Eastern Shore Natural Gas Company; Notice of Request Under Blanket Authorization, 28972-28973 [2011-12297]
Download as PDF
28972
Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 97 / Thursday, May 19, 2011 / Notices
DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY
Federal Energy Regulatory
Commission
[Docket No. CP11–333–000]
jlentini on DSK4TPTVN1PROD with NOTICES
Eastern Shore Natural Gas Company;
Notice of Request Under Blanket
Authorization
Take notice that on April 28, 2011,
Eastern Shore Natural Gas Company
(Eastern Shore), 1110 Forrest Avenue,
Dover, Delaware 19904, pursuant to its
blanket certificate issued in Docket No.
CP96–128–000,1 filed an application in
accordance to sections 157.205(b),
157.208(c), and 157.210 of the
Commission’s Regulations under the
Natural Gas Act (NGA) as amended, for
the construction, ownership, and
operation of new mainline facilities and
new delivery point measurement and
regulating stations in Sussex County,
Delaware and Worcester County,
Maryland, all as more fully set forth in
the application, which is on file with
the Commission and open to public
inspection.
In order to provide additional firm
natural gas transportation service to
Chesapeake Utilities Corporation—
Delaware Division, Chesapeake Utilities
Corporation—Maryland Division, and
Eastern Shore Gas Company (Shippers),
Eastern Shore proposes to construct,
own, operate, and maintain about 2.3
miles of new ten-inch steel pipeline
looping along Route 13 near Seaford in
Sussex County, Delaware and 19.4 miles
of six-inch mainline extension from
Millsboro, Delaware to Berlin,
Worcester County, Maryland. Eastern
Shore also proposes to install new
delivery point facilities in the towns of
Frankford, Dagsboro, and Selbyville,
Delaware, and Bishop, Showell, and
Berlin, Maryland. Eastern Shore has
entered into binding Precedent
Agreements with the Shippers in which
the Shippers have agreed to execute
fifteen-year FT Service Agreements with
Eastern Shore to provide additional
natural gas transportation service for the
total of 6,250 dts/day 2 under Eastern
Shore’s maximum FT Zone One and
Zone Two Tariff Rates on file with the
Commission. Eastern Shore will recover
its project costs entirely from the
Shippers, with no subsidy from Eastern
Shore’s other firm service customers.
The total estimate cost of the proposed
facilities is $13,018,853. Eastern Shore
1 81
FERC ¶ 61,013 (1997).
dts/day to Chesapeake Utilities
Corporation—Delaware Division, 1,700 dts/day to
Chesapeake Utilities Corporation—Maryland
Division, and 500 dts/day to Eastern Shore Gas
Company.
2 4,050
VerDate Mar<15>2010
15:54 May 18, 2011
Jkt 223001
proposes the facilities to be completed
and placed into service by November 1,
2011.
Any questions concerning this
application may be directed to Glen
DiEleuterio, Project Manager, at (302)
734–6710, ext. 6723 or via fax (302)
734–6745, or e-mail at
GDIEleuterio@esng.com.
This filing is available for review at
the Commission or may be viewed on
the Commission’s Web site at https://
www.ferc.gov, using the ‘‘eLibrary’’ link.
Enter the docket number excluding the
last three digits in the docket number
filed to access the document. For
assistance, please contact FERC Online
Support at
FERCOnlineSupport@ferc.gov or call
toll-free at (866) 206–3676, or, for TTY,
contact (202) 502–8659. Comments,
protests and interventions may be filed
electronically via the Internet in lieu of
paper. See, 18 CFR 385.2001(a)(1)(iii)
and the instructions on the
Commission’s Web site under the ‘‘eFiling’’ link. The Commission strongly
encourages intervenors to file
electronically.
Any person or the Commission’s staff
may, within 60 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
NGA (18 CFR 157.205), a protest to the
request. If no protest is filed within the
time allowed therefore, 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 allowed time
for filing a protest, the instant request
shall be treated as an application for
authorization pursuant to section 7 of
the NGA.
Dated: May 12, 2011.
