Notice of Intent To Prepare an Environmental Impact Statement and Notice of Potential Floodplain and Wetlands Involvement for the FutureGen 2.0 Program, 29728-29732 [2011-12632]
Download as PDF
<![CDATA[
29728
Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 99 / Monday, May 23, 2011 / Notices
will meet to receive updates on EAC’s
program activities and budget. The
Board will receive updates on the
Voting System Testing and Certification
program. The Board will hear updates
from a special committee on Defining
Issues of Voting System Sustainability.
The Board will hear presentations by
the National Institute of Standards and
Technology (NIST) and the Federal
Voting Assistance Program (FVAP) on
UOCAVA Internet voting and common
data format. The Board will receive
updates on EAC grants programs
including: The Accessible Voting
Technology Initiative; and the PreElection Logic and Accuracy Testing
and Post-Election Audit Initiative. The
Board will receive updates on EAC
research and studies. The Board will
hear a presentation on a Rutgers report
on Voter Participation of People with
Disabilities in 2010. The Board will hear
other committee reports, elect officers
and consider motions. The Board will
consider other administrative matters.
Members of the public may observe
but not participate in EAC meetings
unless this notice provides otherwise.
Members of the public may use small
electronic audio recording devices to
record the proceedings. The use of other
recording equipment and cameras
requires advance notice to and
coordination with the EAC’s
Communications Office.
This meeting will be open for public
observation.
PERSON TO CONTACT FOR INFORMATION:
Bryan Whitener, Telephone: (202) 566–
3100.
Thomas R. Wilkey,
Executive Director, U.S. Election Assistance
Commission.
[FR Doc. 2011–12667 Filed 5–19–11; 11:15 am]
BILLING CODE 6820–KF–P
DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY
Notice of Intent To Prepare an
Environmental Impact Statement and
Notice of Potential Floodplain and
Wetlands Involvement for the
FutureGen 2.0 Program
Department of Energy.
Notice of Intent and Notice of
Potential Floodplain and Wetlands
Involvement.
AGENCY:
srobinson on DSK4SPTVN1PROD with NOTICES
ACTION:
The U.S. Department of
Energy (DOE or the Department)
announces its intent to prepare an
Environmental Impact Statement (EIS)
pursuant to the National Environmental
Policy Act (NEPA) of 1969 (42 U.S.C.
4321 et seq.), the Council on
SUMMARY:
VerDate Mar<15>2010
16:22 May 20, 2011
Jkt 223001
Environmental Quality’s (CEQ) NEPA
regulations (40 CFR Parts 1500–1508),
and DOE’s NEPA implementing
procedures (10 CFR Part 1021) to assess
the potential environmental impacts of
DOE’s proposed action: providing
approximately $1 billion in Federal
funding (most of it appropriated by the
American Recovery and Reinvestment
Act, or ‘‘ARRA’’) for the FutureGen 2.0
program. DOE has prepared this Notice
of Intent (NOI) to inform interested
parties of the pending EIS and to invite
public comments on the proposed
action, including: (1) The range of
environmental issues, (2) the
alternatives to be analyzed, and (3) the
impacts to be considered in the EIS. The
NOI also provides notice in accordance
with 10 CFR Part 1022 (DOE’s
regulations for compliance with
floodplain and wetland review
requirements) that the proposed project
may involve potential impacts to
floodplains and wetlands.
The FutureGen 2.0 program would
provide financial assistance for the
repowering of an existing electricity
generator with clean coal technologies
integrated with a pipeline that would
transport carbon dioxide (CO2) to a
sequestration site where it would be
injected and stored in a deep geologic
formation. DOE entered into separate
cooperative agreements with Ameren
Energy Resources (Ameren) and with
the FutureGen Alliance (the Alliance)
that define DOE’s proposed action. This
program consists of an Oxy-Combustion
Large Scale Test undertaken by Ameren
at its Meredosia Power Station in west
central Illinois and a Pipeline and CO2
Storage Reservoir undertaken by the
Alliance. In addition, the Alliance
would construct and operate facilities
for research, training, and visitors in the
vicinity of the sequestration site. The
Alliance has identified its preferred
sequestration site in Morgan County,
Illinois, and two alternative sites, one in
Christian County, Illinois and one in
Douglas County, Illinois. The program
would provide performance and
emissions data as well as establish
operating and maintenance experience
that would facilitate future large-scale
commercial deployment of these
technologies. DOE would provide
technical and programmatic guidance to
Ameren and the Alliance and oversee
activities for compliance with the terms
of the cooperative agreements. DOE is
responsible for NEPA compliance
activities.
DOE encourages government agencies,
private-sector organizations, and the
general public to participate in the
FutureGen 2.0 program through the
NEPA process. DOE will consult with
PO 00000
Frm 00009
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
interested Native American Tribes and
Federal, state, regional and local
agencies during preparation of the EIS.
Further, DOE invites agencies with
jurisdiction by law or special expertise
to participate as cooperating agencies in
the preparation of this EIS.
DATES: DOE invites comments on the
proposed scope and content of the EIS
from all interested parties. To ensure
consideration in the preparation of the
EIS, comments must be received by June
22, 2011. DOE will consider late
comments to the extent practicable. In
addition to receiving comments in
writing and by e-mail [See ADDRESSES
below], DOE will conduct public
scoping meetings during which
government agencies, private-sector
organizations, and the general public are
invited to present oral and written
comments with regard to DOE’s
proposed action, alternatives, and
potential impacts of the proposed
FutureGen 2.0 program. DOE will
consider these comments in developing
the EIS. Public scoping meetings will be
held on June 7, 8, and 9, 2011 [See
‘‘Public Scoping Process’’ under
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION below].
ADDRESSES: Written comments on the
scope of the EIS and requests to
participate in the public scoping
meetings should be addressed to: Mr.
Cliff Whyte, U.S. Department of Energy,
National Energy Technology Laboratory,
P.O. Box 880, Morgantown, West
Virginia 26507–0880. Individuals and
organizations who would like to provide
oral or written comments should contact
Mr. Whyte by mail at the above address;
telephone (toll-free) 1–877–338–5689;
fax 304–285–4403; or electronic mail
(FG2.EIS@netl.doe.gov).
Oral comments will be heard during
the formal portion of the scoping
meetings [See ‘‘Public Scoping Process’’
under SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION
below]. Various displays and other
information about DOE’s NEPA process
and the FutureGen 2.0 program will be
available, and representatives from DOE
and the project partners will be present
at an informal session to discuss the
FutureGen 2.0 program and the EIS
process.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: For
further information about this project,
contact Mr. Whyte as described above.
For general information about 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; telephone (202–
586–4600); fax (202–586–7031); or leave
a toll-free message (1–800–472–2756).
E:\FR\FM\23MYN1.SGM
23MYN1
Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 99 / Monday, May 23, 2011 / Notices
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
srobinson on DSK4SPTVN1PROD with NOTICES
Background
On February 27, 2003, President
George W. Bush proposed that the
United States undertake a $1 billion, 10year project to build the world’s first
coal-fueled plant to produce electricity
and hydrogen with near-zero emissions.
