The U.S. Department of Energy announces its intent to prepare an Environmental Impact Statement to assess the potential environmental impacts of providing financial assistance for the construction and operation of a project proposed by Hydrogen Energy California LLC.

1. Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 65 / Tuesday, April 6, 2010 / Notices 17397
will meet to review, develop and competitive process under the Clean under what circumstances it would
provide recommendations on all aspects Coal Power Initiative (CCPI) program. provide financial assistance to the
of the academic and administrative The project proposed by HECA would project. There are a number of state and
policies of the University; examine all demonstrate Integrated Gasification federal agencies that do have regulatory
aspects of professional military Combined Cycle (IGCC) technology with authority over the project; one of them
education operations; and provide such carbon capture in a new baseload is the California Energy Commission
oversight and advice, as is necessary, to electric generating plant in Kern (CEC), which is responsible for power
facilitate high educational standards County, California. The plant would use plant licensing under the Warren-
and cost effective operations. The Board blends of coal and petroleum coke Alquist Act (Cal. Pub. Res. Code section
will be focusing primarily on the (petcoke) or petcoke alone as its 25500 et seq.). This licensing process,
internal procedures of the Marine Corps feedstock, and would demonstrate which will consider all relevant
University. All sessions of the meeting carbon capture and sequestration on a environmental aspects of HECA’s
will be open to the public. commercial scale. proposed project and related facilities,
DATES: The meeting will be held on
The HECA project would gasify the is defined by California law, and under
Friday, April 30, 2010, from 8 a.m. to coal and petcoke to produce synthesis state law is certified as fulfilling the
4:30 p.m. gas (syngas), which would then be requirements of the California
processed and purified to produce a Environmental Quality Act (CEQA; Cal.
ADDRESSES: The meeting will be held at
hydrogen-rich fuel. The hydrogen Pub. Res. Code section 21000 et seq.).
Marine Corps University President’s would be used to power a combustion
Conference Room (Hooper Room). The Under this certified process, CEC holds
turbine, generating electricity while public hearings, makes a final staff
address is: 2076 South Street, Quantico, minimizing emissions of sulfur dioxide,
Virginia 22134. assessment, conducts evidentiary
nitrogen oxides, mercury, and hearings, and issues a decision based on
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: particulates compared to conventional
Mary Lanzillotta, Executive Secretary, the hearing record, which includes the
coal-fired power plants. In addition, the staff’s and other parties’ assessments.
Marine Corps University Board of project would achieve a carbon dioxide
Visitors, 2076 South Street, Quantico, Through this process, the CEC staff will
(CO2) capture efficiency of conduct an independent analysis of the
Virginia 22134, telephone number 703– approximately 90 percent at steady-state
784–4037. proposed project and prepare an
operation. The captured CO2 would be independent assessment of its potential
Dated: March 30, 2010. compressed and transported via environmental impacts, conditions of
A.M. Vallandingham, pipeline to the adjacent Elk Hills Field certification (e.g. mitigation measures),
Lieutenant Commander, Judge Advocate (owned and operated by Occidental of and alternatives. The staff will consult
Generals Corps, U.S. Navy, Federal Register Elk Hills, Inc.) for injection into deep with interested Native American tribes
Liaison Officer. underground oil and gas reservoirs for
and local, regional, state, and federal
[FR Doc. 2010–7730 Filed 4–5–10; 8:45 am] enhanced oil recovery (EOR) and
agencies, and CEC will coordinate its
geologic sequestration.
BILLING CODE 3810–FF–P
The EIS will inform DOE’s decision environmental review with other
on whether to provide financial agencies, including the California
assistance under its CCPI Program to the Department of Oil, Gas and Geothermal
DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY project proposed by HECA, which has Resources (DOGGR). DOE understands
an estimated capital cost of $2.3 billion. that, pursuant to California law and a
Hydrogen Energy California’s grant of primacy from the United States
Integrated Gasification Combined DOE’s financial assistance (or ‘‘cost
share’’) would be limited to $308 Environmental Protection Agency
Cycle Project, Kern County, CA— regarding Class II wells under section
Notice of Intent To Prepare an million, about 11 percent of the project’s
total cost. DOE’s financial assistance is 1425 of the Safe Drinking Water Act,
Environmental Impact Statement and DOGGR has responsibility for
also limited to certain aspects of the
Notice of Potential Floodplain and permitting EOR injection and extraction
power plant, carbon capture, and
Wetlands Involvement wells, and is likely to have the
sequestration. The EIS will evaluate the
AGENCY: Department of Energy. potential impacts of DOE’s proposed regulatory lead for the CO2 sequestration
action (provision of financial aspects of the proposed project, and
ACTION: Notice of intent and notice of
assistance), the project proposed by would impose permit conditions on
potential floodplain and wetlands
HECA and any connected actions, and these aspects of the project that are
involvement.
