[Federal Register Volume 67, Number 135 (Monday, July 15, 2002)]
[Notices]
[Pages 46489-46490]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 02-17718]



[[Page 46489]]

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

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY

Federal Energy Regulatory Commission

[Docket Nos. CP02-396-000, CP02-397-000 and CP02-398-000]


Greenbrier Pipeline Company, LLC; Notice of Applications

July 8, 2002.
    Take notice that on July 3, 2002, Greenbrier Pipeline Company, LLC 
(Greenbrier), 120 Tredegar Street, Richmond, Virginia 2319, filed 
applications pursuant to section 7(c) of the Natural Gas Act (NGA) and 
part 157 of the Commission's Regulations. In Docket No. CP02-396-000, 
Greenbrier requests a certificate of public convenience and necessity 
authorizing it to construct, own, operate, and maintain certain 
pipeline, compression and other facilities. In Docket No. CP02-397-000, 
Greenbrier requests a blanket certificate pursuant to Subpart G of Part 
284 of the Commission's Regulations authorizing Greenbrier to provide 
open access firm and interruptible transportation services. In Docket 
No. CP02-398-000, Greenbrier requests a blanket certificate pursuant to 
Subpart F of Part 157 of the Commission's Regulations to perform 
certain routine construction, operation, and abandonment activities. 
Greenbrier's proposals are more thoroughly described in the application 
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).
    In Docket No. PF01-1-000, Greenbrier participated in a pre-filing 
National Environmental Policy Act review of its proposed project 
intended to identify landowner issues and resolve problems before the 
certificate application was filed. Greenbrier asks the Commission to 
issue a preliminary determination on non-environmental issues by 
December 31, 2002 and a final order granting the requested 
authorizations by June 1, 2003. Greenbrier anticipates placing a 
portion of the facilities in service by February 1, 2005 for electric 
generation plant test gas and by May 1, 2005 for general purposes. The 
entire project is scheduled to be in-service by November 1, 2005.
    Any questions regarding Greenbrier's application should be directed 
to Sean Sleigh, Certificates Manager, Dominion Transmission, Inc., 445 
West Main Street, Clarksburg, WV 26301, phone (304) 627-3463 or fax 
(304) 627-3305.
    Greenbrier proposes to construct mainline facilities consisting of: 
(1) 217 miles of 30-inch pipeline from an interconnect with Dominion 
Transmission, Inc. and Tennessee Gas Pipeline near Clendenin, WV, to a 
point in Rockingham County, NC (through Kanawha, Clay, Nicholas, 
Fayette, Raleigh, Summers, and Mercer Counties, WV, and Giles, Bland, 
Pulaski, Montgomery, Floyd, Franklin, and Henry Counties, VA); (2) 41 
miles of 24-inch pipeline continuing through Rockingham, Caswell, and 
Person Counties, NC; and (3) about 17.5 miles of 20-inch pipeline from 
Person County to Granville County, NC. The proposed facilities include 
three laterals: (1) Approximately 1 mile of 12-inch lateral pipeline in 
Person County, NC; (2) 2 miles of 10-inch lateral pipeline in Granville 
County, NC; and (3) approximately \1/2\ mile of 30-inch lateral 
pipeline in Rockingham County, NC. Greenbrier also proposes to 
construct a total of 44,980 HP of compression at two sites: (1) 33,145 
HP at the proposed Elk River Compressor Station in Kanawha county, WV, 
and (2) 11,835 HP at the proposed Eden Compressor Station site in 
Rockingham County, NC. The proposed project's 279 miles of pipeline and 
two compressor stations will provide up to 600,000 Dth per day of firm 
transportation service. The estimated cost is approximately $497 
million.
    The project is said to be designed to create gas supply diversity 
and to serve the growing energy market in the South Atlantic region, 
including local distribution companies' growth, new electric power 
plants, marketers, and others. Greenbrier has entered into 15-year 
precedent agreements with seven shippers for all of the project's 
600,000 Dth per day capacity. The precedent agreements reflect both 
negotiated rates and recourse rates, and two of the precedent 
agreements include interim rates for the period during which a portion 
of the project's facilities will be in early service. Greenbrier states 
that the only difference between the negotiated rates and the recourse 
rates its that the negotiated rates include a lower rate of return on 
equity.
    Greenbrier's recourse rates, as stated in its pro forma tariff, 
include both term differentiated and seasonal rates. For FT contracts 
of 15 years or greater, the recourse rates are based upon a 15-year 
levelized cost-of-service. The recourse rates for contracts having a 
term shorter than 15 years are based on a traditional, first full-year 
cost-of-service. Seasonal rates are calculated for a summer period 
(April 1 through October 31) and a winter period (November 1 through 
March 31).

------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                            Traditional   Levelized rate
               Rate design                 rate ($/Dth)       ($/Dth)
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Winter Reservation Rate.................        $20.9016        $17.1753
Winter Daily Rate.......................          0.6921          0.5687
Summer Reservation Rate.................          4.9766          4.0894
Summer Daily Rate.......................          0.1628          0.1338
Annual Reservation Rate.................         11.6120          9.5418
Annual Daily Rate.......................          0.3818          0.3137
------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Greenbrier requests regulatory asset treatment for the differences 
between its book depreciation and the depreciation component of its 
levelized firm recourse rates and its initial levelized negotiated 
rates. Greenbrier also requests that the Commission authorize it to 
cease calculating AFUDC on certain facilities, at the time those 
facilities are placed in service early, and capture and defer as a 
regulatory asset any shortfall in revenue, or as a regulatory liability 
any excess revenue collected, compared to the cost of service for those 
facilities placed in service (on or about May 1, 2005) until the 
entirety of the project is placed in service (on or about November 1, 
2005).
    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 July 29, 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 385.214 or 385.211) and the 
Regulations under the NGA (18 CFR 157.10). A person obtaining party 
status will be

[[Page 46490]]

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 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.

Magalie R. Salas,
Secretary.
[FR Doc. 02-17718 Filed 7-12-02; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6717-01-P