UGI Sunbury, LLC; Notice of Application, 43080-43081 [2015-17810]
Download as PDF
43080
Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 139 / Tuesday, July 21, 2015 / Notices
DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY
Federal Energy Regulatory
Commission
[Docket No. EL13–88–000]
asabaliauskas on DSK5VPTVN1PROD with NOTICES
Northern Indiana Public Service
Company v. Midcontinent Independent
System Operator, Inc. and PJM
Interconnection, L.L.C.; Notice of
Request for Comments
On September 11, 2013, Northern
Indiana Public Service Company
(NIPSCO) filed a complaint against
Midcontinent Independent System
Operator, Inc. (MISO) and PJM
Interconnection, L.L.C. (PJM).1 NIPSCO
requested that the Commission order
MISO and PJM (the RTOs) to reform the
interregional planning process of the
Joint Operating Agreement between
MISO and PJM (MISO–PJM JOA). On
June 15, 2015, the Commission held a
technical conference to explore issues
raised in the Complaint related to the
MISO–PJM JOA and the MISO–PJM
seam.
Shown below are post-technical
conference questions for which the
Commission seeks further comment. To
the extent that any response calls for
specific revisions to the MISO–PJM
JOA, the Commission requests that
parties also provide redline revisions to
the MISO–PJM JOA where possible.
1. According to comments made at the
technical conference, it appears that
several MISO and/or PJM stakeholder
groups are currently working on
potential revisions to the MISO–PJM
JOA, MISO tariff and/or PJM tariff (e.g.,
models and assumptions, Market
Efficiency Project and Cross Border
Market Efficiency Project criteria, etc.).
Please comment on the status of that
effort, the potential revisions being
considered, and the timing of any
proposed revisions to be filed with the
Commission for consideration.
2. Provide specific examples of types
of facilities that could have a significant
benefit (e.g., relieving congestion across
the seam) but may not pass MISO’s
regional Market Efficiency Project and/
or Cross-Border Market Efficiency
Project criteria. To the extent such
facilities would have significant benefit,
what steps do the RTOs need to take to
address the matter?
3. What specific revisions would need
to be made to the MISO–PJM JOA in
order to better align the existing regional
transmission planning cycles with the
interregional transmission planning
process?
1 NIPSCO Complaint, Docket No. EL13–88–000
(filed Sept. 11, 2013).
VerDate Sep<11>2014
17:58 Jul 20, 2015
Jkt 235001
4. Would revisions to the MISO–PJM
JOA to require the RTOs to, annually, or
at some other regular interval, conduct
a joint interregional transmission
planning study help to address the
issues created by the configuration of
the PJM and MISO planning regions? If
so, what specific revisions to the MISO–
PJM JOA would be required?
5. Based on comments at the technical
conference, it appears that projects that
successfully navigate the Interregional
Planning Stakeholder Advisory
Committee process must be studied and
approved two more times—once
through the MISO regional planning
process and once through the PJM
regional planning process. Please give
specific examples of reforms that could
be made to address this ‘‘triple hurdle’’ 2
(e.g., creation of a new project category
for interregional transmission projects to
be eligible for selection in the two
RTOs’ respective regional transmission
plans).
6. Please explain whether the
avoidance of market-to-market
payments should be included in the
assessment of the benefits of CrossBorder Market Efficiency Projects.
7. Should the MISO–PJM JOA be
revised to include the process and study
scope of the ‘‘Quick Hit’’ 3 study
process? Please explain why or why not.
8. Explain ways in which the RTOs
can better coordinate planning of new
generator interconnection and generator
retirement. Would using models with
the same assumptions and criteria be
one way to better coordinate? What
specific revisions would need to be
made to the MISO–PJM JOA?
Interested parties should submit
comments in response to the questions
above on or before August 14, 2015.
Reply comments must be filed on or
before August 31, 2015.
