Successfully reported this slideshow.
We use your LinkedIn profile and activity data to personalize ads and to show you more relevant ads. You can change your ad preferences anytime.



Published on

Notice of Intent To Prepare an
Environmental Impact Statement for
Implementation of the FutureGen

  • Be the first to comment

  • Be the first to like this


  1. 1. 42840 Federal Register / Vol. 71, No. 145 / Friday, July 28, 2006 / Notices U.S. Department of Education, 830 First Council on Environmental Quality communities, the environmental Street, NE., Union Center Plaza, room (CEQ) NEPA regulations (40 CFR parts community, international stakeholders, #41B4, Washington, DC 20202–5320. 1500–1508), and the DOE NEPA and research organizations to participate Telephone: 202–377–3212; and as a implementing procedures (10 CFR part in the FutureGen Project through the secondary contact, Shirley Wheeler, 1021), to assess the potential NEPA process. Director, Collections Management, environmental impacts for the proposed Potential environmental impacts of Federal Student Aid, U.S. Department of action of providing Federal funding (up each of the four alternatives will be Education, 830 First Street, NE., Union to $700 million) for the FutureGen analyzed in detail in the EIS. Center Plaza, room #41F1, Washington, Project. The FutureGen Project would Reasonable power plant technologies DC 20202–5320. Telephone: (202) 377– comprise the planning, design, and component configurations proposed 3294. If you use a telecommunications construction and operation by a private- by the Alliance will be used in the device for the deaf (TTD), you may call sector organization of a coal-fueled evaluation. In addition, DOE will the Federal Relay Service (FRS) at 1– electric power and hydrogen gas (H2) consider potential mitigation 800–877–8339. production plant integrated with carbon opportunities in the EIS. Individuals with disabilities may dioxide (CO2) capture and geologic DATES: To ensure that all of the issues obtain this document in an alternative sequestration of the captured gas. related to this proposal are addressed, format (e.g., Braille, large print, Following an evaluation of 12 site DOE invites comments on the proposed audiotape, or computer diskette) on proposals from seven states, DOE scope and content of the EIS from all request to either contact person listed in identified four sites as reasonable interested parties. Comments must be the previous paragraph. alternatives: (1) Mattoon, Illinois; (2) received by September 13, 2006, to Tuscola, Illinois; (3) Jewett, Texas; and ensure consideration. Late comments Electronic Access to This Document (4) Odessa, Texas. DOE has prepared will be considered to the extent You may view this document, as well this Notice of Intent (NOI) to inform practicable. In addition to receiving as all other documents of this interested parties of the pending EIS comments in writing and by telephone Department published in the Federal and to invite public comments on the [See ADDRESSES below], DOE will Register, in text or Adobe portable proposed action, including: (1) The conduct public scoping meetings in document format (PDF) on the following proposed plans for implementing the which government agencies, private- site: FutureGen Project, (2) the range of sector organizations, and the general fedregister/index.html. environmental issues and alternatives to public are invited to present oral To use PDF you must have Adobe be analyzed, and (3) the nature of the comments or suggestions with regard to Acrobat Reader Program, which is impact analyses to be considered in the the alternatives and impacts to be available free at this site. If you have EIS. A general overview of the proposed considered in the EIS. Scoping meetings questions about using PDF, call the U.S. action was published on February 16, will be held during August 2006 near Government Printing Office (GPO), toll 2006, in an Advance Notice of Intent (71 each proposed project site, at locations free, at 1–888–293–6498; or in the FR 8283). and on dates to be announced in a Washington, DC, area at (202) 512–1530. DOE has signed a Cooperative future Federal Register notice and in Agreement that provides financial Note: The official version of this document local newspapers. Oral comments will assistance to the FutureGen Industrial is the document published in the Federal be heard during the scoping meetings Register. Free Internet access to the official Alliance, Inc. (Alliance) for implementing the FutureGen Project. beginning at 7 p.m. (See Public Scoping edition of the Federal Register and the Code Process). The