Notice of Availability of the Draft Environmental Impact Statement and Public Hearing Notice for the Texas Clean Energy Project, near Odessa, Ector County, TX, 15968-15970 [2011-6694]

Download as PDF srobinson on DSKHWCL6B1PROD with NOTICES 15968 Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 55 / Tuesday, March 22, 2011 / Notices Collaborative may include researchers who are not a part of the ADA National Network. For purposes of this priority, the term ‘‘ADA stakeholders’’ refers to individuals and entities with rights and responsibilities under the ADA. The Collaborative must be designed to contribute to the following outcomes: (a) Improved knowledge related to ADA implementation. The Collaborative must contribute to this outcome by— (1) Conducting research on one or more areas in the ADA. These areas may include, but are not limited to research on specific titles of the ADA, research on ADA issues in specific industries, or research on ADA issues that are relevant to individuals with specific types of disabling conditions; (2) Addressing research questions or hypotheses of national significance that are directly relevant to individuals and entities with rights and responsibilities under the ADA (ADA stakeholders); and (3) Using appropriate and clearlyidentified research designs to generate reliable and valid findings. (b) Improved ADA stakeholder awareness and utilization of research findings produced by the ADA National Network. The Collaborative must contribute to this outcome by— (1) Preparing research products (e.g., articles and presentations) that describe the findings of the Collaborative’s research. The Collaborative must also share these research products and research findings with the ADA Regional Centers and the ADA KT Center, which the Department intends to fund under separate priorities, for further dissemination to ADA stakeholders; and (2) Participating in the ADA National Network research conference. Types of Priorities: When inviting applications for a competition using one or more priorities, we designate the type of each priority as absolute, competitive preference, or invitational through a notice in the Federal Register. The effect of each type of priority follows: Absolute priority: Under an absolute priority, we consider only applications that meet the priority (34 CFR 75.105(c)(3)). Competitive preference priority: Under a competitive preference priority, we give competitive preference to an application by (1) awarding additional points, depending on the extent to which the application meets the priority (34 CFR 75.105(c)(2)(i)); or (2) selecting an application that meets the priority over an application of comparable merit that does not meet the priority (34 CFR 75.105(c)(2)(ii)). VerDate Mar<15>2010 18:36 Mar 21, 2011 Jkt 223001 Invitational priority: Under an invitational priority, we are particularly interested in applications that meet the priority. However, we do not give an application that meets the priority a preference over other applications (34 CFR 75.105(c)(1)). Final Priorities: We will announce the final priorities in a notice in the Federal Register. We will determine the final priorities after considering responses to this notice and other information available to the Department. This notice does not preclude us from proposing additional priorities or requirements, definitions, or selection criteria, subject to meeting applicable rulemaking requirements. Note: This notice does not solicit applications. In any year in which we choose to use these priorities, we invite applications through a notice in the Federal Register. Executive Order 12866: This notice has been reviewed in accordance with Executive Order 12866. Under the terms of the order, we have assessed the potential costs and benefits of this proposed regulatory action. The potential costs associated with this proposed regulatory action are those resulting from statutory requirements and those we have determined as necessary for administering this program effectively and efficiently. In assessing the potential costs and benefits—both quantitative and qualitative—of this proposed regulatory action, we have determined that the benefits of the proposed priorities justify the costs. Discussion of Costs and Benefits: The benefits of the Disability and Rehabilitation Research Projects and Centers Programs have been well established over the years in that similar projects have been completed successfully. These proposed priorities will generate new knowledge through research and development. Another benefit of these proposed priorities is that the establishment of new DRRPs will improve the lives of individuals with disabilities. The new DRRPs will generate, disseminate, and promote the use of new information that will improve the options for individuals with disabilities to perform regular activities in the community. Intergovernmental Review: This program is not subject to Executive Order 12372 and the regulations in 34 CFR part 79. Accessible Format: Individuals with disabilities can obtain this document in an accessible format (e.g., braille, large print, audiotape, or computer diskette) by contacting the Grants and Contracts PO 00000 Frm 00035 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 Services Team, U.S. Department of Education, 400 Maryland Avenue, SW., Room 5075, PCP, Washington, DC 20202–2550. Telephone: (202) 245– 7363. If you use a TDD, call the FRS, toll free, at 1–800–877–8339. Electronic Access to This Document: You can view this document, as