In response to that announcement, DOE
developed plans for the original
FutureGen project, which would
establish the technical and economic
feasibility of producing electricity and
hydrogen from coal—a low-cost and
abundant energy resource—while
capturing and geologically storing the
CO2 generated in the process. DOE
issued a Final EIS for the original
FutureGen project (DOE/EIS–0394) in
November 2007 and an associated
Record of Decision in July 2009 (74 FR
35174). The proposed action would
have resulted in the construction and
operation of a 330–MWe (gross)
integrated gasification combined cycle
(IGCC) plant near Mattoon, Illinois, with
capture and storage of more than 1
million tons of CO2 per year in the
Mount Simon geologic formation. The
total cost of the original FutureGen
Project proved to be higher than
acceptable, however, causing a funding
gap that could not be filled by Federal
or state governments or private industry.
As a result DOE refocused its approach.
The FutureGen 2.0 program consists of
the two separate Cooperative
Agreements with Ameren and the
Alliance. Ameren’s partners include
Babcock & Wilcox Power Generation
Group (B&W) and Air Liquide Process &
Construction, Inc. (AL). The Alliance is
a non-profit corporation that represents
a global coalition of coal producers, coal
users and coal equipment suppliers,
including full members: Alpha Natural
Resources, Inc.; Anglo American, LLC;
CONSOL Energy, Inc.; Louisville Gas
and Electric Company and Kentucky
Utilities Company (LG&E and KU);
Peabody Energy Corporation; Rio Tinto
Energy America; and Xstrata, PLC.
Purpose and Need for DOE Action
In pursuing the United States’ goal of
providing safe, affordable and clean
energy for its citizens, coal plays an
important role in the nation’s energy
supply. However, without carbon
capture and sequestration, the
combustion of coal and other fossil fuels
leads to increased releases of CO2 into
the atmosphere. Because power plants
are large stationary sources, it is
generally considered to be more feasible
to capture CO2 from them and store it
rather than attempting to capture it from
mobile sources such as automobiles.
VerDate Mar<15>2010
16:22 May 20, 2011
Jkt 223001
To this end, DOE has sought to
support near-zero emissions
technologies that would produce
electric power from coal while
permanently storing CO2 in deep
geologic formations. The technical,
economic, and environmental feasibility
of producing electric power from coal
coupled with geologic storage
technology must be proven. DOE
believes that oxy-combustion
technology has the potential to help
open a market for repowering in many
of the world’s existing pulverized coal
power plants. In the absence of the
proven operation of a repowered, nearzero emissions plant, the contribution of
coal to the nation’s energy supply could
be reduced. This could potentially
increase the use of higher cost and/or
nondomestic energy resources and
impact the domestic economy as well as
energy security.
Proposed Action
DOE proposes to provide financial
assistance (approximately $1 billion) to
Ameren and the Alliance to support
implementation of their projects, which
if successful would provide critical
performance and emissions data as well
as establish operating, permitting,
maintenance, and other experience
needed for future commercial
deployment of these technologies.
The FutureGen 2.0 program seeks to
continue the work of the original
FutureGen project by advancing
technology that can make the United
States a world leader in carbon capture
and storage (CCS). In formulating its
proposal for FutureGen 2.0, DOE sought
to reduce the project’s overall cost by
changing the technology from coal
gasification to oxy-combustion. The
inherent scalability of oxy-combustion
technology allows a reduction in power
plant size with substantial cost benefits.
Studies by DOE’s National Energy
Technology Laboratory have identified
oxy-combustion technology as a
potentially cost-effective approach to
implement carbon capture at existing
coal-fueled facilities. It also has the
potential for use in new power plants as
well as in repowering a large crosssection of the world’s existing
pulverized coal plants.
The FutureGen 2.0 program would
proceed through 2020 with design,
construction, operation, and monitoring.
Performance and economic test results
would be shared among all participants,
industry, the environmental
community, and the public. The
Alliance has an open membership
policy to encourage the addition of
other coal producers, coal users and
coal equipment suppliers, both
PO 00000
Frm 00010
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
29729
domestic and international. Consistent
with the original FutureGen project,
DOE encourages participation from
international organizations to maximize
the global applicability and acceptance
of FutureGen 2.0’s results, helping to
support an international consensus on
the role of coal and geologic storage in
addressing global greenhouse gas
emissions and energy security.
Oxy-Combustion Large Scale Test
For the Oxy-Combustion Large Scale
Test, Ameren and its team would
repower Unit 4 at Ameren’s Meredosia
Power Station in west central Illinois
using advanced oxy-combustion
technology. The oxy-combustion facility
may be capable of running on a range
of coals and operating conditions. The
data generated would be used to expand
the market for oxy-combustion
technology. The project is also expected
to provide performance and emissions
data as well as establish operating and
maintenance experience that will
facilitate future large-scale commercial
projects.
The scope of this test includes project
definition, design, procurement,
manufacture, installation, startup,
commercial operation and testing of an
integrated oxy-combustion coal boiler
with CO2 capture, purification, and
compression. The plant would generate
approximately 200 MWe gross with a
net output estimated at approximately
140 MWe. The CO2 would be cleaned,
compressed for transport, and delivered
to a terminal point for transfer to the
Alliance’s project.
Meredosia Power Station: The
Meredosia Power Station is located
adjacent to the east side of the Illinois
River, south of Meredosia, Illinois,
approximately 18 miles west of
Jacksonville, Illinois. The plant includes
four generating units, three of which are
coal-fired and one of which is oil-fired.
Unit 4, built in 1975, is an oil-fired unit
that is currently idle. The steam turbine
and generator have low operating hours
and could be placed into service as part
of the repowered oxy-combustion
design. The station contains existing
infrastructure that could support the
operation of the oxy-combustion system
including interconnection to the
electrical grid, water supply and intake
structures, wastewater outfalls, coal
storage and handling areas, and barge
and truck delivery systems for coal. The
5,300-foot western boundary of the 260acre Meredosia Power Station fronts the
Illinois River, where the station’s oil
and coal barge unloading facilities are
located. The land immediately adjacent
to the station on the north, northeast
and southeast is railroad property; other
E:\FR\FM\23MYN1.SGM
23MYN1
29730
Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 99 / Monday, May 23, 2011 / Notices
srobinson on DSK4SPTVN1PROD with NOTICES
immediately adjacent property is
roadway. Beyond and in addition to the
railroad property and roadways, land
use is primarily residential to the north
and northeast, scattered residential and
agricultural to the east, and industrial to
the south.
Oxy-Combustion Technology: This
technology involves designing the
power plant’s boiler to combust coal
with a mixture of nearly pure oxygen
and recycled flue gas (which is
primarily CO2) rather than air. An air
separation unit produces the oxygen.
The concentrated stream of CO2 that
leaves the boiler would be ready for
processing by environmental cleanup
equipment (to remove other captured
emissions) and the compression and
purification unit. The concentrated and
compressed CO2 would then be
transferred to a pipeline for
transmission to the Alliance’s storage
location. The oxy-combustion
technology during normal operations
would produce near-zero emissions of
oxides of nitrogen (NOX), oxides of
sulfur (SOx), mercury, particulate
matter and other pollutants typical of a
conventional coal-fired boiler. The plant
would be designed to capture
approximately 1.3 million metric tons of
CO2 per year from the oxy-combustion
system and is targeted to achieve a CO2
capture rate exceeding 90 percent.
