[Federal Register Volume 61, Number 233 (Tuesday, December 3, 1996)]
[Notices]
[Pages 64077-64080]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 96-30667]


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

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY
[Docket No. CP97-92-000, et al.]


Transcontinental Gas Pipe Line Corporation, et al.; Natural Gas 
Certificate Filings

November 22, 1996.
    Take notice that the following filings have been made with the 
Commission:

1. Transcontinental Gas Pipe Line Corporation

[Docket No. CP97-92-000]

    Take notice that on November 12, 1996, Transcontinental Gas Pipe 
Line Corporation (Transco), P. O. Box 1396, Houston, Texas 77251, filed 
in Docket No. CP97-92-000 an application pursuant to Section 7(c) of 
the Natural Gas Act for a certificate of public convenience and 
necessity authorizing an extension and expansion of Transco's Mobile 
Bay Lateral including (i) authorization to construct and operate 
approximately 76.8 miles of 30-inch diameter pipeline extending from a 
proposed new platform in Main Pass Area, Block 260 to its existing 
Compressor Station No. 82 in Mobile County, Alabama; approximately 17.5 
miles of 36-inch diameter onshore pipeline loop located immediately 
downstream of Station No. 82 in southern Mobile County, Alabama; a new 
30,000 horsepower compressor Station No. 83 located in northern Mobile 
County, Alabama; and a 26,000 horsepower compression addition at 
Transco's existing Station No. 82; all of which facilities will provide 
a total of the dekatherm equivalent of 600 MMcf per day of additional 
service offshore \1\

[[Page 64078]]

and 500 MMcf per day of additional service onshore \2\, to become 
available in late 1998; (ii) approval of Transco's initial rates for 
such service to be Transco's then-current Rate schedule FT rate for 
Zone 4A, and (iii) approval of rolled-in rate treatment for costs 
associated with the Mobile Bay Lateral Extension and Expansion Project, 
to be made effective in Transco's first NGA Section 4 rate proceeding 
following the in-service date of the project, all as more fully set 
forth in the application which is on file with the Commission and open 
to public inspection.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \1\ In referring to the ``offshore extension'' of its Mobile Bay 
Lateral, Transco states that approximately 73.0 miles of the 
extension will be located offshore and approximately 4.0 miles will 
be located onshore upstream of and connecting with Station No. 82, 
which is the existing terminus of the Mobile Bay Lateral.
    \2\ Transco states that it is sizing its onshore expansion 
facilities smaller than its offshore facilities based on informal 
indications that it will receive 100 MMcf of capacity turnback on 
the Mobile Bay Lateral.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    In order to create the firm transportation capacity under the 
project, Transco states that it will construct and operate the 
following facilities:

Offshore Facilities

     Approximately 76.8 miles of 30-inch diameter pipeline 
commencing at a proposed offshore platform in Main Pass Area, Block 260 
to be constructed by a producer, to Transco's Station No. 82 in Mobile 
County, Alabama.

Onshore Facilities

     Approximately 17.5 miles of 36-inch diameter pipeline loop 
located immediately downstream of Station No. 82 in Mobile County, 
Alabama, from Mobile Bay Lateral MP 105.19 to MP 122.68;
     A new 30,000 horsepower compressor Station No. 83 located 
in Mobile County, Alabama at Mobile Bay Lateral MP 71.57; and
     A 26,000 horsepower compression addition at Transco's 
existing Station No. 82 in Mobile County, Alabama.