well as all other documents of this Department published in the Federal Register, in text or Adobe Portable Document Format (PDF) on the Internet at the following site: https://www.ed.gov/news/ fedregister. To use PDF you must have Adobe Acrobat Reader, which is available free at this site. Note: The official version of this document is the document published in the Federal Register. Free Internet access to the official edition of the Federal Register and the Code of Federal Regulations is available on GPO Access at: https:// www.gpoaccess.gov/nara/. Catalog of Federal Domestic Assistance (CFDA) Number: 84.133A–6, 84.133A–7, and 84.133A–8. Dated: March 17, 2011. Alexa Posny, Assistant Secretary for Special Education and Rehabilitative Services. [FR Doc. 2011–6713 Filed 3–21–11; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4000–01–P DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY Notice of Availability of the Draft Environmental Impact Statement and Public Hearing Notice for the Texas Clean Energy Project, near Odessa, Ector County, TX Department of Energy. Notice of Availability and Public Hearing. AGENCY: ACTION: The U.S. Department of Energy (DOE) announces the availability of the Texas Clean Energy Project Draft Environmental Impact Statement (DOE/ EIS–0444D) for public review and comment, as well as the date, location, and time for a public hearing. The draft environmental impact statement (EIS) analyzes the potential environmental impacts associated with the Texas Clean Energy Project (TCEP), which would be constructed and operated by Summit Texas Clean Energy, LLC, an affiliate of Summit Power Group, Inc. (Summit). Summit’s proposal was selected by DOE to receive financial assistance under the Clean Coal Power Initiative (CCPI) program. DOE prepared this draft EIS in accordance with the National Environmental Policy Act of 1969 (NEPA) (42 U.S.C. 4321 et seq.), the SUMMARY: E:\FR\FM\22MRN1.SGM 22MRN1 Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 55 / Tuesday, March 22, 2011 / Notices Council on Environmental Quality (CEQ) regulations that implement the procedural provisions of NEPA (40 CFR parts 1500–1508), and the DOE procedures implementing NEPA (10 CFR part 1021). DATES: DOE invites the public to comment on the draft EIS during the public comment period, which ends May 2, 2011. DOE will consider all comments postmarked or received during the public comment period in preparing the final EIS and will consider late comments to the extent practicable. DOE will hold a public hearing on April 5, 2011, in Odessa, Texas. An informational session will be held from 4 p.m. to 7 p.m., preceding the formal presentations and formal comment period from 7 p.m. to approximately 9 p.m. See the Public Hearing section for details on the hearing process and locations. Requests for information about this draft EIS and requests to receive a copy of it should be directed to: Mr. Mark L. McKoy, Environmental Manager, U.S. Department of Energy, National Energy Technology Laboratory, M/S B07, P.O. Box 880, Morgantown, WV 26507–0880. Additional information about the draft EIS may also be requested by electronic mail at: mmckoy@netl.doe.gov or by telephone: (304) 285–4426, or toll-free at: (800) 432–8330, extension 4426. The draft EIS will be available at: https:// nepa.energy.gov/. Copies of the draft EIS are also available for review at the locations listed in the SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION section of this Notice. Written comments on the draft EIS can be mailed to Mr. Mark L. McKoy, Environmental Manager, at the address noted above. Written comments may also be submitted by fax to: (304) 285– 4403, or submitted electronically to: mmckoy@netl.doe.gov. Oral comments on the draft EIS will be accepted verbatim only during the public hearing scheduled for the date and location provided in the DATES section of this Notice. ADDRESSES: For further information on the proposed project or the draft EIS, please contact Mr. Mark L. McKoy (see ADDRESSES). For general information regarding the DOE NEPA process, please 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 20585–0103; telephone: (202) 586–4600; fax: (202) 586–7031; or leave a message at: (800) 472–2756. srobinson on DSKHWCL6B1PROD with NOTICES FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: VerDate Mar<15>2010 17:11 Mar 21, 2011 Jkt 223001 DOE proposes to provide limited financial assistance (approximately $450 million), through a cooperative agreement, to Summit for the proposed TCEP. The project proponent team includes: Summit; Blue Source, LLC; Siemens, AG; Linde AG (operating through Selas Fluid Processing, Corp.); Fluor Corporation; and CW NextGen, Inc. The TCEP would use coal-fueled integrated gasification combined-cycle technology to generate electric power and would capture carbon dioxide (CO2) for use in enhanced oil recovery (EOR) and eventual sequestration. The plant would generate 400 megawatts (gross) of electricity, of which approximately 213 megawatts would be provided to the power grid. It would also produce urea, argon, and sulfuric acid for sale in commercial markets. Because of its multiple production capabilities, the plant is referred to as a poly-generation (or polygen) plant. DOE would provide approximately 26 percent of the $1.73 billion (rounded-2009 dollars) in development and capital costs recognized under the DOE cooperative agreement. The polygen plant would be built on a 600 acre oil field site in Ector County, Texas, north of the abandoned oil town