[Federal Register Volume 61, Number 235 (Thursday, December 5, 1996)]
[Notices]
[Pages 64517-64519]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 96-30922]
[[Page 64517]]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY
[Docket No. CP97-102-000, et al.]
Northwest Pipeline Corporation, et al.; Natural Gas Certificate
Filings
November 27, 1996.
Take notice that the following filings have been made with the
Commission:
1. Northwest Pipeline Corporation
[Docket No. CP97-102-000]
Take notice that on November 18, 1996, Northwest Pipeline
Corporation (Northwest), 295 Chipeta Way, Salt Lake City, Utah 84108,
filed in the above docket a request pursuant to Sections 157.205,
157.211 and 157.216 of the Regulations (18 CFR Sections 157.205,
157.211 and 157.216) for authorization to upgrade its Kalama II Meter
Station in Cowlitz County, Washington, by abandoning certain facilities
and constructing and operating upgraded replacement facilities to
accommodate a request by Cascade Natural Gas Corporation (Cascade) for
additional delivery capacity at the Kalama II delivery point, all as
more fully set forth in the application which is on file with the
Commission and open to public inspection.
Northwest states that the Kalama II Meter Station was originally
constructed by its predecessor, El Paso Natural Gas Company, under
certificate authorization received in Docket No. CP69-55. A subsequent
modification to this station was authorized in Docket No. CP93-752. The
meter station currently consists of a four-inch tap, two-inch inlet
piping, one four-inch turbine meter, two one-inch regulations, a relief
valve and appurtenances. The meter station has a maximum design
delivery capacity of 3,903 Dth per day at the contractual delivery
pressure of 400 psig from Northwest's Astoria Lateral into Cascade's
distribution system.
Specifically, Northwest proposes to upgrade the Kalama II Meter
Station by:
Installing an additional four-inch turbine meter,
Replacing the two-inch inlet piping with new four-inch
piping,
Replacing the two existing one-inch regulators with two-
inch large port Mooney regulators, and
Replacing the existing relief valve with a three-inch by
four-inch relief valve and appurtenances.
Northwest states that as a result of this proposed upgrade, the
maximum design delivery capacity of the meter station will increase
from approximately 3,903 Dth per day to approximately 12,057 Dth per
day at 400 psig.
Northwest states that the total cost of the proposed meter station
upgrade is estimated to be approximately $320,800. Pursuant to a
Facilities Agreement between Northwest and Cascade dated August 1,
1996, Northwest will construct the upgraded facilities and Cascade will
reimburse Northwest for the cost of the meter station upgrade.
Comment date: January 13, 1997, in accordance with Standard
Paragraph G at the end of this notice.
2. Natural Gas Pipeline Company of America
[Docket No. CP97-107-000]
Take notice that on November 19, 1996, Natural Gas Pipeline Company
of America (Natural), 701 East 22nd Street, Lombard, Illinois 60148,
filed in Docket No. CP97-107-000, an application pursuant to Section
7(c) of the Natural Gas Act (NGA), and Part 157 of the Federal Energy
Regulatory Commission's (Commission) regulations, for a certificate of
public convenience and necessity authorizing Natural to increase the
certificated maximum daily deliverability at its Cooks Mills Storage
Field (Cooks Mills) from 80 MMcf per day to 150 MMcf per day, all as
more fully set forth in the application which is on file with the
Commission and open to public inspection.
Natural states that it is not proposing to construct jurisdictional
facilities to effectuate the increase in deliverability. Moreover,
Natural states that it is not requesting authority to increase the
reservoir capacity, storage inventory level, or seasonal working volume
at Cooks Mills. Natural says that Cooks Mills can operate at a higher
level than the currently certificated maximum daily deliverability of
80 MMcf per day as a direct result of a recently completed well
performance improvement program.
Comment date: December 18, 1996, in accordance with Standard
Paragraph F at the end of this notice.
Florida Gas Transmission Company
[Docket No. CP97-110-000]
Take notice that on November 20, 1996, Florida Gas Transmission
Company (FGT), 1400 Smith Street, P.O. Box 1188, Houston, Texas 77251-
1188, filed in Docket No. CP97-110-000 a request pursuant to Sections
157.205 and 157.212 of the Commission's Regulations under the Natural
Gas Act (18 CFR 157.205, 157.212) for authorization to construct and
operate a new city gate station in Hillsborough County, Florida to
accommodate delivery of natural gas to Peoples Gas Systems, Inc.
