[Federal Register Volume 65, Number 23 (Thursday, February 3, 2000)]
[Notices]
[Pages 5332-5333]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 00-2370]


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

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY

Federal Energy Regulatory Commission

[Docket Nos. OR96-15-000; OR98-1-000; OR98-2-000 (Consolidated)]


Ultramar Inc., Complainant v. SFPP, L.P. Respondent, ARCO 
Products Company, a Division of Atlantic Richfield Company; Texaco 
Refining and Marketing, Inc.; Mobil Oil Corporation, Complainants v. 
SFPP, L.P. and Ultramar Diamond Shamrock Corporation, Complainant v. 
SFPP, L.P. Respondent; Notice of Amended Complaint

January 28, 2000.
    Take notice that on January 10, 2000, pursuant to Rule 206 of the 
Commission's Rules of Practice and Procedure (18 CFR 385.206), the 
Procedural Rules Applicable to Oil Pipeline Proceedings (18 CFR 
343.1(a)), and the Commission's Order Establishing Further procedures 
issued in these dockets on January 13, 1999, Ultramar Diamond Shamrock 
Corporation and Ultramar Inc. (Ultramar) tendered for filing their 
amended complaint in the captioned proceedings. This amended complaint 
modifies and supplements the original complaints filed in these matters 
by Ultramar in Docket Nos. OR96-15-000 and OR98-2-000 on August 30, 
1996 and November 21, 1997 respectively.
    On August 30, 1996, Ultramar Inc. filed a complaint against SFPP, 
in Docket No. OR96-15, asserting that SFPP had violated the Interstate 
Commerce Act (ICA) by failing to file an interstate tariff for the 
Watson enhancement facilities (Drain Dry facilities) and that, 
generally, the rate for the same was and continues to be unjust and 
unreasonable and without basis.
    Ultramar respectfully requests that the Commission: (1) Examine the 
challenged rates and charges collected by SFPP for its jurisdictional 
interstate service; (2) order refunds to Ultramar,

[[Page 5333]]

including appropriate interest thereon, for the applicable reparation 
periods to the extent the Commission finds that such rates or charges 
were unlawful; (3) determine just, reasonable, and nondiscriminatory 
rates for SFPP's jurisdictional interstate service; (4) award Ultramar 
reasonable attorney's fees and costs; and (5) order such other relief 
as may be appropriate.
    SFPP's motion for a further extension of time file on January 24, 
2000 is denied.
    Any person desiring to be heard or to protest the amended complaint 
should file a motion to intervene or a protest with the Federal Energy 
Regulatory Commission, 888 First Street, N.E., Washington, D.C. 20426, 
in accordance with Rules 214 and 211 of the Commission's Rules of 
Practice and Procedure 18 CFR 385.214, 385.211. All such motions or 
protests should be filed on or before February 14, 2000. 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. This filing may be viewed on the 
web at http://www.ferc.fed.us/online/rims.htm (call 202-208-2222 for 
assistance). Answers to this amended complaint shall be due on or 
before February 14, 2000.

David P. Boergers,
Secretary.
[FR Doc. 00-2370 Filed 2-2-00; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6717-01-M