reasonable alternatives to DOE’s needed to ensure the HECA project’s
SUMMARY: The U.S. Department of proposed action. The purposes of this compliance with California’s
Energy (DOE or the Department) Notice of Intent are to: (1) Inform the requirements regarding CO2 emissions
announces its intent to prepare an public about DOE’s proposed action and from power plants.1
Environmental Impact Statement (EIS) HECA’s proposed project; (2) announce DOE intends to coordinate its NEPA
pursuant to the National Environmental the public scoping meeting; (3) solicit review of the HECA project with the
Policy Act of 1969 (NEPA) (42 U.S.C. comments for DOE’s consideration environmental review conducted by
4321 et seq.), the Council on regarding the scope and content of the CEC as lead agency under CEQA. It will
Environmental Quality’s NEPA EIS; (4) invite those agencies with work closely with CEC throughout its
regulations (40 CFR parts 1500–1508), jurisdiction by law or special expertise regulatory processes in order to
and DOE’s NEPA regulations (10 CFR to be cooperating agencies in integrate the NEPA and CEQA processes
sroberts on DSKD5P82C1PROD with NOTICES
part 1021) to assess the potential preparation of the EIS; and (5) provide in an efficient and expeditious manner.
environmental impacts of providing notice that the proposed project may In particular, DOE will work with CEC
financial assistance for the construction involve potential impacts to floodplains
1 DOE anticipates that, pursuant to Cal. Pub. Res.
and operation of a project proposed by and wetlands.
Code section 21000 et seq., California agencies will
Hydrogen Energy California LLC DOE does not have regulatory impose mitigation measures to address potential
(HECA). DOE selected this project for an jurisdiction over the HECA project. Its impacts and project design elements to verify the
award of financial assistance through a decisions are limited to whether and sequestration of CO2 injected for EOR.
VerDate Nov<24>2008 16:37 Apr 05, 2010 Jkt 220001 PO 00000 Frm 00030 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:FRFM06APN1.SGM 06APN1

2. 17398 Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 65 / Tuesday, April 6, 2010 / Notices
on making the environmental analyses Background submission of applications.
conducted for CEC’s regulatory Since the early 1970s, DOE and its Applications are reviewed according to
processes as useful as possible in DOE’s predecessor agencies have pursued the criteria specified in the funding
NEPA process. research and development programs opportunity announcement; these
that include large, technically complex criteria include technical, financial,
DATES: DOE invites comments on the
projects in pursuit of innovation in a environmental, and other
proposed scope and content of the EIS considerations. DOE selects the projects
from all interested parties. Comments wide variety of coal technologies
through the proof-of-concept stage. that demonstrate the most promise
must be received by May 24, 2010, to when evaluated against these criteria,
ensure consideration. DOE will consider However, helping a technology reach
the proof-of-concept stage does not and enters into a cooperative agreement
scoping comments submitted after this with the applicant. These agreements
date to the extent practicable. In ensure its continued development or
set out the project’s objectives, the
addition to receiving comments in commercialization. Before a technology
obligations of the parties, and other
writing and by telephone, DOE will can be considered seriously for
features of the partnership. Applicants
conduct a public scoping meeting in commercialization, it must be
must agree to provide at least 50 percent
which agencies, organizations, and demonstrated at a sufficient scale to
of their project’s cost; for most CCPI
individuals are invited to present oral prove its reliability and economically
projects, the applicant’s cost share is
and written comments and suggestions competitive performance. The financial
much greater.