(Peoples) under FGT's blanket certificate issued in Docket No. CP82-
553-000 pursuant to Section 7 of the Natural Gas Act, all as more fully
set forth in the request that is on file with the Commission and open
to public inspection.
FGT proposes to construct and operate a new city gate station in
Hillsborough County, Florida to serve as an additional point of
delivery under existing firm and interruptible gas transportation
service agreements. The proposed new city gate station will consist of
a 4-inch tap and valve at or near mile post 83.6 on FGT's existing St.
Petersburg Lateral, minor 4-inch connecting pipe, electronic flow
measurement equipment and other appurtenant facilities to enable FGT to
deliver natural gas to Peoples of up to 717 MMBtu per day and 261,705
MMBtu per year at the subject city gate station. FGT states that
Peoples would reimburse it for all construction costs which is
estimated to be $66,000. FGT states that Peoples has elected to
construct, operate and own the metering and regulation facilities and
related appurtenant facilities.
FGT states that the proposed construction and operation of the new
city gate station will not result in an increase in FGT's contractual
gas deliveries to Peoples under the existing agreements. Therefore, the
proposed construction and operation will not impact FGT's peak day
delivery requirements nor its annual gas deliveries.
Comment date: January 13, 1997, in accordance with Standard
Paragraph G at the end of this notice.
4. Florida Gas Transmission Company
[Docket No. CP97-112-000]
Take notice that on November 21, 1996, Florida Gas Transmission
Company (FGT), 1400 Smith Street, Houston, Texas 77002, filed in the
above docket, a request pursuant to Sections 157.205 and 157.216 of the
Commission's Regulations under the Natural Gas Act for authorization to
abandon and sell a measurement facility, all as more fully set forth in
the request that is on file with the Commission and open to public
inspection.
Specifically, FGT proposes to abandon and transfer by sale to City
Gas Company of Florida, a Division of NUI Corporation (City Gas) the
Goulds measurement facility which is located on the 4-inch Homestead
Lateral in Dade County, Florida. Upon receiving the authority requested
herein, FGT indicates that it will sell the Goulds measurement facility
concurrently with the Homestead Lateral to City Gas. FGT states that it
received an order
[[Page 64518]]
authorizing the abandonment and sale of the Homestead Lateral on
October 21, 1996 in Docket No. CP96-221-000.
FGT states that this proposed activity is not prohibited by its
existing tariff and that it has sufficient capacity to continue all
services without detriment or disadvantage to its other customers.
Comment date: January 13, 1997, in accordance with Standard
Paragraph G at the end of this notice.
5. Florida Gas Transmission Company
[Docket No. CP97-113-000]
Take notice that on November 21, 1996, Florida Gas Transmission
Company (FGT), P.O. Box 1188, Houston, Texas 77251-1188, filed in
Docket No. CP97-113-000 a request pursuant to Sections 157.205 and
157.212 of the Commission's Regulations under the Natural Gas Act (18
CFR 157.205, 157.212) for authorization to construct and operate a
delivery point located in Dade County, Florida, for City Gas Company of
Florida, a Division of NUI Corporation (City Gas), under FGT's blanket
certificate issued in Docket No. CP82-553-000, pursuant to Section 7(c)
of the Natural Gas Act, all as more fully set forth in the request that
is on file with the Commission and open to public inspection.
FGT proposes to construct, operate, and own the new Cutler Ridge
Meter Station to be used as a transportation delivery point by FGT to
City Gas, located at the interconnection of their existing Turkey Point
Lateral and the 4-inch Homestead Lateral in Dade County, Florida.
FGT advises the proposed new Cutler Ridge Delivery Point will
include a rotary meter, approximately 150 feet of 4-inch connecting
line, and other related minor facilities. FGT estimates the cost for
the construction of the proposed delivery point to be $130,000,
including Federal income tax gross-up. FGT states City Gas will
reimburse them for all costs directly and indirectly incurred by FGT.
FGT states the present gas quantities delivered at the old Cutler
Ridge Delivery Point are 7,096 MMBtu daily and 2,288,501 MMBtu
annually, and the proposed gas quantities delivered at the new Cutler
Ridge Delivery Point to be the same. FGT advises the end use of the gas
deliveries will be primarily industrial.
Comment date: January 13, 1997, in accordance with Standard
Paragraph G at the end of this notice.
