[Federal Register Volume 60, Number 199 (Monday, October 16, 1995)]
[Notices]
[Pages 53602-53605]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 95-25529]



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

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY
[Docket No. CP95-706-000, et al.]


El Paso Natural Gas Company, et al.; Natural Gas Certificate 
Filings

October 6, 1995.
    Take notice that the following filings have been made with the 
Commission:

1. El Paso Natural Gas Company

[Docket No. CP95-706-000]

    Take notice that on August 23, 1995, as supplemented on September 
27, 1995, El Paso Natural Gas Company (El Paso), Post Office Box 1492, 
El Paso, Texas 79978, filed in Docket No. CP95-706-000, a request 
pursuant to Section 157.205 of the Commission's Regulations under the 
Natural Gas Act (18 CFR 157.205) for authorization to modify, then 
operate the existing Llano Grama Ridge Receipt Point, located in Lea 
County, New Mexico, as a bidirectional receipt/delivery point, under 
the authorization issued in Docket No. CP82-435-000 pursuant to Section 
7 of the Natural Gas Act. It is stated that this conversion will permit 
El Paso to deliver gas to, as well as continue to receive gas from, 
Llano, Inc. (Llano), all as more fully set forth in the request which 
is on file with the Commission and open to public inspection.
    El Paso states that Llano now desires to receive gas for either 
redelivery to end-users or, in certain instances, redelivery into 
facilities of another interstate pipeline company. Accordingly, El Paso 
requests authorization to modify and then operate the Llano Grama Ridge 
Receipt Point as a bidirectional receipt/delivery point to be 
designated as the Llano Grama Ridge Meter Station.
    El Paso states that the estimate cost of the proposed facilities is 
$28,900 and that Llano has agreed to reimburse El Paso for the involved 
costs. It is stated that the proposed quantity to be transported on a 
firm basis to the Llano Grama Ridge Meter Station is estimated to be 
18,250,000 Mcf annually, or an average of 50,000 Mcf daily.
    El Paso states: (i) operation of the Llano Grama Ridge Meter 
Station in bidirectional service is not prohibited by El Paso's 
existing tariff; and (ii) gas volumes will be delivered pursuant to 
transportation arrangements between El Paso and any shipper desiring El 
Paso to make deliveries on a shipper's behalf at this meter station. El 
Paso asserts that it has sufficient capacity to deliver the requested 
gas volumes without detriment or disadvantage to El Paso's other 
customers. 

[[Page 53603]]

    Comment date: November 20, 1995 in accordance with Standard 
Paragraph G at the end of this notice.

2. CNG Transmission Corporation

[Docket Nos. CP93-200-004, CP95-32-001 and CP95-245-001]