public will be invited to of Federal Regulations is available on GPO The Alliance is a non-profit industrial consortium led by the coal-fueled an informal session of the scoping Access at: index.html. electric power industry and the coal meetings at the same locations production industry. Along with beginning at 4 p.m. to learn more about Authority: 5 U.S.C. 552a; Pub. L. 100–503; planning, designing, constructing and the proposed action. Various displays 26 U.S.C. 6103(m)(2) and (m)(4). operating the FutureGen power plant and other information about the Dated: July 25, 2006. and the sequestration facility, the proposed action will be available, and Theresa S. Shaw, Alliance would also monitor, measure, DOE personnel will be present at the and verify geologic sequestration of CO2. informal session to discuss the Chief Operating Officer, Federal Student Aid. The FutureGen Project aims to FutureGen Project and the EIS process. [FR Doc. E6–12131 Filed 7–27–06; 8:45 am] establish the technical and economic ADDRESSES: Comments on the proposed BILLING CODE 4000–01–P feasibility of co-producing electricity scope of the EIS and requests for copies and H2 from coal while capturing and of the Draft EIS may be submitted by fax sequestering the CO2 generated in the (304–285–4403), e-mail DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY process. FutureGen would employ (, or a letter integrated gasification combined-cycle addressed to the NEPA Document Notice of Intent To Prepare an (IGCC) power plant technology that for Manager for the FutureGen Project: Mr. Environmental Impact Statement for the first time would be integrated with Mark L. McKoy, National Energy Implementation of the FutureGen CO2 capture and geologic sequestration. Technology Laboratory, U.S. Project DOE is providing technical and Department of Energy, P.O. Box 880, AGENCY:Department of Energy. programmatic guidance to the Alliance, Morgantown, WV 26507–0880, Attn: ACTION:Notice of Intent to Prepare an retains certain review and approval FutureGen Project EIS. Environmental Impact Statement. rights as defined in the Cooperative Comments or requests to participate Agreement, and oversees Alliance in the public scoping process also can rwilkins on PROD1PC63 with NOTICES SUMMARY: The U.S. Department of activities for compliance with the terms be submitted by contacting Mr. Mark L. Energy (DOE) announces its intent to of the Cooperative Agreement. DOE is McKoy directly at telephone 304–285– prepare an Environmental Impact responsible for NEPA compliance 4426; toll free number 1–800–432–8330 Statement (EIS) pursuant to the National activities. Both DOE and the Alliance (extension 4426); fax 304–285–4403; or Environmental Policy Act (NEPA), the encourage state and local agencies, local e-mail VerDate Aug<31>2005 17:47 Jul 27, 2006 Jkt 208001 PO 00000 Frm 00046 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:FRFM28JYN1.SGM 28JYN1
  2. 2. Federal Register / Vol. 71, No. 145 / Friday, July 28, 2006 / Notices 42841 FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: To that combustion of fossil fuels leads to that support the goal of near-zero obtain additional information about this increased concentrations of CO2 and emissions. project, contact Mr. Mark L. McKoy by other greenhouse gases in the The FutureGen Project would proceed the means provided above. For general atmosphere. Combined, the electricity through 2018 with design, construction, information on the DOE NEPA process, and transportation sectors are operation, and monitoring. Performance please contact: Ms. Carol M. Borgstrom, responsible for nearly three-fourths of and economic tests results would be Director, Office of NEPA Policy and the country’s man-made greenhouse gas shared among all participants, industry, Compliance (EH–42), U.S. Department emissions. Because power plants are the environmental community, and the of Energy, 1000 Independence Avenue, stationary sources, it is more feasible to public. DOE intends to invite SW., Washington, DC 20585–0119. capture these emissions and sequester participation from international Telephone: 202–586–4600. Facsimile: them than it would be to capture organizations to maximize the global 202–586–7031. Or leave a toll-free greenhouse gas emissions from mobile applicability and acceptance of message at 1–800–472–2756. sources, such as automobiles. FutureGen’s results, helping to support SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: To this end, DOE has identified a an international consensus on the role need for a near-zero emissions, coal-to- of coal and geological sequestration in Background energy option that would produce addressing global greenhouse gas President Bush proposed on February electric power and H2 from coal while emissions and energy security. 