of Penwell. Summit would design and construct the plant to capture approximately 90 percent of its CO2. During the demonstration phase of the plant’s operations, the project would sequester about 3 million tons of CO2 per year by transporting it in pipelines to existing oil fields in the Permian Basin of West Texas for use in EOR operations by third-party buyers of the CO2. Following the demonstration phase, the polygen plant would continue in commercial operation for 30 to 50 years and would continue to capture its CO2. The draft EIS evaluates the potential impacts of the proposed project, connected actions, and reasonable alternatives. Because the proposed project may affect wetlands, the draft EIS includes an assessment of impacts to wetlands in accordance with DOE regulations for Compliance with Floodplains and Wetlands Environmental Review Requirements (10 CFR part 1022). DOE analyzed two alternatives in the draft EIS, the Proposed Action and the No Action Alternative. Under the Proposed Action, DOE would provide approximately $450 million in costshared funding under the CCPI program to the proposed project. DOE has already provided a portion of the total funding ($23.2 million) to Summit for SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: PO 00000 Frm 00036 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 15969 DOE’s share of the preliminary design and project definition. Under the No Action Alternative, DOE would not provide continued funding under the CCPI Program. In the absence of DOE funding, Summit could pursue two options. First, the facility and supporting infrastructure could be built as proposed without DOE funding. The potential environmental impacts of this option would be essentially the same as the Proposed Action. Second, Summit could choose to cancel the project, and none of the proposed facilities would be built. This option would not contribute to the goal of the CCPI program, which is to accelerate commercial deployment of advanced coal technologies with carbon capture and sequestration that provide the United States with clean, reliable, and affordable energy. For purposes of this draft EIS, DOE assumes that the project would not be built under the No Action Alternative. DOE has developed an overall strategy for compliance with NEPA for the CCPI program consistent with CEQ regulations (40 CFR parts 1500–1508) and DOE regulations (10 CFR part 1021). This strategy has two phases. The first phase involves an open solicitation and competitive selection process to obtain a set of projects that best meets program needs. The applications that meet the mandatory eligibility requirements constitute the range of reasonable alternatives available to DOE to meet the program’s purpose and needs. Following reviews by technical, environmental, and financial panels and a comprehensive assessment by a merit review board, DOE officials select those projects that they conclude best meets the program’s purposes and needs. By broadly soliciting proposals to meet the programmatic purposes and needs for DOE action and by evaluating the potential environmental impacts associated with each proposal before selecting projects that would go forward to the second phase, DOE considers a reasonable range of alternatives for implementing CCPI. The second phase consists of preparing detailed NEPA analyses for each selected project. For the TCEP, DOE determined that providing financial assistance to the proposed project would constitute a major federal action that may significantly affect the quality of the human environment. Therefore, DOE has prepared this draft EIS to assess the potential environmental impacts of Summit’s proposed project and the options that are still under consideration by Summit. Alternative sites considered by Summit in developing the proposed E:\FR\FM\22MRN1.SGM 22MRN1 15970 Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 55 / Tuesday, March 22, 2011 / Notices project are presented in the EIS. Alternative sources of water supply and reasonable alternative routes for linear facilities are addressed as options in the draft EIS. The draft EIS considers the environmental consequences that may result from the proposed project and describes additional mitigation that might be used to reduce various impacts. Potential impacts identified during the scoping process and analyzed in the draft EIS relate to the following: Air quality; soils, geology, and mineral resources; ground water; surface water; biological resources; aesthetics; cultural resources; land use; socioeconomics; environmental justice; community services; utility systems; transportation; materials and waste management; human health, safety, and accidents; and noise and vibration. srobinson on DSKHWCL6B1PROD with NOTICES Availability of the Draft EIS Copies of the draft EIS have been distributed to Members of Congress; Native American tribal governments; Federal, State, and local officials; and agencies, organizations, and individuals who may be interested or affected. The draft EIS will be available on the Internet at: https://nepa.energy.gov/. Copies of the draft EIS are available for public review at the following location: University of Texas of the Permian Basin, J. Conrad Dunagan Library, Main Floor, 4901 E. University Avenue, Odessa, TX 79762–0001. Additional copies also can be requested (see ADDRESSES). Public Hearing DOE will conduct a public hearing on April 5, 2011 at the MCM Elegante Hotel, 5200 E. University Boulevard, Odessa, TX 79762 to obtain comments on the draft