[Federal Register Volume 60, Number 32 (Thursday, February 16, 1995)]
[Notices]
[Pages 9029-9030]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 95-3846]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY
[Docket Nos. CP94-196-002; and CP94-197-002]
Williams Natural Gas Company Williams Gas Processing--Mid-
Continent Region Co.; Notice of Filing
February 10, 1995.
Take notice that on February 3, 1995, Williams Natural Gas Company
(WNG), Post Office Box 3288, Tulsa, Oklahoma 74101, tendered for filing
a default contract to comply with the Commission's December 22, 1994,
Order in Docket No. CP94-196-000, all as more fully set forth in the
filing which [[Page 9030]] is on file with the Commission and open to
public inspection.
The Commission in its December 22, 1994 Order, required WNG and
Williams Gas Processing--Mid-Continent Region Company (WGP-MCR) to file
a ``default contract'' to provide a transitional mechanism for any
existing shippers who had not negotiated an agreement with WGP-MCR for
gathering services. WNG asserts that WGP-MCR has negotiated and
executed agreements with shippers representing approximately 80 percent
of the volumes currently being gathered by WNG on the subject
facilities. WNG states that the default contract will be offered to
shippers representing the remaining 20 percent of the current volumes.
WNG asserts that it currently has 88 gathering agreements. WNG
states that WGP-MCR has consolidated the negotiated agreements so that
the same shipper only needs one agreement to provide for gas gathered
in multiple gathering areas. Therefore, WNG claims that WGP-MCR's 21
negotiated agreements will replace 28 WNG agreements. WNG also states
that 17 agreements have been terminated effective January 31, 1995,
because they have been inactive for a year and the shippers agreed to
discontinue these inactive accounts. Finally, WNG states that the
remaining 43 gathering agreements, representing 20 percent of the
volumes, could be replaced by the default contract. WNG states that
WGP-MCR has provided the remaining customers with drafts of the default
contract for their review, recognizing that the contract will require
the Commission's approval before execution. WNG claims that the
remaining customers will still have the opportunity to negotiate an
agreement tailored to their needs or, if the desire, to select the
default option.
WNG states that the proposed default contract is consistent with
the form of gathering agreement filed with the Commission in WNG's
restructuring proceedings, Docket No. RS92-12-000, et al. WNG notes
that, while it was not required to file the form of gathering agreement
in the tariff, in the review process many of the provisions were
expressly approved by the Commission. WNG states that the entire
default contract is consistent with the Commission's requirements in
those orders. WNG states there was one oversight, in that the provision
that limits both parties' liability was not removed from the gathering
agreements that were sent to potential shippers. WNG states that the
oversight was not discovered until the recent review of the agreements
in preparation of this default contract filing. Therefore, WNG states
that it will send to all gathering shippers offers to amend the current
agreements to remove that provision as soon as possible. Finally, WNG
states that WGP-MCR has removed the particular provision from the
default contract.
WNG states that the default contract specifically sets out the
applicable provisions of WNG's Tariff General Terms and Conditions.
Additionally, WNG claims that the default contract contains language
clarifications to make it more applicable to gathering and more
understandable, but results in no substantive language changes to the
applicable provisions. WNG states that WGP-MCR proposes to add four
additional provisions to the general terms and conditions of the
default contract, due to the differences between traditional interstate
pipeline services and gathering services. WNG states that the four
provisions are: (1) Pass-Through of Unforeseen Costs Imposed by
Government, to allow for the pass through of unforeseen government-
imposed charges in fees or costs; (2) Capacity Curtailment, curtailment
based on a straight pro rata basis; (3) Other Pipeline Requirements,
because the gathering systems will be connected to multiple
transmission pipelines, shippers will be required to comply with
downstream requirements including bearing the resulting penalties for
failure to comply; (4) Nominations, provides that the gathering fee and
fuel are based on confirmed nominations rather than on receipt point
volumes and this is for the convenience of all the parties.
WNG states that the default contract's general terms and conditions
contain WNG's tariff imbalance penalty provisions. However, WNG states
that neither it nor WGP-MCR will double charge penalties for
transactions across separate gathering and transmission facilities that
currently qualify for a single penalty on WNG's system.
WNG claims that the default contract rates have been determined
utilizing the currently effective WNG rate methodology for WNG's rate
case, Docket No. RP93-109-000. WNG states that the rates are a result
of applying the currently effective rate methodology to the WNG
facilities which will be conveyed to WGP-MCR to provide gathering
service. WNG also notes that since it has not received a final order in
Docket No. RP93-109-000, the currently effective gathering rates are
subject to refund and WGP-MCR will refund amounts to the default
contract customers if the Commission makes such a requirement in its
final order.
WNG states that the rate is subject to an escalator, which uses the
Gross Domestic Product fixed Weighted Price Index as published by the
U.S. Department of Commerce. WNG states that WGP-MCR has not included
discount language in the default contract because there are no
remaining shippers receiving a discounted gathering rate from WNG. WNG
asserts that any customers receiving discounted gathering rates from
WNG have negotiated agreements with WGP-MCR and will not be using the
default contract.
Any person desiring to be heard or to make a protest with reference
to said application should, on or before March 3, 1995, file with the
Federal Energy Regulatory Commission (825 North Capitol Street NE.,
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) 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.
Lois D. Cashell,
Secretary.
[FR Doc. 95-3846 Filed 2-15-95; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6717-01-M