Pipeline and CO2 Storage Reservoir
For the Pipeline and CO2 Storage
Reservoir project, the Alliance would
design, construct, and operate a
transmission pipeline and geologic
injection and storage facility. The
Alliance’s work involves selection of a
suitable storage site, development of the
subsurface storage field, development of
CO2 transport infrastructure (pipeline),
and construction of the associated
research and training facilities,
including a visitor center. The Alliance
has identified its preferred site in
Morgan County, Illinois, for the
injection facility, and two other sites
(one in Christian County and one in
Douglas County, Illinois) as potential
alternate locations should the preferred
site prove infeasible. The Alliance’s
preferred site for geologic storage in
Morgan County, Illinois is
approximately 30 miles from the
Meredosia Power Station, and the
Alliance’s alternate sites in Christian
County and Douglas County, Illinois are
approximately 75 and 125 miles from
the plant site, respectively. All three
sites would be evaluated in the EIS
unless DOE determines that they are not
reasonable alternatives.
The Alliance would construct a
pipeline to transport CO2 from the
VerDate Mar<15>2010
16:22 May 20, 2011
Jkt 223001
Meredosia Power Station to the selected
storage site where it would be injected
through deep wells into the target
geologic formation. The pipeline and
storage reservoir would be designed to
inject and store approximately 39
million metric tons over a 30-year
operating period. Depending on
stakeholder and landowner acceptance,
the Alliance may also consider other
sources of CO2 in addition to that from
Ameren’s plant for injection. Research
would include site characterization,
injection and storage, and CO2
monitoring and measurement.
The target formation for CO2 injection
and storage is the Mount Simon
sandstone formation, which is one of
the Illinois Basin’s major deep saline
formations. The formation’s positive
characteristics for CO2 storage include
its isolation from other strata, as well as
its depth, lateral continuity, and relative
permeability. The Mount Simon is
bounded below by a Pre-Cambrian
igneous rock and above by the Eau
Claire formation, which is a mixture of
tightly layered shales with low
permeability, as well as by secondary
caprock formations above the Eau
Claire. The Alliance would implement a
monitoring, verification, and accounting
(MVA) program to monitor the injection
and storage of CO2 within the geologic
formations to verify that it stays within
the target formation. The MVA program
would meet injection control permitting
and requirements that DOE may impose.
In accordance with the Safe Drinking
Water Act, the Alliance would be
required to obtain a Class VI
underground injection control permit
from the U.S. Environmental Protection
Agency. The MVA program consists of
the following components: (1) Injection
system monitoring; (2) containment
monitoring (via monitoring wells,
mechanical integrity testing, and other
means); (3) CO2 plume tracking via
multiple techniques; (4) CO2 injection
simulation modeling; and (5) perhaps
new experimental techniques not yet in
practice.
Proposed Project Schedules
The Oxy-Combustion Large Scale Test
would initiate operations (including
CO2 capture, purification and
compression) in 2016 and complete
federally-funded project activities
(operational testing) in 2018. The
Pipeline and CO2 Storage Reservoir
would become operational at the same
time (2016) and complete federallyfunded project activities (operational
testing and two-years of additional
federally-funded MVA activities) in
2020. CO2 capture, pipeline transport,
injection, and MVA activities are
PO 00000
Frm 00011
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
expected to operate (without federal
funding) for approximately 30 years.
MVA activities would take place during
injection and continue beyond its
cessation as prescribed by regulatory
requirements. The schedule is
contingent upon Ameren and the
Alliance receiving the necessary permits
and regulatory approvals, as well as
financial closing on all the necessary
funding sources, including DOE’s
financial assistance. DOE’s proposal to
provide full financial assistance for
detailed design, procurement of
equipment, construction, and operations
is contingent upon DOE’s completion of
the NEPA process, and achievement of
the permitting and financial
requirements listed above by Ameren
and the Alliance.
Connected and Cumulative Actions
The components of the FutureGen 2.0
program will be evaluated individually
and collectively within the EIS.
Although injection of other sources of
CO2 is not currently proposed, such
injection is reasonably foreseeable and
will be evaluated in the EIS. DOE will
also consider the cumulative impacts of
the program, which will include the
analysis of emissions (including
greenhouse gas emissions) and other
incremental impacts. Cumulative
impacts are impacts on the environment
which result from the incremental
impacts of an action when added to
other past, present, and reasonably
foreseeable future actions.
Alternatives
NEPA requires that an EIS evaluate
the range of reasonable alternatives to
an agency’s proposed action. DOE’s
range of reasonable alternatives includes
the No Action Alternative, which is to
withhold financial assistance for the
FutureGen 2.0 program, and the Action
Alternative, which is to provide
financial assistance to the FutureGen 2.0
program.
DOE has developed the range of
reasonable alternatives for FutureGen
2.0 program based on evaluation of
various clean coal technologies through
the Clean Coal Power Initiative program;
analysis of the original FutureGen
Project in terms of technology, costs,
and suitability for geologic storage; data
obtained and reviewed through various
funding opportunity announcements;
data obtained for the original FutureGen
Project and a related project called
Restructured FutureGen; and the
interest of industry to participate in
projects to support FutureGen 2.0 based
on these evaluations. In particular,
DOE’s current proposal to advance the
programmatic goal of CO2 storage in the
E:\FR\FM\23MYN1.SGM
23MYN1
srobinson on DSK4SPTVN1PROD with NOTICES
Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 99 / Monday, May 23, 2011 / Notices
Mount Simon Formation in Illinois
through the FutureGen Program was
addressed in its Final Environmental
Impact Statement for the FutureGen
Project (DOE/EIS–0394 [November
2007]) and associated Record of
Decision (74 FR 35174 (2009)).
Through review and consideration of
these data and analysis, the repowering
of an existing power plant with oxycombustion technology was identified
as the approach that would meet cost
and technology advancement objectives
of FutureGen Program. Furthermore,
DOE determined that due to cost and
technical advantages obtained through
efforts conducted by the FutureGen
Alliance under the original FutureGen
Project, that the Alliance’s choice of
geologic storage formations would be
limited to the Mount Simon Formation.
Given these factors, reasonable
alternatives were limited to potential
oxy-combustion repowering projects at a
location from which it would remain
economically viable to transport
captured CO2 for injection into the
Mount Simon Formation.
The range of reasonable alternatives
for a financial assistance project that is
proposed by industrial participants is
limited to the alternatives or project
options under consideration by the
participants or that are reasonable
within the confines of the project as
proposed (e.g., the particular location of
the processing units, pipelines, injection
sites on land proposed for the project,
and potential measures to mitigate
potential environmental impacts) and a
‘‘no-action’’ alternative. Regarding the no
action alternative, DOE assumes for
purposes of the EIS that, if DOE decides
to withhold financial assistance, the
project would not proceed.
DOE will evaluate the two projects
that constitute the FutureGen 2.0
program with and without any
mitigating conditions that DOE may
identify as reasonable and appropriate.
Alternatives considered in developing
respective components of the proposed
FutureGen 2.0 program and eliminated
from further consideration will also be
discussed in the EIS.