EIS. Requests to speak at the public hearing can be made by calling or writing to Mr. Mark L. McKoy (see ADDRESSES). Requests to speak that have not been submitted prior to the hearing will be accepted in the order in which they are received during the hearing. Speakers are encouraged to provide a written version of their oral comments or supplementary materials for the record. Each speaker will be allowed approximately five minutes to present comments. Those speakers who want more than five minutes should indicate the length of time desired in their request. Depending on the number of speakers, DOE may need to limit all speakers to five minutes initially and provide additional opportunities as time permits. Comments will be recorded by a court reporter and will become part of the public record. Oral and written VerDate Mar<15>2010 18:36 Mar 21, 2011 Jkt 223001 comments will be given equal consideration. The hearing will begin at 4 p.m. with an informational session. Formal presentations and a formal comment session will begin at approximately 7 p.m. DOE will begin the hearing’s formal session with overviews of the DOE program, proposed project, and NEPA process, followed by oral statements by the pre-registered speakers. Speakers may be asked questions to help ensure that DOE fully understands the comments. A presiding officer will establish the order of speakers and provide any additional procedures necessary to conduct the meetings. All meetings will be accessible to people with disabilities. In addition, any individual needing specific assistance, such as a sign language interpreter or a translator, should contact Mr. Mark L. McKoy (See ADDRESSES) at least 48 hours in advance of the hearing so that arrangements can be made. Issued in Washington, DC, on March 17, 2011. Mark J. Matarrese, Director, Office of Environment, Security, Safety & Health, Office of Fossil Energy. [FR Doc. 2011–6694 Filed 3–21–11; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 6450–01–P DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY Bonneville Power Administration Central Ferry to Lower Monumental 500-kilovolt Transmission Line Project Bonneville Power Administration (BPA), Department of Energy (DOE). ACTION: Notice of Availability of Record of Decision (ROD). AGENCY: This notice announces the availability of the ROD to implement the Central Ferry—Lower Monumental 500kilovolt (kV) Transmission Line Project in Garfield, Columbia, and Walla Walla counties, Washington. BPA has decided to implement the Combination A Alternative identified in the Central Ferry—Lower Monumental 500-kV Transmission Line Project Final Environmental Impact Statement (DOE/ EIS–0422, February 2011). The Combination A Alternative consists of constructing a new 500-kV single-circuit transmission line from BPA’s new Central Ferry Substation near the Port of Central Ferry in Garfield County generally west through Garfield, Columbia, and Walla Walla counties to BPA’s existing Lower Monumental SUMMARY: PO 00000 Frm 00037 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 Substation in Walla Walla County, a distance of about 38 miles. The transmission line route begins at the new Central Ferry Substation along the Snake River, and runs southwest for about 11 miles mostly parallel to and about 1,200 to 2,500 feet (about 1⁄4; mile to c mile) south of BPA’s two existing Little Goose-Lower Granite 500-kV steel lattice transmission lines. The route then angles away from the existing lines and proceeds southwest for about 6 miles before crossing the Tucannon River directly north of the town of Starbuck. The route then proceeds west for about 20 miles from the Tucannon River crossing to BPA’s existing Lower Monumental Substation. BPA will acquire new 150-foot-wide right-of-way for the entire length of the new line. Approximately 161 new lattice steel transmission towers, ranging in height from about 104 to 189 feet with an average span length between towers of about 1,200 feet, will be constructed in the new right-of-way. The conductor and overhead ground wire for the new transmission line will be placed on these towers, and counterpoise would be buried in the ground at selected towers. Construction of the new line also will include the upgrade of about 5 miles of existing access roads, and the construction of about 38 miles of new access roads. Power circuit breakers, disconnect switches, and other electrical equipment will be installed at Lower Monumental Substation. In the vicinity of the Lower Monumental Substation, six existing steel lattice towers that support existing transmission lines in this area will be relocated to allow entry of the Central Ferry-Lower Monumental transmission line into the substation. Fiber optic cable will be installed along a portion of the new line. All mitigation measures identified in the EIS are adopted. ADDRESSES: Copies of the ROD and EIS may be obtained by calling BPA’s tollfree document request line, 1–800–622– 4520. The ROD and EIS are also available on our Web site, https:// www.bpa.gov/go/centralferrylomo. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Tish Eaton, Bonneville Power Administration—KEC–4, P.O. Box 3621, Portland, Oregon 97208–3621; toll-free telephone number 1–800–622–4519; fax number 503–230–5699; or e-mail tkeaton@bpa.gov. Issued in Portland, Oregon, on March 11, 2011. Stephen J. Wright, Administrator and Chief Executive Officer. [FR Doc. 2011–6662 Filed 3–21–11; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 6450–01–P E:\FR\FM\22MRN1.SGM 22MRN1