27, 2003, that the United States permanently sequestering CO2 in deep undertake a $1 billion, 10-year project to geological formations. The technical, FutureGen Project Processes build the world’s first coal-fueled plant economic, and environmental feasibility The FutureGen Project would employ to produce electricity and H2 with near- of producing electric power and advanced coal gasification technology zero emissions. In response to this hydrogen from coal, when coupled with integrated with combined cycle announcement, the DOE developed sequestration technology, must be electricity generation, H2 production, plans for the FutureGen Project, which proven. In the absence of proven CO2 capture, and sequestration of the would establish the technical and operations of a large, integrated, near- captured gas in geologic repositories. economic feasibility of producing zero emissions power plant, the The gasification process would combine electricity and H2 from coal—a low-cost contribution of coal to the nation’s coal, oxygen (O2), and steam to produce and abundant energy resource—while energy mix could be reduced, a H2-rich ‘‘synthesis gas.’’ After exiting capturing and geologically storing the particularly if environmental the conversion reactor, the composition CO2 generated in the process. regulations continue to tighten, thereby DOE would implement the FutureGen of the synthesis gas would be ‘‘shifted’’ potentially increasing use of non- Project through a Cooperative to produce additional H2. The product domestic energy resources, and Agreement that provides financial impacting energy security. stream would consist mostly of H2, assistance to the FutureGen Industrial steam, and CO2. Following separation of Proposed Action these three gas components, the H2 Alliance, Inc., a non-profit corporation that represents a global coalition of coal DOE proposes to provide financial would be used to generate electricity in and energy companies. Members of the assistance (up to $700 million) for the a gas turbine and/or fuel cell. Some of Alliance would be expected to provide Alliance to implement the FutureGen the H2 could be used as a feedstock for an estimated $250 million to help fund Project. The Alliance would plan, chemical plants or petroleum refineries Project development. The Alliance design, construct, and operate the or as a transportation fuel. Steam from members are: American Electric Power FutureGen Project, an advanced the process could be condensed, treated, Company, Inc. (Columbus, Ohio); Anglo integrated coal gasification combined and recycled into the gasifier or added American, LLC (London, UK); BHP cycle power and hydrogen gas to the plant’s cooling water circuit. CO2 Billiton Limited (Melbourne, Australia); production plant and CO2 sequestration from the process would be sequestered China Huaneng Group (Beijing, China); facility sized nominally at 275 MW in deep underground geologic CONSOL Energy, Inc. (Pittsburgh, (equivalent output), and appurtenant formations that would be monitored to Pennsylvania); Foundation Coal facilities (electrical transmission line verify the permanence of CO2 storage. Holdings, Inc. (Linthicum Heights, connector, new pipelines and Technology Alternatives Maryland); Kennecott Energy (now: Rio compressor stations to convey CO2, Tinto Energy America based in Gillette, injection wells, and monitoring wells). The FutureGen Project would Wyoming); Peabody Energy Corporation The goal of this initiative would be to incorporate cutting-edge and emerging (St. Louis, Missouri); PPL Corporation prove the technical and economic technologies ready for full-scale or sub- (Allentown, Pennsylvania); and feasibility of a near-zero emissions, coal- scale testing in a power plant setting Southern Company (Atlanta, Georgia). to-energy plant that could be prior to their commercial deployment. The U.S. government would invest commercially deployed by 2020. During Identification of technology alternatives about $700 million in the FutureGen the first phase of the FutureGen Project, is currently in progress for key Project, with up to $80 million of that the Alliance and DOE would quantify components of the FutureGen facility, money coming from foreign the specific emissions objectives. The involving gasification, O2 production, governments. Several foreign FutureGen Project would co-produce H2 production, synthesis gas cleanup, governments have recently entered into electric power and H2 in an industrial/ H2 turbines, fuel