    Take notice that on October 3, 1995, CNG Transmission Corporation 
(CNG), 445 West Main Street, Clarksburg, West Virginia 26302-2450 filed 
amendments to applications for abandonment authority to sell certain 
gathering facilities in West Virginia to Cabot Oil & Gas Corporation 
(Cabot) in Docket No. CP93-200-000 and CP95-32-000. CNG states that Big 
Sandy Gas Company (Big Sandy), an affiliate of Cabot which would have 
been receiving and operating the gathering facilities, also filed 
requests for a declaratory order for non-jurisdictional status of the 
gathering facilities in Docket Nos. CP93-198-000 and CP95-46, 
respectively.
    CNG states that it also filed for abandonment authority to sell 
certain gathering facilities in central West Virginia to Parker & 
Parsley Gas Processing Company (Parker & Parsley) in docket No. CP95-
254-000. It is stated that Parker & Parsley also filed a request for a 
declaratory order for non-jurisdictional status of the gathering 
facilities in Docket No. CP95-244-000.
    It is stated that Cabot and CNG have attempted unsuccessfully to 
resolve pricing issues concerning the Cabot sales, with CNG terminating 
letters of intent between the parties, effective October 1, 1995. CNG 
states that, due to a change by Parker & Parsley in its Appalachian 
operations, CNG has also elected to terminate the purchase and sale 
agreement between CNG and Parker & Parsley. However, CNG states that it 
has entered into a letter of intent with Eastern States Oil & Gas, Inc. 
(Eastern) to sell Eastern the same gathering facilities being sold to 
Cabot and Parker & Parsley. It is stated that a definitive Purchase and 
Sale Agreement will be signed in the near future.
    Additionally, CNG states that Exhibit Y in the above-referenced 
dockets have been supplemented to reflect the accounting entries for 
the new purchaser and depreciation as of December 31, 1995. CNG 
contends that the result of the combined sale is a decrease in the 
stranded costs incurred by CNG in disposing of the three largest sales 
by $1,500,000 through increased proceeds and with the effect of 
depreciation through December 31, 1995.
    In response to the Commission's request to file a default contract, 
CNG states that Eastern is beginning its negotiations with the 
producers and shippers on the facilities including the Independent Oil 
& Gas Association of West Virginia (IOGA). CNG states that it has 
agreed to sell and Eastern has agreed to purchase the facilities 
subject to the Commission's default contract requirements regarding 
rates and fuel loss. It is stated that the sale to Eastern is based on 
the default gathering rates which are anticipated to be in effect 
beginning January 1996, as provided in CNG's rate settlement before the 
Commission in Docket No. RP94-96-000.
    CNG anticipates that a default contract can be filed with the 
Commission in the near future that will be acceptable to most producers 
and shippers which Eastern and IOGA have agreed upon. CNG understands 
that Big Sandy and Parker & Parsley will be filing pleadings in their 
respective dockets reflecting these changed circumstances and Eastern 
will also file in these dockets to be substituted as petitioner.
    CNG also requests that the response date for filing a default 
contract be extended to November 1, 1995. CNG states that Big Sandy has 
authorized CNG to file on its behalf this response to the Commission's 
letter dated August 30, 1995 in Docket No. CP93-200-000 and CP93-198-
000.
    Comment date: October 27, 1995 in accordance with Standard 
Paragraph F at the end of this notice.

3. Mountain Fuel Supply Company v. Prima Exploration, Inc., BTA Oil 
Producers, and NGC Energy Resources, Limited Partnership

[Docket No. CP95-784-000]

    Take notice that on September 28, 1995, Mountain Fuel Supply 
Company (Mountain Fuel), 180 East First South Street, Salt Lake City, 
Utah 84111 filed with the Commission in Docket CP95-784-000 a complaint 
against Prima Exploration, Inc. (Prima), 7800 East Union Avenue, 
Denver, Colorado 80237, BTA Oil Producers, (BTA) 104 South Pecos, 
Midland, Texas 79701, and NGC Energy Resources, Limited Partnership, 
13430 Northwest Freeway, Suite 1200, Houston 77040-6095 (NER). Mountain 
Fuel states that its complaint is based on Prima's failure to comply 
with the Commission's order in Docket No. CP93-702-000 1 
authorizing Prima to withdraw and deliver to Mountain Fuel its storage 
gas at the Bridger Lake Field in Summit County, Utah and Uinta County, 
Wyoming. Mountain Fuel also states that its complaint against BTA and 
NER is based on their acquisition from Prima of the certificated 
storage facilities and operation of the facilities to provide 
certificated service to Mountain Fuel without first having obtained the 
necessary authorization from the Commission. Mountain Fuel further 
states that neither Prima, BTA nor NER have made an effort to comply 
with the requirements of the order in Docket No. CP93-702-000 to return 
Mountain Fuel's storage gas in a timely manner.

    \1\ Phillips Petroleum Company and Prima Exploration, Inc., et 
al., 69 FERC 61,050 (1994).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Mountain Fuel requests that the Commission issue an order (i) 
directing Prima, or BTA and NER, as the case may be to withdraw and 
deliver the balance of Mountain Fuel's gas at Bridger Lake by October, 
13, 1996, (ii) ordering Prima, or BTA and NER, as the case may be, to 
purchase and deliver to Mountain Fuel at withdrawal rates in accordance 
with the 1992 letter agreement, the gas they cannot redeliver pursuant 
to the 1994 order, and (iii) providing Mountain Fuel any other relief 
the Commission deems appropriate.
    Comment date: November 6, 1995 in accordance with the first 
paragraph of Standard Paragraph F at the end of this notice.