Agencies

[Federal Register Volume 76, Number 55 (Tuesday, March 22, 2011)]
[Notices]
[Pages 15968-15970]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2011-6694]


=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY


Notice of Availability of the Draft Environmental Impact 
Statement and Public Hearing Notice for the Texas Clean Energy Project, 
near Odessa, Ector County, TX

AGENCY: Department of Energy.

ACTION: Notice of Availability and Public Hearing.

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

SUMMARY: The U.S. Department of Energy (DOE) announces the availability 
of the Texas Clean Energy Project Draft Environmental Impact Statement 
(DOE/EIS-0444D) for public review and comment, as well as the date, 
location, and time for a public hearing. The draft environmental impact 
statement (EIS) analyzes the potential environmental impacts associated 
with the Texas Clean Energy Project (TCEP), which would be constructed 
and operated by Summit Texas Clean Energy, LLC, an affiliate of Summit 
Power Group, Inc. (Summit). Summit's proposal was selected by DOE to 
receive financial assistance under the Clean Coal Power Initiative 
(CCPI) program.
    DOE prepared this draft EIS in accordance with the National 
Environmental Policy Act of 1969 (NEPA) (42 U.S.C. 4321 et seq.), the

[[Page 15969]]

Council on Environmental Quality (CEQ) regulations that implement the 
procedural provisions of NEPA (40 CFR parts 1500-1508), and the DOE 
procedures implementing NEPA (10 CFR part 1021).

DATES: DOE invites the public to comment on the draft EIS during the 
public comment period, which ends May 2, 2011. DOE will consider all 
comments postmarked or received during the public comment period in 
preparing the final EIS and will consider late comments to the extent 
practicable.
    DOE will hold a public hearing on April 5, 2011, in Odessa, Texas. 
An informational session will be held from 4 p.m. to 7 p.m., preceding 
the formal presentations and formal comment period from 7 p.m. to 
approximately 9 p.m. See the Public Hearing section for details on the 
hearing process and locations.

