operation of the pipeline. 
Therefore, Transwestern states that it filed the original abandonment 
application on August 30, 1994. Transwestern determined that it would 
be most practical and efficient to promptly lay the groundwork for the 
abandonment of said facilities and withdraw them from Transwestern's 
refunctionalization proceeding where they had been previously included. 
Transwestern states that it felt that this sequencing would avoid the 
necessity of needlessly determining the facilities primary function 
when they were, except for the uneconomical Halley Plant, unused and 
unuseful.
    After filing the abandonment application, Transwestern states that 
it was discovered that there were several discrepancies in the 
attachments to the application. Transwestern states that the 
discrepancies have now been corrected and are the subject of its 
Amendment. Transwestern states that the following is a summary 
description of the changes made to the application's attachments:
    a. Text. Only one page of text has been amended by the addition of 
the word ``approximately'' in the fourth line of the second full 
paragraph of Section VII.
    b. Compression Facilities--Appendix 1.
    Appendix 1, which includes the detail on all of the compressors has 
been amended as follows:
    i. Summary Sheet.
    The Appendix 1 summary sheet has been amended in that the asterisks 
which had indicated which of the compressors had also been included in 
the refunctionalization filing in Docket No. CP94-254-000 have been 
removed. The asterisks have been removed because Transwestern states 
that it has determined that, in fact, knowing which of the facilities 
in the abandonment filing are included in the refunctionalization 
filing is a meaningless exercise; the original refunctionalization 
filing made on February 25, 1994 only included those facilities for 
which Transwestern requested a changed functionalization. Therefore, 
multiple facilities which Transwestern included in the abandonment 
proceeding were not included in the refunctionalization proceeding 
because no change in functionalization was requested. Transwestern 
states that realistically, the primary function that a facility had 
when it was active is irrelevant to a determination of whether it is in 
fact now used and useful. Transwestern states that it has concluded 
that the asterisks have created more confusion than necessary and that 
the application for abandonment would be more meaningful without them.
    The system numbers for the Reger Stuart No. 726, the A.R. King No. 
721, the Kemnitz Nos. 864 and 884 have been corrected.
    The line segment numbers have been corrected for the Hoeppner No. 
854, Meier Cruise No. 813, A.R. King No. 721, W. Waha No. 749 and the 
Pecos River No. 839 compressors.
    Additionally, it is stated that the original cost has been 
corrected for all of the compressors but the Reger Stuart No. 726, the 
Meier Cruise No. 813, the W. Waha No. 749 and the Monument No. 811 
compressors. These corrections have been made due to the fact that the 
database from which the data was originally retrieved has been scrubbed 
in order to formulate Appendixes A and B of the refunctionalization 
data response, a process that had not been performed when this 
abandonment was originally filed. Finally, a cost total has been added 
to the table.
    ii. Individual Compressor Data Sheets.
    All of the compressor data sheets behind the summary sheet have 
been amended by the removal of line 4 which indicated whether the 
compressor had been included in the refunctionalization proceeding. 
Additionally, the original cost figures have been changed for all of 
the compressors except the Reger Stuart No. 726, the Meier Cruise No. 
813, the W. Waha No. 749 and the Monument No. 811 compressors. Finally, 
Page 14, line 7 has been amended so that on in service date of 1969 is 
reflected.
    c. Plants--Appendix 2.
    i. Summary Sheet.
    The summary sheet in Appendix 2 has been amended to remove the 
asterisks for those plants included in the refunctionalization filing.
    The original cost for all of the plants except the Huber Plant has 
been adjusted to reflect the refinement of the facilities database as 
described above. In addition, the cost for the Bell Lake Plant has been 
revised because two compressors and an extraneous piece of pipeline 
were included in the original number in error. Finally, a cost total 
for the plants has been added to the summary sheet.
    ii. Individual Plant Data Sheets.
    Line 3 has been deleted on all of the individual plant data sheets 
to eliminate the cross reference to the refunctionalization proceeding. 
The original cost figures have been corrected for each plant except the 
Huber plant.
    In addition, Transwestern states that its field personnel have 
compiled more detailed information for each of the plants included in 
the abandonment proceeding with regard to estimates of salvage value, 
removal costs and reclamation costs. Thus, the entries on lines 12, 13 
and 14 on the individual plant data sheets have been amended to reflect 
a more individualized estimate. Finally, the entries on the Walton, 
Keystone and Bell Lake Plants on line 14 have been amended to reflect 
that more facilities than originally indicated are excepted from the 
abandonment filing.
    d. Appendix 3--Meters, Dehydrators and Associated Facilities.
    Appendix 3 has been amended to remove the asterisks which had 
indicated that certain facilities had been included in the 
refunctionalization filing.
    Corrections were made to 120 original cost figures, again due to 
the refinement of the facilities database in connection with the data 
responses in Docket No. CP94-254-000. Sixteen line entries were deleted 
for facilities which had been improperly included in the appendix, and 
ten facilities were added which had been improperly excluded from the 
appendix. Finally, nine docket numbers contained typographical errors 
and were corrected.
    e. Exhibit Y--Accounting Treatment of Abandonment.
    As a result of the above corrections and amendments, the entries in 
Exhibit Y have also changed in Category 1 (Original Cost of Facilities 
Proposed to be Abandoned); Category 2 (Cost of Removal); Category 3 
(Salvage); Category 4 (Proposed Entries to Account); Category 6 
(Accumulated Deferred Income Taxes); and Category 7 (accrued Current 
Income Taxes).
    Comment date: October 27, 1994, in accordance with Standard 
Paragraph F at the end of this notice.

