94-3224. Mobile Bay Pipeline Co., et al.; Natural Gas Certificate Filings  

  • [Federal Register Volume 59, Number 29 (Friday, February 11, 1994)]
    [Unknown Section]
    [Page 0]
    From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
    [FR Doc No: 94-3224]
    
    
    [[Page Unknown]]
    
    [Federal Register: February 11, 1994]
    
    
    -----------------------------------------------------------------------
    
    DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY
    [Docket No. CP94-190-000, et al.]
    
     
    
    Mobile Bay Pipeline Co., et al.; Natural Gas Certificate Filings
    
    January 31, 1994.
        Take notice that the following filings have been made with the 
    Commission:
    
    1. Mobile Bay Pipeline Co.
    
    [Docket No. CP94-190-000]
    
        Take notice that on January 19, 1994, Mobile Bay Pipeline Company 
    (Mobile Bay), P.O. Box 1478, Houston, Texas 77251-1478, filed in Docket 
    No. CP94-190-000 a request pursuant to Secs. 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 and operate pipeline and 
    measuring facilities for deliveries to Mobile Gas Service Company 
    (MGSC) in Mobile County, Alabama, under Mobile Bay's blanket 
    certificate issued in Docket No. CP91-3217-000 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.
        Mobile Bay proposes to install approximately 100 feet of 6-inch 
    pipeline with appurtenant metering and regulating facilities in order 
    to make deliveries of gas transported for MGSC. It is stated that 
    Mobile Bay will transport up to 40,000 MMBtu equivalent of gas per day 
    on an interruptible basis for MGSC under Mobile Bay's Part 284 blanket 
    certificate issued in Docket No. CP88-394-000. It is asserted that the 
    volumes delivered through the proposed facilities will be within 
    currently certificated levels. It is further asserted that Mobile Bay 
    has sufficient capacity to make the deliveries without detriment or 
    disadvantage to its other existing customers. It is estimated that the 
    cost of installing the facilities will be $162,000, and it is stated 
    that MGSC will reimburse Mobile Bay for such cost.
        Comment date: March 17, 1994, in accordance with Standard Paragraph 
    G at the end of this notice.
    
    2. California Public Utilities Commission
    
    [Docket No. CP94-198-000]
    
        Take notice that on January 24, 1994, the Public Utilities 
    Commission for the State of California (California PUC), 505 Van Ness 
    Avenue, San Francisco, California 94102 filed a petition for a 
    declaratory order under Rule 207 of the Commission's Rules of Practice 
    and Procedure (18 CFR 385.207). The California PUC is requesting that 
    the Commission issue an order declaring that:
        1. The sale of natural gas imported from Canada by Pacific 
    Interstate Transmission Company (PITCO) to Southern California Gas 
    Company (SoCalGas) is a ``First Sale'' under section 3(b) of the 
    Natural Gas Act (NGA) and section 2(21) of the Natural Gas Policy Act 
    (NGPA).
        2. PITCO's sale of the imported volumes to SoCalGas was 
    deregulated, as of January 1, 1993, under the Natural Gas Decontrol Act 
    of 1989.
        3. PITCO is not within the jurisdiction of the Federal Energy 
    Regulatory Commission.
        4. PITCO's certificate of public convenience and necessity issued 
    by the Commission under section 7(c) of the NGA is revoked.
        The California PUC's reasons for its request are more fully set 
    forth in its petition which is on file with the Commission and open to 
    public inspection.
        The Commission certificated PITCO in 1980 under its authority under 
    section 7 of the NGA and found that the certification was ``necessary 
    and related to'' the Alaska Natural Gas Transportation System (ANGTS) 
    within the meaning of section 9 of the Alaska Natural Gas 
    Transportation Act (ANGTA).
        Under that certificate, PITCO sells up to 300,000 Mcf per day of 
    natural gas to its affiliate SoCalGas. SoCalGas is a local distribution 
    company/Hinshaw pipeline which is regulated by the California PUC. 
    PITCO purchases the natural gas sold to SoCalGas from Northwest Alaskan 
    Pipeline Company (Northwest Alaskan) which imports the volumes from the 
    Canadian exporter, Pan Alberta Gas Ltd. (Pan Alberta). PITCO pays 
    Northwest Alaskan a demand charge which includes Northwest Alaskan's 
    administrative costs and the passthrough of demand charges for 
    transportation of the natural gas in Canada. The rate schedule under 
    which Northwest Alaskan sells the natural gas to PITCO, (Rate Schedule 
    X-4) is the subject of an ongoing proceeding in Docket No. RP94-52-000 
    which is not consolidated with this proceeding.
        The volumes sold to PITCO are shipped on what was designated the 
    Western Delivery System (WDS) of the ``prebuild facilities'' of the 
    ANGTS. The WDS was an incremental expansion of the interstate pipeline 
    facilities of Pacific Gas Transmission Company (PGT), Northwest 
    Pipeline Corporation (Northwest) and El Paso Natural Gas Company (El 
    Paso). PITCO has an ownership interest in the incremental facilities 
    built by Northwest, and pays PGT, Northwest and El Paso for 
    transportation services. PITCO's interstate pipeline cost of service 
    tariff on file with the Commission aggregates all the natural gas 
    commodity, transportation and administration charges which are passed 
    through to SoCalGas.
        The California PUC now contends the following :
        I. Section 3(b) of the NGA deregulates the sale of natural gas 
    imported from Canada.
        II. Northwest Alaskan's initial sale to PITCO does not eliminate 
    the ``First Sale'' status that attaches to the volumes sold by PITCO to 
    SoCalGas.
        III. PITCO's sale to SoCalGas is a ``First Sale'' under section 
    3(b) of the NGA or Section 2(21) of the NGPA.
        (a) A ``First Sale'' under section 3(b) of the NGA does not require 
    qualification as a ``First Sale'' under section 2(21) of the NGPA.
        (b) PITCO's sale nonetheless would qualify as a ``First Sale'' 
    under the NGPA alone.
        IV. Application of ``First sale'' status under section 3(b) of the 
    NGA is not precluded by ANGTA.
        (a) Reliance on section 9 of ANGTA is outdated.
        (b) The Commission has recognized the incompatibility of reliance 
    on section 9 of ANGTA and compliance with Section 3(b) of the NGA.
        (c) Congress Recognized ANGTA was no longer viable legislation at 
    the same time it deregulated the sale of natural gas imported from 
    Canada.
        (d) An alternate to the ANGTA has been approved by the Department 
    of Energy.
        Thus the California PUC seeks the declaratory order described 
    above.
        Comment date: February 22, 1994, in accordance with the first 
    paragraph of Standard Paragraph F at the end of this notice.
    
