Record of Decision and Floodplain Statement of Findings; Kemper County IGCC Project, Kemper County, MS, 51248-51256 [2010-20565]

Agencies

• DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY

[Federal Register Volume 75, Number 160 (Thursday, August 19, 2010)]
[Notices]
[Pages 51248-51256]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2010-20565]


-----------------------------------------------------------------------

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY


Record of Decision and Floodplain Statement of Findings; Kemper 
County IGCC Project, Kemper County, MS

AGENCY: U.S. Department of Energy.

ACTION: Record of Decision and Floodplain Statement of Findings.

-----------------------------------------------------------------------

SUMMARY: The Department of Energy (DOE) prepared an Environmental 
Impact Statement (EIS) (DOE/EIS-0409) to assess the environmental 
impacts associated with a proposed project designed, constructed, 
operated, and owned by Mississippi Power, a Southern Company 
subsidiary. The U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (USACE) was a cooperating 
agency in the preparation of this EIS. The project would demonstrate 
advanced power generation systems using Integrated Gasification 
Combined Cycle (IGCC) technology at an undeveloped site in Kemper 
County, MS. DOE's proposed action has two components: first, to provide 
cost-

[[Page 51249]]

shared financial assistance and, second, to issue a loan guarantee. 
After careful consideration of the potential environmental impacts and 
other factors such as program goals and objectives, DOE has decided 
that it will provide, through a cooperative agreement with Southern 
Company Services (SCS), also a Southern Company subsidiary, $270 
million in cost-shared funding under DOE's Clean Coal Power Initiative 
(CCPI) program for the project. A separate decision would be made 
regarding the loan guarantee; DOE would announce that decision in a 
subsequent Record of Decision.

ADDRESSES: The Final EIS is available on the DOE National Environmental 
Policy Act (NEPA) Web site at https://www.nepa.energy.gov/1445.htm and 
on the DOE National Energy Technology Laboratory (NETL) Web site at 
https://www.netl.doe.gov/technologies/coalpower/cctc/ccpi/bibliography/demonstration/adv-gen/ccpi_285-mw.html. The Record of Decision (ROD) 
will be available on both Web sites soon. Copies of the Final EIS and 
this ROD may be obtained by contacting Mr. Richard A. Hargis, Jr., 
National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) Document Manager, U.S. 
Department of Energy, National Energy Technology Laboratory, 626 
Cochrans Mill Road, P.O. Box 10940, Pittsburgh, PA 15236-0940; 
telephone: 412-386-6065; or e-mail: Kemper-EIS@netl.doe.gov.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: To obtain additional information about 
the project or the EIS, contact Mr. Richard A. Hargis, Jr. at the 
addresses provided above. For general information on the DOE NEPA 
process, contact Ms. Carol M. Borgstrom, Director, Office of NEPA 
Policy and Compliance (GC-54), U.S. Department of Energy, 1000 
Independence Avenue, SW., Washington, DC 20585; telephone: 202-586-
4600; or leave a toll-free message at 1-800-472-2756.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: DOE prepared this ROD and Floodplain 
Statement of Findings pursuant to Council on Environmental Quality 
(CEQ) regulations for implementing the procedural provisions of NEPA 
[40 Code of Federal Regulations (CFR) Parts 1500-1508], DOE NEPA 
regulations (10 CFR part 1021) and DOE's Compliance with Floodplain and 
Wetland Environmental Review Requirements (10 CFR part 1022). This ROD 
is based on DOE's Final EIS for the Kemper County IGCC Project (DOE/
EIS-0409, May 2010) and other program considerations.

Background and Purpose and Need for Agency Action

    Public Law 107-63, enacted in November 2001, first provided funding 
for the Clean Coal Power Initiative (CCPI) program, a Federal program 
to accelerate the commercial readiness of advanced technologies in 
existing and new coal-based power plants. The program encompasses a 
broad spectrum of commercial-scale demonstrations that target today's 
most pressing environmental challenges, including reducing mercury and 
greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions by boosting the efficiency at which coal 
is converted to electricity or other energy forms. When integrated with 
other DOE initiatives, the program will help the nation successfully 
commercialize advanced power systems that will produce electricity at 
greater efficiencies, release almost no emissions, create clean fuels, 
and employ carbon dioxide (CO2) management capabilities.
    The purpose of DOE's proposed action under the CCPI program is to 
demonstrate the feasibility of the Transport Integrated Gasification 
(TRIGTM) IGCC technology at a size that would be attractive 
to utilities for commercial operation. DOE, Southern Company, Kellogg 
Brown & Root LLC, and other industrial proponents have been developing 
this technology since 1996. It is cost-effective when using low-heat 
content, high moisture, or high-ash content coals, including lignite. 
These coals constitute approximately one-half of proven coal reserves. 
A successful demonstration would generate technical, environmental, and 
financial data to confirm that the technology can be implemented at a 
commercial scale. Financial assistance from DOE would reduce the cost 
and financial risk in demonstrating that the technology is ready for 
commercialization.
    The purpose of DOE's proposed action with regard to the Federal 
loan guarantee is to encourage early commercial use in the United 
States of new or significantly improved energy technology and to reduce 
or eliminate emissions of GHGs and other air pollutants pursuant to 
Title XVII of the Energy Policy Act of 2005 (EPAct).
    Two principal needs are addressed by DOE's proposed actions. First, 
the project would satisfy the responsibility Congress imposed on DOE to 
demonstrate advanced coal-based technologies that can generate clean, 
reliable, and affordable electricity in the United States. Second, with 
regard to the Federal loan guarantee, this project would fulfill 
EPAct's objective of assisting projects that ``avoid, reduce, or 
sequester air pollutants or anthropogenic emissions of GHGs'' and 
``employ new or significantly improved technologies as compared to 
technologies in service in the United States.''

