[Federal Register Volume 60, Number 92 (Friday, May 12, 1995)]
[Notices]
[Pages 25711-25714]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 95-11711]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY
[Docket No. CP95-464-000, et al.]
Continental Natural Gas, Inc., et al.; Natural Gas Certificate
Filings
May 4, 1995.
Take notice that the following filings have been made with the
Commission:
1. Continental Natural Gas, Inc. Complainant, vs. Colorado Interstate
Gas Company Respondent
[Docket No. CP95-464-000]
Take notice that on May 3, 1995, Continental Natural Gas Company
(Continental), 1400 SouthBoston, Tulsa, Oklahoma 74119, filed with the
Commission in Docket No. CP95-464-000 a complaint, motion for a cease
and desist order, and a motion for order directing physical
interconnections pursuant to Rule 206 of the Commission's Rules of
Practice and Procedure, against Colorado Interstate Gas Company (CIG)
(Respondent), alleging violations of the Natural Gas Act (NGA); Section
7(b)--Unauthorized abandonment of facilities and services, Section
7(c)--Unauthorized modification of facilities, and Section 284 of the
Commission Regulations-discrimination in favor of its non-
jurisdictional processing affiliate, all as more fully set forth in the
complaint which is on file with the Commission and open to public
inspection.
Continental, an Oklahoma corporation with its principal place of
business in Tulsa, Oklahoma, engaged in the gathering, processing and
marketing of natural gas, is also a gathering and transportation
customer on CIG's system and operates a natural gas processing plant
connected to CIG's system.
CIG, a Delaware corporation, with principal place of business in
Colorado Springs, Colorado, is engaged in the business of gathering and
interstate transmission of natural gas. CIG's system stretches from
Texas to Wyoming.
Continental requests that the Commission direct CIG to cease and
desist in its plans to reconfigure the Mocane Compressor Station and
direct CIG to provide Continental with the requested mainline and
gathering interconnections necessary to continue the needed compression
at the Mocane Station. Continental states that its Warren processing
plant is located on CIG's mainline, immediately downstream from the
Mocane Compressor Station (also on CIG's mainline) in Beaver County,
OK, which is essential to ensuring access to gas supply for the Warren
plant. Continental alleges that CIG plans to abandon (without
Commission approval) a significant portion of the compression at the
Mocane Station and to appropriate such compression (modification) for
the primary benefit of its non-jurisdictional processing affiliate.
Continental states that the abandonment of that compression will
significantly reduce the throughput capability of the Mocane Station
and will cause severe harm to Continental.
As explained by Continental, Continental has requested that CIG
provide it with certain mainline and gathering interconnects in order
to maintain as well as maximize current [[Page 25712]] and future
access to the gas supply behind the Mocane Gathering System. However,
CIG has withheld authorization for these interconnects, as asserted by
Continental, but CIG has recently provided similar interconnections to
CIG's processing affiliate. Continental states that CIG has offered no
explanation for such discrimination. As a result, Continental requests
that the Commission (1) direct CIG to cease and desist in its plans to
reconfigure the Mocane Compressor Station and (2) direct CIG to provide
Continental with the requested mainline and gathering interconnections.
Comment date: June 5, 1995, in accordance with the first paragraph
of Standard Paragraph F at the end of this notice.
2. Transwestern Pipeline Company
[Docket No. CP95-70-001]
Take notice that on May 1, 1995, Transwestern Pipeline Company
(Transwestern), Post Office Box 1188, Houston, Texas 77251-1188 filed
an amendment (Amendment) to its original application in Docket No.
CP95-770-000, which was filed pursuant to Section 7(b) of the Natural
Gas Act for permission and approval to abandon certain facilities by
transfer to Transwestern Gathering Company (TGC), a wholly-owned
subsidiary of Transwestern.1 Transwestern states that the
Amendment incorporates minor revisions and corrections to ensure
consistency among the captioned proceeding, Transwestern's
refunctionalization proceeding in Docket No. CP94-254 and
Transwestern's abandonment proceeding in Docket No. CP94-751, all as
more fully set forth in the application which is on file with the
Commission and open to public inspection.
\1\Transwestern states that the facilities which are proposed to
be transferred to TGC mirror the facilities which are identified in
the data response filed on September 6, 1994, in Docket No. CP94-
254-000 (Refunctionalization Proceeding).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Transwestern states that, in response to a June 7, 1994, data
request from the Commission in the refunctionalization proceeding, it
conducted an in-depth review and analysis of each facility in its
entire system, resulting in a different functionalization of the
facilities from that originally filed. It is stated that the response
was filed September 6, 1994.