The sequestration site would be
designed to accept and store at a
minimum the CO2 captured at Ameren’s
Meredosia Power Station over its 30year design life. The Alliance undertook
a site selection process in October 2010
with the issuance of a Request for
Proposals seeking a site upon which the
Alliance would construct and operate
the CO2 storage project. The Alliance
hosted two public meetings, one for
prospective site offerors and a
subsequent meeting for the general
public, on October 28, 2010, in
VerDate Mar<15>2010
16:22 May 20, 2011
Jkt 223001
Springfield, Illinois. Representatives for
16 proposed sites attended the meeting,
and the Alliance received proposals
from six sites in November 2010. In
December 2010, the Alliance selected
four of the six sites for further
evaluation and subsequently identified
three candidate sites, one preferred and
two alternates, which will be evaluated
in the EIS.
DOE will also consider a no-action
alternative whereby the Department
would not fund the FutureGen 2.0
program and the project would not
proceed. In the absence of DOE funding,
it would be unlikely that the project
proponents, or industry in general,
would soon undertake the utility-scale
integration of CO2 capture and geologic
storage with a coal-fired power plant
repowered with oxy-combustion.
Absent DOE’s investment in a utilityscale facility, the development of oxycombustion repowered plants integrated
with CO2 capture and geologic storage
would occur more slowly or not at all.
Decision Making Process
DOE will consider public scoping
comments in preparing a Draft EIS,
which will be issued for public
comment. DOE will consider public
comments on the Draft EIS and respond
as appropriate in the Final EIS. No
sooner than 30 days following
completion of the Final EIS, DOE would
announce its decision regarding
whether to provide financial assistance
to these projects in a Record of Decision
(ROD). If DOE decides to provide
financial assistance, the Alliance would
develop its pipeline and storage site.
Similarly, Ameren would proceed with
detailed design and construction
activities at the Meredosia site.
Floodplains and Wetlands
Activities required to implement the
FutureGen 2.0 program, such as those
required to repower Unit 4 at the
Meredosia Power Station, would be
undertaken to avoid or minimize
potential impacts to wetlands or
floodplains. The Meredosia Power
Station site includes low lying areas to
the west, north, and south, which are
located in the floodplain. However, the
existing generating units as well as
proposed locations for the new oxycombustion unit are located above the
floodplain elevation. Any wetland and
floodplain impacts that might result
from installation of monitoring and
injection wells, or the construction of
CO2 pipelines or other linear features
required for this program, will be
described in the EIS. In the event that
DOE were to identify wetlands and
floodplains that would be affected by
PO 00000
Frm 00012
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
29731
the FutureGen 2.0 program as a result of
pipelines, injection facilities, or
connected actions, DOE would prepare
a floodplain and wetland assessment in
accordance with its regulations at 10
CFR Part 1022, and include the
assessment in the Draft EIS.
Preliminary Identification of
Environmental Issues
DOE intends to address the issues
listed below when considering the
potential impacts resulting from the
construction and operation of the
proposed FutureGen 2.0 program and
any connected actions. This list is
neither intended to be all-inclusive, nor
a predetermined set of potential
impacts. DOE invites comments on
whether this is an appropriate list of
issues that should be considered in the
EIS. The preliminary list of potentially
affected resources or activities and their
related environmental issues includes:
Air quality resources: Potential air
quality impacts from emissions during
construction and operation of the
repowered Unit 4 at the Meredosia plant
or CCS facilities and other related
facilities on local or regional air quality;
Climate change: Potential impacts
from emissions of CO2 and other
greenhouse gas emissions;
Water resources: Potential impacts
from water utilization and consumption,
plus potential impacts from stream
crossings and wastewater discharges;
Infrastructure and land use: Potential
environmental and socioeconomic
impacts associated with the project,
including delivery of feed materials and
distribution of products (e.g., access
roads, pipelines);
Visual resources: Potential impacts to
the view shed, scenic views (e.g.,
impacts from the injection wells,
pipelines, and support facilities for the
injection wells and pipelines), and
perception of the community or locality;
Solid wastes: Pollution prevention
and waste management issues
(generation, treatment, transport,
storage, disposal or use), including
potential impacts from the generation,
treatment, storage, and management of
hazardous materials and other solid
wastes;
Biological resources: Potential
impacts to vegetation, wildlife,
threatened or endangered species, and
ecologically sensitive habitats;
Floodplains and wetlands: Potential
wetland and floodplain impacts from
construction of project facilities;
Traffic: Potential impacts from the
construction and operation of the
facilities, including changes in local
traffic patterns, deterioration of roads,
traffic hazards, and traffic controls;
E:\FR\FM\23MYN1.SGM
23MYN1
29732
Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 99 / Monday, May 23, 2011 / Notices
srobinson on DSK4SPTVN1PROD with NOTICES
Historic and cultural resources:
Potential impacts related to site
development and the associated linear
facilities (e.g., pipelines);
Geology: Potential impacts from the
injection and storage of CO2 on
underground resources such as ground
water supplies, mineral resources, and
fossil fuel resources, and the fate and
stability of CO2 being stored;
Health and safety issues: Potential
impacts associated with use, transport,
and storage of hazardous chemicals, as
well as CO2 capture and transport to the
sequestration site;
Socioeconomics: Potential impacts to
schools, housing, public services, and
local revenues, including the creation of
jobs;
Environmental justice: Potential for
disproportionately high and adverse
impacts on minority and low-income
populations;
Noise and light: Potential disturbance
impacts from construction,
transportation of materials, and facility
operations;
Connected actions: Potential impacts
from the integrated operations of the
oxy-combustion project and
sequestration project, as well as
potential development of support
facilities or supporting infrastructure;
Cumulative effects that could result
from the incremental impacts of the
proposed project when added to other
past, present, and reasonably
foreseeable future actions;
DOE will also address compliance
with regulatory and environmental
permitting requirements and
environmental monitoring plans
associated with the carbon capture
facility and CO2 geologic storage
activities.
Public Scoping Process
This Notice of Intent initiates the
scoping process under NEPA, which
will guide the development of the Draft
EIS. To ensure identification of issues
related to DOE’s proposed action with
respect to the proposed FutureGen 2.0
program, DOE seeks public input to
define the scope of the EIS. The public
scoping period will end June 22, 2011.
Interested government agencies, Native
American Tribes, private-sector
organizations, and the general public are
encouraged to submit comments or
suggestions concerning the content of
the EIS, issues and impacts that should
be addressed, and alternatives that
should be considered. Scoping
comments should clearly describe
specific issues or topics that the EIS
should address. Written, e-mailed, or
faxed comments should be received by
June 22, 2011 (see ADDRESSES). DOE will
VerDate Mar<15>2010
16:22 May 20, 2011
Jkt 223001
consider late comments to the extent
practicable.
DOE will conduct public scoping
meetings according to the following
schedule:
Issued in Washington, DC, this 18th day of
May 2011.
Charles D. McConnell,
Chief Operating Officer, Office of Fossil
Energy.
June 7, 2011—Taylorville High School,
815 W. Springfield Road, Taylorville,
IL 62568.
June 8, 2011—Ironhorse Golf Club, 2000
Ironhorse Drive, Tuscola, IL 61953.
June 9, 2011—The Jacksonville Elks
Lodge, 231 West Morgan Street,
Jacksonville, IL 62650.
BILLING CODE 6450–01–P
Each public scoping meeting will
include an informal session from 5 to
7 p.m, followed by a formal presentation
at 7 p.m.
Oral comments will be heard during
the formal portion of the scoping
meetings. The public is also invited to
learn more about the project at an
informal session at each location. DOE
requests that anyone who wishes to
speak at the public scoping meetings
should contact Mr. Whyte, either by
phone, e-mail, fax, or postal mail (see
ADDRESSES).