EIS Process

    On September 22, 2008, DOE published a Notice of Intent (NOI) (73 
FR 54569) to prepare the EIS and hold a public scoping meeting. DOE 
held a public scoping meeting in DeKalb, Mississippi, on October 14, 
2008. The Department received oral responses at the meeting and other 
responses by comment card, mail, e-mail, and telephone from 
individuals, interested groups, and Federal, State, and local 
officials. On November 5, 2009, DOE published in the Federal Register 
(74 FR 57297) a Notice of Availability (NOA) for the Kemper County IGCC 
Project Draft EIS. The NOA invited comments on the Draft EIS. As part 
of the review process, DOE conducted a public hearing on December 1, 
2009, in DeKalb, Mississippi. The public was encouraged to provide oral 
comments at the hearing and to submit written comments to DOE during a 
45-day comment period that ended December 21, 2009. DOE received 
numerous comments; many resulted from e-mail campaign efforts of two 
non-governmental organizations.
    DOE issued the Final EIS and the Environmental Protection Agency 
(EPA) published a NOA in the Federal Register on May 21, 2010 (75 FR 
28612). In the Final EIS, DOE responded to comments on the Draft EIS. 
Among the issues raised in these comments were concerns about (1) DOE's 
statement of purpose and need; (2) the range of alternatives 
considered; (3) air pollutant emissions, emissions controls, and air 
quality impacts; (4) emissions of GHG and climate change effects; (5) 
surface water quality and downstream effects on the Pascagoula River 
and Gulf of Mexico; (6) stream restoration following mining; (7) 
increases in flood elevations and effects on floodplains; (8) wetlands 
impacts and mitigation; (9) hydrologic impacts, especially on Okatibbee 
Lake; (10) groundwater impacts and effects on drinking water supplies; 
(11) noise impacts; (12) mining impacts, including soils, and land 
reclamation; (13) wildlife impacts, including threatened and endangered 
species; (14) risks to human health from criteria and hazardous air 
pollutants, including mercury deposition and bioaccumulation; (15) 
socioeconomic and environmental justice impacts; (16) traffic impacts; 
(17)

[[Page 51250]]

land and right-of-way acquisition; and (18) effects on community 
resources.

Decision

    DOE has decided to provide Mississippi Power with cost-shared 
funding of $270 million through a cooperative agreement with Southern 
Company Services to design, construct, and demonstrate the Kemper 
County IGCC Project.

Basis of Decision

    DOE's decision is based on the importance of achieving the 
objectives of the Clean Coal Power Initiative and a careful review of 
the potential environmental impacts presented in the EIS. The project 
provides a significant opportunity to demonstrate a technology that can 
use the nation's abundant coal resources in a cost-effective and clean 
manner while reducing GHG emissions. The effective and clean use of 
domestic energy resources allows the United States to reduce its 
reliance on world markets for its energy supplies--reliance on these 
markets decreases national security. This technology also addresses 
concerns about the consequences of continuing to use fossil fuels 
without effectively managing their carbon emissions. The project 
incorporates controls that make its carbon emissions essentially equal 
to natural gas-based power generation. The key feature of the TRIG\TM\ 
technology is its cost-effective use of low-rank coals, like 
Mississippi lignite, which constitutes nearly 50% of our nation's coal 
resource. DOE has reviewed and participated in the technology's 
development and believes that it is ready for commercial demonstration. 
Without this project, DOE would not have the opportunity to demonstrate 
this technology and make it available for the cost-effective and clean 
use of low rank coals.
    The project would also have economic benefits to the region. Beyond 
the estimated combined construction payroll for the plant and mine of 
$145 million, there would be an estimated additional indirect benefit 
of $82 million and 186 additional jobs due to construction activities. 
The operation of the plant and mine would result in an estimated $25 
million annual payroll, an indirect annual economic benefit of about 
$11.4 million, and approximately 97 new jobs.
    This decision incorporates all practicable means to avoid or 
minimize environmental harm. DOE plans to verify the environmental 
impacts predicted in the EIS and the implementation of appropriate 
avoidance and mitigation measures.

Mitigation

    DOE's decision incorporates measures to avoid or minimize adverse 
environmental impacts during the design, construction and demonstration 
of the project. DOE requires that the participants comply with all 
applicable Federal, State, and local environmental laws, orders, and 
regulations. Mitigation measures beyond those specified in permit 
conditions will be addressed in a Mitigation Action Plan (MAP). DOE 
will prepare the MAP, consistent with 10 CFR 1021.331, which will 
explain how the mitigation measures will be planned, implemented and 
monitored. The MAP is an adaptive management tool; mitigation 
conditions in it would be removed if equivalent conditions are 
otherwise established by permit, license, or law, as compliance with 
permit, license or regulatory requirements are not considered 
mitigation activities subject to DOE control and are therefore not 
included in MAPs.
    DOE will ensure that commitments in the MAP are met through 
management of the cooperative agreement, which requires that Southern 
Company Services fulfills the monitoring and mitigation requirements 
specified in this ROD. DOE will make copies of the MAP available for 
inspection in the appropriate locations for a reasonable time. Copies 
of the MAP and any annual reports required under the MAP will also be 
available upon written request.

Project Description and Location

    The power plant would be located on an approximately 1,650-acre 
site in southwestern Kemper County. The mine and linear facilities 
(e.g., pipelines) would extend into several other counties. The power 
plant site and mine area are rural and sparsely populated. The 
electrical transmission lines and pipelines would also traverse mostly 
rural areas. Mississippi Power plans to acquire additional properties 
adjacent to the proposed power plant site for buffer areas. 
Approximately 1,400 acres of buffer areas immediately north and east of 
the site have been acquired, optioned, or identified for acquisition.
    The IGCC plant consists of two major systems: Lignite coal 
gasification and combined-cycle power generation. The gasification 
systems consist primarily of lignite handling, gasification, and syngas 
processing and cleanup. There are two lignite gasifiers. At full 
capacity, the gasifiers would convert an average of 13,800 tons per day 
of lignite into syngas (synthesis gas). The principal combined-cycle 
components include two combustion turbines (CTs), two heat recovery 
steam generators (HRSG), and a steam turbine. In a combined-cycle unit, 
fuel gas is combusted in CTs, and its hot exhaust gas is then used to 
heat water to drive a steam turbine. The reuse of the CTs' exhaust heat 
to power a steam turbine constitutes the combined-cycle approach, which 
increases the amount of electricity that can be generated from a given 
amount of fuel.
    The proposed project would reduce sulfur dioxide (SO2), 
nitrogen oxides (NOx), mercury, and particulate emissions by removing 
them from the syngas. The removal of nearly 100 percent of the fuel-
bound nitrogen from the syngas prior to combustion in the gas CTs would 
result in appreciably lower NOx emissions compared to conventional 
coal-fired plants. The facility would have carbon capture systems 
sufficient to reduce CO2 emissions by approximately 67 
percent by removing carbon from the syngas. The CO2 would be 
compressed and piped offsite where it would be sold for beneficial use 
and geologic storage via enhanced oil recovery (EOR).
    Connected actions are actions that are closely related to the 
proposed action and therefore are evaluated in the same EIS. The 
project's connected actions consist of construction and operation of a 
cooling water supply (i.e., reclaimed effluent from municipal 
wastewater treatment) pipeline, a natural gas pipeline, associated 
transmission lines and substations, CO2 pipelines, and a 
lignite mine. North American Coal Company would construct and operate 
the mine. The mine would be located next to the power plant site. The 
mine would be the primary source of feedstock for the IGCC project. 
Approximately 4.3 million tons per year of lignite would be mined for 
up to 40 years. As many as 12,275 acres would be disturbed over the 
life of the mine. Actual mining--the uncovering and extraction of 
lignite--would disturb between 135 and 340 acres per year. After the 
first 3 to 5 years of mining, approximately the same acreage would be 
reclaimed each year as that newly disturbed.
    Construction of the power plant would begin in 2010 and continue 
for 3.5 years. During construction, an average of 500 workers would be 
on the site, with approximately 1,150 workers required during the peak 
construction period. The plant's operational workforce would be 
approximately 90-105 employees.

