[Federal Register Volume 59, Number 133 (Wednesday, July 13, 1994)]
[Unknown Section]
[Page 0]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 94-16921]
[[Page Unknown]]
[Federal Register: July 13, 1994]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY
[Docket No. CP94-625-000, et al.]
El Paso Natural Gas Company, et al.; Natural Gas Certificate
Filings
July 6, 1994.
Take notice that the following filings have been made with the
Commission:
1. El Paso Natural Gas Company
Docket No. CP94-625-000
Take notice that on June 23, 1994, El Paso Natural Gas Company (El
Paso), P.O. Box 1492, El Paso, Texas 79978, filed a request with the
Commission in Docket No. CP94-625-000 pursuant to Sections 157.205 and
157.212 of the Commission's Regulations under the Natural Gas Act (NGA)
for authorization to construct and operate a delivery point to provide
firm transportation and delivery of natural gas to Southwest Gas
Corporation (Southwest) under El Paso's blanket certificate issued in
Docket Nos. CP82-435-000 and CP88-433-000 pursuant to Section 7 of the
NGA, all as more fully set forth in the request which is open to the
public for inspection.
El Paso proposes to construct and operate a delivery point on the
20'' O.D. Maricopa County Line of its North System Mainline to provide
firm transportation of natural gas to Southwest. El Paso states that
Southwest would then deliver the gas to the residential and commercial
customers located in the Garden Lakes area of Maricopa County, Arizona.
El Paso estimates the cost of the proposed delivery point would be
$93,400 and states that Southwest has agreed to reimburse El Paso for
the expenses.
El Paso reports that it has sufficient capacity to accomplish the
proposed deliveries without detriment to its other existing customers.
Comment date: August 22, 1994, in accordance with Standard
Paragraph G at the end of this notice.
2. Newfield Exploration Company
Docket No. CP94-636-000
Take notice that on June 30, 1994, Newfield Exploration Company
(Newfield), 363 N. Sam Houston Pkwy E., Suite 2020, Houston, Texas
77060, filed a petition for declaratory order in Docket No. CP94-636-
000 requesting that the Commission declare that, following Newfield's
purchase of certain offshore facilities from Texas Eastern Transmission
Corporation (Texas Eastern), that those facilities are gathering
facilities exempt from the Commission's Regulations pursuant to Section
1(b) of the Natural Gas Act (NGA), all as more fully set forth in the
petition which is on file with the Commission and open to public
inspection.
Newfield states that the facilities consist of one currently-
certificated supply line owned by Texas Eastern along with an
associated metering facility. It is indicated that the supply line
consists of a 4.8 mile, 8-inch lateral that connects Newfield's oil and
gas production platform in the Eugene Island Block 182-A area to the
facilities of Sea Robin Pipeline Company (Sea Robin) in Eugene Island
Block 197 in offshore Louisiana. It is indicated that on June 16, 1993,
Texas Eastern ceased purchasing the Newfield production gathered by the
facilities to be purchased, but did continue transporting Newfield's
production through the facilities for redelivery to the transmission
facilities of Sea Robin.
Newfield asserts that the primary function of the facilities to be
acquired is gathering as set forth in Farmland Industries, Inc., 23
FERC 61,023 (1983), as later modified by Amerada Hess Corp., et al,
52 FERC 61,268 (1990), (Amerada Hess). It is indicated that under
that test the Commission applies six criteria to determine the
jurisdictional status of a facility: (1) the diameter and length of a
facility; (2) the extension of facilities beyond a central point in the
field; (3) the geographic configuration of the system; (4) the location
of compressors and processing plants; (5) the location of wells along
all or part of the facility; and (6) the operating pressure of the
line. In Amerada Hess, the Commission indicated that it would consider
other factors, in addition to the Farmland criteria, especially for
offshore facilities, including the changing technical and geographic
nature of exploration and production, the purpose, location and
operation of the facility, the general business activity of the
facility, and whether the jurisdictional determination is consistent
with the objectives of the Natural Gas Act and the Natural Gas Policy
Act of 1978.
