[Federal Register Volume 66, Number 101 (Thursday, May 24, 2001)]
[Notices]
[Pages 28738-28739]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 01-13095]


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

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY

Federal Energy Regulatory Commission

[Docket No. CP01-31-001]


Kern River Gas Transmission Company; Notice of Amendment

May 18, 2001.
    Take notice that on May 11, 2001, Kern River Gas Transmission 
Company (Kern River), 295 Chipeta Way, Salt Lake City, Utah, 84158, 
filed in Docket No. CP01-31-001 an amendment to its November 15, 2000 
application in Docket No. CP01-31-000 for authority

[[Page 28739]]

to construct and operate the remaining facilities required for its 2002 
Expansion Project, all as more fully set forth in the application which 
is on file with the Commission and open to public inspection. The 
filing may be viewed at http://www.ferc.fed.us/online/rims.htm (call 
202-208-2222 for assistance).
    Kern River states that after incorporating the facilities currently 
being installed for its short-term California Action Project 
(authorized in Docket No. CP01-106-000) into the design of its 
originally proposed 2002 Expansion Project, Kern River states that it 
now requests issuance of a certificate of public convenience and 
necessity only: (i) To install an additional compressor unit at its 
existing Muddy Creek Compressor Station (Muddy Creek) in Lincoln 
County, Wyoming; (ii) to upgrade its existing Opal Meter Station in 
Lincoln County, Wyoming; and (iii) to install a new electric motor-
driven compressor unit at the Daggett Compressor Station (Daggett) in 
San Bernardino County, California. Kern River states that these 
proposed facilities will cost approximately $31.4 million to construct 
and that the 2002 Expansion Project also will be allocated a pro rata 
share (124.5/145.5) of the California Action Project costs that were 
proposed to be levelized or amortized over 15 years.
    Kern River states that it continues to request an up-front 
determination that its 2002 Expansion Project qualifies for rolled-in 
rate treatment. Kern River states that the rolled-in effect of the 2002 
Expansion billing determinants (124,500 Dth/d) and the cost of service 
attributable thereto will reduce the otherwise applicable rates for 
existing rolled-in shippers by approximately 6 to 7 percent, partially 
offset by an increase in fuel gas and electricity cost reimbursement 
obligations for compression on the expanded system.
    It is also stated by Kern River that to ensure recovery of its 
actual electric fuel costs for the proposed electric compressor at 
Daggett from the shippers flowing gas through that station (excluding 
California Action Project shippers, which are subject to a separate, 
incremental fuel in-kind reimbursement obligation), Kern River states 
that it continues to request approval of a pro forma tariff provision 
establishing an electric compressor fuel surcharge. However, it is 
stated that the initial surcharge now is proposed to be $0.0099 per Dth 
of applicable flow through the station, based on updated volumes and 
electric costs.
    Kern River states that, since the 2002 Expansion shippers require 
service by May 1, 2002, in order to serve the fuel requirements of new 
and eisting electric power generation facilities in California, Kern 
River requests the Commission to grant the requested authorizations by 
no later than August, 2001, so construction can commence at Muddy Creek 
by September 1, 2001, before the advent of winter weather in Wyoming.
    Any questions regarding this application should be directed to Gary 
K. Kotter, Manager, Certificates, Kern River Gas Transmission Company, 
P.O. Box 58900, Salt Lake City, Utah 84158-0900, call (801) 584-7117.
    There are two ways to become involved in the Commission's review of 
this project. First, any person wishing to obtain legal status by 
becoming a party to the proceedings for this project should, on or 
before June 8, 2001, file with the Federal Energy Regulatory 
Commission, 888 First Street, NE, Washington, DC 20426, a motion to 
intervene 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 NGA (18 CFR 157.10). A person obtaining party 
status will be placed on the service list maintained by the Secretary 
of the Commission and will receive copies of all documents filed by the 
applicant and by all other parties. A party must submit 14 copies of 
filings made with the Commission and must mail a copy to the applicant 
and to every other party in the proceeding. Only parties to the 
proceeding can ask for court review of Commission orders in the 
proceeding.
    However, a person does not have to intervene in order to have 
comments considered. The second way to participate is by filing with 
the Secretary of the Commission, as soon as possible, an original and 
two copies of comments in support of or in opposition to this project. 
The Commission will consider these comments in determining the 
appropriate action to be taken, but the filing of a comment alone will 
not serve to make the filer a party to the proceeding. The Commission's 
rules require that persons filing comments in opposition to the project 
provide copies of their protests only to the party or parties directly 
involved in the protest.
    Persons who wish to comment only on the environmental review of 
this project should submit an original and two copies of their comments 
to the Secretary of the Commission. Environmental commenters will be 
palced on the Commission's environmental mailing list, will receive 
copies of the environmental documents, and will be notified of meetings 
associated with the Commission's environmental review process. 
Environmental commenters will not be required to serve copies of filed 
documents on all other parties. However, the non-party commenters will 
not receive copies of all documents filed by other parties or issued by 
the Commission (except for the mailing of environmental documents 
issued by the Commission) and will not have the right to seek court 
review of the Commission's final order.
    The Commission may issue a preliminary determination on non-
environmental issues prior to the completion of its review of the 
environmental aspects of the project. This preliminary determination 
typically considers such issues as the need for the project and its 
economic effect on existing customers of the applicant, on other 
pipelines in the area, and on landowners and communities. For example, 
the Commission considers the extent to which the applicant may need to 
exercise eminent domain to obtain rights-of-way for the proposed 
project and balances that against the non-environmental benefits to be 
provided by the project. Therefore, if a person has comments on 
community and landowner impacts from this proposal, it is important 
either to file comments or to itnervene as early in the process as 
possible.
    Comments and protests may be filed electronically via the internet 
in lieu of paper. See, 18 CFR 385.2001(a)(1)(iii) and the instructions 
on the Commission's web site at http://www.ferc.fed.us/efi/doorbell.htm.
    If the Commission decides to set the application for a formal 
hearing before an Administrative Law Judge, the Commission will issue 
another notice describing that process. At the end of the Commission's 
review process, a final Commission order approving or denying a 
certificate will be issued.

Linwood A. Watson, Jr.,
Acting Secretary.
[FR Doc. 01-13095 Filed 5-23-01; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6717-01-M