ADDRESSES: Parties may submit
comments by one of the following
methods: Agency Web site: https://
www.ferc.gov/. Follow the instructions
for submitting comments via the eFiling
2 Various panelists referred to this process as the
‘‘triple hurdle’’ problem.
3 MISO and PJM state that under the newly
initiated PJM and MISO ‘‘Quick Hit’’ study, the
RTOs are considering near-term upgrades to remedy
recent historical interregional congestion issues.
MISO and PJM explain that this study allows
projects to be identified more quickly and alleviate
the underlying issues promptly. MISO and PJM
Joint Comments at 3, n.10 (filed Mar. 31, 2015). See
also PJM/MISO Interregional Planning Stakeholder
Advisory Committee Meeting Presentation at 4 (The
‘‘Quick Hit’’ study goal is to identify valuable
projects on the MISO–PJM seam. Valuable projects
are those that will relieve known Market-to-Market
issues, are completed in a relatively short time
frame, have a quick payback on investment, and are
not greenfield projects.)
PO 00000
Frm 00030
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
link found under the ‘‘Documents and
Filing’’ tab.
Mail: Those unable to file comments
electronically may mail or hand-deliver
comments to: Federal Energy Regulatory
Commission, Secretary of the
Commission, 888 First Street NE.,
Washington, DC 20426.
All comments submitted should be
identified by Docket No. EL13–88–000.
For further information contact:
Jason Strong (Technical Information)
Federal Energy Regulatory Commission,
Office of Energy Market Regulation
888 First Street NE., Washington, DC
20426
(202) 502–6124
jason.strong@ferc.gov
Ben Foster (Technical Information)
Federal Energy Regulatory Commission,
Office of Energy Policy and
Innovation
888 First Street NE., Washington, DC
20426
(202) 502–6149
ben.foster@ferc.gov
Lina Naik (Legal Information)
Federal Energy Regulatory Commission,
Office of the General Counsel
888 First Street NE., Washington, DC
20426
(202) 502–8882
lina.naik@ferc.gov
Dated: July 15, 2015.
Kimberly D. Bose,
Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2015–17811 Filed 7–20–15; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6717–01–P
DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY
Federal Energy Regulatory
Commission
[Docket No. CP15–525–000; PF15–9–000]
UGI Sunbury, LLC; Notice of
Application
Take notice that on July 1, 2015, UGI
Sunbury, LLC (Sunbury), 460 N. Gulph
Road, King of Prussia, PA 19406, filed
an application pursuant to section 7(c)
of the Natural Gas Act (NGA) and Parts
157 and 284 of the Commission’s
Regulations requesting: (i) A certificate
authorizing Sunbury to construct, own,
and operate new interstate natural gas
pipeline facilities (Sunbury Pipeline
Project); (ii) a blanket certificate
authorizing Sunbury to construct and/or
abandon certain eligible facilities, and
(iii) a blanket certificate authorizing
Sunbury authority to provide openaccess transportation services with pregranted abandonment authority. The
Sunbury Pipeline Project is designed to
add an additional 200,000 Dth/d of new
E:\FR\FM\21JYN1.SGM
21JYN1
asabaliauskas on DSK5VPTVN1PROD with NOTICES
Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 139 / Tuesday, July 21, 2015 / Notices
pipeline capacity to industrial and
residential users and would require the
construction of approximately 34.4
miles of 20-inch-diameter pipeline in
Snyder, Union, Northumberland,
Montour, and Lycoming Counties,
Pennsylvania.
The Sunbury Pipeline Project would
run generally north to south,
interconnecting with the pipeline
facilities of Transcontinental Gas
Pipeline Company and the MARC I
Pipeline at its northern end and also
interconnecting with the distribution
facilities of UGI Penn Natural Gas and
UGI Central Penn Gas. At its southern
terminus the Sunbury Pipeline would
connect to the proposed Hummel
Station Generating Facility at the
existing site of the coal-fired Sunbury
Generating Facility in Snyder County,
Pennsylvania. The estimated cost of the
Project is $178,243,345. The filing may
be viewed on the web at https://
www.ferc.gov using the ‘‘eLibrary’’ link.