cells and fuel cell/ discussions with DOE regarding utility setting while capturing and turbine hybrids, CO2 sequestration, possible contributions. geologically sequestering approximately advanced materials, instrumentation, one to two million metric tons of CO2 sensors and controls, and byproduct Purpose and Need for Agency Action per year. The FutureGen Project would utilization. Decisions on incorporation rwilkins on PROD1PC63 with NOTICES In pursuing the United States’ goal of be a prototype facility that would of specific technologies would be made providing safe, affordable and clean facilitate large-scale integrated testing of by the Alliance consistent with the energy for its citizens, coal must play an development-stage technologies and overall project goal of proving the important role in the Nation’s energy could also provide a test platform for technical and economic feasibility of the mix. A key obstacle, however, is the fact cutting-edge research on technologies near-zero emissions concept. VerDate Aug<31>2005 17:47 Jul 27, 2006 Jkt 208001 PO 00000 Frm 00047 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:FRFM28JYN1.SGM 28JYN1
  3. 3. 42842 Federal Register / Vol. 71, No. 145 / Friday, July 28, 2006 / Notices In identifying technology alternatives, results of the screening process, and Illinois—Tuscola the FutureGen Alliance started with a identifies the sites that the Alliance The proposed Tuscola site is a 208- list of major components and concludes are candidates. The report is acre parcel of land located in east- subsystems of the power plant facility available at the Web site of the central Illinois 1.5 miles west of the city and created a matrix of potential FutureGen Alliance, http:// of Tuscola and approximately 20 miles configurations of equipment. Following north of the Mattoon site. The city of presentations by various technology DOE has reviewed the Alliance’s Champaign is located approximately 20 vendors and with assistance from selection process for fairness and miles to the north, and Decatur is numerous power plant experts, the compliance with the established located approximately 35 miles to the matrix of potential configurations has approach, and DOE is satisfied with the west. This Douglas County site is been gradually reduced to three results. Furthermore, having considered located on flat farmland near an configurations, which will undergo all proposed site alternatives in industrial complex, which is more detailed cost and project risk ascertaining which ones were reasonable, DOE has determined that immediately west of the site. To the analysis. Ultimately, the Alliance will the Alliance’s candidate site list is the immediate north and south the area is identify the specific technology preliminary list of reasonable alternative rural with a very low population alternatives that would be most sites for detailed analysis in the EIS. density. From this site the proposed appropriate for the FutureGen Project. The preliminarily identified site project would be able to connect to the The goal of this process is to arrive at alternatives are: power line grid via construction of a an initial conceptual design, which also one-mile connection to reach the 138 kV will provide reference information to be Illinois—Mattoon line to the north, or a 14-mile used in the EIS impact analyses. It is expected that sequestration The proposed 240-acre Mattoon connection to reach the 345 kV line to would be accomplished using existing power plant site is located in east- the east. The site is situated along the state-of-the-art technologies for both central Illinois approximately one mile CSX railroad and is about three miles transmission and injection of the CO2 northwest of the city of Mattoon and from Interstate Highway 57. Therefore, stream. Various technologies will be approximately 150 miles south of it has access to coal delivery via rail and considered for monitoring at the Chicago. This Coles County site is truck, and natural gas would be injection sites. currently used as farmland, is flat, and supplied by an existing onsite pipeline. is surrounded by a rural area of low- The site is outside the 500-year Alternatives, Including the Proposed density population. The Rural King floodplain, and while no wetlands were Action warehouse is located nearby. The site identified on the site, wetlands are NEPA requires that agencies evaluate has access to coal delivery via rail and likely to occur in the proposed CO2 and the reasonable alternatives to the truck, and natural gas can be supplied electricity transmission corridors. proposed action in an EIS. The purpose