On October 3, 1994, Transwestern states that it supplemented its
data response by making some substantial, but mostly miscellaneous
corrections and revisions to the refunctionalization of facilities. On
November 14, 1994, Transwestern contends that it again supplemented its
data response with a summary on its proposed adjustments to plant and
depreciation resulting from the refunctionalization proposed in the
data response.
Also on November 14, 1994, Transwestern submits that it filed an
application in Docket No. CP95-70-000 proposing to spindown certain
compression, plants, metering, dehydration and pipeline facilities,
along with certain agreements and services, by transfer to TGC.
Essentially, Transwestern proposed to spindown to TGC all of its
facilities functionalized as gathering in the refunctionalization
proceeding.
On December 5, 1994, Transwestern filed a Petition for Declaratory
Order in Docket No. CP95-112-000 seeking the Commission to declare that
upon completion of the acquisition by TGC of the facilities being spun
down from Transwestern, such facilities and the services provided
through them would be exempt from Commission jurisdiction.
Subsequent to the filing of the spindown, Transwestern contends
that it was determined that certain minor revisions and corrections
were required to the application in this proceeding.
Comment date: May 25, 1995, in accordance with Standard Paragraph F
at the end of this notice.
3. Transwestern Pipeline Company
[Docket No. CP94-254-001]
Take notice that on May 1, 1995, Transwestern Pipeline Company
(Transwestern), P. O. Box 1188, Houston, Texas 77251-1188, filed in
Docket No. CP94-254-001 an amendment (Amendment) to its original
application filed in the captioned proceeding on February 25, 1994
pursuant to Sections 7(b) and (c) of the Natural Gas Act for a
certificate of public convenience and necessity and abandonment
authorization relating to the proposed refunctionalization of certain
facilities from production and gathering to transmission and from
transmission to production and gathering, respectively. Transwestern
states that it filed the Amendment to fully incorporate the
functionalization of facilities proposed in its data response filed on
September 6, 1994, all as more fully set forth in the application which
is on file with the Commission and open to public inspection.
Transwestern states that, in response to a June 7, 1994, data
request from the Commission, it conducted an in-depth review and
analysis of each facility in its entire system, resulting in a
different functionalization of the facilities from that originally
filed. It is stated that the response was filed September 6, 1994.
On October 3, 1994, Transwestern states that it supplemented its
data response by making some substantial, but mostly miscellaneous
corrections and revisions to the refunctionalization of facilities. On
November 14, 1994, Transwestern contends that it again supplemented its
data response with a summary on its proposed adjustments to plant and
depreciation resulting from the refunctionalization proposed in the
data response.
Also on November 14, 1994, Transwestern submits that it filed an
application in Docket No. CP95-70-000 proposing to spindown certain
compression, plants, metering, dehydration and pipeline facilities,
along with certain agreements and services, by transfer to Transwestern
Gathering Company (TGC). Essentially, Transwestern proposed to spindown
to TGC all of its facilities functionalized as gathering in the
refunctionalization proceeding.
On December 5, 1994, Transwestern filed a Petition for Declaratory
Order in Docket No. CP95-112-000 seeking the Commission to declare that
upon completion of the acquisition by TGC of the facilities being spun
down from Transwestern, such facilities and the services provided
through them would be exempt from Commission jurisdiction.
Transwestern states that the refunctionalization of facilities
contained in the data response is fully consistent with the
Commission's primary function test. In addition, it is stated that the
refunctionalization proposed in the data response is the basis of the
spindown to TGC. Therefore, to avoid confusion, to ensure consistency
among the refunctionalization, spindown and petition for declaratory
order and to ensure a consistent Commission record, Transwestern
requests that its original application in the refunctionalization
proceeding be amended to fully incorporate the functionalization of
facilities proposed in Transwestern's data response, as amended.
Comment date: May 25, 1995, in accordance with Standard Paragraph F
at the end of this notice.
4. Mississippi River Transmission Corporation NorAm Field Services
Corp.
[Docket No. CP95-376-000]
Take notice that on April 28, 1995 Mississippi River Transmission
Corporation (MRT) 9900 Clayton Road, St. Louis, Missouri 63124, and
NorAm Field Services Corp. (NFS) 525 Milam, [[Page 25713]] Shreveport,
Louisiana 71101, jointly filed in Docket No. CP95-376-000 an
application pursuant to Section 7(b) and Rule 207. MRT is proposing to
abandon by sale and transfer, certain gathering facilities to, its
affiliate, NFS. NFS is petitioning the Commission for a declaratory
order, wherein the Commission declines to assert jurisdiction over the
gathering facilities once the facilities become the property of NFS,
all as more fully set forth in the application which is on file with
the Commission and open to public inspection.