Enter the docket number excluding the
last three digits in the docket number
field to access the document. For
assistance, contact FERC at
FERCOnlineSupport@ferc.gov or call
toll-free, (886) 208–3676 or TYY, (202)
502–8659.
Any questions concerning this
application should be directed to
Anthony C. Cox, Director, UGI Sunbury,
LLC, One Meridian Blvd., Suite 2C01,
Wyomissing, PA 19610, phone: (610)
373–7999, facsimile: (610) 374–4288,
email: acox@sunburypipeline.com, or
Janna R. Chesno, Hogan Lovells US LLP,
555 Thirteen Street NW., Washington,
DC 20004, phone: (202) 637–5600,
facsimile: (202) 637–5910, email:
janna.chesno@hoganlovells.com.
On December 30, 2014 the
Commission granted Sunbury’s request
to utilize the Pre-Filing Process and
assigned Docket No. PF15–9–000 to staff
activities involved in the Sunbury
Pipeline Project. Now, as of the filing of
the July 1 application, the Pre-Filing
Process for this Project has ended. From
this time forward, this proceeding will
be conducted in Docket No. CP15–525–
000 as noted in the caption of this
Notice.
Pursuant to section 157.9 of the
Commission’s rules, 18 CFR 157.9,
within 90 days of this Notice the
Commission staff will either: complete
its environmental assessment (EA) and
place it into the Commission’s public
record (eLibrary) for this proceeding, or
issue a Notice of Schedule for
Environmental Review. If a Notice of
Schedule for Environmental Review is
issued, it will indicate, among other
milestones, the anticipated date for the
Commission staff’s issuance of the final
VerDate Sep<11>2014
17:58 Jul 20, 2015
Jkt 235001
environmental impact statement (FEIS)
or EA for this proposal. The filing of the
EA in the Commission’s public record
for this proceeding or the issuance of a
Notice of Schedule will serve to notify
federal and state agencies of the timing
for the completion of all necessary
reviews, and the subsequent need to
complete all federal authorizations
within 90 days of the date of issuance
of the Commission staff’s FEIS or EA.
There are two ways to become
involved in the Commission’s review of
this project. First, any person wishing to
obtain legal status by becoming a party
to the proceedings for this project
should, on or before the comment date
stated below, file with the Federal
Energy Regulatory Commission, 888
First Street NE., Washington, DC 20426,
a motion to intervene 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 NGA (18
CFR 157.10). A person obtaining party
status will be placed on the service list
maintained by the Secretary of the
Commission and will receive copies of
all documents filed by the applicant and
by all other parties. A party must submit
5 copies of filings made with the
Commission and must mail a copy to
the applicant and to every other party in
the proceeding. Only parties to the
proceeding can ask for court review of
Commission orders in the proceeding.
However, a person does not have to
intervene in order to have comments
considered. The second way to
participate is by filing with the
Secretary of the Commission, as soon as
possible, an original and two copies of
comments in support of or in opposition
to this project. The Commission will
consider these comments in
determining the appropriate action to be
taken, but the filing of a comment alone
will not serve to make the filer a party
to the proceeding. The Commission’s
rules require that persons filing
comments in opposition to the project
provide copies of their protests only to
the party or parties directly involved in
the protest.
Persons who wish to comment only
on the environmental review of this
project should submit an original and
two copies of their comments to the
Secretary of the Commission.
Environmental commenters will be
placed on the Commission’s
environmental mailing list, will receive
copies of the environmental documents,
and will be notified of meetings
associated with the Commission’s
environmental review process.
Environmental commenters will not be
required to serve copies of filed
PO 00000
Frm 00031
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
43081
documents on all other parties.