Third Party/Non-Jurisdictional Facilities

     A third party will construct, own and operate a 600 MMcf 
per day separation plant, including a slug catcher, immediately 
upstream of Compressor Station No. 82. The plant will be designed to 
remove liquids from the pipeline and deliver pipeline quality natural 
gas to the suction side of Compressor Station No. 82. The plant is 
estimated to require thirty acres of land and is planned to be located 
immediately to the west and adjacent to Compressor Station No. 82.
    Transco states that the proposed in-service date for the project is 
December 1, 1998. Transco estimates that the proposed facilities will 
cost, in the aggregate, $171.5 million.
    According to Transco, the project will create firm transportation 
capacity of the dekatherm equivalent of 600 MMcf per day from Main Pass 
Block 260 to Transco's Station No. 82 and 500 MMcf per day from Station 
No. 82 to Station No. 85, where Transco's Mobile Bay Lateral 
interconnects with its mainline in Choctaw County, Alabama. Transco 
states that it will make the capacity under the project available to 
all shippers by means of an ``open season'' planned to be held 
commencing November 15, 1996. It is stated that the open season will 
extend until December 16, 1996. Concurrent with the open season, 
Transco states that it intends to solicit interest in the 
relinquishment of firm capacity currently held by shippers on the 
Mobile Bay Lateral, in order to assure that the project facilities are 
properly sized. Transco states that it will notify the Commission of 
the commitments received from customers as soon as practicable after 
the end of the open season period, and Transco will seek to enter into 
firm transportation precedent agreements which reflect a minimum 15 
year term. Transco states that it expects to file these executed 
precedent agreements within thirty days of the end of the open season 
period. Transco states that the firm transportation service to be 
rendered through this new capacity will be performed under its Rate 
Schedule FT and Part 284(G) of the Commission's regulations. Transco 
states that it will charge the project shippers the then-current Zone 
4A rate under Rate Schedule FT in effect when the facilities are placed 
in service, plus any applicable surcharges.
    Transco avers that the project shippers will have primary firm 
transportation rights to all delivery points located in Transco's Rate 
Zone 4A, enabling them to access various market points on the 
interstate pipeline grid, including markets at the pooling points 
located at Transco's Station No. 85 and the existing upstream and 
downstream interconnections with other pipelines on Transco's system.
    Transco requests that the Commission grant rolled-in rate treatment 
for the costs associated with the project in Transco's first Section 4 
rate proceeding to become effective after the in-service date of this 
project. Transco states that the presumption to roll-in the project 
costs applies because the rate impact on its existing customers under 
each firm rate schedule is less than five percent, which is the level 
set forth in the Commission's Statement of Policy for a presumption of 
rolled-in rate treatment on the pricing of new pipeline construction. 
Transco also states that the facilities constructed as part of the 
project will produce significant system-wide operational and financial 
benefits and will be operated on an integrated basis with its existing 
facilities.
    To meet the proposed in-service date for the project, Transco 
requests that the Commission issue a preliminary determination 
approving all aspects of the proposal other than environmental matters 
by July 1, 1997, with a final determination and all appropriate 
certificate authorizations by February 1, 1998.
    The Commission staff cannot schedule a completion date for the 
environmental analysis of this project, because Transco has not begun 
certain critical processes. Transco has not yet filed applications with 
the Minerals Management Service (MMS) or the U.S. Army Corps of 
Engineers (COE), nor has it requested a determination of consistency 
with the Coastal Zone Management Plan (Alabama Department of 
Environmental Management (ADEM)). The staff wants to coordinate its 
environmental analysis with the MMS, ADEM, and the COE.
    Other missing material that will delay the completion of the 
environmental analysis include surveys for threatened or endangered 
species and consultation with the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service and 
completion of surveys for cultural resources and consultation with the 
State Historic Preservation Office. These resources are of particular 
interest because they were of concern with respect to the construction 
of the original Mobile Bay Lateral.
    Concerns over erosion and sedimentation plans must also be resolved 
as part of our environmental analysis.
    Comment date: December 13, 1996, in accordance with Standard 
Paragraph F at the end of this notice.