Kimberly D. Bose,
Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2011–12298 Filed 5–18–11; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6717–01–P
DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY
Federal Energy Regulatory
Commission
[Docket No. CP11–303–000]
Eastern Shore Natural Gas Company;
Notice of Request Under Blanket
Authorization
Take notice that on April 28, 2011,
Eastern Shore Natural Gas Company
PO 00000
Frm 00025
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
(Eastern Shore), 1110 Forrest Avenue,
Dover, Delaware, 19904, pursuant to its
blanket certificate issued in Docket No.
CP96–128–000,1 filed an application in
accordance to sections 157.205(b),
157.208(c), and 157.210 of the
Commission’s Regulations under the
Natural Gas Act (NGA) as amended, for
the construction, ownership, and
operation of new mainline facilities and
a new delivery point measurement and
regulating station from Glasgow,
Delaware to Elkton, Maryland, all as
more fully set forth in the application,
which is on file with the Commission
and open to public inspection.
In order to provide additional firm
natural gas transportation service to
Chesapeake Utilities Corporation—
Maryland Division (Chesapeake),
Eastern Shore proposes to construct,
own, operate, and maintain about 5
miles of new six-inch steel pipeline
running westward from Route 40 in
Glasgow, Delaware to Elkton, Maryland,
and install a new delivery point
measurement and regulating station
near the intersection of US 40 and
Maryland 279 in Elkton, Maryland.
Eastern Shore has entered into a binding
Precedent Agreement with Chesapeake
in which Chesapeake has agreed to
execute a fifteen-year FT Service
Agreement with Eastern Shore to
provide additional natural gas
transportation service of 4,070 dts/day
under Eastern Shore’s maximum FT
Zone One Tariff Rate on file with the
Commission. Eastern Shore will recover
its project costs entirely from
Chesapeake, with no subsidy from
Eastern Shore’s other firm service
customers. The total estimate cost of the
proposed facilities is $5,850,450.
Eastern Shore proposes the facilities to
be completed and placed into service by
November 1, 2011.
Any questions concerning this
application may be directed to Glen
DiEleuterio, Project Manager, at (302)
734–6710, ext. 6723 or via fax (302)
734–6745, or e-mail at
GDIEleuterio@esng.com.
This filing is available for review at
the Commission or may be viewed on
the Commission’s Web site at https://
www.ferc.gov, using the ‘‘eLibrary’’ link.
Enter the docket number excluding the
last three digits in the docket number
filed to access the document. For
assistance, please contact FERC Online
Support at FERC
OnlineSupport@ferc.gov or call toll-free
at (866)206–3676, or, for TTY, contact
(202)502–8659. Comments, protests and
interventions may be filed electronically
via the Internet in lieu of paper. See, 18
1 81
FERC ¶ 61,013 (1997).
E:\FR\FM\19MYN1.SGM
19MYN1
Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 97 / Thursday, May 19, 2011 / Notices
CFR 385.2001(a)(1)(iii) and the
instructions on the Commission’s Web
site under the ‘‘e-Filing’’ link. The
Commission strongly encourages
intervenors to file electronically.
Any person or the Commission’s staff
may, within 60 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
NGA (18 CFR 157.205), a protest to the
request. If no protest is filed within the
time allowed therefore, 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 allowed time
for filing a protest, the instant request
shall be treated as an application for
authorization pursuant to section 7 of
the NGA.
Dated: May 12, 2011.
Kimberly D. Bose,
Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2011–12297 Filed 5–18–11; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6717–01–P
DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY
Federal Energy Regulatory
Commission
[Docket Nos. ER11–2127–001, ER11–2127–
002, EL11–37–000]
jlentini on DSK4TPTVN1PROD with NOTICES
Terra-Gen Dixie Valley, LLC; Order on
Rehearing and Accepting Tariff Filing,
Subject to Modification, Establishing
Hearing Procedures and Directing
Further Compliance Filing
Before Commissioners: Marc Spitzer,
Philip D. Moeller, John R. Norris, and
Cheryl A. LaFleur.
1. In this order, the Commission
addresses an open access transmission
tariff (OATT) submitted by Terra-Gen
Dixie Valley, LLC (Terra-Gen), in
response to a Commission order issued
in this proceeding on January 14, 2011.1
The Commission will accept TerraGen’s OATT, to be effective May 14,
2011, and order modifications to TerraGen’s OATT and require a further
compliance filing. We will also establish
hearing and settlement procedures.