via connection along rail right-of-way to Cooling water for the plant would be of the agency action determines the an existing pipeline located one mile obtained from the Equistar Chemical range of reasonable alternatives. In this from the site. Cooling water would be Company, which draws water directly case, DOE proposes to provide financial gray water from wastewater treatment from the Kaskaskia River 1.5 miles to assistance to the Alliance to build the facilities in Mattoon (five miles the west of the site, and would require first ever coal-fueled plant to produce southeast of the plant site) and the construction of a new pipeline of electricity and H2 with near-zero Charleston (13 miles east of the plant this length. An additional new pipeline emissions. DOE believes the utility and site) and would be delivered via between 9.5 and 11.5 miles in length coal industries should lead the project proposed new pipelines. Additional would also be required to transport CO2 since they have significant interest in water would be supplied from local to one of two potential injection fields the success of near-zero emissions potable sources or from the Kaskaskia due south of the plant site. The primary technology. River, which is located about five miles injection site, located 11.5 miles from The EIS will analyze reasonable to the north. Lake Shelbyville is more the plant site, is a 10-acre parcel in a alternative sites for the FutureGen than eight miles to the west. The site rural, agricultural area. Tuscola’s Project. These sites have been identified would require the construction of two proposed injection target is the Mt. through a process that started with a miles of additional transmission line to Simon sandstone, a saline-bearing solicitation by the Alliance for reach a 138 kV substation southeast of formation expected to be between 1200 proposals. Twelve proposals were the site or 16 miles of new line to and 1800 meters (4000 and 5900 ft) deep submitted by state and local connect to a 345 kV substation south of at the proposed injection site. The organizations, representing sites in the site. The site is outside the 500-year primary cap rock here is the Eau Claire seven states (Illinois, Kentucky, North floodplain, and while no wetlands were Formation, which is a laterally Dakota, Ohio, Texas, West Virginia, and identified onsite, wetlands may be persistent shale expected to be between Wyoming). The Alliance, working present 0.75 mile downstream of the site 100 and 150 meters (330 and 500 ft) through various technical experts, first and may also exist in the water supply thick at the Tuscola injection site. applied qualifying criteria that pipeline corridors. CO2 injection is eliminated four sites and then subjected proposed onsite, requiring no offsite Texas—Jewett the remaining site proposals to scoring pipeline construction. The Mt. Simon Located north of the town of Jewett, criteria. Along with the scoring criteria, saline-bearing sandstone, the injection in east-central Texas, 65 miles north of best value criteria were applied in the target at Mattoon, is expected to be Bryan/College Station, and 60 miles east final step of determining which sites are between 1800 and 2100 meters (5900 of Waco, the proposed 400-acre Jewett reasonable from a technical, and 6900 ft) deep beneath the site. The site is also known as the ‘‘Heart of rwilkins on PROD1PC63 with NOTICES environmental and economic Mt. Simon is capped by the Eau Claire Brazos’’ site. The site is located at the perspective. At the conclusion of the Formation, which is a laterally intersection of Leon, Limestone and review of proposals, the Alliance persistent shale expected to be between Freestone counties along U.S. Highway provided DOE with a report that 100 and 150 meters (330 and 500 ft) 79 and Farm Road 39 in an area describes the screening process, the thick at Mattoon. characterized by very gently rolling VerDate Aug<31>2005 17:47 Jul 27, 2006 Jkt 208001 PO 00000 Frm 00048 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:FRFM28JYN1.SGM 28JYN1