Specifically, pursuant to Section 7(b) of the Natural Gas Act, MRT
proposes to abandon by sale to NFS, four discrete, certificated
gathering systems which MRT states are remote from its transmission
system. The four gathering systems are: Mills Ranch in Wheeler County,
Texas; Little Washita in Grady County, Oklahoma; North Reydon in Roger
Mills County, Oklahoma; and Southwest New Liberty in Beckham County,
Oklahoma. In addition, pursuant to Rule 207 of the Commission's Rules
of Practice and Procedure, 18 CFR 385.207, MRT and NFS petition the
Commission for an order declaring that the facilities are exempt from
Commission regulations under Section 1(b) of the Natural Gas Act.
MRT states that because the gathering facilities are remote from
its transmission system, they are not integral to MRT's operations in
the post-restructuring environment. It is further stated that although
all of the facilities have been certificated, they have historically
been functionalized as gathering facilities for ratemaking purposes,
and that such facilities clearly qualify as gathering facilities under
the modified primary function test. It is averred that NFS is engaged
in the business of providing exclusively non-jurisdictional gathering
services in competition with producers, gatherers and intrastate
pipelines; and that NFS will operate the facilities in essentially the
same manner as they have been operated by MRT. It is stated that the
net book value of the subject facilities as of December 31, 1994 was
$810,430.
Comment date: May 25, 1995, in accordance with Standard Paragraph F
at the end of this notice.
5. Transwestern Pipeline Company
[Docket No. CP94-751-002]
Take notice that on May 1, 1995, Transwestern Pipeline Company
(Transwestern), Post Office Box 1188, Houston, Texas 77251-1188 filed
an amendment (Amendment) to its original application in Docket No.
CP94-751-000, which was filed pursuant to Section 7(b) of the Natural
Gas Act for an order granting permission and approval to abandon
certain facilities. Transwestern states that the Amendment reflects the
sale of certain facilities to third parties, the determination that
certain of the facilities have already been abandoned and the
determination that gas is currently flowing through certain of the
wellhead facilities, all as more fully set forth in the amendment which
is on file with the Commission and open to public inspection.
It is stated that in the process of analyzing Transwestern's system
in response to the May 27, 1994 series of gathering orders issued by
the Commission and while preparing for further proceedings in
Transwestern's refunctionalization proceeding in Docket No. CP94-254-
000, it was discovered that certain field facilities, including
compressors, plants, meters, dehydrators and miscellaneous associated
facilities are no longer used and useful or are uneconomical or
otherwise unnecessary for continued operation of the pipeline.
Therefore, Transwestern states that it filed the original abandonment
application on August 30, 1994. Transwestern determined that it would
be most practical and efficient to first seek an order authorizing the
abandonment of facilities in Docket No. CP94-751-000 before seeking the
refunctionalization of Transwestern's remaining facilities in Docket
No. CP94-254-000. Transwestern states that it felt that this sequencing
would avoid the necessity of needlessly determining the facilities
primary function when they were proposed to be abandoned.
Transwestern states that it has now been determined that certain
additional revisions are necessary to the application in Docket No.
CP94-751-000 to reflect the sale of certain facilities to third
parties, the determination that certain of the facilities have already
been abandoned and the determination that gas is currently flowing
through certain of the wellhead facilities.
On November 14, 1994, Transwestern submits that it filed an
application in Docket No. CP95-70-000 proposing to spindown certain
compression, plants, metering, dehydration and pipeline facilities,
along with certain agreements and services, by transfer to Transwestern
Gathering Company (TGC). Essentially, Transwestern proposed to spindown
to TGC all of its facilities functionalized as gathering in the
refunctionalization proceeding.
On December 5, 1994, Transwestern filed a Petition for Declaratory
Order in Docket No. CP95-112-000 seeking the Commission to declare that
upon completion of the acquisition by TGC of the facilities being spun
down from Transwestern, such facilities and the services provided
through them would be exempt from Commission jurisdiction. In general,
Transwestern contends that where facilities are removed from the
instant abandonment application to be sold to third parties, such
facilities are included in an amendment to Transwestern's spindown
proceeding in Docket No. CP95-70-000 filed concurrently and will be
accordingly spundown to TGC prior to the sale to a third party.
Comment date: May 25, 1995, 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, 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.
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 [[Page 25714]] unnecessary for applicant to appear or be
represented at the hearing.
Lois D. Cashell,
Secretary.
[FR Doc. 95-11711 Filed 5-11-95; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6717-01-P