Proposed Actions

    DOE's proposed actions are to provide financial assistance and to 
issue a loan

[[Page 51251]]

guarantee. The Congress established the CCPI program to accelerate 
commercial deployment of advanced technologies for generating clean, 
reliable, and affordable electricity in the United States using 
abundant domestic reserves of coal. EPAct established the Federal Loan 
Guarantee Program to assist energy projects that employ innovative 
technologies.
    DOE proposed providing an additional $270 million in financial 
assistance to the Kemper County project. It has already provided some 
funding ($23.5 million) to Southern Company Services for the 
preliminary design and definition of this project at a previous 
location. DOE's proposed action encompasses those activities that are 
eligible for this funding, including the construction of power plant 
components such as the gasification island, the combined-cycle power 
generation unit, and its auxiliary facilities.
    In addition to providing financial assistance, DOE is considering 
issuing a loan guarantee. A separate ROD would be issued regarding the 
loan guarantee. If approved for a guarantee, a loan from the Federal 
Financing Bank would fund a portion of the plant's construction costs.

Alternatives

    Congress directed DOE to pursue the goals of the CCPI Program by 
means of partial funding of projects owned and controlled by non-
Federal sponsors. This statutory requirement places DOE in a much more 
limited role than if it were the owner and operator of the project. 
Here, the purpose of and need for DOE action is defined by the CCPI 
program (and enabling legislation, Public Law 107-63) and the Federal 
Loan Guarantee Program (and enabling legislation, EPAct). Given these 
programmatic purposes and needs, reasonable alternatives available to 
DOE prior to the selection of this project under the CCPI and Loan 
Guarantee Programs were other projects that applied to these programs 
and met their eligibility requirements. Other applications (and their 
potential environmental, safety and health impacts) were considered 
during the evaluation and selection process. Pursuant to 10 CFR 
1021.216, a synopsis of the environmental review and critique completed 
for the evaluation and selection process will be posted on the DOE NETL 
Web site at https://www.netl.doe.gov/technologies/coalpower/cctc/ccpi/bibliography/demonstration/adv-gen/ccpi_285-mw.html. Once the 
selection process complete, the reasonable alternatives are limited to 
alternatives still under consideration by the proponents of a selected 
project and the no-action alternative.
    The site for the Kemper County project was chosen by Mississippi 
Power based on a site selection process it had completed prior to 
seeking DOE funding for the project. It found that the only reasonable 
site was the Kemper County site based on the location of accessible 
lignite reserves near Mississippi Power's service territory, proximity 
to infrastructure, topography, environmental considerations, and 
available open space.
    With regard to alternative power generation technologies, DOE 
considered other coal-based technologies in evaluating the proposals 
received under the CCPI solicitation. Other technologies (e.g., natural 
gas, wind power, solar energy, and conservation) would not achieve the 
CCPI program's goal of accelerating commercial deployment of advanced 
coal-based technologies. Other alternatives, such as reducing the size 
of the proposed project, were dismissed as unreasonable, since the size 
of the proposed project is related to Mississippi Power's projected 
need for power.
    Under the proposed action alternative, DOE assessed the impacts of 
alternative water sources, alternative linear facility routes, and 
alternative levels of CO2 capture. Route selection 
procedures were applied to all proposed linear facilities. These 
procedures considered various route selection factors, such as making 
use of (or paralleling) existing rights-of-way and avoiding developed 
or sensitive areas.
    The EIS evaluated a range of alternative levels of percentage 
CO2 capture: 25, 50, 67, and greater than 67. After 
initially basing the design on 25-percent capture, designs were updated 
to target 50- and then 67-percent capture. The project DOE has decided 
to fund includes a capture rate of 67 percent. This higher rate will 
require more fuel to achieve the same net power output relative to a 
plant with 50-percent capture. Air quality impacts vary slightly 
between the 50- and 67-percent rates and some other differences would 
result (e.g., there would be small variations in outputs of by-
products).

No-Action Alternative

    Under the no-action alternative, DOE would not provide cost-shared 
funding for the design, construction, and demonstration of the proposed 
Kemper County IGCC Project, nor issue a loan guarantee. DOE considered 
the no-action alternative to be the same as the ``no-build'' 
alternative. However, without DOE participation, Southern Company and 
Mississippi Power could pursue two options. First, Mississippi Power 
could continue with the project without Federal participation. DOE 
believes that option is unlikely, because the financial risks and costs 
of deploying a new type of IGCC power system are significant. In any 
event, if the proponents were to proceed with the project without DOE 
participation, the direct, indirect, and cumulative impacts would be 
essentially the same as DOE's proposed action. Second, the proponents 
could abandon the IGCC project and, instead, meet future energy and 
capacity needs from other sources. Under this scenario, the proposed 
IGCC facility would not be built. It is also likely that the lignite 
mine would not be built nor the linear facilities. As a consequence, 
none of the direct impacts associated with the project would occur, 
whether adverse or beneficial. In addition, the opportunities for more 
rapid commercialization of the gasification technologies (alone or 
integrated with the combined-cycle facilities) would diminish, because 
utilities and industries tend to prefer known and demonstrated 
technologies. This outcome would not achieve the CCPI program's goal of 
accelerating commercial deployment of advanced coal-based technologies 
that can generate clean, reliable, and affordable electricity in the 
United States.