4. ANR Pipeline Company

[Docket No. CP95-788-000]

    Take notice that on September 28, 1995, ANR Pipeline Company (ANR), 
500 Renaissance Center, Detroit, Michigan 48243, filed in Docket No. 
CP95-788-000 an application pursuant to Section 7(b) of the Natural Gas 
Act for authorization to abandon a natural gas exchange service between 
ANR and Union Oil Company of California (UNOCAL), all as more fully set 
forth in the application on file with the Commission and open to public 
inspection.
    ANR proposes to abandon the service which was authorized by the 
Commission in Docket No. CP81-13-000, and carried out under the terms 
of an agreement dated June 27, 1980, and on file as Rate Schedule X-113 
of ANR's FERC Gas Tariff, Original Volume No. 2. It is stated that 
Michigan Wisconsin Pipe Line (MichWisc), ANR's predecessor, was 
authorized to deliver up to 3,000 Mcf of gas per day for UNOCAL for 
maximum periods of 3 days per exchange transaction at a point near 
ANR's Creole Meter Station, located offshore Louisiana. It is stated 
that UNOCAL was authorized to redeliver equivalent quantities of gas to 
MichWisc at the same point.
    It is stated that in a letter dated September 20, 1993, ANR 
notified UNOCAL of its intent to terminate the service. It is asserted 
that the purpose of the service was to facilitate the recovery 

[[Page 53604]]
of UNOCAL's oil reserves, which are now fully depleted. It is further 
asserted that UNOCAL has signed ANR's letter to indicate its agreement 
with ANR's request for abandonment.
    Comment date: October 27, 1995 in accordance with Standard 
Paragraph F at the end of this notice.

5. Columbia Gulf Transmission Company

[Docket No. CP96-4-000]

    Take notice that on October 3, 1995, Columbia Gulf Transmission 
Company (Columbia Gulf), P.O. Box 683, Houston, Texas 77001, filed in 
Docket No. CP96-4-000 a request pursuant to Sections 157.205 and 
157.211 of the Commission's Regulations under the Natural Gas Act (18 
CFR 157.205, 157.211) for authorization to modify an existing receipt 
point and establish an additional delivery point to Delta Natural Gas 
Company, Inc., (Delta) in Madison County, Kentucky, under Columbia 
Gulf's blanket certificate issued in Docket No. CP83-496 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.
    Columbia Gulf requests authorization to make certain modifications 
to its existing Speedwell receipt point and establish a delivery point 
for firm transportation service. Columbia Gulf states that it would 
provide the service pursuant to its Blanket Certificate issued in 
Docket No. CP83-496 under existing authorized rate schedules and within 
certificate entitlements, as follows:

------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                    Maximum    Estimated
                                                     daily      annual  
       Customer               Rate schedule        quantity    quantity 
                                                     (Dth)       (Dth)  
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Delta.................  Firm Transportation            4,000   1,460,000
                         Service (FTS).                                 
------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Columbia Gulf states that the modifications to the existing 
Speedwell point of receipt, which will be established as a delivery 
point, has been requested by Delta for additional firm transportation 
service to be utilized for its system supply. Columbia Gulf adds that 
the additional transportation service to be provided through the new 
point of delivery will be firm transportation service under Columbia 
Gulf's Rate Schedule FTS.
    Columbia Gulf states that Columbia Gulf and Delta have executed an 
FTS-1 Service Agreement providing for an FTS Demand Service of 4,000 
Dth/d. Columbia Gulf adds that it will receive 4,000 Dth/d for the 
account of Delta at Leach, Kentucky from Columbia Gas Transmission 
Corporation (Columbia Gas), and that Columbia Gulf will deliver by 
backhaul to Delta at the new point of delivery at Speedwell. Columbia 
Gulf states that Columbia Gas has revised its GTS service agreement 
with Delta to provide 4,000 Dth/d at Leach.
    Columbia Gulf states there will be no impact on Columbia Gulf's 
existing design day and annual obligations to its customers due to the 
nature of the backhaul. Columbia Gulf states that Delta has agreed to 
reimburse Columbia Gulf 100% of the cost of the modification, which is 
approximately $3,861, including gross-up for income tax purposes. 
Columbia Gulf adds that it will contribute approximately $45,000 for 
the cost of a filter separator to be installed.
    Columbia Gulf states that it will comply with all of the 
environmental requirements of Sections 157.206(d) of the Commission's 
Regulations prior to the modification of any facilities.
    Comment date: November 20, 1995 in accordance with Standard 
Paragraph G at the end of this notice.