However, the non-party commenters
will not receive copies of all documents
filed by other parties or issued by the
Commission (except for the mailing of
environmental documents issued by the
Commission) and will not have the right
to seek court review of the
Commission’s final order.
Motions to intervene, protests and
comments 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 ‘‘e-Filing’’ link. The
Commission strongly encourages
electronic filings.
Comment Date: August 5, 2015.
Dated: July 15, 2015.
Kimberly D. Bose,
Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2015–17810 Filed 7–20–15; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6717–01–P
DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY
Federal Energy Regulatory
Commission
Combined Notice of Filings #2
Take notice that the Commission
received the following exempt
wholesale generator filings:
Docket Numbers: EG15–105–000.
Applicants: Prairie Breeze Wind
Energy III LLC.
Description: Notice of SelfCertification of Exempt Wholesale
Generator Status of Prairie Breeze Wind
Energy III LLC.
Filed Date: 7/15/15.
Accession Number: 20150715–5103.
Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 8/5/15.
Take notice that the Commission
received the following electric rate
filings:
Docket Numbers: ER10–2881–014;
ER14–787–002; ER13–1541–008; ER13–
1101–009; ER10–2886–014; ER10–2885–
014; ER10–2884–014; ER10–2883–014;
ER10–2882–014; ER10–2663–014;
ER10–2641–014; EL15–39–000.
Applicants: Alabama Power
Company, Southern Power Company,
Mississippi Power Company, Georgia
Power Company, Gulf Power Company,
Oleander Power Project, Limited
Partnership, Southern Company—
Florida LLC, Southern Turner Cimarron
I, LLC, Spectrum Nevada Solar, LLC,
Campo Verde Solar, LLC, Macho
Springs Solar, LLC.
Description: Answer of Alabama
Power Company, et al., to the April 27,
2015 Order.
Filed Date: 6/26/15.
Accession Number: 20150701–0178.
E:\FR\FM\21JYN1.SGM
21JYN1
Agencies
[Federal Register Volume 80, Number 139 (Tuesday, July 21, 2015)]
[Notices]
[Pages 43080-43081]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2015-17810]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY
Federal Energy Regulatory Commission
[Docket No. CP15-525-000; PF15-9-000]
UGI Sunbury, LLC; Notice of Application
Take notice that on July 1, 2015, UGI Sunbury, LLC (Sunbury), 460
N. Gulph Road, King of Prussia, PA 19406, filed an application pursuant
to section 7(c) of the Natural Gas Act (NGA) and Parts 157 and 284 of
the Commission's Regulations requesting: (i) A certificate authorizing
Sunbury to construct, own, and operate new interstate natural gas
pipeline facilities (Sunbury Pipeline Project); (ii) a blanket
certificate authorizing Sunbury to construct and/or abandon certain
eligible facilities, and (iii) a blanket certificate authorizing
Sunbury authority to provide open-access transportation services with
pre-granted abandonment authority. The Sunbury Pipeline Project is
designed to add an additional 200,000 Dth/d of new
[[Page 43081]]
pipeline capacity to industrial and residential users and would require
the construction of approximately 34.4 miles of 20-inch-diameter
pipeline in Snyder, Union, Northumberland, Montour, and Lycoming
Counties, Pennsylvania.
The Sunbury Pipeline Project would run generally north to south,
interconnecting with the pipeline facilities of Transcontinental Gas
Pipeline Company and the MARC I Pipeline at its northern end and also
interconnecting with the distribution facilities of UGI Penn Natural
Gas and UGI Central Penn Gas. At its southern terminus the Sunbury
Pipeline would connect to the proposed Hummel Station Generating
Facility at the existing site of the coal-fired Sunbury Generating
Facility in Snyder County, Pennsylvania. The estimated cost of the
Project is $178,243,345. The filing may be viewed on the web at https://www.ferc.gov using the ``eLibrary'' link. Enter the docket number
excluding the last three digits in the docket number field to access
the document. For assistance, contact FERC at
FERCOnlineSupport@ferc.gov or call toll-free, (886) 208-3676 or TYY,
(202) 502-8659.