2. Colorado Interstate Gas Company

[Docket No. CP97-94-000]

    Take notice that on November 12, 1996, Colorado Interstate Gas 
Company (CIG), P.O. Box 1087, Colorado Springs, Colorado 80944, filed 
in Docket No. CP97-94-000 a request pursuant to Sections 157.205 and 
157.216 of the Commission's Regulations under the Natural Gas Act (18 
CFR 157.205, 157.216) for authorization to lease to Vessels 
Hydrocarbons, Inc. (Vessels) almost 2.22 miles of 8-inch diameter pipe 
located in Adams County, Colorado, under CIG's blanket certificate 
issued in Docket No. CP83-21-000 pursuant to Section 7 of the Natural 
Gas

[[Page 64079]]

Act, all as more fully set forth in the request that is on file with 
the Commission and open to public inspection.
    CIG states it has been advised by Vessels that Vessels plans to 
consolidate its processing activities by closing its Third Creek plant 
and constructing a line to move raw gas from the tailgate of the Third 
Creek plant to its Wattenberg plant which is almost 18.5 miles away. 
CIG also states the abandonment by lease to Vessels of CIG's Third 
Creek Lateral will prevent the construction of almost 2.22 miles of 
pipe and avoid the associated environmental disruption. Vessels has 
advised CIG that Shippers using the Wattenberg plant will have access 
to CIG's transmission after processing.
    CIG further states that the subject facilities were certificated 
and operated pursuant to the certificate of public convenience and 
necessity issued in Docket No. CP79-284.
    Comment date: January 6, 1997, in accordance with Standard 
Paragraph G at the end of this notice.

3. Columbia Gas Transmission Corporation

[Docket No. CP97-95-000]

    Take notice that on November 13, 1996, Columbia Gas Transmission 
Corporation (Columbia), 1700 MacCorkle Avenue, SE., Charleston, West 
Virginia 25314-1599, filed in Docket No. CP97-95-000, pursuant to 
Section 7(b) of the Natural Gas Act (NGA), as amended, and Section 
157.7 and 157.18 of the Commission's Regulations thereunder, an 
abbreviated application requesting permission and approval to abandon 
certain natural gas compression facilities, all as more fully set forth 
in the application on file with the Commission.
    Columbia requests NGA Section 7(b) authorization for the 
abandonment of seven 500 horsepower horizontal type engine compressor 
units, located within the York Compressor Station, located in Medina 
County, Ohio.
    Columbia states that in addition to the abandonment of the 
compressor units for which Columbia is seeking authorization, Columbia 
would also remove any associated equipment, appurtenances and buildings 
associated with these units.
    Columbia further states that the York Compressor Station has been 
in service since 1914 to compress local field production gas and relay 
transmission volumes into Columbia's Line L. Columbia states that 
although authorization to abandon the horizontal units, originally 
installed between 1914 and 1928, was received in Docket No. CP80-14-000 
(Columbia Gas Transmission Corporation, 11 FERC Paragraph 61,047 
(1980); order amending certificate, 11 FERC Paragraph 61,214 (1980)), 
an increase in actual over estimated local production in the area 
prompted Columbia to retract its abandonment authorization.
    Columbia states that in a letter dated January 21, 1982 to the 
Commission, Columbia advised that the horizontal units would be 
retained in service. It is stated that since that time, the decline in 
location production along with other facility upgrades in the York 
Production field rendered the horizontal units inactive by 1989. 
Columbia now requests approval to proceed with the abandonment granted 
by the Commission in 1980. Columbia states that the horizontal units 
are no longer needed and have become obsolete and their abandonment 
will not result in any termination of service. Therefore, Columbia 
submits that the proposed abandonment is required by the present and 
future public convenience and necessity.
    Columbia states that the cost of retiring the seven horizontal 
compressor units is approximately $264,000, with an estimated net debit 
to accumulated provision for depreciation of $835,305.
    Comment date: December 13, 1996, in accordance with Standard 
Paragraph F at the end of this notice.

4. National Fuel Gas Supply Corporation

[Docket No. CP97-101-000]

    Take notice that on November 18, 1996, National Fuel Gas Supply 
Corporation (National), 10 Lafayette Square, Buffalo, New York 14203, 
filed in Docket No. CP97-101-000 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 construct and operate a 
residential sales tap under National's blanket certificate issued in 
Docket No. CP83-4-000 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.
    Specifically, National proposes to construct and operate a sales 
tap for delivery of approximately 150 Mcf annually of gas to National 
Fuel Gas Distribution Corporation (Distribution) at an estimated cost 
of $1,500, for which National would be reimbursed by Distribution.
    Comment date: January 6, 1997, in accordance with Standard 
Paragraph G at the end of this notice.