with regard to DOE’s proposed action, risk associated with such large-scale To date the CCPI program has
alternatives, and potential impacts of demonstration projects is often too high conducted three rounds of solicitations
HECA’s project that DOE will consider for the private sector to assume in the and project selections. The first round
in the EIS. The scoping meeting will be absence of strong incentives. sought projects that would demonstrate
held in Salon A of the Bakersfield The CCPI program was established in advanced technologies for power
Marriott at the Convention Center, 801 2002 as a government and private sector generation and improvements in plant
Truxtun Avenue, Bakersfield, partnership to implement the efficiency, economics, and
California, at 7 p.m. on Wednesday, recommendation in President Bush’s environmental performance. Round 2
April 14, 2010. The public is also National Energy Policy to increase requested applications for projects that
invited to learn more about the investment in clean coal technology. would demonstrate improved mercury
proposed project at an informal session Through cooperative agreements with controls and gasification technology.
at this location beginning at 5 p.m. its private sector partners, the program Round 3, which DOE conducted in two
Displays and other information about advances clean coal technologies to phases, sought projects that would
DOE’s proposed action and the HECA commercialization; these technologies demonstrate advanced coal-based
project will be available, and often involve combustion electricity generating technologies
representatives from DOE and HECA improvements, control systems which capture and sequester (or put to
will be present at the informal session advances, gasifier design, pollution beneficial use) carbon dioxide
to discuss the proposed project, DOE’s reduction (including greenhouse gas emissions. DOE’s overarching goal for
CCPI program, and the EIS process. reduction), efficiency increases, fuel Round 3 projects was to demonstrate
processing, and others. technologies at commercial scale in a
ADDRESSES: Written comments on the The Congress established criteria for commercial setting that would: (1)
scope of the EIS and requests to projects receiving financial assistance Operate at 90 percent capture efficiency
participate in the public scoping under this program in Title IV of the for CO2; (2) make progress towards
meeting should be addressed to: Dr. R. Energy Policy Act of 2005 (Pub. L. 109– capture and sequestration at less than a
Paul Detwiler, U.S. Department of 58) (EPACT 2005). Under this statute, 10 percent increase in the cost of
Energy, National Energy Technology CCPI projects must ‘‘advance efficiency, electricity for gasification systems and a
Laboratory, 626 Cochrans Mill Road, environmental performance, and cost less than 35 percent increase for
P.O. Box 10940, Pittsburgh, PA 15236– competitiveness well beyond the level combustion and oxycombustion
0940. Individuals who would like to of technologies that are in commercial systems; and (3) make progress toward
provide oral or electronic comments service’’ (Pub. L. 109–58, section 402(a)). capture and sequestration of 50 percent
should contact Dr. Detwiler directly by In February 2009, the American of the facility’s CO2 output at a scale
telephone: 412–386–7349; toll-free Recovery and Reinvestment Act of 2009 sufficient to evaluate the full impacts of
number: 1–866–269–6493; fax: 412– (Pub. L. 111–5, 123 Stat. 115 (Feb. 17, carbon capture technology on a
386–6127; or electronic mail: 2009)) (ARRA) appropriated $3.4 billion generating plant’s operations,
heca.eis@netl.doe.gov. to DOE for ‘‘Fossil Energy Research and economics and performance. The HECA
Development;’’ the Department intends project was one of two selected in the
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: For
to use a significant portion of these first phase of Round 3. DOE entered into
information about this project or to
funds to provide financial assistance to a cooperative agreement with HECA on
receive a copy of the draft EIS when it
CCPI projects. September 30, 2009.
is issued, contact Dr. Detwiler as
The CCPI program selects projects for
described above. For general Purpose and Need for DOE Action
its government-private sector
information on the DOE NEPA process,
partnerships through an open and The purpose and need for DOE
contact Ms. Carol M. Borgstrom,
competitive process. Potential private action—providing limited financial
Director, Office of NEPA Policy and
sector partners may include developers assistance to HECA’s project—are to
sroberts on DSKD5P82C1PROD with NOTICES
Compliance (GC–54), U.S. Department
of technologies, utilities and other advance the CCPI program by funding
of Energy, 1000 Independence Avenue,
energy producers, service corporations, projects that have the best chance of
SW., Washington, DC 20585–0103;
research and development firms, achieving the program’s objective as
telephone: 202–586–4600; fax: 202–
software developers, academia and established by the Congress: The
586–7031; or leave a toll-free message at
others. DOE issues funding opportunity commercialization of clean coal
1–800–472–2756.