  4. 4. Federal Register / Vol. 71, No. 145 / Friday, July 28, 2006 / Notices 42843 reclaimed mine lands immediately pipeline network. A short new CO2 Decision Making Process adjacent to an operating lignite mine pipeline would connect the power plant No sooner than 30 days following and the 1800 MW Jewett power plant. site to the existing pipeline, and a new completion of the Final EIS, DOE will It has access to coal delivery via rail and four-mile (approximately) pipeline announce in a Record of Decision (ROD) truck, and natural gas would be would connect the existing CO2 pipeline either the no-action alternative or those supplied by an existing onsite pipeline. to the proposed injection sites. Proposed sites, if any, that are acceptable to DOE. Proposed groundwater wells on injection targets for this site are the If DOE selects the action alternative, the property immediately west of the site Queen Formation and the Delaware Alliance will subsequently select a host would supply cooling water to the plant Mountain Group, both of which are site from among those, if any, listed in via a new pipeline. Transmission more than 1100 meters (3600 ft) deep the ROD as acceptable to DOE. infrastructure with excess capacity beneath grazing lands and scrub lands at Following the tentative selection of a exists on the site. This site is outside of the site. The system is capped by layers host site, the Alliance will conduct the 500-year floodplain. There are no of anhydrite, dolomitic anhydrite, and extensive site characterization work on jurisdictional wetlands on the site. Lake anhydrite-halite, which are identified as the chosen site. Information obtained Limestone and the Navasota River are the upper Queen and the overlying from the characterization will be located about 3.5 miles to the west. It Seven Rivers Formations. reviewed by the DOE and will support would be necessary to construct 33 In addition to the site alternatives the completion of a supplement analysis miles of new CO2 pipeline, 25 miles of which would be built along an existing preliminarily identified in the NOI, the (see 10 CFR 1021.314) by DOE to gas pipeline right-of-way, to transport EIS will describe different technologies determine whether the newly gained CO2 to the storage site, which is located information would have altered in a and strategies for implementing on 1550 acres located northeast of the significant way the findings in the EIS. important elements of the FutureGen power plant site. The land use at the The supplement analysis will be used to Project. Critical technology alternatives sequestration site is pastures, wooded determine whether a Supplemental EIS for various components and subsystems must be prepared. hills and open fields. The proposed of an integrated gasification combined- target injection formations are the Travis cycle power plant exist for the air Preliminary Identification of Peak sandstone, and the Rodessa and separation unit (e.g., cryogenic Environmental Issues Pettit limestones, all of which are separation versus physical membrane DOE intends to address the issues saline-bearing formations between 1400 separation), gasifier (various commercial listed below when considering the and 3600 meters (4600 and 11,800 ft) gasifiers with differing feed types, wall deep. The primary seal overlying these potential impacts resulting from the structures, and ash/slag recovery and siting, construction and operation of the formations is the 120-meter (400 ft) cooler systems), gas turbine (e.g., syngas FutureGen power plant, sequestration thick Eagleford Shale. turbine versus H2 turbine), CO2 capture field, and associated facilities. This list Texas—Odessa system (e.g., chemical scrubbers, is neither intended to be all-inclusive The proposed Odessa site is located pressure-swing absorption systems, nor a predetermined set of potential on 600 acres, approximately 15 miles physical membranes), and synthesis gas impacts. DOE invites comments on southwest of the city of Odessa in Ector as well as turbine combustion gas clean- whether this is the correct list of County, Texas. The site is on flat land up systems (e.g., selective catalytic important issues that should be adjacent to Interstate Highway 20. There reduction versus selective non-catalytic considered in the EIS. The is an extensive junk yard of abandoned reduction). The Alliance will provide to environmental issues include: oil and gas equipment along the site’s DOE a conceptual design that will be • Air quality impacts: potential for air southern border. The proposed power analyzed in the EIS for each of the emissions during construction and plant property is entirely above the 500- alternative sites. This conceptual design operation of the power plant and year floodplain and contains no will encompass the power plant and appurtenant facilities to impact local jurisdictional wetlands. Surrounding sequestration requirements and sensitive receptors, local environmental land is or was used primarily for oil and attributes (e.g., emissions, effluents, feed conditions, and special-use areas, gas exploration with some scattered stocks, workers) for any of the including impacts to smog and haze and industrial plants (sulfur