6. CNG Transmission Corporation
[Docket No. CP97-114-000]
Take notice that on November 21, 1996, CNG Transmission Corporation
(CNG), 445 West Main Street, Clarksburg, West Virginia 26301, filed in
Docket No. CP97-114-000 a request pursuant to Sections 157.205 and
157.211 of the Commission's Regulations under the Natural Gas Act (18
CFR 157.205, 157.211) for authorization to construct a new Measuring
and Regulation (M&R) station and appurtenant facilities in Wetzel
County, West Virginia, under CNG's blanket certificate issued in Docket
No. CP82-537-000 pursuant to Section 7 of the Natural Gas Act, all as
more fully set forth in the request that is on file with the Commission
and open to public inspection.
CNG states that these facilities will serve as a new point of
interconnection with Eastern States Oil & Gas Inc. (Eastern). CNG
states that an M&R station must be constructed near Pine Grove, Wetzel
County, West Virginia so CNG can deliver Eastern's gas supplies. The
auxiliary installations will be a meter, regulator, various valves and
piping. The facility will be an interconnection with CNG's TL-413 line.
Eastern has agreed to reimburse CNG for its costs and that CNG will be
the owner of the M&R station. CNG states it will maintain and operate
the M&R station and that the maximum daily design capacity will be 500
Mcf.
Comment date: January 13, 1997, in accordance with Standard
Paragraph G at the end of this notice.
7. Colorado Interstate Gas Company
[Docket No. CP97-117-000]
Take notice that on November 21, 1996, Colorado Interstate Gas
Company (CIG), Post Office Box 1087, Colorado Springs, Colorado 80944,
filed in Docket No. CP97-117-000, a petition to amend the
authorizations issued on November 17, 1959, October 14, 1969 and June
19, 1973, in Docket Nos. G-19452, CP96-333 and CP73-174, respectively,
pursuant to Section 7(c) of the Natural Gas Act (NGA) and Part 157 of
the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission's (Commission) regulations to
change the Maximum Allowable Operating Pressure (MAOP) of approximately
34.1 miles of the Trinidad Lateral located in Otero and Las Animas
Counties, Colorado, all as more fully set forth in the petition on file
with the Commission and open to public inspection.
Specifically, CIG seeks to increase the MAOP of 34.1 miles of the
8-inch looped Trinidad Lateral from 820 psig to 1067 psig. CIG states
that the proposed change in MAOP will increase the operational capacity
of this portion of the Trinidad Lateral from approximately 26,000 Mcf/d
to approximately 43,000 Mcf/d. CIG says that this increase in capacity
would be used to transport potential gas supplies from the Raton Basin
Area.
CIG states that the regulators at the delivery points are currently
being evaluated to determine if any change to these above ground
facilities will be required. CIG proposes to make any regulator change
if any is required pursuant to Section 2.55 of the Commission's
Regulations.
Comment date: January 13, 1997, in accordance with Standard
Paragraph G at the end of this notice.
8. Indicated Land Owners v. Riverside Pipeline Company, L.P.
[Docket No. CP97-118-000]
Take notice that on November 19, 1996, the Indicated Land Owners
1 filed a ``Motion to Intervene Out-Of-Time and Protest'' in
Riverside Pipeline Company, L.P.'s (Riverside) proceeding in Docket No.
CP96-152-000. In their pleading, the Indicated Land Owners ask the
Commission to issue an order to show cause why Riverside's proposed
KPOC 700 Line Expansion under section 311 of the Natural Gas Policy Act
(NGPA) in Docket No. CP96-746-000 should not be subject to Section 7(c)
of the Natural Gas Act (NGA). The Commission is treating this pleading
as a complaint under the NGPA and Section 5 of the NGA, in the above-
captioned new docket.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ The Indicated Land Owners are Harry J. Lloyd, Loch Lloyd,
Inc., Bill Southerland and JoAnn Farb.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
On August 26, 1996, Riverside and Kansas Pipeline Partnership filed
in Docket No. CP96-746-000 a section 284.11 Notice of Construction for
its KPOC 700 Line, also known as its Linchpin 2 Project.2
Riverside indicates that it intends to construct these facilities as
non-jurisdictional natural gas facilities to be used exclusively for
NGPA Section 311(a)(1) transportation.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\2\ This certificate application was filed as a result of the
Commission's order in Docket No. RP95-212-000, which found that
KansOk Partnership and Kansas Pipeline Partnership operated as a
single interstate pipeline system. See KansOk Partnership, et al.,
73 FERC para. 61,160 (1995).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Indicated Land Owners note that the cost of the proposed NGPA
section 311 expansion is estimated to be at least $36.5 million. The
Indicated Land Owners contend that the cost of the expansion is
substantial and cannot be accomplished without reflecting the cost of
the facilities in Riverside's rate base. The Indicated Land Owners
[[Page 64519]]
complain that, nonetheless, Riverside is professing that these
facilities will be used exclusively for NGPA Section 311 transportation
and that the costs of these facilities will not be added to Riverside's
jurisdictional rate base.