Newfield asserts that there can be doubt that the primary function
of the facilities is gathering. It is stated that the facilities
connect directly to producing wells and were constructed to gather gas
produced from those wells for delivery into transmission facilities
currently owned by Sea Robin. Newfield also states that the facilities
are short in length and small in diameter, do not extend beyond the
production area, and are located upstream of processing or dehydration
facilities and therefore are gathering facilities. Newfield also points
out that an application of the non-physical factors set out in Amerada
Hess demonstrates that the facilities should be classified as gathering
facilities. It is stated that the sole purpose of the facilities is to
gather gas produced by Newfield as the sole working interest owner in
the wells for delivery to transmission facilities owned by Sea Robin.
Newfield also states that its general business activity is the
exploration and production of natural gas.
Newfield requests that the petition be considered contemporaneously
with Texas Eastern's application in Docket No. CP94-567-000 to abandon
the facilities to be sold to Newfield.
Comment date: July 27, 1994, in accordance with Standard Paragraph
F at the end of this notice.
3. Columbia Gulf Transmission Company
Docket No. CP94-640-000
Take notice that on July 1, 1994, Columbia Gulf Transmission
Company (Columbia Gulf), 1700 MacCorkle Avenue, SE., Charleston, West
Virginia 25314-1599, filed in Docket No. CP94-640-000, an abbreviated
application pursuant to Sections 7(b) and (c) of the Natural Gas Act
for a certificate of public convenience and necessity authorizing the
construction and operation of certain replacement natural gas
facilities and an order granting permission and approval to abandon the
facilities being replaced, all as more fully set forth in the
application which is on file with the Commission and open to public
inspection.
Specifically, Columbia Gulf proposes to construct and operate
approximately 1.2 miles of 30-inch pipeline crossing the Mississippi
River replacing approximately 1.2 miles of duel 24-inch crossing which
ruptured in 1993 in East Carroll Parish, Louisiana. Columbia Gulf
states that this river crossing is part of Columbia Gulf's Mainline 200
30-inch pipeline. Columbia Gulf further states that the Mainline 200
operates as part of a looped system in conjunction with Columbia Gulf's
Mainline 100 30-inch and Mainline 300 36-inch extending from southern
Louisiana to northeastern Kentucky. Columbia Gulf states that the
proposed crossing, when operated as part of Columbia Gulf's looped
pipeline system, will have equivalent designed delivery capacity to
that of the facilities being replaced.
Columbia Gulf states that the estimated cost of the proposed
construction is $5,747,000. Columbia Gulf states that it will finance
the construction with funds generated from internal sources.
Columbia Gulf requests that this application be processed pursuant
to section 385.802 of the Commission's Rules of Practice and Procedure
and hereby waives oral hearing and the opportunity for filing
exceptions to the decision of the Commission and requests the
Commission to omit the intermediate decision procedure.
Comment date: July 27, 1994, in accordance with Standard Paragraph
F at the end of this notice.
4. Columbia Gas Transmission Corporation
Docket No. CP94-641-000
Take notice that on July 1, 1994, Columbia Gas Transmission
Corporation (Columbia), 1700 MacCorkle Avenue, SE., Charleston, West
Virginia 25314, filed in Docket No. CP94-641-000 an application
pursuant to Sections 7(c) and 7(b) of the Natural Gas Act for
authorization to construct and operate certain replacement natural gas
facilities and for authorization to abandon the facilities being
replaced, all as more fully set forth in the application on file with
the Commission and open to public inspection.
Columbia proposes to construct and operate approximately 4.9 miles
of 12-inch transmission pipeline replacing approximately 4.9 miles of
deteriorating and obsolete 12-inch pipeline (Line A-5) in seven
sections in Broome and Tioga Counties, New York.
Columbia states that it is not requesting authorization for any new
or additional service. Columbia also states that the sections of
pipeline to be constructed will have equivalent designed delivery
capacity and that the facilities being replaced have become obsolete
and/or physically deteriorated to the extent that the replacement is
deemed advisable. The estimated cost of the proposed construction is
$5,061,000 and the estimated net debit to retirement associated with
the abandonment is $655,000.
Comment date: July 26, 1994, in accordance with Standard Paragraph
F 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 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 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. 94-16921 Filed 7-12-94; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6717-01-P