Finally, as discussed below, we will
grant in part and deny in part TerraGen’s request for rehearing of the
January 14 Order.
1 See Terra-Gen Dixie Valley, LLC, 134 FERC ¶
61,027 (2011) (January 14 Order).
VerDate Mar<15>2010
15:54 May 18, 2011
Jkt 223001
I. Background
2. Terra-Gen is the owner of a 60 MW
geothermal plant (Plant), located in
northern Nevada, and an associated 214mile, 230 kV radial generator tie-line
(Dixie Valley Line) (collectively, Dixie
Valley QF). Both the Plant and the Dixie
Valley Line were certified as a single QF
under the Commission’s regulations.
Terra-Gen currently utilizes the Dixie
Valley Line by selling the 60 MW output
of the Plant to Southern California
Edison (SoCal Edison) under a preexisting power purchase agreement.
3. On September 16, 2010, the
Commission acted on a petition by
Terra-Gen, whereby Terra-Gen and two
of its affiliates, TGP Dixie Development
Company, LLC, and New York Canyon,
LLC, sought a determination awarding
priority to existing and future planned
expansion transmission capacity on the
Dixie Valley Line. In that Order, the
Commission also addressed a complaint
filed against Terra-Gen by Green
Borders Geothermal, LLC (Green
Borders). In relevant part, the
Commission found that: (1) Terra-Gen
must file an OATT as a result of Green
Borders’ valid transmission service
request made on May 8, 2007; (2) TerraGen is entitled to continue its present
use of its 60 MW of capacity; (3) TerraGen had not supported its request for
100 MW of priority transmission
capacity for expansion of its generation
resource; and (4) Terra-Gen had not
supported the claim for priority of 200
MW of expansion capacity for the two
Terra-Gen affiliates.2 However, the
Commission allowed Terra-Gen ‘‘to
submit further evidence of pre-existing
development plans that satisfy the
criteria in Aero Energy and Milford.’’
The Commission explained that TerraGen ‘‘must demonstrate the existence of
specific pre-existing generation
development plans, consistent material
progress towards achieving such plans,
and that such plans and initial progress
pre-date Green Border’s valid request for
service.’’ 3
4. In compliance with the September
16 Order, Terra-Gen submitted its OATT
to the Commission on November 15,
2010, in Docket No. ER11–2127–000.
Terra-Gen also submitted additional
materials to support its request for 300
MW of priority transmission capacity.4
On January 14, 2010, the Commission
rejected Terra-Gen’s OATT because
Terra-Gen had not demonstrated that its
OATT was consistent with or superior
2 Terra-Gen Dixie Valley, LLC, 132 FERC ¶ 61,215
(2010) (September 16 Order).
3 Id. P 53.
4 The additional materials were submitted in
Docket No. EL10–29–002.
PO 00000
Frm 00026
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
28973
to the pro forma OATT. The
Commission directed Terra Gen to
resubmit an OATT that is consistent
with the direction of the January 14
Order. On March 16, 2011, Terra-Gen
submitted the instant filing in
compliance with the January 14 Order.
Subsequently, Terra-Gen requested
rehearing of the January 14 Order.
A. Request for Rehearing of January 14
Order
5. On February 14, 2011, Terra-Gen
filed a Request for Rehearing of the
January 14 Order (Request for
Rehearing). Terra-Gen alleges that the
Commission departed from precedent,
failed to engage in reasoned decisionmaking, and acted arbitrarily and
capriciously ‘‘by finding that [Terra-Gen]
had not justified an OATT exemption
for its existing or future priority
transmission services when the
Commission had grandfathered [TerraGen’s] priority transmission services in
the September 16 Order.’’ 5 Specifically,
Terra-Gen argues that the Commission
improperly departed from precedent
established in Sagebrush by rejecting
Terra-Gen’s proposed OATT provisions
that would provide ‘‘an OATT
exemption for its existing and any
future service rights confirmed by the
Commission.’’ 6 According to Terra-Gen,
its proposed treatment of the 60 MW of
existing capacity on the Dixie Valley
Line is no different than Sagebrush’s
‘‘treatment of capacity to which it had
pre-OATT grandfathered rights.’’ 7
B. Terra-Gen OATT
6. Terra-Gen asserts that its OATT
complies with the directives in the
January 14 Order. Specifically, TerraGen explains that its compliance OATT
contains several deviations from the pro
forma OATT due to the design of the
Dixie Valley Line as a generator tie-line.
