[Federal Register Volume 63, Number 45 (Monday, March 9, 1998)]
[Notices]
[Pages 11427-11428]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 98-5973]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY
Federal Energy Regulatory Commission
[Docket No. GP98-10-000]
Amoco Production Company; Notice of Offer of Settlement and Call
for the Protection of Rights Pending Adjudication or Settlement
March 3, 1998.
Take notice that on February 24, 1998, Amoco Production Company
(Amoco), alleging compliance with the Commission's January 28, 1998
Order Clarifying Procedures (82 FERC para. 61,059), filed an offer of
settlement with the Commission, and called for the protection of its
rights pending adjudication or settlement, with respect to Amoco's
Kansas and valorem tax refund obligation to Colorado Interstate Gas
Company (CIG), identified in the Statement of Refunds Due filed by CIG
in Docket No. RP98-54-000. Amoco's pleading is on file with the
Commission and, except for Amoco's confidential offer of settlement, is
open to public inspection.
Amoco contends that the Commission has established a procedure to
follow, under 18 CFR 385.605 of the Commission's regulations, when
informal settlement or reconciliation efforts fail, and that it has
complied with the requisites of that Section. Amoco suggests that a
Settlement Judge be appointed, that Amoco's refund obligation to CIG be
held in abeyance and that interest be tolled, on the basis that Amoco
has a constitutional and statutory right to a hearing before it may be
deprived of property, i.e., the 1983-1988 Kansas ad valorem tax
reimbursement dollars that Amoco previously collected from CIG. Amoco
further alleges that it made a settlement offer to CIG, and that CIG
rejected that offer.
Amoco also requests a full and fair hearing, and claims that there
are contested issues of material fact (measurable in dollars) on which
CIG and Amoco disagree. Amoco further argues that these issues must be
adjudicated. Amoco's alleged issues of material fact include:
(1) The amount of dollars of revenue Amoco collected for the sale
of its gas in each relevant time period;
(2) How much (if any) of the dollars Amoco collected were in excess
of the maximum lawful price (MLP) in each relevant time period;
(3) How much (if any) of the excess dollars collected by Amoco were
actually paid by customers of interstate pipelines through the
pipeline's PGA process, i.e., how much were the pipeline's customers
overcharged; and
(4) Assuming that part of the refund amount is interest, then when
did the interstate pipeline customers begin paying a fraction of the
amounts determined to be in excess of the MLP, which Amoco contends
will govern the amount of interest owned.
Amoco's pleading includes its claim that it has complied with the
Commission's orders requiring a statement of its basic principles for
rejecting CIG's refund claim, and Amoco's privledged and confidential
offer of settlement to CIG (Amoco's Attachment A). Amoco also provides
its own assessment as to how to compute the correct refund amount.
The procedural rules governing settlements are set forth in Section
385.602 of the Commission's Rules of Practice and Procedure. Under
Section 385.602(f), any person wishing to make
[[Page 11428]]
comments with respect to an offer of settlement must do so not later
than 20 days after the date the settlement offer was filed. Reply
comments must be filed not later than 30 days after the date the
settlement offer was filed. Accordingly, any person desiring to file
comments with respect to Amoco's offer of settlement should file with
the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, 888 First Street, NE.,
Washington, DC 20426, by March 16, 1998, in accordance with the
requirements of the Commission's Rules of Practice and Procedure [18
CFR 385.602(f)].
David P. Boergers,
Acting Secretary.
[FR Doc. 98-5973 Filed 3-6-98; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6717-01-M
