[Federal Register Volume 63, Number 14 (Thursday, January 22, 1998)]
[Notices]
[Pages 3321-3322]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 98-1453]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY
Federal Energy Regulatory Commission
[Docket No. CP98-167-000]
PG&E Gas Transmission, Northwest Corporation; Notice of Intent To
Prepare an Environmental Assessment for the Proposed PG&E Gas
Transmission, Northwest Corporation's 1998 Expansion Project and
Request for Comments on Environmental Issues and Notice of Site Visit
January 15, 1998.
The staff of the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission (FERC or
Commission) will prepare an environmental assessment (EA) that will
discuss the environmental impacts of the construction, installation and
operation of three new compressor units at three of its existing
compressor stations proposed in the PG&E Gas Transmission, Northwest
Corporation's 1998 Expansion Project.\1\ This EA will be used by the
Commission in its decision-making process to determine whether the
project is in the public convenience and necessity.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ PG&E Gas Transmission, Northwest Corporation's application
was filed with the Commission under Section 7 of the Natural Gas Act
and Part 157 of the Commission's regulations.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Summary of the Proposed Project
PG&E Gas Transmission, Northwest Corporation (PG&E), formerly
Pacific Gas Transmission Company, proposes to expand the capacity of
its facilities in Oregon, Washington, and Idaho. PG&E states that the
proposed compression upgrades would allow PG&E to transport between
Kingsgate, British Columbia and Stanfield, Oregon up to an additional
56,000 dekatherms per day on an annual basis. PG&E seeks to increase
the total horsepower (hp) at three of its existing compressor stations:
3,100 hp increase at Station 4, located at milepost (MP)
46.7 on PG&E's existing mainline pipeline in Bonner County, Idaho;
specifically, by exchanging an existing 13,000 hp unit with a new
15,000 hp unit and exchanging an existing 13,000 hp unit with a low-
hour 14,100 hp refurbished unit;
4,700 hp increase at Station 7, located at MP 212.6 on
PG&E's existing mainline pipeline in Walla Walla County, Washington;
specifically, by upgrading its existing 35,000 hp unit to 39,700 hp
through equipment modifications and control setpoint changes; and
1,500 hp increase at Station 9, located at MP 319.5 on
PG&E's existing mainline pipeline in Morrow County, Oregon;
specifically, by exchanging an existing 12,600 hp unit with a new
14,100 hp unit. PG&E would install a new, higher capacity oil cooler to
be located immediately outside the compressor building and would adjust
the temperature control setpoint to the turbine unit.
The general location map and plot plans for each of the proposed
compressor station upgrades are shown in Appendix 1. If you are
interested in obtaining procedural information, please write to the
Secretary of the Commission.
Land Requirements for Construction
All construction activities would take place within the existing
fencelines of all three compressor stations. No new land disturbance
outside existing compressor station fencelines would be required.
The EA Process
The National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) requires the
Commission to take into account the environmental impacts that could
result from an action whenever it considers the issuance of a
Certificate of Public Convenience and Necessity. NEPA also requires us
to discover and address concerns the public may have about proposals.
We call this ``scoping''. The main goal of the scoping process is to
focus the analysis in the EA on the important environmental issues. By
this Notice of Intent, the Commission requests public comments on the
scope of the issues it will address in the EA. All comments received
are considered during the preparation of the EA. State and local
government representatives are encouraged to notify their constituents
[[Page 3322]]
of this proposed action and encourage them to comment on their areas of
concern.
The EA will discuss impacts that could occur as a result of the
construction and operation of the proposed project under these general
headings:
Air and noise quality
Land use
Geology and soils
Public safety
Endangered and threatened species
Cultural resources
We will also evaluate possible alternatives to the proposed project
or portions of the project, and make recommendations on how to lessen
or avoid impacts on the various resource areas.
PG&E has proposed a system alternative, known as the Pipeline
Looping Alternative, which would involve the looping of PG&E's existing
mainline with a third, 42-inch-diameter pipeline located between
Mainline valve (MV) 5-1 in Kootenai County, Idaho and MV 5-2 in Spokane
County, Washington. The pipeline loop would be about 10.7 miles in
length. See appendix 2 for an approximate location of this system
alternative.
Our independent analysis of the issues will be in the EA. Depending
on the comments received during the scoping process, the EA may be
published and mailed to Federal, state, and local agencies, public
interest groups, interested individuals, affected landowners,
newspapers, libraries, and the Commission's official service list for
this proceeding. A comment period will be allotted for review if the EA
is published. We will consider all comments on the EA before we make
our recommendations to the Commission.
Currently Identified Environmental Issues
We have already identified several issues that we think deserve
attention based on a preliminary review of the proposed facilities and
the environmental information provide by PG&E. This preliminary list of
issues may be changed based on your comments and our analysis.
Four noise-sensitive areas (NSAs) have been identified in
close proximity to Station 4.
One NSA has been identified in close proximity to Station
7.
One NSA has been identified in close proximity to Station
9.
Possible consideration of the Pipeline Looping Alternative
in lieu of expanding the three existing compressor stations.
No nonjurisdictional facilities have been identified for this
project.
Public Participation
You can make a difference by sending a letter addressing your
specific comments or concerns about the project. You should focus on
the potential environmental effects of the proposal, alternatives to
the proposal (including alternative routes, and measures to avoid or
lessen environmental impact. The more specific your comments, the more
useful they will be. Please carefully follow these instructions to
ensure that your comments are received in time and properly recorded:
Send two copies of your letter to: Mr. David P. Boergers,
Acting Secretary, Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, 888 First St.,
N.E., Room 1A, Washington, DC 20426;
Label one copy of the comments for the attention of the
Environmental Review and Compliance Branch, PR-11.1;
Reference Docket No. CP98-167-000; and
Mail your comments so that they will be received in
Washington, DC on or before February 17, 1998.
Notice of Site Visit
On January 22, 1998, the staff of the Office of Pipeline Regulation
will be conducting an environmental site visit of PG&E's Pipeline
Looping Alternative. All parties may attend. Those planning to attend
must provide their own transportation.
For further information about where the site inspection will begin,
please contact Paul McKee at (202) 208-1088.
Becoming an Intervenor
In addition to involvement in the EA scoping process, you may want
to become an official party to the proceeding or become an
``intervenor''. Among other things, intervenors have the right to
receive copies of case-related Commission documents and filings by
other intervenors. Likewise, each intervenor must provide copies of its
filings to all other parties. If you want to become an intervenor you
must files a motion to intervene according to Rule 214 of the
Commission's Rules of Practice and Procedure (18 CFR 385.214) (see
appendix 3).
You do not need intervenor status to have your environmental
comments considered.
Linwood A. Watson, Jr.,
Acting Secretary.
[FR Doc. 98-1453 Filed 1-21-98; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6717-01-M