[Federal Register Volume 67, Number 10 (Tuesday, January 15, 2002)]
[Notices]
[Pages 1970-1971]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 02-908]


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

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY

Federal Energy Regulatory Commission

[Docket No. CP02-60-000]


CMS Trunkline LNG Company, LLC; Notice of Application

January 9, 2002.
    Take notice that on December 26, 2001, and supplemented on January 
7, 2002, CMS Trunkline LNG Company, LLC (Trunkline LNG), P.O. Box 4967, 
Houston, Texas 77210-4967, filed an application in the above-referenced 
docket number pursuant to section 7(c) of the Natural Gas Act (NGA) and 
part 157 of the Commission's Rules and Regulations, for a certificate 
of public convenience and necessity authorizing the construction, 
operation and maintenance of additional facilities at its LNG Terminal 
located in Calcasieu Parish, Louisiana. The application is on file with 
the Commission and open to public inspection. This filing may be viewed 
on the web at http://www.ferc.gov using the ``RIMS'' link, select 
``Docket#'' and follow the instructions (please call (202) 208-2222 for 
assistance).
    Trunkline LNG proposes (1) to expand the storage capacity of its 
terminal by constructing and operating a fourth cryogenic storage tank 
with a capacity of 140,000 cubic meters; (2) to increase its 
sustainable daily sendout capability from 630 MMcf per day to 1,200 
MMcf per day by constructing and operating additional LNG pumps and LNG 
vaporizers; (3) to construct and operate a second marine unloading 
dock; and (4) appurtenant supporting facilities. Currently, all re-
gasified LNG is transported from Trunkline LNG's

[[Page 1971]]

terminal by CMS Trunkline Gas Company, LLC's pipeline facilities 
(Trunkline Gas) which have a certificated capacity of 1.0 Bcf per day. 
Concurrently, Trunkline Gas is filing an application, Docket No. CP02-
55-000, requesting a certificate of public convenience and necessity 
authorizing Trunkline Gas to modify its existing metering facilities to 
accommodate the proposed increased LNG deliveries.
    Trunkline LNG conducted an open season for the future use and 
potential expansion of its terminal, from December 15, 2000 to February 
15, 2001. As a consequence, Trunkline LNG entered into the contracts 
with BG LNG Services, Inc. (BG LNG). In May 2001, Trunkline LNG and BG 
LNG entered into a firm service agreement (Base Agreement) for all the 
current uncommitted capacity at the Terminal. The 22-year contract, 
which begins in January 2002, gives BG LNG the firm service rights to 
all of the Terminal's current uncommitted vaporization and storage 
capacity of approximately 5.1 Bcf at the currently effective maximum 
tariff rate under Rate Schedule FTS. The contract storage capacity will 
increase to 6.3 Bcf after the existing contract with Trunkline LNG's 
existing customer, Duke Energy LNG, expires in August 2005. In addition 
to the Base Agreement, Trunkline LNG and BG LNG entered into an 
agreement (Precedent Agreement) that sets the parameters for a second 
firm service agreement (Expansion Agreement) utilizing the capacity 
associated with the Expansion Project. In essence, the Precedent 
Agreement provides for BG LNG to obtain additional firm storage 
capacity of 2.7 MMDt and daily sendout capability of 570,000 Dt per day 
at the Terminal from January 1, 2005 until December 31, 2023.
    The proposed construction will take place entirely on Trunkline 
LNG's property already dedicated to its terminal. No new land or 
rights-of-way are required for the proposed expansion.
    Trunkline LNG estimates that the total capital cost of constructing 
its proposed expansion will be approximately $149.1 million, excluding 
AFUDC. Trunkline LNG estimates that AFUDC will total $28.1 million. The 
total capital cost including AFUDC will be approximately $177.2 
million. The total Cost of Service associated with the expansion 
project will be approximately $54.2 million. The initial incremental 
recourse rates proposed by Trunkline LNG for service utilizing the 
expansion facilities are traditional cost-of-service based rates, using 
the straight-fixed variable rate design methodology. The incremental 
recourse rates have been designed on 100% of the costs associated with 
the Expansion Project. The incremental recourse reservation rate will 
be $0.5208 per Dt for service under proposed Rate Schedule FTS-2, using 
design units based on the incremental storage capacity associated with 
the Expansion Project.
    Any questions regarding the application be directed to William W. 
Grygar, Vice President, Rates and Regulatory Affairs, CMS Trunkline LNG 
Company, LLC, P.O. Box 4967, Houston, Texas 77210-4967 at (713) 989-
7000.
    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 January 30, 2002, 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 parts 385.214 or 385.211) and the 
Regulations under the NGA (18 CFR part 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 
placed 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 intervene as early in the process as 
possible.
    Comments, protests, and interventions may be filed electronically 
via the internet in lieu of paper. See, 18 CFR part 385.2001(a)(1)(iii) 
and the instructions on the Commission's web site under the ``e-
Filing'' link.
    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.

C.B. Spencer,
Acting Secretary.
[FR Doc. 02-908 Filed 1-14-02; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6717-01-P