    3. Arkla Energy Resources Company
    
    [Docket No. CP94-199-000]
    
        Take notice that on January 25, 1994, Arkla Energy Resources 
    Company (Arkla), P.O. Box 21734, Shreveport, Louisiana 71151, filed in 
    Docket No. CP94-199-000 a request pursuant to Sec. 157.205 of the 
    Commission's Regulations under the Natural Gas Act (18 CFR 157.205) for 
    authorization to abandon 23 rural taps and certificate one existing 
    delivery tap, under Arkla's blanket certificate issued in Docket Nos. 
    CP82-384-000 and CP82-384-001 pursuant to section 7 of the Natural Gas 
    Act, all as more fully set forth in the request which is on file with 
    the Commission and open to public inspection.
        Arkla states that it proposes to abandon by transfer to Arkansas 
    Louisiana Gas Company (ALG), 23 1-inch rural delivery taps on gathering 
    lines previously sold to third-party gathering companies located in 
    various Parishes and Counties in Arkansas, Louisiana and Texas.
        Arkla states further that it also proposes to certificate an 
    existing 1-inch interconnect with Centennial Natural Gas (Centennial), 
    as an alternate point through which ALG can secure gas supply to be 
    transported to its rural customers.
        Comment date: March 17, 1994, in accordance with Standard Paragraph 
    G at the end of this notice.
    
    Standard Paragraphs
    
        F. Any person desiring to be heard or to make any protest with 
    reference to said application should on or before the comment date, 
    file with the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, Washington, DC 
    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) 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 the 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 application 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 and/or permission and approval 
    for the proposed abandonment are 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 applicant to appear or be represented at the 
    hearing.
        G. Any person or the Commission's staff may, within 45 days after 
    issuance of the instant notice by the Commission, file pursusant to 
    Rule 214 of the Commission's Procedural Rules (18 CFR 385.214) a motion 
    to intervene or notice of intervention and pursuant to Sec. 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 therefor, 
    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. 94-3224 Filed 2-10-94; 8:45 am]
    BILLING CODE 6717-01-P
    
    
    

Document Information

Published:
02/11/1994
Department:
Energy Department
Entry Type:
Uncategorized Document
Document Number:
94-3224
Dates:
March 17, 1994, in accordance with Standard Paragraph G at the end of this notice.
Pages:
0-0 (1 pages)
Docket Numbers:
Federal Register: February 11, 1994, Docket No. CP94-190-000, et al.