Potential Environmental Impacts and Mitigation Measures

    In making its decision, DOE considered the environmental impacts of 
the proposed action and the no-action alternative on potentially 
affected environmental resource areas. These include: Air quality; 
greenhouse gas emissions; geology and soils; surface waters; ground 
water; terrestrial ecology; aquatic ecology; floodplains; wetlands; 
land use; socioeconomics; environmental justice; transportation; waste 
management; recreation; aesthetics and visual resources; cultural and 
historic resources; noise; and human health and safety. The EIS also 
considered the impacts from these facilities combined with those from 
other past, present and reasonably foreseeable future actions (i.e., 
cumulative impacts). The following sections discuss the potential 
impacts in these areas.

Air Quality

    Construction of the power plant would generate fugitive dust, 
engine emissions, and other emissions that would result in localized 
air quality

[[Page 51252]]

impacts. Projected emissions from power plant operations are up to 590 
tons per year (tpy) SO2, 1,900 tpy NOX, 470 tpy 
particulate matter less than or equal to 10 micrometers in aerodynamic 
diameter (PM10), 980 tpy carbon monoxide (CO), and lesser 
amounts of other pollutants. These emissions would potentially 
contribute to an increase in pollutant concentrations ranging from 
approximately 3 to 15 percent of the National Ambient Air Quality 
Standards (NAAQS) and from 12 to 71 percent of Prevention of 
Significant Deterioration (PSD) Class II increments. Plant emissions 
would have insignificant impacts on the closest PSD Class I area, which 
is 225 km (140 miles) away. For estimation of ambient impacts, all 
PM10 from combustion sources was assumed to be less than 2.5 
micrometers (i.e., PM2.5). The power plant would also emit 
an estimated 1.8 to 2.6 million tpy of CO2 annually, as well 
as small amounts of other pollutants (e.g., 55 tpy of sulfuric acid 
mist and less than 0.1 tpy of mercury). In addition to CO2, 
much smaller emissions of other GHGs (e.g., nitrous oxide and methane) 
would be emitted from the IGCC plant and mine.
    Construction and operation of the lignite mine would generate 
fugitive dust emissions from areas cleared to facilitate mining; 
fugitive dust emissions from clearing, mining, and grading an average 
of 275 acres per year for as many as 40 years; fugitive dust emissions 
from off-road trucks and other vehicles traveling on internal, unpaved 
roads; point source emissions of particulate matter from transfer 
points at the lignite handling facilities; and criteria and hazardous 
air pollutant emissions from combustion of gasoline and diesel fuel in 
construction and operating equipment. These emissions would have 
localized impacts.
    During construction, use of modern, well-maintained machinery and 
vehicles meeting applicable emission performance standards would 
minimize emissions. Use of dust abatement techniques such as wetting 
soils, covering storage piles, and limiting operations during windy 
periods on unpaved, unvegetated surfaces would reduce airborne dust and 
resulting impacts. The distances of most construction-related 
activities from the nearest property boundary and residences would 
mitigate most potential impacts. EPA recommended, and DOE requires as a 
condition of its decision to provide financial assistance, measures to 
minimize diesel exhaust emissions from construction and operating 
equipment. These measures include using low-sulfur diesel fuel, 
properly equipping and maintaining diesel-fueled equipment, properly 
training operators, and employing safe work practices.

Greenhouse Gas Emissions

    Mississippi Power will design the IGCC facility to capture 
approximately 67 percent of the CO2 that would otherwise be 
emitted. The captured CO2 will be sent by pipeline for use 
in EOR. The project, operating at an 85-percent capacity factor (i.e., 
at full capacity), will emit approximately 1.8 million tpy of 
CO2 while burning lignite coal and firing natural gas in the 
duct burners. It will also emit small amounts (approximately 91,000 tpy 
of CO2 equivalents) of other GHGs.
    Based on a study of life cycle GHG emissions from IGCC power 
systems DOE estimates that plant support operations, maintenance, and 
lignite mining could increase annual GHG emissions attributable to the 
operation of the generating station by approximately 130,000 tons (for 
a total of approximately 2.0 to 2.8 million tons annually). Total 
emissions of GHGs from construction activities will be approximately 
430,000 tons of CO2 equivalents (approximately 15 to 22 
percent of 1 year's operating emissions). During its initial 6 months 
of operation, the plant may use coal delivered by truck from the Red 
Hills Mine. These temporary deliveries may result in an additional 
4,400 tons of CO2 emissions.
    Most of the GHG emissions from coal-mining operations will result 
from combustion of diesel fuel in mining equipment and off-road 
vehicles. The annual emissions of CO2 from mining operations 
were estimated at approximately 45,000 tons. These emissions represent 
less than 2 percent of the annual project's emissions. DOE requires as 
a condition of its decision that the plant be designed and built to 
achieve 67 percent carbon capture and that the project proponents use 
best efforts to achieve 67 percent carbon capture during the 
demonstration period.

Surface Waters

    No new process wastewater discharges are anticipated from the power 
plant. The plant will use reclaimed effluent from two publicly owned 
treatment works in Meridian, Mississippi, which will reduce flows in 
Sowashee Creek but also remove a source of pollutants that contribute 
to the creek's impaired status. As many as 32 miles of perennial stream 
channels and 24 miles of intermittent stream channels will be removed 
temporarily by construction and lignite extraction at the adjacent 
mine. The USACE maintains the avoidance, minimization and mitigation 
process in accordance with Section 404 of the CWA which includes the 
permit application evaluation process. This process includes 
implementation of the USACE stream evaluation process including an 
adverse impact analysis. If authorized by the USACE and upon completion 
of all mining and reclamation, the existing drainage patterns will be 
restored. The USACE will determine through its minimization evaluation 
process the number and length of streams, if any, to be mined and 
diverted. Aquatic communities in streams in Kemper County not 
physically disturbed by the mining operations would not be adversely 
affected based on the data collected at the Red Hills Mine. The water 
budget of Okatibbee Lake would not change significantly, meaning that 
the total volume of water flowing through the lake should remain within 
its historical range. The use of sedimentation ponds for water quality 
treatment will result in decreased peak flows following storm events. 
Water quality standards are not expected to be exceeded due to mine 
discharges.
    DOE requires, as a condition of its decision, that upstream and 
downstream water quality monitoring be conducted at appropriate 
locations in the mine area and in Okatibbee Lake to assess actual 
impacts. The monitoring parameters and details will be described in the 
MAP. In addition, DOE requires that the project proponents develop an 
adaptive environmental management plan in consultation with the USACE 
and MDEQ that establishes thresholds for implementing corrective 
measures in the event this monitoring detects adverse impacts. This 
plan would require the participants to mitigate adverse impacts to 
Okatibbee Lake and surrounding environments.