announcements that specify the types of technologies that advance efficiency,
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: projects it is seeking, and invites environmental performance, and cost
VerDate Nov<24>2008 16:37 Apr 05, 2010 Jkt 220001 PO 00000 Frm 00031 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:FRFM06APN1.SGM 06APN1

3. Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 65 / Tuesday, April 6, 2010 / Notices 17399
competitiveness well beyond the level CO2 generated during steady-state line would be approximately 7 miles in
of technologies that are currently in operation. The CO2 would be piped length. The project would recycle water
commercial service. offsite for EOR and geologic and would incorporate zero liquid
sequestration in the Elk Hills Field, discharge (ZLD) technology for process
Site of the Project Proposed by HECA
located approximately 4 miles and other wastewater from plant
HECA proposes to construct its IGCC southwest of the project’s location. operations. Therefore, there would be
baseload electric generating facility on a The proposed plant would minimize no industrial wastewater discharge.
site currently used for agriculture in sulfur dioxide, nitrogen oxides, Sanitary wastewater would be disposed
Kern County, California. The 1,101 acre mercury, and particulate emissions as of in an onsite leach field (e.g., a septic
site (473 acres of which would be used compared to conventional coal-fired system) in accordance with applicable
for the project and 628 acres for a power plants. It is expected to remove law.
controlled buffer area) is located in in excess of 99 percent of the sulfur
south-central California near the The site of the proposed project is
dioxide produced by the plant and
unincorporated community of Tupman, about 8 miles southeast of Pacific Gas &
would also control emissions of
approximately 7 miles west of the city Electric Company’s Midway Substation.
nitrogen oxides, carbon monoxide, and
of Bakersfield. The site’s topography is A 345-kilovolt (kV) transmission line
volatile organic compounds. In
characterized by relatively flat, low- would be constructed to interconnect
addition, over 99 percent of the mercury
lying terrain that slopes very gently in the feedstock would be removed and the project to the grid at this existing
from southeast to northwest. over 99 percent of the particulates in the substation, and to provide firm
The IGCC facilities would occupy syngas would be removed using liquid transmission service for the plant’s
approximately 250 acres (or less than 25 scrubbing. output. This transmission line would
percent) of the site. Most of the Solids generated by the gasifiers follow a relatively direct route between
remainder of the site would continue to would be accumulated onsite and made the plant and the substation, and
be used for agriculture; some areas available for appropriate recycling or therefore would be about 8 miles long.
would be occupied by new process and beneficial use, and if these options are Rights-of-way (ROW) up to 175 feet in
potable water pipelines, a transmission not available, disposed of in accordance width would be required for this new
line, a natural gas supply pipeline, a with applicable laws. It is anticipated line.
CO2 pipeline, access roads and fuel- that a significant fraction of the HECA would also construct an
handling facilities. gasification solids with fuel value can approximately 8-mile natural gas supply
be segregated and returned to the pipeline extending southeast from the
Proposed Generating Plant gasification process; the solids without site, and an approximately 4-mile CO2
The HECA project would demonstrate fuel value would be beneficially used or pipeline extending from the site to a
IGCC and carbon capture technology on properly disposed of. This return of custody transfer point where Occidental
a commercial scale in a new power solids with fuel value to the gasification would take possession of the CO2 and
plant consisting of three gasifiers with process limits the amount of solids that continue its transportation via pipeline
gas cleanup systems, a gas combustion must be disposed of as waste or to the Elk Hills Field for EOR use and
turbine, a heat recovery steam generator, beneficially used for another purpose. geologic sequestration. The ROW for
a steam turbine, and associated In addition to the gasifiers and these underground pipelines would be
facilities. turbines, the plant’s equipment would approximately 50 feet wide.
