[Federal Register Volume 67, Number 213 (Monday, November 4, 2002)]
[Notices]
[Pages 67155-67156]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 02-27924]


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

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY

Federal Energy Regulatory Commission

[Docket Nos. CP02-90-001 and CP02-93-001]


AES Ocean Express LLC; Notice of Amendments to Applications for a 
Certificates of Public Convenience and Neccessity, and for Section 3 
Authorization and a Presidential Permit

October 24, 2002.
    Take notice that on October 18, 2002, AES Ocean Express LLC (Ocean 
Express), Two Alhambra Plaza, Suite 1104, Coral Gables, Florida, 33134, 
filed in Docket No. CP02-90-001 an amendment to its pending application 
for a certificate of public convenience and necessity filed pursuant to 
Section 7(c) of the Natural Gas Act (NGA) in Docket No. CP02-90-000, 
and in Docket No. CP02-93-001, it filed an amendment to its pending 
application for a Presidential Permit and Section 3 authorization, 
filed pursuant to Section 3 of the NGA and Executive Order No. 10485 in 
Docket No. CP02-93-000. The

[[Page 67156]]

application amendments reflect a proposed new route variation and 
certain revised pipeline materials and design in the vicinity of the 
12-square mile Navy Restricted Area located offshore from Broward 
County, Florida, as well as a change in the ownership structure of 
Ocean Express.
    The application amendments are on file with the Commission and open 
to public inspection. The filings may be viewed on the web at http://www.ferc.gov using the ``FERRIS'' link, selecting ``Docket '' 
and following the instructions (please call (202) 208-2222 for 
assistance). Any questions regarding the applications or these 
amendments may be directed to Julie Romaniw, AES Ocean Express LLC, Two 
Alhambra Plaza, Suite 1104, Coral Gables, FL 33134; Phone No. (305) 
444-4002.
    Ocean Express explains that its proposed route variation reflects 
the measures contemplated by the ``agreement in principle'' reached 
between Ocean Express and the Naval Surface Warfare Center, Carderock 
Division (Naval Group) to resolve the Naval Group's technical and 
operational concerns regarding construction, operation and maintenance 
of the proposed Ocean Express Pipeline offshore of Broward County, 
Florida. Specifically, Ocean Express states that its amendment involves 
a 7.5-mile offshore route variation, as well as the use of special 
stainless steel, 40-foot and 500-foot anode spacings, three-layer 
polypropylene coating and other design features for specific portions 
of the offshore pipeline. Ocean Express explains that in developing the 
7.5-mile offshore route variation, it gave extensive consideration to 
the avoidance or minimization of potential impacts to sensitive marine 
resources, such as the three nearshore reef systems, the technical 
feasibility of constructing the offshore route variation, and other 
related factors.
    The proposed route variation increases the estimated cost of the 
project to from $ 93.1 million to $ 111.6 million and increases the 
Monthly Reservation Rate from $ 1.3859 per Dth to $ 1.6085 per Dth. The 
design capacity of the project is unchanged and is 842,000 Dth per day. 
The total length of the United States part of the pipeline project is 
increased from 52.4 miles to 54.3 miles; the onshore route and 6.3 mile 
length remains unchanged, but the offshore length in increased from 
46.1 miles to 48.0 miles.
    Separately, Ocean Express explains that since the time it filed its 
original applications in these proceedings on February 21, 2002, VAC 
Ocean Cay LLC (VAC) has acquired a 25% interest in Ocean Express. Ocean 
Express states that it has included the information and documentation 
required by the Commission's regulations regarding the new ownership 
structure.
    Ocean Express requests that the Commission issue a preliminary 
determination on non-environmental issues by February 1, 2003, and 
final certificate authorization by early in the third quarter of 2003.
    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 November 14, 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 385.211 and 385.214) 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 currently in the proceeding. Only parties to 
the proceeding can ask for court review of Commission orders in the 
proceeding.
    Motions to intervene, comments and protests may be filed 
electronically via the internet in lieu of paper. See 18 CFR 
385.2001(a)(1)(iii) and the Commission's website at http://www.ferc.gov. . The Commission strongly encourages prospective 
intervenors, commenters or protesters to file electronically.
    Parties who filed motions to intervene in the underlying pending 
applications in Docket Nos. CP02-90, et al. do not need to move to 
intervene again in response to this notice, but may file a supplement 
to their previous filing(s) if they have any comments or protests with 
regard to the changes in the project proposed by these amendments.
    Persons who wish to comment only on the environmental review of 
this project, as amended, 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 environmental documents, and will be able 
to participate in meetings associated with the Commission's 
environmental review process. Commenters will not be required to serve 
copies of filed documents on all other parties. However, Commenters 
will not receive copies of all documents filed by other parties or 
issued by the Commission, and will not have the right to seek rehearing 
or appeal the Commission's final order to a Federal court.
    The Commission will consider all comments and concerns equally, 
whether filed by commenters or those requesting intervenor status.
    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 ion 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 to 
file comments or to intervene as early in the process as possible.
    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.,
Deputy Secretary.
[FR Doc. 02-27924 Filed 11-1-02; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6717-01-P