[Federal Register Volume 60, Number 191 (Tuesday, October 3, 1995)]
[Notices]
[Page 51786]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 95-24487]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY
[Docket No. CP95-779-000]
Gateway Pipeline Company, Complainant v. Western Gas Interstate
Company, Respondent; Notice of Complaint
September 27, 1995.
Take notice that on September 26, 1995, Gateway Pipeline Company
(Complainant), 333 North Sam Houston Parkway East, Houston, Texas
77060, filed a complaint in Docket No. CP95-779-000, pursuant to
Section 385.206 of the Commission's Rules of Practice and Procedure (18
CFR 385.206) against Western Gas Interstate Company (Respondent) to
immediately cease and desist all activity related to its application
filed in Docket No. CP95-606-000, as amended. Complainant states that
this pleading is in response to respondent's on-going construction
activities related to the proposed interstate transmission facilities
identified in the above-mentioned proceeding, all as more fully set
forth in the complaint which is on file with the Commission and open to
public inspection.
Complainant states that respondent has already constructed the
permanent delivery point facilities for which it currently has pending
an application for construction authority in Docket No. CP95-606-000,
and it is now in the process of constructing the associated permanent
mainline transmission facilities for which it has pending an
application in Docket No. CP95-606-001. Complainant states that
respondent began construction of these mainline facilities on Friday,
September 22, 1995, and as of Sunday, September 24, has already strung,
welded and buried some four miles of mainline transmission pipeline.
Complainant states that at respondent's current pace, it should
complete the construction and installation of nearly all of the 16-mile
mainline by the end of the week ending September 30, 1995, and the
facilities should be operational within three weeks.
Complainant asserts that respondent has no authority to construct
these facilities, because the amendment to the pending application
filed in Docket No. CP95-606-001 is still pending before the
Commission, and the Commission is in the process of conducting an
environmental assessment of respondent's proposal.
Complainant also asserts that respondent's construction activities
therefore appear to violate Section 7(c) of the Natural Gas Act (NGA),
which, among other things, requires natural gas companies to secure
prior approval of proposals to construct and operate facilities used
for the transmission of gas in interstate commerce.
Complainant further asserts that by respondent having unilaterally
decided to begin constructing its interstate transmission facilities
without obtaining prior Commission approval of its application,
respondent has now in effect told the Commission: ``Never mind'';
respondent never really needed to file anything because these are NGPA
Section 311 facilities.\1\
\1\In the Notice of Withdrawal, respondent attempts to withdraw
both its request and abbreviated application, claiming that both of
these applications have ``become moot, because [Western] will
construct and operate the 15.5 miles of 8'' pipeline and sales tap
to the Seaboard Farm (Seaboard) processing plant * * * pursuant to
Section 311 of the Natural Gas Policy Act.'' Notice of Withdrawal at
1-2.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Complainant states that the Commission should reject Western's
transparent and flagrant attempt to rationalize, on a post hoc basis,
citing what it considers respondent's ``no-holds-barred'' effort to get
its pipeline in the ground. In its petition, complainant states that
these facilities are not even arguably legitimate 311 facilities--
``facilities utilized solely for transportation authorized under
Section 311(a) of the NGPA''\2\--since no intrastate or LDC entity is
involved in the proposed transportation transaction to Seaboard.\3\
\2\18 CFR 284.3(c).
\3\According to Exhibit I of Western's Abbreviated Application,
Seaboard is to be served by Western under a Rate Schedule FT-N
transportation contract executed by Seaboard. Nowhere in that
contract or in the abbreviated application is there any mention of
an LDC or intrastate pipeline ``on behalf of'' entity, the essential
element for transportation service to qualify as a Section 311(a)
transaction.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Further, complainant states that respondent's FERC filings have
evidence a pronounced ``make-it-up-as-we-go'' flavor, geared toward
getting its pipeline in the ground as soon as possible, with as little
Commission scrutiny as it can get by with. Complainant further states
that respondent is not content to wait for a Commission order on its
abbreviated application and has decided simply to construct its
pipeline, apparently hoping that it can cure any FERC problems after
its pipeline is up and running. Complainant argues that the Commission
should not tolerate respondent's disregard of Commission authority.
Complainant requests that, in order to prevent respondent from
completing the construction and installation of its entire project and
to preserve the status quo pending Commission investigation of this
complaint, the Director of Enforcement issue by telephone a cease and
desist order directly to respondent's offices, via telephone, by close-
of-business on September 25, 1995, but in no event later than 12 noon
September 26, 1995. Complainant also requests that the Commission
should (1) institute an investigation into respondent's construction
activities related to respondent's application, (2) order respondent to
show cause why it should not be held in violation of Section 7(c) of
the NGA, and thus subject to penalties under Section 21 of the NGA,
including criminal and civil penalties under Sections 21(a) and 21(b),
respectively, of the NGA and (3) grant other appropriate relief
pursuant to Sections 5 and 16 of the NGA as a result of the requested
investigation.
Any person desiring to be heard or to make protest with reference
to said complaint should on or before October 4, 1995, file with the
Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, Washington, D.C. 20426, a motion
to intervene or a protest in accordance with the requirements of the
Commission's Rules of Practice and Procedure (18 CFR 385.214 or
385.211). All protests filed with the Commission will be considered by
it in determining the appropriate action to be taken but will not serve
to make the protestants parties to the proceeding. Any person wishing
to become a party to a proceeding or to participate as a party in any
hearing therein must file a motion to intervene in accordance with the
Commission's Rules. Answers to the complaint are also due on or before
October 4, 1995.
Lois D. Cashell,
Secretary.
[FR Doc. 95-24487 Filed 10-2-95; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6717-01-M