manufacturing, technology alternatives that may be impacts from dust and any significant cement kiln, etc.). The site has access to selected by the Alliance in the final vapor plumes; coal delivery via rail and truck, and designs. Mitigation will be addressed for • Noise and light impacts: potential natural gas would be supplied by an the potential impacts of the FutureGen impacts from construction, existing onsite pipeline. Water would be Project at each of the four sites and for transportation of materials, and facility provided via a pipeline to be the conceptual design and technologies operations; constructed by the City of Odessa to considered. • Traffic issues: potential impacts transport water from the Texland Great from the construction and operation of Plains Water Supply well located 49 DOE will also consider a no-action the facilities, including changes in local miles to the north, which produces alternative whereby DOE would not traffic patterns, deterioration of roads, water from the Ogallala aquifer. fund the FutureGen Project. In the traffic hazards, and traffic controls; Alternatively, water may be purchased absence of DOE funding, it would be • Floodplains: potential impacts to from the West Texas Water Supply unlikely that the Alliance, or industry in flood flow resulting from earthen fills, System, located 37 miles west of the general, would soon undertake the access roads, and dikes that might be site. Two miles of new transmission line utility-scale integration of CO2 capture needed in a floodplain; would be needed to connect the plant to and geologic sequestration with a coal- • Wetlands: potential impacts rwilkins on PROD1PC63 with NOTICES either a 138 kV line or a 345 kV line. fired power plant. Absent DOE’s resulting from fill, sediment deposition, The proposed 6,000-acre injection field investment in a utility-scale facility, the vegetation clearing and facility erection is 58 miles south of the Odessa plant development of integrated CO2 capture that might be needed in a wetland; site. CO2 would be transported in (and and sequestration with power plant • Visual impacts associated with co-mingled in) an existing regional CO2 operations would occur more slowly. facility structures: views from VerDate Aug<31>2005 17:47 Jul 27, 2006 Jkt 208001 PO 00000 Frm 00049 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:FRFM28JYN1.SGM 28JYN1
  5. 5. 42844 Federal Register / Vol. 71, No. 145 / Friday, July 28, 2006 / Notices neighborhoods, impacts to scenic views Proposed EIS Schedule materials to supplement their (e.g., impacts from water vapor plumes, A tentative schedule has been presentations. Oral and written power transmission lines, pipelines), developed for the EIS. The public comments will be given equal internal and external perception of the scoping period will close on September consideration. State and local elected community or locality; 13, 2006. The Draft EIS is scheduled to officials and tribal leaders may be given • Historic and cultural resources: priority in the order of those making be issued for public review and potential impacts from the site oral comments. comment in March 2007, followed by a selection, design, construction and DOE will begin the meeting with an 45-day public comment period and operation of the facilities; overview of the proposed FutureGen • Water quality impacts: potential public hearings. The Final EIS is scheduled to be issued in June 2007, Project. The meeting will not be impacts from water utilization and conducted as an evidentiary hearing, consumption, plus potential impacts followed by the ROD in August 2007. and speakers will not be cross- from wastewater discharges; Public Scoping Process examined. However, speakers may be • Infrastructure and land use impacts: asked questions to help ensure that DOE potential environmental and To ensure that all issues related to this proposed action are addressed, DOE fully understands the comments or socioeconomic impacts of project site suggestions. A presiding officer will selection, construction, delivery of feed seeks public input to define the scope of the EIS. The public scoping period establish the order of speakers and materials, and distribution of products provide any additional procedures (e.g., power transmission lines, will begin with publication of the NOI and end on September 13, 2006. necessary to conduct the meeting. pipelines); • Marketability of products and Interested government agencies, private- Issued in Washington, DC, this 25th day of market access to feedstocks; sector organizations and the general July, 2006. • Solid wastes: pollution prevention public are