Applications, hearings, determinations, etc.: Texaco Exploration & Production, Inc.,

Text

---

Federal Register: April 22, 1999 (Volume 64, Number 77)NoticesPage 19757-19758From the Federal Register Online via GPO Access [wais.access.gpo.gov]

DOCID:fr22ap99-52

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY

Federal Energy Regulatory Commission

Docket Nos. SA99-25-000, SA99-26-000, SA99-27-000, SA99-28-000, SA99- 29-000 (Not Consolidated)Texaco Exploration and Production Inc.; Notice of Petition for Dispute Resolution or, Alternatively, and Adjustment

April 16, 1999.

Take notice that on March 10, 1999, Texaco Exploration and Production Inc. (Texaco), fileda petition for dispute resolution and adjustment under Section 502(c) of the Natural Gas Policy Act of 1978 (NGPA 15 U.S.C. 3412(c)) and Rules 1101-1117 of the Commission's Rules of Practice and Procedure (18 CFR 385.1101-385.1117).

Pipeline

Docket No.

Colorado Interstate Gas Company...................... \1\ SA99-25-000 Northern Natural Gas Company......................... \2\ SA99-26-000 Panhandle Eastern Pipe Company....................... \3\ SA99-27-000 Williams Gas Pipelines Central, Inc.................. \4\ SA99-28-000 KN Interstate Gas Transmission Company............... \5\ SA99-29-000

\1\ Changed from GP99-10-000. \2\ Changed from GP99-11-000. \3\ Changed from GP99-12-000. \4\ Changed from GP99-13-000. \5\ Changed from GP99-14-000.

Texaco requests that the Commission resolve its dispute with the pipelines by holding that settlements and/or release agreements resolved all issues, including those associated with Kansas ad valorem tax dispute resolution and adjustment, between the parties. Texaco contends that by agreeing in the settlement to forego claims it for nonperformance it otherwise could have continued to pursue, Texaco agreed to accept total payments under the contracts that did not exceed the MLP ceilings multiplied by the total volumes represented by each pipeline's nonperformance. In such circumstances, no refund should be required. To order otherwise would prevent Texaco from receiving the very benefits it bargained for in the settlements--settlements that the Commission itself strongly encouraged as a means to resolve the massive take-or-pay and underpayments liabilities of interstate pipelines and make the transition to a more market-responsive and competitive environment.

Texaco maintains that the pipelines and consumers benefitted from agreements and settlements because the settlements allowed the pipelines to avoid the much higher costs that full-performance of the contract would have entailed. By resolving ``all claims'' relating to, inter alia, ``contractural price'', the settlements resolved the Kansas ad valorem tax reimbursement issue. The Commission has found that these settlements served the public interest. Texaco's petitions are on file with the Commission, and they are open to public inspection. This filing may be viewed on the web at http://www.ferc.fed.us/online/ rims.htm (call 202-208-2222 for assistance).

Any person desiring to be heard or to make any protest with reference to said petition should on or before 15 days after the date of publication in the Federal Register of this notice, file with the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, 888 First Street, N.E., Washington, D.C. 20426, a motion to intervene or a protest in accordance with the requirements of the Commission's Rules of Practice and

[Page 19758]Procedure (18 CFR 385.214, 385.211, 385.1105, and 385.1106). All protests filedwith 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. Linwood A. Watson, Jr., Acting Secretary.

FR Doc. 99-10036Filed4-21-99; 8:45 amBILLING CODE 6717-01-M

---