Those who do not arrange in advance
to speak may register at the meeting
(preferably at the beginning of the
meeting) and would be given an
opportunity to speak after previously
scheduled speakers. Speakers will be
given approximately five minutes to
present their 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
opportunity as time permits. Individuals
may also provide written materials in
lieu of, or supplemental to, their
presentations. DOE will give equal
consideration to oral and written
comments.
DOE will begin the formal meeting
with an overview of the proposed
FutureGen 2.0 program. The meeting
will not be conducted as an evidentiary
hearing, and speakers will not be crossexamined. However, speakers may be
asked questions to help ensure that DOE
fully understands the comments or
suggestions. A presiding officer will
establish the order of speakers and
provide any additional procedures
necessary to conduct the meeting. A
stenographer will record the
proceedings, including all oral
comments received.
ACTION:
PO 00000
Frm 00013
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
[FR Doc. 2011–12632 Filed 5–20–11; 8:45 am]
DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY
Environmental Management SiteSpecific Advisory Board, Oak Ridge
Reservation
Department of Energy.
Notice of open meeting.
AGENCY:
This notice announces a
meeting of the Environmental
Management Site-Specific Advisory
Board (EM SSAB), Oak Ridge
Reservation. The Federal Advisory
Committee Act (Pub. L. 92–463, 86 Stat.
770) requires that public notice of this
meeting be announced in the Federal
Register.
SUMMARY:
Wednesday, June 8, 2011, 6 p.m.
DOE Information Center,
475 Oak Ridge Turnpike, Oak Ridge,
Tennessee 37830.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Patricia J. Halsey, Federal Coordinator,
Department of Energy Oak Ridge
Operations Office, P.O. Box 2001, EM–
90, Oak Ridge, TN 37831. Phone (865)
576–4025; Fax (865) 576–2347 or e-mail:
halseypj@oro.doe.gov or check the Web
site at https://www.oakridge.doe.gov/em/
ssab.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Purpose of the Board: The purpose of
the Board is to make recommendations
to DOE–EM and site management in the
areas of environmental restoration,
waste management, and related
activities.
Tentative Agenda: The main meeting
presentation will be on the 2011 Oak
Ridge Reservation Remediation
Effectiveness Report and the upcoming
CERCLA Five-Year Review.
Public Participation: The EM SSAB,
Oak Ridge, welcomes the attendance of
the public at its advisory committee
meetings and will make every effort to
accommodate persons with physical
disabilities or special needs. If you
require special accommodations due to
a disability, please contact Patricia J.
Halsey at least seven days in advance of
the meeting at the phone number listed
above. Written statements may be filed
with the Board either before or after the
meeting. Individuals who wish to make
oral statements pertaining to the agenda
item should contact Patricia J. Halsey at
the address or telephone number listed
DATES:
ADDRESSES:
E:\FR\FM\23MYN1.SGM
23MYN1
]]>Agencies
[Federal Register Volume 76, Number 99 (Monday, May 23, 2011)]
[Notices]
[Pages 29728-29732]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2011-12632]
=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY
Notice of Intent To Prepare an Environmental Impact Statement and
Notice of Potential Floodplain and Wetlands Involvement for the
FutureGen 2.0 Program
AGENCY: Department of Energy.
ACTION: Notice of Intent and Notice of Potential Floodplain and
Wetlands Involvement.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: The U.S. Department of Energy (DOE or the Department)
announces its intent to prepare an Environmental Impact Statement (EIS)
pursuant to the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) of 1969 (42
U.S.C. 4321 et seq.), the Council on Environmental Quality's (CEQ) NEPA
regulations (40 CFR Parts 1500-1508), and DOE's NEPA implementing
procedures (10 CFR Part 1021) to assess the potential environmental
impacts of DOE's proposed action: providing approximately $1 billion in
Federal funding (most of it appropriated by the American Recovery and
Reinvestment Act, or ``ARRA'') for the FutureGen 2.0 program. DOE has
prepared this Notice of Intent (NOI) to inform interested parties of
the pending EIS and to invite public comments on the proposed action,
including: (1) The range of environmental issues, (2) the alternatives
to be analyzed, and (3) the impacts to be considered in the EIS. The
NOI also provides notice in accordance with 10 CFR Part 1022 (DOE's
regulations for compliance with floodplain and wetland review
requirements) that the proposed project may involve potential impacts
to floodplains and wetlands.
The FutureGen 2.0 program would provide financial assistance for
the repowering of an existing electricity generator with clean coal
technologies integrated with a pipeline that would transport carbon
dioxide (CO2) to a sequestration site where it would be
injected and stored in a deep geologic formation. DOE entered into
separate cooperative agreements with Ameren Energy Resources (Ameren)
and with the FutureGen Alliance (the Alliance) that define DOE's
proposed action. This program consists of an Oxy-Combustion Large Scale
Test undertaken by Ameren at its Meredosia Power Station in west
central Illinois and a Pipeline and CO2 Storage Reservoir
undertaken by the Alliance. In addition, the Alliance would construct
and operate facilities for research, training, and visitors in the
vicinity of the sequestration site. The Alliance has identified its
preferred sequestration site in Morgan County, Illinois, and two
alternative sites, one in Christian County, Illinois and one in Douglas
County, Illinois. The program would provide performance and emissions
data as well as establish operating and maintenance experience that
would facilitate future large-scale commercial deployment of these
technologies. DOE would provide technical and programmatic guidance to
Ameren and the Alliance and oversee activities for compliance with the
terms of the cooperative agreements. DOE is responsible for NEPA
compliance activities.
DOE encourages government agencies, private-sector organizations,
and the general public to participate in the FutureGen 2.0 program
through the NEPA process. DOE will consult with interested Native
American Tribes and Federal, state, regional and local agencies during
preparation of the EIS. Further, DOE invites agencies with jurisdiction
by law or special expertise to participate as cooperating agencies in
the preparation of this EIS.
DATES: DOE invites comments on the proposed scope and content of the
EIS from all interested parties. To ensure consideration in the
preparation of the EIS, comments must be received by June 22, 2011. DOE
will consider late comments to the extent practicable. In addition to
receiving comments in writing and by e-mail [See ADDRESSES below], DOE
will conduct public scoping meetings during which government agencies,
private-sector organizations, and the general public are invited to
present oral and written comments with regard to DOE's proposed action,
alternatives, and potential impacts of the proposed FutureGen 2.0
program. DOE will consider these comments in developing the EIS. Public
scoping meetings will be held on June 7, 8, and 9, 2011 [See ``Public
Scoping Process'' under SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION below].
ADDRESSES: Written comments on the scope of the EIS and requests to
participate in the public scoping meetings should be addressed to: Mr.
Cliff Whyte, U.S. Department of Energy, National Energy Technology
Laboratory, P.O. Box 880, Morgantown, West Virginia 26507-0880.
Individuals and organizations who would like to provide oral or written
comments should contact Mr. Whyte by mail at the above address;
telephone (toll-free) 1-877-338-5689; fax 304-285-4403; or electronic
mail (FG2.EIS@netl.doe.gov).