encouraged to submit Andrew Lawrence, plans and waste management strategies, comments or suggestions concerning the Acting Assistant Secretary, Environment, including the handling of ash, slag, content of the EIS, issues and impacts Safety and Health. water treatment sludge, and hazardous to be addressed in the EIS, and [FR Doc. E6–12118 Filed 7–27–06; 8:45 am] materials; alternatives that should be considered. BILLING CODE 6450–01–P • Disproportionate impacts on Scoping comments should clearly minority and low-income populations; describe specific issues or topics that • Connected actions: potential the EIS should address to assist DOE in development of support facilities or identifying significant issues. Written, e- ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION supporting infrastructure; mailed, faxed, or telephoned comments AGENCY • Ecological impacts: potential on-site should be received by September 13, [ER–FRL–6677–7] and off-site impacts to vegetation, 2006 (see ADDRESSES). terrestrial wildlife, aquatic wildlife, DOE will conduct public scoping Environmental Impact Statements and threatened or endangered species, and meetings at locations, dates and times Regulations; Availability of EPA ecologically sensitive habitats; specified in a future Federal Register Comments • Geologic impacts: potential impacts notice and in notices published in local from the sequestration of CO2 and other newspapers. These notices are Availability of EPA comments captured gases on underground scheduled to be published within the prepared pursuant to the Environmental resources such as potable water next two weeks and will provide the Review Process (ERP), under section supplies, mineral resources, and fossil public with at least two weeks notice. 309 of the Clean Air Act and section fuel resources; Generally, one scoping meeting will be 102(2)(c) of the National Environmental • Ground surface impacts from CO2 held near each proposed power plant Policy Act as amended. Requests for sequestration: potential impacts from site. copies of EPA comments can be directed leakage of injected CO2, potential An informal session of the public to the Office of Federal Activities at impacts from induced flows of native scoping meetings will begin at 202–564–7167. fluids to the ground surface or near the approximately 4 p.m., followed by a An explanation of the ratings assigned ground surface, and the potential for formal session beginning at to draft environmental impact induced ground heave and/or approximately 7 p.m. Members of the statements (EISs) was published in FR microseisms; public who wish to speak at a public dated April 7, 2006 (71 FR 17845). • Fate and stability of sequestered scoping meeting should contact Mr. Draft EISs CO2 and other captured gases; • Health and safety issues associated Mark L. McKoy, either by phone, fax, e-mail, or in writing (see ADDRESSES in EIS No. 20060093, ERP No. D–AFS– with CO2 capture and sequestration; K61164–CA, Commercial Pack Station • Cumulative effects that result from this Notice). Those who do not arrange in advance to speak may register at a and Pack Stock Outfitter/Guide the incremental impacts of the proposed meeting (preferably at the beginning of Permit Issuance, Implementation, project when added to other past, the meeting) and may speak after Special-Use-Permit to Twelve Pack present, and reasonably foreseeable previously scheduled speakers. Station and Two Outfitter/Guides, future projects; • Compliance with regulatory Speakers will be given approximately Inyo National Forest, CA. requirements and environmental five minutes to present their comments. Summary: EPA expressed permitting; Those speakers who want more than environmental concerns about adverse • Environmental monitoring plans five minutes should indicate the length impacts to water quality from specific associated with the power plant and of time desired in their request. campsites, grazing, and trail use, and rwilkins on PROD1PC63 with NOTICES with the CO2 sequestration site; Depending on the number of speakers, recommended implementation of • Mitigation of identified DOE may need to limit all speakers to protective measures described in environmental impacts; and five minutes initially and provide Alternative 3 and the inclusion of a • Ultimate closure plans for the CO2 second opportunities as time permits. detailed monitoring and enforcement sequestration site and reservoirs. Speakers may also provide written plan in the final EIS. Rating EC2. VerDate Aug<31>2005 17:47 Jul 27, 2006 Jkt 208001 PO 00000 Frm 00050 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:FRFM28JYN1.SGM 28JYN1