[Federal Register Volume 59, Number 236 (Friday, December 9, 1994)]
[Unknown Section]
[Page 0]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 94-30305]
[[Page Unknown]]
[Federal Register: December 9, 1994]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY
[Docket No. OR95-1-000]
Sinclair Oil Co. v. CITGO Products Pipeline Co., CITGO Petroleum
Corp., and Lyondell-CITGO Refining Co., Ltd. Notice of Complaint
December 2, 1994.
Take notice that on November 28, 1994, Sinclair Oil Corporation
(Sinclair) filed a complaint against CITGO Products Pipeline Company
(CITGO), CITGO's parent corporation, CITGO Petroleum Corporation (CITGO
Petroleum), and CITGO's refining affiliate, Lyondell CITGO Refining
Company, LTD. (Lyondell). Sinclair asserts that these parties
(Respondents) have acted to violate the Interstate Commerce Act (ICA)
and manipulate the pipeline in order to obtain a competitive advantage.
Sinclair asserts that in September of 1994, CITGO purchased a
petroleum products pipeline that runs from Houston, Texas to Drumright,
Oklahoma, where the CITGO pipeline interconnects with several other
pipelines, including a pipeline owned by Williams Pipe Line Company
(Williams). Sinclair states that the Williams line delivers products in
Kansas City and other Northern destinations. Sinclair further asserts
that CITGO is presently transporting large quantities of petroleum
products produced by Lyondell along the pipeline from Houston, past
established terminals in Oklahoma, and through its terminal in
Drumright into the Williams system. Despite the fact that Drumright has
been an established interconnection point for the past four decades,
Sinclair alleges, CITGO refuses to deliver gas and diesel fuel to
competitors of the Lyondell affiliate at Drumright. Sinclair also
states that CITGO has refused to publish a tariff from Houston to
Shawnee, Oklahoma, an intermediate point on its pipeline at which
product has been delivered to a Sinclair terminal for the past 46
years; or from Ardmore, Oklahoma to Drumright or Shawnee. Sinclair
argues that these actions and Respondents' discriminatory and
preferential treatment of shippers violate sections 1(4), 3(1), 3(4),
and 6(1) of the ICA.
Sinclair requests that, pursuant to sections 13(1) of the ICA and
Rule 206 of the Commission's Rules of Practice and Procedure, that the
Commission order CITGO to (i) publish a tariff for the intermediate
points on its pipeline, in particular Shawnee, Oklahoma, Ardmore,
Oklahoma, and Drumright, Oklahoma, with a provision for the shipment of
diesel fuel from Ardmore to Drumright based on the historical
transportation of diesel fuel between these two points; (ii) to publish
tariffs for interconnection points to other pipelines, in particular
the interconnection to the Williams line at Drumright; (iii) to publish
fair and reasonable prorationing policies for the shipment of all
grades of gasoline and diesel fuel to all intermediate destination
points on the CITGO pipeline and to Drumright, the terminus of the
pipeline; (iv) to cease and desist its discrimination against Sinclair
and other shippers and the preferences it is granting to its own
affiliates, which are utilizing the same segment of CITGO's pipeline to
which Sinclair is being denied access; and (v) to pay Sinclair and
other similarly situated shippers damages and reparations, including
the costs of this proceeding, interest, and attorneys fees.
In addition, Sinclair asks the Commission to give expeditious
treatment to its complaint in view of the irreparable injury that
Sinclair will incur, and asks the Commission to shorten the time for
responding to its complaint to seven days. Sinclair also requests that
emergency interim relief be provided to mitigate the irreparable injury
that Sinclair would otherwise incur and to effectuate the public policy
objectives of the ICA.
Any person desiring to be heard or to protest said complaint should
file a motion to intervene or a protest with the Federal Energy
Regulatory Commission, 825 North Capitol Street, NE., Washington, DC
20426, in accordance with Rules 214 and 211 of the Commission's Rules
of Practice and Procedure, 18 CFR 385.214, 385.214. All such motions or
protests should be filed on or before December 19, 1994. Protests will
be considered by the commission in determining the 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 December 19, 1994.
Lois D. Cashell,
Secretary.
[FR Doc. 94-30305 Filed 12-8-94; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6717-01-M