3. Texas Gas Transmission Corp.

[Docket No. CP94-810-000]

    Take notice that on September 28, 1994, Texas Gas Transmission 
Corporation (Texas Gas), filed in Docket No. CP94-810-000 a request 
pursuant to Sec. 157.205 of the Commission's Regulations under the 
Natural Gas Act (18 CFR 157.205) for authorization to add a new 
delivery point in Marshall County, Kentucky, to serve an existing 
customer, the City of Benton, Kentucky (Benton), under Texas Gas' 
blanket certificate issued in Docket No. CP82-407-000 pursuant to 
Section 7 of the Natural Gas Act, all as more fully set forth in the 
request which is on file with the Commission and open to public 
inspection.
    Texas Gas states that the new delivery point would enable Benton to 
accommodate increased heating and industrial load growth occurring in 
the area and would be known as the Benton #2 Delivery Point.
    Texas Gas states further that Texas Gas would construct, own, 
operate and maintain a 2-inch meter station on Texas Gas' main line 
system approximately four miles northwest of Benton in Marshall County, 
Kentucky.
    Service to this new delivery point, it is said, would be 
accomplished within Benton's existing contract quantities and without 
detriment to Texas Gas' other customers.
    Comment date: November 21, 1994, in accordance with Standard 
Paragraph G at the end of this notice.

4. Florida Gas Transmission Corp.

[Docket No. CP94-816-000]

    Take notice that on September 30, 1994, Florida Gas Transmission 
Company (FGT), 1400 Smith Street, P.O. Box 1188, Houston, Texas 77251-
1188, filed in Docket No. CP94-816-000 a request pursuant to 
Secs. 157.205 and 157.216 of the Commission's Regulations under the 
Natural Gas Act (18 CFR 157.205, 157.216) for authorization to abandon 
approximately .1 of a mile of the 3-inch lateral and the Estech Drying 
Plant Meter Station, under FGT's blanket certificate issued in Docket 
No. CP82-553-000 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.
    Comment date: November 21, 1994, in accordance with Standard 
Paragraph G at the end of this notice.

5. Texas Eastern Transmission Corp.

[Docket No. CP94-818-000]

    Take notice that on September 29, 1994, Texas Eastern Transmission 
Corporation (Texas Eastern), 5400 Westheimer Court, P.O. Box 1642, 
Houston, Texas 77056-5310, filed in Docket No. CP94-818-000 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 construct a new delivery point in Westmoreland County, Pennsylvania, 
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 will construct the new point for delivery of 75 
Dekatherms per day of natural gas to Three Rivers Pipeline (Three 
Rivers), an intrastate pipeline. Three Rivers requested Texas Eastern 
to construct the delivery point between Texas Eastern and Three Rivers. 
It will consist of an 8-inch tap and appurtenant piping on Texas 
Eastern's 36-inch Line No. 29 at mile post 31.67. Three Rivers will 
install a triple 6-inch meter station including 100 feet of 8-inch 
connecting pipeline between the proposed Texas Eastern tap to Three 
Rivers' proposed meter station and Electronic Gas Measurement (EGM). 
Three Rivers will own the meter station and connecting pipe, while 
Texas Eastern will own, operate, and maintain the EGM, with ownership 
reverting to Three Rivers at service termination. Texas Eastern will 
install, own, operate and maintain the proposed 8-inch tap. Three 
Rivers will reimburse Texas Eastern 100% for cost and expenses 
estimated at $111,600. Interruptible transportation pursuant to Part 
284, Subpart B of the Commission's regulations will be rendered by 
Texas Eastern for Three Rivers' system supply use.
    Texas Eastern states the proposed delivery point will have no 
effect on its peak day or annual deliveries or pose any detriment or 
disadvantage to its other customers.
    Comment date: November 21, 1994, in accordance with Standard 
Paragraph G at the end of this notice.

