[Federal Register Volume 61, Number 219 (Tuesday, November 12, 1996)]
[Notices]
[Page 58058]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 96-28815]


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

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY
[Docket No. RP97-71-000]


Transcontinental Gas Pipe Line Corporation; Notice of Proposed 
Changes in FERC Gas Tariff

November 5, 1996.
    Take notice that on November 1, 1996, Transcontinental Gas Pipe 
Line Corporation (Transco) tendered for filing as part of its FERC Gas 
Tariff, Third Revised Volume No. 1, the tariff sheets listed in 
Appendix A to that filing, to become effective December 1, 1996.
    Transco states that the cost of service proposed in the instant 
filing is $793,104,220, compared to a cost of service of $710,024,010 
underlying Transco's rates found just and reasonable in Docket No. 
RP92-137. Transco notes that since the effectiveness of the Docket No. 
RP92-137 case, it has filed a general rate case in Docket No. RP95-197, 
as to which settlements addressing issues including cost of service are 
currently awaiting Commission action. Transco also notes that the cost 
of service for Docket No. RP92-137 is not directly comparable to the 
cost of service in the instant case, due to the fact that certain 
Transco expansion projects, which increased cost of service but which 
did not require Transco to file a general Section 4 rate case, were 
placed into service after the effectiveness of the Docket No. RP92-137 
case, i.e., September 1, 1992.
    Transco states that the principal factors supporting the increase 
in cost of service are (1) an increase in rate base resulting from 
additional plant, and (2) an increase in operation and maintenance 
expenses.
    Transco states that changes proposed in the instant filing compared 
to the pre-filed methods in place on the Transco system are 
principally: (1) allocation of 100% of the Hester Storage field cost of 
service to its system firm and interruptible transportation services; 
(2) allocation of Accumulated Deferred Income Taxes based on a net 
plant allocation; (3) capitalization of pipeline recoating expenses 
beginning May 1, 1997; (4) elimination of the ``at-risk'' certificate 
condition governing Transco's Mobile Bay facilities (although the 
instant case has been filed consistent with the ``at-risk'' condition); 
and (5) refunctionalization, pursuant to a prior Commission order, of 
certain jointly owned transmission facilities to the gathering 
function.
    Transco also states that its rates for firm backhauls are currently 
at issue in Docket No. RP96-211, and that the rates reflected in the 
instant filing are consistent with Transco's October 2, 1996 compliance 
filing in that proceeding.
    Transco states that it is not making any proposals in the instant 
filing which are inconsistent with the Stipulation and Agreement filed 
on June 19, 1996, in Docket No. RP95-197, which was certified to the 
Commission on July 31, 1996 by the Presiding Administrative Law Judge 
in that proceeding.
    Transco further states that the instant filing also proposes on a 
prospective only basis the following changes to the pre-filed methods: 
(1) roll-in of the costs of the Leidy Line and Southern expansion 
transmission facilities which currently are subject to incremental 
pricing; and (2) establishing rates for interruptible backhaul service 
equal to rates for interruptible forward haul service. Transco has 
included in Statement Q pro forma tariff sheets reflecting the 
interruptible backhaul rate proposal. These changes are proposed to be 
effective prospectively only after Commission approval.
    Transco states that copies of the filing have been served upon its 
affected customers and interested State Commissions.
    Any person desiring to be heard or to protect this filing should 
file a motion to intervene or protest with the Federal Energy 
Regulatory Commission, 888 First Capitol Street, N.E., Washington, D.C. 
20426, in accordance with Sections 385.214 and 385.211 of the 
Commission's Rules and Regulations. All such motions or protests must 
be filed as provided in Section 154.210 of the Commission's 
Regulations. Protests will be considered by the Commission in 
determining the appropriate 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 
in the Public Reference Room.
Lois D. Cashell,
Secretary.
[FR Doc. 96-28815 Filed 11-8-96; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6717-01-M