Indicated Land Owners state that although the Commission has
conducted programmatic environmental assessments from time to time with
respect to its automatic authorization of NGPA Section 311
transportation, those assessments were based on the assumption that the
facilities involved would be relatively small and would not create
major environmental impacts. Indicated Land Owners contend that such
environmental assessments did not contemplate an interstate pipeline's
attempting deliberately to evade jurisdiction by linking substantial
segments held by intrastate pipeline affiliates with nominal segments
held by an interstate pipeline at the state line. Nor did the
assessments contemplate an interstate pipeline's attempting to evade
environmental consideration of the ``no action'' alternative by using a
two step process of first constructing a NGPA Section 311-only pipeline
and then subsequently seeking to convert it to NGA Section 7(c) status
after the facility becomes a fait accompli.
Indicated Land Owners complain that Riverside is attempting to
circumvent the requirements of the National Environmental Policy Act
(NEPA) by its jurisdictional maneuvers. They argue that if the
Commission delays its environmental review until after Riverside seeks
to convert the proposed KPOC 700 Line to a NGA Section 7(c) pipeline,
important NEPA requirements, such as consideration of the ``no action''
alternative and possible alternative routing, will be evaded.
Indicated Land Owners complain that Riverside is seeking state
condemnation of the proposed right-of-way for the KPOC 700 Line, and is
erroneously asserting that because the transportation is authorized
under NGPA Section 311, federal law preempts a state law inquiry into
the public need for the facilities. Indicated Land Owners allege that,
as a result, Riverside is attempting to create a jurisdictional gap
where it will be able to secure condemnation under state law, without a
prior determination of public necessity for the facilities under either
state or federal law.
Indicated Land Owners ask the Commission to issue a show cause
order as to why Riverside's proposed KPOC 700 Line should not be
subject to NGA Section 7(c). Alternatively, Indicated Land Owners ask
the Commission to conduct a full environmental assessment of the
proposed expansion, including a consideration of the ``no action''
alternative.
Comment date: December 27, 1996, in accordance with the first
paragraph of Standard Paragraph F at the end of this notice. Answers to
the complaint shall also be due on or before December 27, 1996.
Standard Paragraphs
F. Any person desiring to be heard or make any protest with
reference to said filing should on or before the comment date file with
the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, 888 First Street, N.E.,
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 385.211 and 385.214) and the Regulations under
the Natural Gas Act (18 CFR 157.10). 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.
Take further notice that, pursuant to the authority contained in
and subject to jurisdiction conferred upon the Federal Energy
Regulatory Commission by Sections 7 and 15 of the Natural Gas Act and
the Commission's Rules of Practice and Procedure, a hearing will be
held without further notice before the Commission or its designee on
this filing if no motion to intervene is filed within the time required
herein, if the Commission on its own review of the matter finds that a
grant of the certificate is required by the public convenience and
necessity. If a motion for leave to intervene is timely filed, or if
the Commission on its own motion believes that a formal hearing is
required, further notice of such hearing will be duly given.
Under the procedure herein provided for, unless otherwise advised,
it will be unnecessary for the applicant to appear or be represented at
the hearing.
G. Any person or the Commission's staff may, within 45 days after
the issuance of the instant notice by the Commission, file pursuant to
Rule 214 of the Commission's Procedural Rules (18 CFR 385.214) a motion
to intervene or notice of intervention and pursuant to Section 157.205
of the Regulations under the Natural Gas Act (18 CFR 157.205) a protest
to the request. If no protest is filed within the time allowed
therefore, the proposed activity shall be deemed to be authorized
effective the day after the time allowed for filing a protest. If a
protest is filed and not withdrawn within 30 days after the time
allowed for filing a protest, the instant request shall be treated as
an application for authorization pursuant to Section 7 of the Natural
Gas Act.
Lois D. Cashell,
Secretary.
[FR Doc. 96-30922 Filed 12-4-96; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6717-01-P