5. ANR Pipeline Company

[Docket No. CP97-103-000]

    Take notice that on November 18, 1996, ANR Pipeline Company (ANR), 
500 Renaissance Center, Detroit, Michigan 48243-1902, filed in Docket 
No. CP97-103-000 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 operate an existing interconnection 
constructed under the authorization of Section 311 of the Natural Gas 
Policy Act of 1978 and to construct and operate additional facilities 
for the delivery of natural gas to Alcan Ingot, a division of Alcan 
Aluminum Corporation (Alcan) in Webster County, Kentucky, under ANR's 
blanket certificate issued in Docket No. CP82-480-000, 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.
    ANR proposes to operate the existing facilities, which consist of a 
4-inch tap and associated piping, valves and fittings, and to construct 
and operate electronic measurement equipment in order to provide a 
transportation service for Alcan pursuant to a firm transportation rate 
schedule. It is stated that the existing facilities were installed in 
1984 to deliver gas to Alcan on behalf of Orbit Gas Company (Orbit). It 
is explained that Orbit deactivated its interconnection with Alcan and 
that Alcan purchased the facilities downstream of ANR from Orbit.
    It is stated that the facilities would be designed to deliver up to 
417 Mcf of natural gas per hour. ANR estimates the cost of the 
facilities at $23,100, for which ANR would be fully reimbursed. It is 
explained that Alcan has informed ANR that it proposes to use capacity 
release transportation on ANR's system. It is stated that the proposal 
would have no adverse impact on ANR's peak day deliveries or on annual 
entitlements of ANR's existing customers. It is further stated that ANR 
has sufficient gas supply to make the deliveries and that the 
deliveries can be made without detriment or disadvantage to ANR's 
existing customers.
    Comment date: January 6, 1997, in accordance with Standard 
Paragraph G at the end of this notice.

6. Texas Gas Transmission Corporation

[Docket No. CP97-106-000]

    Take notice that on November 19, 1996, Texas Gas Transmission 
Corporation (Texas Gas), 3800 Frederica Street, Owensboro, Kentucky 
42301, filed in Docket No. CP97-106-000 a

[[Page 64080]]

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 construct and operate a delivery point for Clarksdale 
Public Utilities (Clarksdale), in Coahoma County, Mississippi, under 
Texas Gas's 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 that is on file with the Commission and open to 
public inspection.
    Texas Gas proposes to install, operate, maintain and own a dual, 
four-inch meter station with electronic flow measurement equipment and 
remote flow control equipment and related facilities on a site to be 
provided by Clarksdale. Texas Gas states that the proposed delivery 
point will be known as the Clarksdale P.U.C. Meter Station.
    Texas Gas states that Clarksdale is requesting up to 16,800 MMBtu 
per day of interruptible natural gas transportation service for use at 
its Clarksdale facility for electric generation.
    Texas Gas states that Clarksdale's natural gas requirements are 
presently supplied by Mississippi Valley Gas Company, a local 
distribution customer of Texas Gas, and that Clarksdale has requested 
that Texas Gas construct a new delivery point in Coahoma County, 
Mississippi to enable Clarksdale to receive natural gas transportation 
service directly from Texas Gas.
    Texas Gas states that Clarksdale will reimburse Texas Gas in full 
for the cost of the facilities to be installed by Texas Gas, which cost 
is estimated to be $139,670.
    Comment date: January 6, 1997, in accordance with Standard 
Paragraph G at the end of this notice.

Standard Paragraphs

    F. Any person desiring to be heard or make any protest with 
reference to said filing should on or before the comment date file with 
the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, 888 First Street, N.E., 
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 385.211 and 385.214) 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 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 filing 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 is 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 the applicant to appear or be represented at 
the hearing.
    G. Any person or the Commission's staff may, within 45 days after 
the 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 
therefore, 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. 96-30667 Filed 12-2-96; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6717-01-P