6. Columbia Gas Transmission Corp.

[Docket No. CP94-820-000]

    Take notice that on September 29, 1994, Columbia Gas Transmission 
Corporation (Columbia), 1700 MacCorkle Avenue, S.E., Charleston, West 
Virginia 25314-1599, filed in Docket No. CP94-820-000 a request 
pursuant to Secs. 157.205 and 157.211 of the Commission's Regulations 
under the Natural Gas Act (18 CFR 157.205) for authorization to 
construct and operate facilities for 13 new delivery points for 
existing firm transportation customers in Ohio and West Virginia, under 
Columbia's blanket certificate issued in Docket No. CP83-76-000, all as 
more fully set forth in the request which is on file with the 
Commission and open to public inspection.
    Columbia proposes to construct and operate the facilities for the 
delivery of gas to Columbia Gas of Ohio, Inc. (COH) and Mountaineer Gas 
Company (Mountaineer), Columbia's existing customers, in order for COH 
to serve one residential customer and for Mountaineer to serve 12 
residential customers. Columbia states that each of the 13 delivery 
points would be used for the delivery of 1.5 dt equivalent of gas per 
day and 150 dt equivalent on an annual basis. It is asserted that these 
volumes would be within COH's and Mountaineer's existing peak day and 
annual entitlements from Columbia. Columbia estimates the cost of 
installing the facilities at $150 apiece. It is stated that the 
delivery points would be used for the delivery of gas transported on a 
firm basis under Columbia's Part 284 blanket certificate, issued in 
Docket No. CP86-240-000.
    Comment date: November 21, 1994, in accordance with Standard 
Paragraph G at the end of this notice.

7. NorAm Gas Transmission Co.

[Docket No. CP95-4-000]

    Take notice that on October 4, 1994, NorAm Gas Transmission Company 
(NGT), 1600 Smith Street, Houston, Texas 77002, filed in Docket No. 
CP95-4-000 a request pursuant to Secs. 157.205 and 157.211 of the 
Commission's Regulations under the Natural Gas Act for authorization 
under its blanket certificate issued in Docket Nos. CP82-384-000 and 
CP82-384-001 to construct and operate certain facilities, all as more 
fully set forth in the request which is on file with the Commission and 
open to public inspection.
    NGT proposes to convert an existing receipt point into a delivery 
point on NGT's Line OM-1 in Franklin County, Arkansas to deliver up to 
5,000 MMBtu per day of gas, transported pursuant to Sec. 284.223, to 
serve Sunbelt Oil Field Services (Sunbelt). NGT states that the subject 
facilities consist of a 6-inch tap, 6-inch meter run, two orifice 
meters, temperature recorder and dehydrator. NGT further states the 
facilities were originally constructed in 1990 under Sec. 2.55(d) of 
the Commission's Regulations to receive gas from wells operated by 
Sunbelt. NGT asserts that it would be reimbursed for the estimated cost 
of construction which is $8,672.
    Comment date: November 21, 1994, in accordance with Standard 
Paragraph G at the end of this notice.

8. Texas Gas Transmission Co.

[Docket No. CP95-6-000]

    Take notice that on October 4, 1994, Texas Gas Transmission 
Corporation (Texas Gas), 3800 Frederica Street, Owensboro, Kentucky, 
42301 filed in Docket No. CP95-6-000 a request pursuant to 
Secs. 157.205 and 157.212 of the Commission's Regulations under the 
Natural Gas Act (18 CFR 157.205 and 157.212) for authorization to add a 
new deliver point in Hopkins County, Kentucky, to serve Western 
Kentucky Gas Company (Western), an existing customer, under Texas Gas' 
blanket certificate issued in Docket No. CP82-407-000, pursuant to 
Section 7(c) 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 Gas states that the new delivery point, to be known as the 
Buchanan Road delivery point, will be located on Texas Gas' Slaughters-
Nortonville 10'' pipeline in Hopkins County, Kentucky, at Milepost 
7+4967, the site of an existing side valve. Texas Gas further states 
that no construction of new facilities will be required by Texas Gas 
since Texas Gas will be utilizing an existing side valve, located on 
existing right-of-way and Western will install, own, operate and 
maintain measurement and associated facilities.
    Texas Gas advises that service to the new delivery point will be 
accomplished within Western's existing contract quantities as set forth 
in its Firm Transportation Agreement dated November 1, 1993 and its 
Firm No Notice Transportation Agreement dated November 1, 1993. Texas 
Gas also states that the natural gas delivered at the new delivery 
point will enable Western to render natural gas service to residential 
users in the Buchanan Road area.
    Comment date: November 21, 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, D.C. 
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. 94-25615 Filed 10-14-94; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6717-01-P