[Federal Register Volume 59, Number 240 (Thursday, December 15, 1994)]
[Unknown Section]
[Page 0]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 94-30800]


[[Page Unknown]]

[Federal Register: December 15, 1994]


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

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY
[Docket No. CP95-116-000]

 

Natural Gas Pipeline Company of America v. Northern Border 
Pipeline Company; Notice of Complaint

December 9, 1994.
    Take notice that on December 7, 1994, Natural Gas Pipeline Company 
of America (Natural), 701 East 22nd Street, Lombard, Illinois 61048, 
filed with the Commission in Docket No. CP95-116-000 a complaint, 
pursuant to Rule 206 of the Commission's Rules of Practice and 
Procedure, against Northern Border Pipeline Company (Northern Border), 
alleging that the capacity allocation procedure under a current 
Northern Border expansion and extension proposal is unduly 
discriminatory.
    According to Natural, Northern Border held an open season between 
October 24 and November 18, 1994, for new capacity on a proposal to 
expand its system between Port of Morgan, Montana, Ventura, Iowa, and 
Harper, Iowa, by adding new compression facilities; and to extend its 
system by constructing new pipeline facilities approximately 250 miles 
in length eastward from Harper, Iowa, to the metropolitan Chicago, 
Illinois, market. Northern Border's pipeline system interconnects with 
Northern Natural's pipeline system at Ventura and with Natural's 
Amarillo Mainline at the Harper terminus, where Natural receives gas 
for transportation to the Chicago market.
    Natural bases its complaint allegations against Northern Border on 
an October 24, 1994, copy of Northern Border's expansion and extension 
proposal.\1\ Natural alleges that Northern Border's proposal involves 
an unlawful and unduly discriminatory typing arrangement, under which 
Northern Border is using its power over the expansion of its existing 
system to coerce shippers who desire such expansion capacity into also 
bidding for unwanted and uneconomical extension capacity beyond Harper, 
Iowa.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \1\Northern Border has not filed its proposal with the 
Commission as of December 9, 1994.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The first paragraph of Section III of the October 24, 1994, 
proposal provides for project capacity to be allocated on the basis of 
the delivery zone requested, with preference given to the three 
delivery zones downstream of the Harper terminus (i.e., on the 
extension project). According to Natural, the proposal also precludes 
``shippers from obtaining only desired expansion capacity by expressly 
excluding any `[e]xpansion of ** existing delivery points [to Northern 
Natural at Ventura and to Natural at Harper]. Incremental deliveries 
will only be accommodated to the extent delivery capacity is or becomes 
available.' (Schedule A, footnote 2).''
    Natural believes a competitive alternative to Northern Border's 
proposal would be to permit shippers to acquire capacity on Northern 
Border's expansion facilities and to move gas farther east by using 
Natural's existing system (which Natural could expand as needed). 
Natural also believes that this alternative could result in gas moving 
from Port of Morgan to Chicago more efficiently and economically than 
under Northern Border's proposal.
    Any person desiring to be heard or to make a protest with reference 
to Natural's complaint, especially potential bidders on Northern 
Border's expansion and extension facilities, should file with the 
Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, 825 North Capitol Street, N.E., 
Washington, D.C. 20426, a motion to intervene or protest in accordance 
with the Commission's Rules of Practice and Procedure (18 CFR 385.211 
or 385.214). All such motions, together with the answer(s) of 
Respondent to the motion and to the Complaint, should be filed on or 
before December 23, 1994. Any person desiring 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 the 
complaint shall be due on or before December 23, 1994.
Lois D. Cashell,
Secretary.
[FR Doc. 94-30800 Filed 12-14-94; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6717-01-M