Oral comments will be heard during the formal portion of the
scoping meetings [See ``Public Scoping Process'' under SUPPLEMENTARY
INFORMATION below]. Various displays and other information about DOE's
NEPA process and the FutureGen 2.0 program will be available, and
representatives from DOE and the project partners will be present at an
informal session to discuss the FutureGen 2.0 program and the EIS
process.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: For further information about this
project, contact Mr. Whyte as described above. For general information
about 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;
telephone (202-586-4600); fax (202-586-7031); or leave a toll-free
message (1-800-472-2756).
[[Page 29729]]
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Background
On February 27, 2003, President George W. Bush proposed that the
United States undertake a $1 billion, 10-year project to build the
world's first coal-fueled plant to produce electricity and hydrogen
with near-zero emissions. In response to that announcement, DOE
developed plans for the original FutureGen project, which would
establish the technical and economic feasibility of producing
electricity and hydrogen from coal--a low-cost and abundant energy
resource--while capturing and geologically storing the CO2
generated in the process. DOE issued a Final EIS for the original
FutureGen project (DOE/EIS-0394) in November 2007 and an associated
Record of Decision in July 2009 (74 FR 35174). The proposed action
would have resulted in the construction and operation of a 330-MWe
(gross) integrated gasification combined cycle (IGCC) plant near
Mattoon, Illinois, with capture and storage of more than 1 million tons
of CO2 per year in the Mount Simon geologic formation. The
total cost of the original FutureGen Project proved to be higher than
acceptable, however, causing a funding gap that could not be filled by
Federal or state governments or private industry. As a result DOE
refocused its approach. The FutureGen 2.0 program consists of the two
separate Cooperative Agreements with Ameren and the Alliance. Ameren's
partners include Babcock & Wilcox Power Generation Group (B&W) and Air
Liquide Process & Construction, Inc. (AL). The Alliance is a non-profit
corporation that represents a global coalition of coal producers, coal
users and coal equipment suppliers, including full members: Alpha
Natural Resources, Inc.; Anglo American, LLC; CONSOL Energy, Inc.;
Louisville Gas and Electric Company and Kentucky Utilities Company
(LG&E and KU); Peabody Energy Corporation; Rio Tinto Energy America;
and Xstrata, PLC.
Purpose and Need for DOE Action
In pursuing the United States' goal of providing safe, affordable
and clean energy for its citizens, coal plays an important role in the
nation's energy supply. However, without carbon capture and
sequestration, the combustion of coal and other fossil fuels leads to
increased releases of CO2 into the atmosphere. Because power
plants are large stationary sources, it is generally considered to be
more feasible to capture CO2 from them and store it rather
than attempting to capture it from mobile sources such as automobiles.
To this end, DOE has sought to support near-zero emissions
technologies that would produce electric power from coal while
permanently storing CO2 in deep geologic formations. The
technical, economic, and environmental feasibility of producing
electric power from coal coupled with geologic storage technology must
be proven. DOE believes that oxy-combustion technology has the
potential to help open a market for repowering in many of the world's
existing pulverized coal power plants. In the absence of the proven
operation of a repowered, near-zero emissions plant, the contribution
of coal to the nation's energy supply could be reduced. This could
potentially increase the use of higher cost and/or nondomestic energy
resources and impact the domestic economy as well as energy security.
Proposed Action
DOE proposes to provide financial assistance (approximately $1
billion) to Ameren and the Alliance to support implementation of their
projects, which if successful would provide critical performance and
emissions data as well as establish operating, permitting, maintenance,
and other experience needed for future commercial deployment of these
technologies.
The FutureGen 2.0 program seeks to continue the work of the
original FutureGen project by advancing technology that can make the
United States a world leader in carbon capture and storage (CCS). In
formulating its proposal for FutureGen 2.0, DOE sought to reduce the
project's overall cost by changing the technology from coal
gasification to oxy-combustion. The inherent scalability of oxy-
combustion technology allows a reduction in power plant size with
substantial cost benefits. Studies by DOE's National Energy Technology
Laboratory have identified oxy-combustion technology as a potentially
cost-effective approach to implement carbon capture at existing coal-
fueled facilities. It also has the potential for use in new power
plants as well as in repowering a large cross-section of the world's
existing pulverized coal plants.
The FutureGen 2.0 program would proceed through 2020 with design,
construction, operation, and monitoring. Performance and economic test
results would be shared among all participants, industry, the
environmental community, and the public. The Alliance has an open
membership policy to encourage the addition of other coal producers,
coal users and coal equipment suppliers, both domestic and
international. Consistent with the original FutureGen project, DOE
encourages participation from international organizations to maximize
the global applicability and acceptance of FutureGen 2.0's results,
helping to support an international consensus on the role of coal and
geologic storage in addressing global greenhouse gas emissions and
energy security.
Oxy-Combustion Large Scale Test
For the Oxy-Combustion Large Scale Test, Ameren and its team would
repower Unit 4 at Ameren's Meredosia Power Station in west central
Illinois using advanced oxy-combustion technology. The oxy-combustion
facility may be capable of running on a range of coals and operating
conditions. The data generated would be used to expand the market for
oxy-combustion technology. The project is also expected to provide
performance and emissions data as well as establish operating and
maintenance experience that will facilitate future large-scale
commercial projects.
The scope of this test includes project definition, design,
procurement, manufacture, installation, startup, commercial operation
and testing of an integrated oxy-combustion coal boiler with
CO2 capture, purification, and compression. The plant would
generate approximately 200 MWe gross with a net output estimated at
approximately 140 MWe. The CO2 would be cleaned, compressed
for transport, and delivered to a terminal point for transfer to the
Alliance's project.
Meredosia Power Station: The Meredosia Power Station is located
adjacent to the east side of the Illinois River, south of Meredosia,
Illinois, approximately 18 miles west of Jacksonville, Illinois. The
plant includes four generating units, three of which are coal-fired and
one of which is oil-fired. Unit 4, built in 1975, is an oil-fired unit
that is currently idle. The steam turbine and generator have low
operating hours and could be placed into service as part of the
repowered oxy-combustion design. The station contains existing
infrastructure that could support the operation of the oxy-combustion
system including interconnection to the electrical grid, water supply
and intake structures, wastewater outfalls, coal storage and handling
areas, and barge and truck delivery systems for coal. The 5,300-foot
western boundary of the 260-acre Meredosia Power Station fronts the
Illinois River, where the station's oil and coal barge unloading
facilities are located. The land immediately adjacent to the station on
the north, northeast and southeast is railroad property; other
[[Page 29730]]
immediately adjacent property is roadway. Beyond and in addition to the
railroad property and roadways, land use is primarily residential to
the north and northeast, scattered residential and agricultural to the
east, and industrial to the south.
Oxy-Combustion Technology: This technology involves designing the
power plant's boiler to combust coal with a mixture of nearly pure
oxygen and recycled flue gas (which is primarily CO2) rather
than air. An air separation unit produces the oxygen. The concentrated
stream of CO2 that leaves the boiler would be ready for
processing by environmental cleanup equipment (to remove other captured
emissions) and the compression and purification unit. The concentrated
and compressed CO2 would then be transferred to a pipeline
for transmission to the Alliance's storage location. The oxy-combustion
technology during normal operations would produce near-zero emissions
of oxides of nitrogen (NOX), oxides of sulfur (SOx),
mercury, particulate matter and other pollutants typical of a
conventional coal-fired boiler. The plant would be designed to capture
approximately 1.3 million metric tons of CO2 per year from
the oxy-combustion system and is targeted to achieve a CO2
capture rate exceeding 90 percent.