ADDRESSES: Requests for information about this draft EIS and requests 
to receive a copy of it should be directed to: Mr. Mark L. McKoy, 
Environmental Manager, U.S. Department of Energy, National Energy 
Technology Laboratory, M/S B07, P.O. Box 880, Morgantown, WV 26507-
0880. Additional information about the draft EIS may also be requested 
by electronic mail at: mmckoy@netl.doe.gov or by telephone: (304) 285-
4426, or toll-free at: (800) 432-8330, extension 4426. The draft EIS 
will be available at: https://nepa.energy.gov/. Copies of the draft EIS 
are also available for review at the locations listed in the 
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION section of this Notice.
    Written comments on the draft EIS can be mailed to Mr. Mark L. 
McKoy, Environmental Manager, at the address noted above. Written 
comments may also be submitted by fax to: (304) 285-4403, or submitted 
electronically to: mmckoy@netl.doe.gov. Oral comments on the draft EIS 
will be accepted verbatim only during the public hearing scheduled for 
the date and location provided in the DATES section of this Notice.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: For further information on the 
proposed project or the draft EIS, please contact Mr. Mark L. McKoy 
(see ADDRESSES). For general information regarding the DOE NEPA 
process, please 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 20585-0103; telephone: (202) 
586-4600; fax: (202) 586-7031; or leave a message at: (800) 472-2756.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: DOE proposes to provide limited financial 
assistance (approximately $450 million), through a cooperative 
agreement, to Summit for the proposed TCEP. The project proponent team 
includes: Summit; Blue Source, LLC; Siemens, AG; Linde AG (operating 
through Selas Fluid Processing, Corp.); Fluor Corporation; and CW 
NextGen, Inc.
    The TCEP would use coal-fueled integrated gasification combined-
cycle technology to generate electric power and would capture carbon 
dioxide (CO2) for use in enhanced oil recovery (EOR) and 
eventual sequestration. The plant would generate 400 megawatts (gross) 
of electricity, of which approximately 213 megawatts would be provided 
to the power grid. It would also produce urea, argon, and sulfuric acid 
for sale in commercial markets. Because of its multiple production 
capabilities, the plant is referred to as a poly-generation (or 
polygen) plant. DOE would provide approximately 26 percent of the $1.73 
billion (rounded-2009 dollars) in development and capital costs 
recognized under the DOE cooperative agreement.
    The polygen plant would be built on a 600 acre oil field site in 
Ector County, Texas, north of the abandoned oil town of Penwell. Summit 
would design and construct the plant to capture approximately 90 
percent of its CO2. During the demonstration phase of the 
plant's operations, the project would sequester about 3 million tons of 
CO2 per year by transporting it in pipelines to existing oil 
fields in the Permian Basin of West Texas for use in EOR operations by 
third-party buyers of the CO2. Following the demonstration 
phase, the polygen plant would continue in commercial operation for 30 
to 50 years and would continue to capture its CO2.
    The draft EIS evaluates the potential impacts of the proposed 
project, connected actions, and reasonable alternatives. Because the 
proposed project may affect wetlands, the draft EIS includes an 
assessment of impacts to wetlands in accordance with DOE regulations 
for Compliance with Floodplains and Wetlands Environmental Review 
Requirements (10 CFR part 1022).
    DOE analyzed two alternatives in the draft EIS, the Proposed Action 
and the No Action Alternative. Under the Proposed Action, DOE would 
provide approximately $450 million in cost-shared funding under the 
CCPI program to the proposed project. DOE has already provided a 
portion of the total funding ($23.2 million) to Summit for DOE's share 
of the preliminary design and project definition.
    Under the No Action Alternative, DOE would not provide continued 
funding under the CCPI Program. In the absence of DOE funding, Summit 
could pursue two options. First, the facility and supporting 
infrastructure could be built as proposed without DOE funding. The 
potential environmental impacts of this option would be essentially the 
same as the Proposed Action. Second, Summit could choose to cancel the 
project, and none of the proposed facilities would be built. This 
option would not contribute to the goal of the CCPI program, which is 
to accelerate commercial deployment of advanced coal technologies with 
carbon capture and sequestration that provide the United States with 
clean, reliable, and affordable energy. For purposes of this draft EIS, 
DOE assumes that the project would not be built under the No Action 
Alternative.
    DOE has developed an overall strategy for compliance with NEPA for 
the CCPI program consistent with CEQ regulations (40 CFR parts 1500-
1508) and DOE regulations (10 CFR part 1021). This strategy has two 
phases. The first phase involves an open solicitation and competitive 
selection process to obtain a set of projects that best meets program 
needs. The applications that meet the mandatory eligibility 
requirements constitute the range of reasonable alternatives available 
to DOE to meet the program's purpose and needs. Following reviews by 
technical, environmental, and financial panels and a comprehensive 
assessment by a merit review board, DOE officials select those projects 
that they conclude best meets the program's purposes and needs. By 
broadly soliciting proposals to meet the programmatic purposes and 
needs for DOE action and by evaluating the potential environmental 
impacts associated with each proposal before selecting projects that 
would go forward to the second phase, DOE considers a reasonable range 
of alternatives for implementing CCPI. The second phase consists of 
preparing detailed NEPA analyses for each selected project. For the 
TCEP, DOE determined that providing financial assistance to the 
proposed project would constitute a major federal action that may 
significantly affect the quality of the human environment. Therefore, 
DOE has prepared this draft EIS to assess the potential environmental 
impacts of Summit's proposed project and the options that are still 
under consideration by Summit.
    Alternative sites considered by Summit in developing the proposed