6. Williams Natural Gas Company

[Docket No. CP96-5-000]

    Take notice that on October 3, 1995, Williams Natural Gas Company 
(WNG), One Williams Center, Tulsa, Oklahoma, 74101, filed in Docket No. 
CP96-5-000, a request pursuant to Sections 157.205, 157.212(a) and 
157.216(b) of the Commission's Regulations under the Natural Gas Act 
(18 CFR 157.205, 157.212(a), and 157.216(b)) for authorization to 
abandon by reclaim two separate town border meter settings used in the 
delivery of gas to Missouri Gas Energy (MGE) and to replace them with a 
single dual run meter setting under WNG's blanket authorization issued 
in Docket No. CP82-479-000, pursuant to Section 7(c) 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.
    WNG proposes to replace the MGE Cassville/Purdy and Monett single 
run meter settings with a dual run 6-inch orifice meter setting at the 
present Cassville/Purdy site in Lawrence County, Missouri. WNG asserts 
that the projected volume of delivery through the replacement 
facilities is not expected to exceed the volume currently delivered. 
WNG relates that the reclaim cost is estimated to be $1,000 with a 
salvage value of $0. WNG indicates that the estimated cost of 
construction is approximately $118,555.
    WGN states that this change is not prohibited by an existing tariff 
and it has sufficient capacity to accomplish the deliveries specified 
without detriment or disadvantage to its other customers. WGN further 
states that it has contacted MGE and MGE is agreeable to its proposed 
modifications. WNG relates that a copy of this filing was sent to the 
Missouri Public Service Commission.
    Comment date: November 20, 1995 in accordance with Standard 
Paragraph G at the end of this notice.

7. Prima Exploration, Inc., et al., BTA Oil Producers and NGC 
Energy Resources, Limited Partnership

[Docket No. CP95-791-000]

    Take notice that on September 29, 1995, Prima Exploration, Inc. 
(Prima 2), 7800 East Union Avenue, Suite 605, Denver, Colorado 
80237, BTA Oil Producers (BTA) and NGC Energy Resources, Limited 
Partnership (NGC) 13430 Northwest Freeway, Suite 1200, Houston, Texas 
77040 (collectively, BTA/NER) jointly filed in Docket No. CP95-791-000 
an application pursuant to Section 7 (b) and (c) of the Natural Gas Act 
requesting permission and approval for Prima to abandon a storage 
service and related facilities in Summit County, Utah and for 
authorization for BTA/NER to acquire the facilities and to continue to 
provide the storage service, all as more fully set forth in the 
application which is on file with the Commission and open to public 
inspection.

    \2\ Prima is a joint venture of four independent exploration and 
production companies, Prima Exploration, Inc., the operator; Vegas 
Production Company; Gunlikson Petroleum, Inc.; and Petroro 
Corporation.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Prima states that it is engaged in providing gas storage service 
from the Bridger Lake Field in Summit County, Utah for Mountain Fuel 
Supply Company (Mountain Fuel) pursuant to a limited jurisdiction 
certificate issued in 

[[Page 53605]]
Docket No. CP93-702-000.3 Prima relates that it wishes to transfer 
its interests in these facilities to BTA/NER and requests permission 
and approval to abandon the storage service it provides for Mountain 
Fuel and the related facilities by transfer to BTA/NER.

    \3\ Phillips Petroleum Company and Prima Exploration, Inc., et 
al., 69 FERC 61,050 (1994).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    BTA/NER request authorization to continue to provide the storage 
service for Mountain Fuel and to acquire the related facilities. BTA/
NER, noting that the certificate granted to Prima was to expire in two 
years, state that it has become apparent that additional time will be 
required for the withdrawals and redelivery of storage gas to Mountain 
Fuel. BTA/NER ask that the requested certificate expire in five years.
    Prima indicates that the related facilities consist of a metering 
station, dehydrator and heater, 425 feet of 4-inch lateral pipeline and 
a single natural gas injection well located in Summit County, Utah. 
Prima also states that no gas has been injected into the facilities 
since April of 1984 and less than 0.5 Bcf of working gas remains in 
storage.
    Comment date: October 27, 1995 in accordance with Standard 
Paragraph F 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 Section 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. 95-25529 Filed 10-13-95; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6717-01-P