Pipeline and CO2 Storage Reservoir
For the Pipeline and CO2 Storage Reservoir project, the
Alliance would design, construct, and operate a transmission pipeline
and geologic injection and storage facility. The Alliance's work
involves selection of a suitable storage site, development of the
subsurface storage field, development of CO2 transport
infrastructure (pipeline), and construction of the associated research
and training facilities, including a visitor center. The Alliance has
identified its preferred site in Morgan County, Illinois, for the
injection facility, and two other sites (one in Christian County and
one in Douglas County, Illinois) as potential alternate locations
should the preferred site prove infeasible. The Alliance's preferred
site for geologic storage in Morgan County, Illinois is approximately
30 miles from the Meredosia Power Station, and the Alliance's alternate
sites in Christian County and Douglas County, Illinois are
approximately 75 and 125 miles from the plant site, respectively. All
three sites would be evaluated in the EIS unless DOE determines that
they are not reasonable alternatives.
The Alliance would construct a pipeline to transport CO2
from the Meredosia Power Station to the selected storage site where it
would be injected through deep wells into the target geologic
formation. The pipeline and storage reservoir would be designed to
inject and store approximately 39 million metric tons over a 30-year
operating period. Depending on stakeholder and landowner acceptance,
the Alliance may also consider other sources of CO2 in
addition to that from Ameren's plant for injection. Research would
include site characterization, injection and storage, and
CO2 monitoring and measurement.
The target formation for CO2 injection and storage is
the Mount Simon sandstone formation, which is one of the Illinois
Basin's major deep saline formations. The formation's positive
characteristics for CO2 storage include its isolation from
other strata, as well as its depth, lateral continuity, and relative
permeability. The Mount Simon is bounded below by a Pre-Cambrian
igneous rock and above by the Eau Claire formation, which is a mixture
of tightly layered shales with low permeability, as well as by
secondary caprock formations above the Eau Claire. The Alliance would
implement a monitoring, verification, and accounting (MVA) program to
monitor the injection and storage of CO2 within the geologic
formations to verify that it stays within the target formation. The MVA
program would meet injection control permitting and requirements that
DOE may impose. In accordance with the Safe Drinking Water Act, the
Alliance would be required to obtain a Class VI underground injection
control permit from the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency. The MVA
program consists of the following components: (1) Injection system
monitoring; (2) containment monitoring (via monitoring wells,
mechanical integrity testing, and other means); (3) CO2
plume tracking via multiple techniques; (4) CO2 injection
simulation modeling; and (5) perhaps new experimental techniques not
yet in practice.
Proposed Project Schedules
The Oxy-Combustion Large Scale Test would initiate operations
(including CO2 capture, purification and compression) in
2016 and complete federally-funded project activities (operational
testing) in 2018. The Pipeline and CO2 Storage Reservoir
would become operational at the same time (2016) and complete
federally-funded project activities (operational testing and two-years
of additional federally-funded MVA activities) in 2020. CO2
capture, pipeline transport, injection, and MVA activities are expected
to operate (without federal funding) for approximately 30 years. MVA
activities would take place during injection and continue beyond its
cessation as prescribed by regulatory requirements. The schedule is
contingent upon Ameren and the Alliance receiving the necessary permits
and regulatory approvals, as well as financial closing on all the
necessary funding sources, including DOE's financial assistance. DOE's
proposal to provide full financial assistance for detailed design,
procurement of equipment, construction, and operations is contingent
upon DOE's completion of the NEPA process, and achievement of the
permitting and financial requirements listed above by Ameren and the
Alliance.
Connected and Cumulative Actions
The components of the FutureGen 2.0 program will be evaluated
individually and collectively within the EIS. Although injection of
other sources of CO2 is not currently proposed, such
injection is reasonably foreseeable and will be evaluated in the EIS.
DOE will also consider the cumulative impacts of the program, which
will include the analysis of emissions (including greenhouse gas
emissions) and other incremental impacts. Cumulative impacts are
impacts on the environment which result from the incremental impacts of
an action when added to other past, present, and reasonably foreseeable
future actions.
Alternatives
NEPA requires that an EIS evaluate the range of reasonable
alternatives to an agency's proposed action. DOE's range of reasonable
alternatives includes the No Action Alternative, which is to withhold
financial assistance for the FutureGen 2.0 program, and the Action
Alternative, which is to provide financial assistance to the FutureGen
2.0 program.
DOE has developed the range of reasonable alternatives for
FutureGen 2.0 program based on evaluation of various clean coal
technologies through the Clean Coal Power Initiative program; analysis
of the original FutureGen Project in terms of technology, costs, and
suitability for geologic storage; data obtained and reviewed through
various funding opportunity announcements; data obtained for the
original FutureGen Project and a related project called Restructured
FutureGen; and the interest of industry to participate in projects to
support FutureGen 2.0 based on these evaluations. In particular, DOE's
current proposal to advance the programmatic goal of CO2
storage in the
[[Page 29731]]
Mount Simon Formation in Illinois through the FutureGen Program was
addressed in its Final Environmental Impact Statement for the FutureGen
Project (DOE/EIS-0394 [November 2007]) and associated Record of
Decision (74 FR 35174 (2009)).
Through review and consideration of these data and analysis, the
repowering of an existing power plant with oxy-combustion technology
was identified as the approach that would meet cost and technology
advancement objectives of FutureGen Program. Furthermore, DOE
determined that due to cost and technical advantages obtained through
efforts conducted by the FutureGen Alliance under the original
FutureGen Project, that the Alliance's choice of geologic storage
formations would be limited to the Mount Simon Formation. Given these
factors, reasonable alternatives were limited to potential oxy-
combustion repowering projects at a location from which it would remain
economically viable to transport captured CO2 for injection
into the Mount Simon Formation.
The range of reasonable alternatives for a financial assistance
project that is proposed by industrial participants is limited to the
alternatives or project options under consideration by the participants
or that are reasonable within the confines of the project as proposed
(e.g., the particular location of the processing units, pipelines,
injection sites on land proposed for the project, and potential
measures to mitigate potential environmental impacts) and a ``no-
action'' alternative. Regarding the no action alternative, DOE assumes
for purposes of the EIS that, if DOE decides to withhold financial
assistance, the project would not proceed.
DOE will evaluate the two projects that constitute the FutureGen
2.0 program with and without any mitigating conditions that DOE may
identify as reasonable and appropriate. Alternatives considered in
developing respective components of the proposed FutureGen 2.0 program
and eliminated from further consideration will also be discussed in the
EIS.
The sequestration site would be designed to accept and store at a
minimum the CO2 captured at Ameren's Meredosia Power Station
over its 30-year design life. The Alliance undertook a site selection
process in October 2010 with the issuance of a Request for Proposals
seeking a site upon which the Alliance would construct and operate the
CO2 storage project. The Alliance hosted two public
meetings, one for prospective site offerors and a subsequent meeting
for the general public, on October 28, 2010, in Springfield, Illinois.
Representatives for 16 proposed sites attended the meeting, and the
Alliance received proposals from six sites in November 2010. In
December 2010, the Alliance selected four of the six sites for further
evaluation and subsequently identified three candidate sites, one
preferred and two alternates, which will be evaluated in the EIS.