Ground Water

    The power plant would use up to 1 million gallons per day (mgd) of 
saline ground water from the Massive Sand aquifer. No adverse impacts 
to other users of the Massive Sand or other aquifers are anticipated 
from the drawdown caused by this use, because predicted drawdowns at a 
distance of 0.5 mile from the supply well would be less than one foot 
for both peak short-term and average long-term use. Construction and 
operation of the lignite mine would require ongoing pit water control. 
These operations could cause drawdown in the shallow Middle Wilcox 
aquifer and could adversely impact some local ground water wells 
depending on site-specific drawdown experienced and the specific

[[Page 51253]]

circumstances of a given well (e.g., well depth, pump setting, etc.). 
It is possible that the amount of drawdown at a given well could cause 
diminution of supply. If an existing supply becomes unusable, 
alternative supplies will be provided by the North American Coal 
Company, the mine operator, as required by the surface mining 
regulations. No adverse effects on the Lower Wilcox aquifer are 
expected.
    Post-mining ground water quality in the reclaimed areas cannot be 
predicted with certainty. Based on experience at similar mines, ground 
water would likely have higher TDS than before mining. Therefore, 
development of future shallow freshwater wells in mine spoil deposits 
might not be feasible. However, sufficient fresh water would be 
available from the Lower Wilcox aquifer and public water systems during 
and after mining.

Terrestrial Ecology

    As many as 1,085 acres of terrestrial ecological resources would be 
altered on the power plant site by construction of the plant and some 
mine-related facilities. Of this, approximately 419 acres are currently 
in agricultural production, mostly in pine plantations, pasture, and 
hay fields. Most wildlife located within the construction area would 
relocate to suitable onsite or adjacent habitats; small, less mobile or 
burrowing animals might be lost. No federally listed plants or animals 
were observed on the site, nor are any known to occur there, although 
records exist for a few listed species in the surrounding region. Two 
State listed species, the sharp-shinned hawk and the barred owl, were 
observed on the sites of the power plant, mine or both, but adverse 
effects are not expected due to these birds' mobility and the abundance 
of suitable habitat in the area. Construction and operation of the 
facilities on the power plant site are not expected to adversely affect 
either listed or migratory species.
    Mine site preparation and construction activities will result in 
sequential vegetation removal from most of the construction areas. 
Approximately 1,455 acres will be affected during the initial 
construction phase. Thereafter, existing terrestrial habitat will be 
cleared and reclaimed at an average rate of 275 acres per year. After 
mining, mine pits will be reclaimed and revegetated. As with the power 
plant site, mobile wildlife would likely relocate to adjacent, non-
impacted, or restored portions of the mine study area or to suitable 
offsite habitats. After reclamation, various wildlife species could 
return to reclaimed lands relatively quickly. Individuals of less 
mobile or burrowing species could be lost. No federally listed plants 
were observed in the mine study area, although Price's potato bean may 
occur in the region. It is unlikely that regional populations of listed 
or migratory species will be adversely affected by mining.
    The primary impact to terrestrial resources from linear facility 
construction or upgrades will result from vegetation clearing; smaller 
temporary impacts will occur due to pipeline trenching. Construction of 
the linear facilities is not expected to adversely affect any 
endangered or threatened plant or wildlife populations, including 
migratory birds.
    With site clearing activities, there is the potential for 
introduction of invasive species. DOE requires as a condition of its 
decision that monitoring be conducted to determine whether invasive, 
exotic, or nuisance species occurrences are increasing as a result of 
project activities. If such occurrences are increasing as a result of 
the project, control and management steps will be required as specified 
in a Mitigation Action Plan (see ``Mitigation'').

Aquatic Ecology

    The power plant is expected to have direct impact on only one 
surface water body. The diversion of effluent to the power plant 
currently being discharged from two publicly owned treatment works 
(POTWs) in Meridian to Sowashee Creek would reduce flows in the creek. 
But it would also remove a source of pollutants to the creek. 
Biological communities downstream of POTWs are commonly suppressed or 
altered due to water quality changes. A reduction of effluent discharge 
may mitigate the impacts of these changes on the aquatic communities.
    The lignite mine will displace aquatic habitat during active mining 
until habitat reclamation is completed. Diversion canals will 
temporarily replace the displaced aquatic habitat and provide habitat 
similar to existing streams and support similar biological communities.
    DOE requires, as a condition of its decision, that fish and 
macroinvertebrate sampling, as specified in the MAP, is conducted using 
appropriate EPA- or Mississippi Department of Environmental Quality 
(MDEQ)-approved bioassessment protocols to determine whether adverse 
effects on the aquatic ecosystem are resulting from the project. If 
significant adverse effects are detected, additional mitigation will be 
implemented to minimize these effects, as specified in the MAP (see 
``Mitigation'').

Floodplain Statement of Findings

    In accordance with 10 CFR part 1022 (DOE regulations on Compliance 
with Floodplain and Wetland Environmental Review Requirements), DOE 
considered the potential impacts of the proposed project and its 
connected actions on floodplains. The portion of the IGCC site that 
will be used for permanent facilities is wholly located above the base 
and critical action floodplain. Construction and operation of the plant 
are expected to have no direct or indirect effect on floodplains. For 
the construction of linear facilities associated with the power plant, 
direct impacts to floodplains will result from clearing vegetation, 
particularly shrubs and trees, from the floodplain areas and stream 
banks.
    Also, depending upon final designs, electrical transmission tower 
supports could be constructed within the base floodplains and 
construction of the reclaimed effluent, natural gas, and CO2 
pipelines may cause temporary direct impacts to the streams that are 
crossed. DOE has found no practicable alternative to locating these 
linear facilities in floodplain areas. It requires, as a condition of 
its decision, that floodplain impacts be minimized through construction 
methods and timing to the extent practicable.
    In addition to the potential floodplain impacts of the linear 
facilities, the connected action of developing the lignite mine will 
divert the flow in the Chickasawhay Creek during the initial years of 
mining within Mine Block A, which will disconnect the existing 
floodplain from the flow channel. Total storm-event runoff volumes 
could increase by up to 637 acre-feet (ac-ft). Okatibbee Lake, a 
multipurpose reservoir operated by the USACE and located approximately 
5 miles downstream, has a summer flood storage capacity of 42,590 ac-ft 
and a winter flood storage capacity of 59,490 ac-ft. The projected 
increase of 637 ac-ft would be less than 1.2 percent of the winter 
flood storage capacity; also, peak flow rates are projected to 
decrease, minimizing the effect of the potential volume increase. 
Between 2038 and 2055--well after DOE's involvement--the mine developer 
may construct levees that could further affect floodplains. Conditions 
for avoidance, minimization, and mitigation during the period after 
DOE's involvement would be established by the USACE and MDEQ. During 
the preparation of the Final EIS and as a result of pre-application 
consultations with the USACE, the North American Coal Company responded 
to DOE and