Terra-Gen explains that its OATT has
non-conforming provisions that include
limiting the applicability of the OATT
with regard to any priority transmission
capacity granted to Terra-Gen and its
affiliates, providing alternative
creditworthiness requirements for
transmission customers, clarifying how
Terra-Gen will cluster transmission
system impact studies, and modifying
the large generator interconnection
procedures.
7. In addition, as it did in its initial
filing, Terra-Gen reaffirms its requests
for waiver of the pro forma OATT
provisions related to the provision of
5 Request
for Rehearing at 5.
for Rehearing at 6 (citing Sagebrush, a
California Partnership, 130 FERC ¶ 61,093 (2010)
(Sagebrush)).
7 Id. at 7.
6 Request
E:\FR\FM\19MYN1.SGM
19MYN1
Agencies
[Federal Register Volume 76, Number 97 (Thursday, May 19, 2011)]
[Notices]
[Pages 28972-28973]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2011-12297]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY
Federal Energy Regulatory Commission
[Docket No. CP11-303-000]
Eastern Shore Natural Gas Company; Notice of Request Under
Blanket Authorization
Take notice that on April 28, 2011, Eastern Shore Natural Gas
Company (Eastern Shore), 1110 Forrest Avenue, Dover, Delaware, 19904,
pursuant to its blanket certificate issued in Docket No. CP96-128-
000,\1\ filed an application in accordance to sections 157.205(b),
157.208(c), and 157.210 of the Commission's Regulations under the
Natural Gas Act (NGA) as amended, for the construction, ownership, and
operation of new mainline facilities and a new delivery point
measurement and regulating station from Glasgow, Delaware to Elkton,
Maryland, all as more fully set forth in the application, which is on
file with the Commission and open to public inspection.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ 81 FERC ] 61,013 (1997).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
In order to provide additional firm natural gas transportation
service to Chesapeake Utilities Corporation--Maryland Division
(Chesapeake), Eastern Shore proposes to construct, own, operate, and
maintain about 5 miles of new six-inch steel pipeline running westward
from Route 40 in Glasgow, Delaware to Elkton, Maryland, and install a
new delivery point measurement and regulating station near the
intersection of US 40 and Maryland 279 in Elkton, Maryland. Eastern
Shore has entered into a binding Precedent Agreement with Chesapeake in
which Chesapeake has agreed to execute a fifteen-year FT Service
Agreement with Eastern Shore to provide additional natural gas
transportation service of 4,070 dts/day under Eastern Shore's maximum
FT Zone One Tariff Rate on file with the Commission. Eastern Shore will
recover its project costs entirely from Chesapeake, with no subsidy
from Eastern Shore's other firm service customers. The total estimate
cost of the proposed facilities is $5,850,450. Eastern Shore proposes
the facilities to be completed and placed into service by November 1,
2011.
Any questions concerning this application may be directed to Glen
DiEleuterio, Project Manager, at (302) 734-6710, ext. 6723 or via fax
(302) 734-6745, or e-mail at GDIEleuterio@esng.com.
This filing is available for review at the Commission or may be
viewed on the Commission's Web site at https://www.ferc.gov, using the
``eLibrary'' link. Enter the docket number excluding the last three
digits in the docket number filed to access the document. For
assistance, please contact FERC Online Support at FERC
OnlineSupport@ferc.gov or call toll-free at (866)206-3676, or, for TTY,
contact (202)502-8659. Comments, protests and interventions may be
filed electronically via the Internet in lieu of paper. See, 18
[[Page 28973]]
CFR 385.2001(a)(1)(iii) and the instructions on the Commission's Web
site under the ``e-Filing'' link. The Commission strongly encourages
intervenors to file electronically.
Any person or the Commission's staff may, within 60 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 NGA (18 CFR 157.205), a protest to the
request. If no protest is filed within the time allowed therefore, 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 allowed time for filing a
protest, the instant request shall be treated as an application for
authorization pursuant to section 7 of the NGA.
Dated: May 12, 2011.
Kimberly D. Bose,
Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2011-12297 Filed 5-18-11; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6717-01-P