DOE will also consider a no-action alternative whereby the
Department would not fund the FutureGen 2.0 program and the project
would not proceed. In the absence of DOE funding, it would be unlikely
that the project proponents, or industry in general, would soon
undertake the utility-scale integration of CO2 capture and
geologic storage with a coal-fired power plant repowered with oxy-
combustion. Absent DOE's investment in a utility-scale facility, the
development of oxy-combustion repowered plants integrated with
CO2 capture and geologic storage would occur more slowly or
not at all.
Decision Making Process
DOE will consider public scoping comments in preparing a Draft EIS,
which will be issued for public comment. DOE will consider public
comments on the Draft EIS and respond as appropriate in the Final EIS.
No sooner than 30 days following completion of the Final EIS, DOE would
announce its decision regarding whether to provide financial assistance
to these projects in a Record of Decision (ROD). If DOE decides to
provide financial assistance, the Alliance would develop its pipeline
and storage site. Similarly, Ameren would proceed with detailed design
and construction activities at the Meredosia site.
Floodplains and Wetlands
Activities required to implement the FutureGen 2.0 program, such as
those required to repower Unit 4 at the Meredosia Power Station, would
be undertaken to avoid or minimize potential impacts to wetlands or
floodplains. The Meredosia Power Station site includes low lying areas
to the west, north, and south, which are located in the floodplain.
However, the existing generating units as well as proposed locations
for the new oxy-combustion unit are located above the floodplain
elevation. Any wetland and floodplain impacts that might result from
installation of monitoring and injection wells, or the construction of
CO2 pipelines or other linear features required for this
program, will be described in the EIS. In the event that DOE were to
identify wetlands and floodplains that would be affected by the
FutureGen 2.0 program as a result of pipelines, injection facilities,
or connected actions, DOE would prepare a floodplain and wetland
assessment in accordance with its regulations at 10 CFR Part 1022, and
include the assessment in the Draft EIS.
Preliminary Identification of Environmental Issues
DOE intends to address the issues listed below when considering the
potential impacts resulting from the construction and operation of the
proposed FutureGen 2.0 program and any connected actions. This list is
neither intended to be all-inclusive, nor a predetermined set of
potential impacts. DOE invites comments on whether this is an
appropriate list of issues that should be considered in the EIS. The
preliminary list of potentially affected resources or activities and
their related environmental issues includes:
Air quality resources: Potential air quality impacts from emissions
during construction and operation of the repowered Unit 4 at the
Meredosia plant or CCS facilities and other related facilities on local
or regional air quality;
Climate change: Potential impacts from emissions of CO2
and other greenhouse gas emissions;
Water resources: Potential impacts from water utilization and
consumption, plus potential impacts from stream crossings and
wastewater discharges;
Infrastructure and land use: Potential environmental and
socioeconomic impacts associated with the project, including delivery
of feed materials and distribution of products (e.g., access roads,
pipelines);
Visual resources: Potential impacts to the view shed, scenic views
(e.g., impacts from the injection wells, pipelines, and support
facilities for the injection wells and pipelines), and perception of
the community or locality;
Solid wastes: Pollution prevention and waste management issues
(generation, treatment, transport, storage, disposal or use), including
potential impacts from the generation, treatment, storage, and
management of hazardous materials and other solid wastes;
Biological resources: Potential impacts to vegetation, wildlife,
threatened or endangered species, and ecologically sensitive habitats;
Floodplains and wetlands: Potential wetland and floodplain impacts
from construction of project facilities;
Traffic: Potential impacts from the construction and operation of
the facilities, including changes in local traffic patterns,
deterioration of roads, traffic hazards, and traffic controls;
[[Page 29732]]
Historic and cultural resources: Potential impacts related to site
development and the associated linear facilities (e.g., pipelines);
Geology: Potential impacts from the injection and storage of
CO2 on underground resources such as ground water supplies,
mineral resources, and fossil fuel resources, and the fate and
stability of CO2 being stored;
Health and safety issues: Potential impacts associated with use,
transport, and storage of hazardous chemicals, as well as
CO2 capture and transport to the sequestration site;
Socioeconomics: Potential impacts to schools, housing, public
services, and local revenues, including the creation of jobs;
Environmental justice: Potential for disproportionately high and
adverse impacts on minority and low-income populations;
Noise and light: Potential disturbance impacts from construction,
transportation of materials, and facility operations;
Connected actions: Potential impacts from the integrated operations
of the oxy-combustion project and sequestration project, as well as
potential development of support facilities or supporting
infrastructure;
Cumulative effects that could result from the incremental impacts
of the proposed project when added to other past, present, and
reasonably foreseeable future actions;
DOE will also address compliance with regulatory and environmental
permitting requirements and environmental monitoring plans associated
with the carbon capture facility and CO2 geologic storage
activities.
Public Scoping Process
This Notice of Intent initiates the scoping process under NEPA,
which will guide the development of the Draft EIS. To ensure
identification of issues related to DOE's proposed action with respect
to the proposed FutureGen 2.0 program, DOE seeks public input to define
the scope of the EIS. The public scoping period will end June 22, 2011.
Interested government agencies, Native American Tribes, private-sector
organizations, and the general public are encouraged to submit comments
or suggestions concerning the content of the EIS, issues and impacts
that should be addressed, and alternatives that should be considered.
Scoping comments should clearly describe specific issues or topics that
the EIS should address. Written, e-mailed, or faxed comments should be
received by June 22, 2011 (see ADDRESSES). DOE will consider late
comments to the extent practicable.
DOE will conduct public scoping meetings according to the following
schedule:
June 7, 2011--Taylorville High School, 815 W. Springfield Road,
Taylorville, IL 62568.
June 8, 2011--Ironhorse Golf Club, 2000 Ironhorse Drive, Tuscola, IL
61953.
June 9, 2011--The Jacksonville Elks Lodge, 231 West Morgan Street,
Jacksonville, IL 62650.
Each public scoping meeting will include an informal session from 5
to 7 p.m, followed by a formal presentation at 7 p.m.
Oral comments will be heard during the formal portion of the
scoping meetings. The public is also invited to learn more about the
project at an informal session at each location. DOE requests that
anyone who wishes to speak at the public scoping meetings should
contact Mr. Whyte, either by phone, e-mail, fax, or postal mail (see
ADDRESSES).
Those who do not arrange in advance to speak may register at the
meeting (preferably at the beginning of the meeting) and would be given
an opportunity to speak after previously scheduled speakers. Speakers
will be given approximately five minutes to present their 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 opportunity as time permits. Individuals may
also provide written materials in lieu of, or supplemental to, their
presentations. DOE will give equal consideration to oral and written
comments.
DOE will begin the formal meeting with an overview of the proposed
FutureGen 2.0 program. The meeting will not be conducted as an
evidentiary hearing, and speakers will not be cross-examined. However,
speakers may be asked questions to help ensure that DOE fully
understands the comments or suggestions. A presiding officer will
establish the order of speakers and provide any additional procedures
necessary to conduct the meeting. A stenographer will record the
proceedings, including all oral comments received.
Issued in Washington, DC, this 18th day of May 2011.
Charles D. McConnell,
Chief Operating Officer, Office of Fossil Energy.
[FR Doc. 2011-12632 Filed 5-20-11; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6450-01-P