[[Page 51254]]

USACE comments by revising the mine development plan. Four separate 
mine plans were analyzed and the alternative finally selected should 
minimize potential wetland and floodplain impacts compared to the other 
practicable mine plans. However, this avoidance and minimization would 
result in approximately 10.0 million tons of lignite remaining in the 
ground. Also, long-term operational costs would increase as a result of 
having to mine lignite from higher ratio (overburden to lignite) 
reserves with less favorable recovery economics. DOE has found no 
practicable alternative to mine development that would further avoid or 
minimize impacts to floodplains.

Wetlands

    There could be impacts to as many as 2,971 acres of wetlands if the 
USACE authorizes the activities that would affect wetlands: 104 acres 
for power plant facilities on the power plant site; 25 acres for mine 
facilities on the power plant site; 2,375 acres in proposed mining 
blocks; and 467 acres within the linear facility corridors. The linear 
facility impacts would most likely be temporary, as they would result 
from construction or other short-term conversions of habitat. The 
remaining impacts may be permanent.
    Approximately 129 acres of wetlands and streams could be lost or 
altered by construction activities associated with the power plant and 
mining facilities located on the power plant site. All of these impacts 
could be permanent. If authorized by the USACE, impacts will require 
mitigation in accordance with the Clean Water Act (CWA) under Section 
404 permit requirements such that existing functional values of 
impacted wetlands are replaced.
    Adverse impacts to as many as 2,375 acres of wetlands that lie 
within the anticipated life-of-mine area are expected over the 40-year 
life-of-mine. Any wetland impacts will require CWA Section 404 permit 
authorization, which could require onsite mitigation (both on reclaimed 
mined lands and in adjoining upland areas not disturbed by mining), 
offsite mitigation, or a combination of both. Based on mitigation at 
other mine sites in the region, wetland functions would, after 
reclamation, be expected to return over time, as natural revegetation 
(or planting) and succession occur and wetland hydrology is restored. 
Long-term monitoring of this process is required by both the USACE and 
MDEQ.
    Within the linear facilities corridors, wetlands will be impacted 
primarily by conversion (partial clearing) of forested and some shrub-
dominated wetlands for construction of linear facilities. As many as 
400 acres of wetlands and 67 acres of other waters (streams, ditches, 
and ponds) could potentially be impacted by linear facilities 
construction. Most impacts will be conversion of forested and possibly 
shrub-dominated wetlands to shrub- and herbaceous-dominated wetland 
systems and all impacts would most likely be temporary. DOE has found 
no practicable alternative to these impacts on wetlands and it requires 
as a condition of its decision that any wetland impacts be avoided 
until the USACE finalizes its permit application evaluation process in 
accordance with Section 404 of the CWA. If a permit is authorized by 
the USACE, mitigation plans must be consistent with 33 CFR part 332, 
Compensatory Mitigation for Losses of Aquatic Resources. The USACE will 
determine the specifics of the mitigation requirements during the 
Department of the Army permit application evaluation process in 
accordance with 33 CFR 325.

Socioeconomics and Environmental Justice

    Project development is expected to result in positive direct and 
indirect effects through ad valorem taxes, sales tax proceeds from 
employee spending, and sales tax proceeds for purchases of equipment 
and services. Beyond the estimated combined construction payroll for 
the plant and mine of $145 million, there is an estimated additional 
indirect benefit of $82 million and 186 additional jobs due to 
construction activities. The corresponding numbers for the operation of 
the plant and mine are an estimated $25 million combined annual 
payroll, an indirect annual benefit of about $11.4 million, and 
approximately 97 additional jobs. Project development may impact 
housing availability during construction, but sufficient housing is 
likely to be available.
    The power plant and mine are located in census tracts that have a 
higher percentage of minorities and a higher percentage of population 
below the poverty level than other census tracts within a 7-mile radius 
around the plant and in the State as a whole. Therefore, DOE has 
concluded that an environmental justice population exists, and has 
examined the potential for ``disproportionately high and adverse'' 
health or environmental effects consistent with Executive Order 12898. 
The potential effects analyzed included health impacts from air 
emissions and accidental releases, displacement of landowners due to 
the development of the mine, effects on ground water wells, 
transportation impacts, housing availability, aesthetics, and noise 
levels in sensitive areas. Based on an analysis of these potential 
effects, DOE has determined that construction and operation of the 
facilities are not likely to result in disproportionately high and 
adverse impacts and burdens on an environmental justice community.

Transportation

    The area roadways connecting to the existing population centers are 
adequate to accommodate the anticipated traffic during construction and 
operation. Local roads in proximity to the power plant will experience 
impact in the form of degraded level of service during both 
construction and operation. Heavy haul routes in proximity to the plant 
will require evaluation for weight and other limitations. The initial 
coal hauling route from the Red Hills Mine to the plant site may 
experience as many as 80 trucks per day spread over a 16-hour day for a 
period of approximately six months. There will be an increase in 
traffic on area roadways resulting in a potential increase in accidents 
and injuries. The increase in truck traffic during the operations 
involving transport of lignite from the Red Hills Mine would be 
especially severe. DOE requires, as a condition of its decision, 
mitigation to minimize these impacts as described in the MAP.