[[Page 15970]]

project are presented in the EIS. Alternative sources of water supply 
and reasonable alternative routes for linear facilities are addressed 
as options in the draft EIS.
    The draft EIS considers the environmental consequences that may 
result from the proposed project and describes additional mitigation 
that might be used to reduce various impacts. Potential impacts 
identified during the scoping process and analyzed in the draft EIS 
relate to the following:
    Air quality; soils, geology, and mineral resources; ground water; 
surface water; biological resources; aesthetics; cultural resources; 
land use; socioeconomics; environmental justice; community services; 
utility systems; transportation; materials and waste management; human 
health, safety, and accidents; and noise and vibration.

Availability of the Draft EIS

    Copies of the draft EIS have been distributed to Members of 
Congress; Native American tribal governments; Federal, State, and local 
officials; and agencies, organizations, and individuals who may be 
interested or affected. The draft EIS will be available on the Internet 
at: https://nepa.energy.gov/. Copies of the draft EIS are available for 
public review at the following location: University of Texas of the 
Permian Basin, J. Conrad Dunagan Library, Main Floor, 4901 E. 
University Avenue, Odessa, TX 79762-0001. Additional copies also can be 
requested (see ADDRESSES).

Public Hearing

    DOE will conduct a public hearing on April 5, 2011 at the MCM 
Elegante Hotel, 5200 E. University Boulevard, Odessa, TX 79762 to 
obtain comments on the draft EIS. Requests to speak at the public 
hearing can be made by calling or writing to Mr. Mark L. McKoy (see 
ADDRESSES). Requests to speak that have not been submitted prior to the 
hearing will be accepted in the order in which they are received during 
the hearing. Speakers are encouraged to provide a written version of 
their oral comments or supplementary materials for the record. Each 
speaker will be allowed approximately five minutes to present comments. 
Those speakers who want more than five minutes should indicate the 
length of time desired in their request. Depending on the number of 
speakers, DOE may need to limit all speakers to five minutes initially 
and provide additional opportunities as time permits. Comments will be 
recorded by a court reporter and will become part of the public record. 
Oral and written comments will be given equal consideration.
    The hearing will begin at 4 p.m. with an informational session. 
Formal presentations and a formal comment session will begin at 
approximately 7 p.m. DOE will begin the hearing's formal session with 
overviews of the DOE program, proposed project, and NEPA process, 
followed by oral statements by the pre-registered speakers. Speakers 
may be asked questions to help ensure that DOE fully understands the 
comments. A presiding officer will establish the order of speakers and 
provide any additional procedures necessary to conduct the meetings.
    All meetings will be accessible to people with disabilities. In 
addition, any individual needing specific assistance, such as a sign 
language interpreter or a translator, should contact Mr. Mark L. McKoy 
(See ADDRESSES) at least 48 hours in advance of the hearing so that 
arrangements can be made.

    Issued in Washington, DC, on March 17, 2011.
Mark J. Matarrese,
Director, Office of Environment, Security, Safety & Health, Office of 
Fossil Energy.
[FR Doc. 2011-6694 Filed 3-21-11; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6450-01-P
This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.