Any questions concerning this application should be directed to
Anthony C. Cox, Director, UGI Sunbury, LLC, One Meridian Blvd., Suite
2C01, Wyomissing, PA 19610, phone: (610) 373-7999, facsimile: (610)
374-4288, email: acox@sunburypipeline.com, or Janna R. Chesno, Hogan
Lovells US LLP, 555 Thirteen Street NW., Washington, DC 20004, phone:
(202) 637-5600, facsimile: (202) 637-5910, email:
janna.chesno@hoganlovells.com.
On December 30, 2014 the Commission granted Sunbury's request to
utilize the Pre-Filing Process and assigned Docket No. PF15-9-000 to
staff activities involved in the Sunbury Pipeline Project. Now, as of
the filing of the July 1 application, the Pre-Filing Process for this
Project has ended. From this time forward, this proceeding will be
conducted in Docket No. CP15-525-000 as noted in the caption of this
Notice.
Pursuant to section 157.9 of the Commission's rules, 18 CFR 157.9,
within 90 days of this Notice the Commission staff will either:
complete its environmental assessment (EA) and place it into the
Commission's public record (eLibrary) for this proceeding, or issue a
Notice of Schedule for Environmental Review. If a Notice of Schedule
for Environmental Review is issued, it will indicate, among other
milestones, the anticipated date for the Commission staff's issuance of
the final environmental impact statement (FEIS) or EA for this
proposal. The filing of the EA in the Commission's public record for
this proceeding or the issuance of a Notice of Schedule will serve to
notify federal and state agencies of the timing for the completion of
all necessary reviews, and the subsequent need to complete all federal
authorizations within 90 days of the date of issuance of the Commission
staff's FEIS or EA.
There are two ways to become involved in the Commission's review of
this project. First, any person wishing to obtain legal status by
becoming a party to the proceedings for this project should, on or
before the comment date stated below, file with the Federal Energy
Regulatory Commission, 888 First Street NE., Washington, DC 20426, a
motion to intervene 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 NGA (18 CFR 157.10). A person
obtaining party status will be placed on the service list maintained by
the Secretary of the Commission and will receive copies of all
documents filed by the applicant and by all other parties. A party must
submit 5 copies of filings made with the Commission and must mail a
copy to the applicant and to every other party in the proceeding. Only
parties to the proceeding can ask for court review of Commission orders
in the proceeding.
However, a person does not have to intervene in order to have
comments considered. The second way to participate is by filing with
the Secretary of the Commission, as soon as possible, an original and
two copies of comments in support of or in opposition to this project.
The Commission will consider these comments in determining the
appropriate action to be taken, but the filing of a comment alone will
not serve to make the filer a party to the proceeding. The Commission's
rules require that persons filing comments in opposition to the project
provide copies of their protests only to the party or parties directly
involved in the protest.
Persons who wish to comment only on the environmental review of
this project should submit an original and two copies of their comments
to the Secretary of the Commission. Environmental commenters will be
placed on the Commission's environmental mailing list, will receive
copies of the environmental documents, and will be notified of meetings
associated with the Commission's environmental review process.
Environmental commenters will not be required to serve copies of filed
documents on all other parties. However, the non-party commenters will
not receive copies of all documents filed by other parties or issued by
the Commission (except for the mailing of environmental documents
issued by the Commission) and will not have the right to seek court
review of the Commission's final order.
Motions to intervene, protests and comments 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 ``e-Filing'' link. The Commission strongly encourages
electronic filings.
Comment Date: August 5, 2015.
Dated: July 15, 2015.
Kimberly D. Bose,
Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2015-17810 Filed 7-20-15; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6717-01-P