Cultural and Historic Resources

    Construction of the proposed power plant could impact one onsite 
historic resource (a house dating from approximately 1900). Mining 
could impact cultural resources which have yet to be evaluated in terms 
of value. Mining of future mine blocks and construction of linear 
facilities would likely impact several sites that have been assessed as 
potentially eligible for listing. Cultural resources will be avoided to 
the extent practicable when siting facilities. Evaluation and 
appropriate resource recovery will be guided by the terms of a project-
specific programmatic agreement, which has been developed to satisfy 
Section 106 of the National Historic Preservation Act. The agreement 
has been signed by DOE, the USACE, the Mississippi Department of 
Archives and History, MDEQ, the Mississippi Band of Choctaw Indians, 
the Choctaw Nation of Oklahoma, Mississippi Power Company, North 
American Coal Company, and Southern Company Services. The programmatic 
agreement is a condition of DOE's decision to provide financial 
assistance.

Noise

    Power plant construction noise would be temporary but noticeable at 
several

[[Page 51255]]

nearby residences. With one exception, the highest levels experienced 
by residents would be no louder than maximum levels from passing 
vehicular traffic. Steam blows that will be necessary over several days 
near the end of plant construction could potentially reach levels of 
annoyance to persons outdoors at the closest residences. DOE requires 
as a condition of its decision that Mississippi Power Company notify 
affected residents prior to the steam blow operation.
    Noise associated with power plant operation is expected to result 
in an impact of 57 A-weighted decibels (dBA) at one adjacent residence, 
exceeding the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency residential 
guideline of 55 dBA but less than the Department of Housing and Urban 
Development residential guideline of 65 dBA. Mississippi Power is 
pursuing acquisition of most of the residential properties near the 
plant site, including the property where the highest noise impacts have 
been predicted. Mining would also result in localized noise impacts, 
primarily in the area surrounding the active mine block. An appropriate 
level of sound control will be designed into facility equipment to 
limit operational noise levels. In addition, DOE requires as a 
condition of its decision that noise from the loudest pieces of 
equipment be reasonably controlled to mitigate impacts as specified in 
the MAP.

Human Health and Safety

    Construction of all of the facilities poses hazards typical of any 
large industrial construction project. Health and safety risks will 
accompany the construction efforts and could affect local residents as 
well as construction workers. Some injuries to construction workers are 
likely, as indicated by industry statistics. Operations of the project 
facilities entail risks as well, given the nature of the facilities and 
based on industry statistics.
    The IGCC power plant would emit a maximum of 18.5 tpy of hazardous 
air pollutants (HAPs). Modeling studies found that these HAPs should 
not result in or contribute significantly to inhalation health risks. 
The total cancer risk was predicted to be less than one in a million 
(the level below which exposures are generally considered to be 
acceptable). The noncancer risks are estimated to be below levels 
considered to have adverse health effects. Similarly, health risks from 
mercury emitted from the IGCC stacks are expected to be below levels of 
concern. DOE requires as a condition of its decision that the project 
proponents characterize IGCC stack emissions of HAPs as specified in 
the MAP.
    The emissions of criteria pollutants could affect the overall 
mortality and morbidity of the surrounding population. The possible 
effects were estimated at less than one additional death per year and 
the lost days of life per person were predicted to be much less than 
one. The annual increase in hospital admissions, incidence of adult 
bronchitis, asthma hospital admissions, and asthma emergency room 
visits were all predicted to be less than one per year. The average 
annual number of asthma attacks among asthmatics, work loss days, and 
restricted activity days for the entire population were conservatively 
predicted to increase by 26, 56, and 298 occurrences, respectively.
    Additional health and safety risks could result from the handling, 
storage, and transport of hazardous materials, including ammonia and 
CO2, due to an accidental release or intentional act of 
sabotage or terrorism. A catastrophic rupture of an ammonia storage 
tank or tanker truck could potentially cause severe health effects up 
to 1.7 and 1.2 miles from the accident, respectively. A complete 
rupture of the CO2 pipeline would potentially result in 
adverse health effects to exposed persons within 0.7 mile of the 
accident. Population levels along the pipeline corridor are low, and 
given the limited extent of the affected area, it is unlikely that an 
accident would result in injuries. All of these results were based on 
the most severe reasonably foreseeable scenarios.

Potential Environmental Impacts of the No-Action Alternative

    Under the no-action alternative, DOE assumed there would be no 
development at the site, since there are no other reasonably 
foreseeable plans for development. Therefore, the impacts under the no-
action alternative (i.e., no development) were evaluated in the EIS and 
compared to the proposed action. There would be no new sources of air 
emissions affecting air quality; there would be no changes in existing 
hydrologic conditions and no alterations of stream flow, path, and 
water quality; existing impaired habitats and low diversity aquatic 
communities would remain; and there would be no alteration or loss of 
existing floodplains, floodplain storage, or flood conveyance capacity. 
There would be no change in existing socioeconomic conditions, no 
potential for economic stimulus from proposed project, and no change in 
existing conditions relative to community services; no change in 
existing conditions relative to environmental justice populations and 
no potential for adverse impacts or economic benefits from the proposed 
project. There would be no change in existing vehicular traffic and 
level of service conditions would remain the same; potentially affected 
cultural resources would remain in place and not be recovered; no new 
sources of noise would be built and operated; and there would be no 
added health and safety risks. Increased emissions of greenhouse gases 
would likely still occur, but these increases would depend on the 
technology that would be used to generate the power that would have 
been provided by the project.

Environmentally Preferred Alternative

    The no-action alternative is environmentally preferable because it 
would result in no change to the existing environmental conditions.

Comments Received on the Final EIS

    DOE received comments on the Final EIS from two Federal agencies: 
EPA's Region 4 (EPA) and the Department of the Interior (DOI). DOE did 
not receive any other comments on the Final EIS. EPA's comments 
supported selection of the IGCC technology but noted there are 
environmental concerns inherent to any power plant and mining 
operations. The specific concerns in EPA's comments involved air 
quality impacts, climate change issues, impacts to waters of the United 
States, bioaccumulation of mercury, effluent discharges, impacts to 
drinking water supplies, effects on housing availability and cost for 
environmental justice populations, and mitigation of the effects of 
increased traffic. DOI's comments focused on impacts to aquatic 
resources.
    EPA's comments on air quality impacts were related to the new 1-
hour National Ambient Air Quality Standards (NAAQSs) for NO2 
(100 parts per billion, or ppb) and SO2 (75 ppb). Due to the 
timing of the issuance of these new standards and of the Final EIS, it 
was not possible to address these new standards in the EIS. The 
conclusion in the Final EIS that NAAQSs would not be exceeded was based 
on modeling done for MDEQ's air permitting process, a process that was 
completed before the new NO2 standard became effective on 
April 12, 2010.\1\ The SO2 standard will not become 
effective until August 23, 2010. In response to EPA's comment that 
information on the project's impacts as to these new standards should 
be provided, DOE conducted a

[[Page 51256]]

conservative screening-level analysis and found that the project would 
have a maximum impact of 41 ppb (1-hour average) of NO2 and 
36 ppb (1-hour average) of SO2. These new standards for 
NO2 and SO2 are likely to result in revisions to 
Mississippi's State Implementation Plan under the Clean Air Act. The 
State would assess air quality levels within the State and identify any 
areas that fail to comply with these standards. Mississippi would need 
to design and implement control strategies for these ``nonattainment 
areas'' that would bring them into compliance with the new NAAQSs for 
NO2 and SO2. This statutory process for State 
implementation of new NAAQSs would include any monitoring or more 
refined modeling that MDEQ determines is needed to ensure compliance 
with these standards.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \1\ The NO2 standard is currently under judicial 
review. See American Petroleum Inst. v. EPA, No. 10-1079 (D.C. Cir. 
Apr. 13, 2010).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    As to climate change issues, EPA questioned the use of 0.3 to 2.1 
metric tons of carbon per acre per year for estimating lost 
sequestration potential and suggested using a value of 1.1 to 7.7 tons 
of carbon dioxide. In fact, 2.1 metric tons of carbon per year is 
equivalent to 7.7 tons of carbon dioxide per year.\2\ EPA also 
requested a reference for the 1 metric ton sequestration potential 
difference between forest and grassland. That figure was obtained from 
``Greenhouse Gas Mitigation Potential in U.S. Forestry and 
Agriculture'' (EPA 430-R-05-006).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \2\ One converts tons of carbon to tons of carbon dioxide using 
the ratio of the molecular weights of the two substances (44/12).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    EPA expressed concern about impacts to waters of the United States, 
in particular impacts to perennial streams, adjacent wetlands, and 
their buffers that have the potential to negatively impact Okatibbee 
Lake. DOE agrees that, to the extent practicable, ``avoidance and 
minimization of impacts should be fully realized'' in the permitting 
process under Section 404 of the Clean Water Act and the regulations 
that implement it (40 CFR part 230). However, complete avoidance, as 
suggested in EPA's comment, of all such impacts may not be practicable. 
Monitoring of the mine's downstream water quality and volume effects on 
the lake, as recommended by EPA, as well as development of an adaptive 
management plan in consultation with the USACE, are conditions of DOE's 
decision and will be included in the MAP. EPA also expressed its views 
on Section 404 permit conditions (e.g. conditioning subsequent permits 
on the success of mitigation, appropriate use of site protection 
instruments, use of mitigation banks or establishment of a single user 
bank, and compliance with the USACE and EPA Mitigation Rule).
    However, these concerns are more appropriately addressed to the 
USACE, the agency responsible for implementing Section 404 of the Clean 
Water Act, rather than to DOE. With regard to bioaccumulation of 
mercury, EPA appreciated DOE's responses to its comments on the Draft 
EIS and recommended that DOE coordinate with MDEQ on updated fish 
tissue sampling data. DOE concluded in the Final EIS that the 
incremental contribution to health hazards associated with mercury 
uptake from the project was small compared to ambient conditions. As 
requested by EPA, DOE consulted with MDEQ and has determined that, 
although more recent laboratory data have been collected by MDEQ, no 
additional analysis is necessary to support DOE's conclusion.
    EPA also stated that impacts of the project should be monitored as 
the project progresses, specifically noting that effluent discharges 
will be regulated under the National Pollutant Discharge Elimination 
System and the MDEQ Surface Mine Control and Reclamation Act permit. 
DOE requires as a condition of its decision that the project comply 
with all permit requirements, including monitoring requirements. Also, 
with respect to monitoring, EPA recommended that monitoring of impacts 
to drinking water sources be conducted and that DOE's ROD include 
measures to ensure the quality of drinking water supplies. DOE requires 
the participants to conduct such monitoring and mitigation as a 
condition of its decision. The required measures will be described in 
the MAP.
    With regard to environmental justice, EPA requested that the 
potential impacts on housing and transportation be acknowledged and 
that potential mitigation measures (i.e. housing or rental assistance) 
be identified in the ROD. DOE's analysis of potential impacts to 
environmental justice populations concluded that there would not be 
disproportionately high and adverse impacts. However, DOE acknowledges 
that there is always the possibility of unanticipated or unforeseeable 
impacts. Therefore, DOE requires as a condition of its decision that 
housing availability be monitored and information on its availability, 
cost, utility costs, and potential sources of assistance be provided as 
described in Mississippi Power's Kemper County Community Plan. EPA 
commended this Community Plan and encouraged Mississippi Power to 
continue to provide opportunities for community engagement and to 
pursue a strategy of employment and training opportunities for the 
local population. DOE agrees and also encourages Mississippi Power to 
continue and expand its community outreach activities.
    Regarding transportation impacts, EPA recommended that DOE consult 
with the Mississippi Department of Transportation and the Federal 
Highway Administration on the development of mitigation measures. DOE 
has contacted both agencies and has identified mitigation measures that 
it will include in the Mitigation Action Plan.
    DOI expressed its views on the impacts to aquatic resources from 
the power plant and mine, noting that there are two separate Section 
404 permit applications before the USACE. DOI stated that, for the 
power plant, impacts to wetlands and streams have been minimized and 
adequate compensatory mitigation has been proposed. DOI also restated 
its determination in a letter dated January 14, 2010, to the USACE that 
the lignite mine would have substantial and unacceptable impacts on 
aquatic resources of national importance and recommended that all lost 
wetland functions and values be mitigated at a suitable offsite area 
within the watershed. DOE recognizes that DOI considers the current 
mitigation plan proposed by the North American Coal Company for the 
mine to be inadequate. DOE expects that additional avoidance and 
minimization, as well as appropriate mitigation consistent with the 
applicable Mitigation Rule, will be developed through USACE's Section 
404 permit application evaluation process, in consultation with the 
U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, EPA and MDEQ. Compliance with the 
requirements of the Section 404 permit (if authorized), as well as all 
other applicable permits, is a condition of DOE's decision.

    Issued in Washington, DC, on this 12th day of August 2010.
James J. Markowsky,
Assistant Secretary, Office of Fossil Energy.
[FR Doc. 2010-20565 Filed 8-18-10; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6450-01-P