The plant proposed by HECA would include stacks, mechanical-draft cooling
gasify petcoke and coal to produce towers, syngas cleanup facilities, and Proposed Use of CO2 for EOR and
syngas, which would then be processed particulate filtration systems. The height Sequestration
and purified to produce a hydrogen-rich of the tallest proposed stack would be
According to HECA’s proposal, the
fuel. The hydrogen would be used to approximately 260 feet above ground.
project would result in the sequestration
drive the gas combustion turbine. Hot The plant would also require systems
of about two million tons of CO2 per
exhaust gas from the gas combustion for feedstock handling and storage, as
year during the demonstration phase
turbine would generate steam from well as on-site roads, administration
funded in part by DOE; HECA
water in the heat recovery steam buildings, water and wastewater
anticipates this rate would continue for
generator to drive the steam turbine; treatment systems, and management
the operational life of the power plant.
both turbines would generate baseload facilities for handling gasification
The captured CO2 would be compressed
electricity. At full capacity, the plant solids.
and transported via pipeline to the Elk
would be expected to use about 3,200
Proposed Linear Facilities Hills Oil Field approximately 4 miles
tons of feedstock per day (about 1.2
Linear facilities are the pipelines and from the power plant. The CO2 would
million tons per year). HECA would
electrical lines that transport materials enable additional domestic oil
transport petcoke to the site by truck.
and power to and from the plant. The production, contributing to the nation’s
Coal would be brought to a nearby
source of process water for the plant energy security.
railhead and transferred to trucks for
delivery to the site. would be brackish groundwater The EOR process involves the
Combined, the gas combustion and supplied by the Buena Vista Water injection and reinjection of CO2 to
steam turbines would generate Storage District; approximately 5 reduce the viscosity and enhance other
approximately 390 MW gross capacity million gallons per day would be properties of the trapped oil that
(250 MW net) of low-carbon baseload required for cooling water makeup, facilitate its flow through the reservoir,
sroberts on DSKD5P82C1PROD with NOTICES
electricity. This combined-cycle steam cycle makeup, and other improving extraction. During EOR
approach of using gas and steam processes. The process water pipeline operations, the pore space left by the
turbines in tandem increases the would be approximately 15 miles in extracted oil is occupied by the injected
amount of electricity that can be length. Potable water for drinking and CO2, sequestering it in the geologic
generated from the feedstock. sanitary use would be supplied by the formation. EOR operations would be
The plant would include a system West Kern Water District, located to the monitored to ensure the injected CO2
capable of capturing about 90 percent of southeast of the site. The potable water remains in the formation.
VerDate Nov<24>2008 16:37 Apr 05, 2010 Jkt 220001 PO 00000 Frm 00032 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:FRFM06APN1.SGM 06APN1

4. 17400 Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 65 / Tuesday, April 6, 2010 / Notices
Proposed Project Schedule action. The purpose and need for DOE to decide to withhold financial
The project proposed by HECA action—providing limited financial assistance from the project, the project
includes engineering and design of the assistance to the HECA IGCC project— would not proceed. DOE currently plans
generating plant, permitting of the plant are to advance the CCPI program by to analyze the project as proposed by
and associated facilities, equipment selecting projects that have the best HECA (with and without any mitigating
procurement, construction, startup, chance of achieving the program’s conditions that DOE may identify as
operations, and demonstration of using objective as established by the Congress: reasonable and appropriate);
the CO2 for EOR followed by verified the commercialization of clean coal alternatives to HECA’s proposal that it
sequestration. HECA anticipates that it technologies that advance efficiency, is still considering (e.g., the ROWs for
would take about four years to environmental performance, and cost linear facilities); and the no action
construct, commission and commence competitiveness well beyond the level alternative.
operation of the plant. It plans to start of technologies that are currently in As noted above, DOE will analyze any
construction by 2012, and commercial service. ‘‘project-specific’’ alternatives that HECA
DOE’s NEPA regulations include a is still considering such as the location
operation by 2016. This schedule is
process for identifying and analyzing of the facility within the site
contingent upon HECA receiving the
reasonable alternatives in the context of
necessary regulatory authorizations boundaries, alternative routes for the
providing financial assistance through a
(which would be preceded by the process water supply pipeline, CO2
competitive selection of projects
hearings and others events mandated by pipeline and transmission line, and
proposed by entities outside the federal
the regulatory agencies’ procedures) and other reasonable alternatives that may
government. The range of reasonable
upon DOE deciding to provide limited be suggested during the scoping period.
alternatives in competitions for grants,
financial assistance for the construction loans and other financial support is Under the no action alternative, DOE
and demonstration phases of the project defined in large part by the range of would not provide funding to HECA. In
(a decision that would occur after responsive proposals DOE receives. the absence of financial assistance from
completion of the EIS). Unlike projects undertaken by DOE DOE, HECA could reasonably pursue
Connected and Cumulative Actions itself, the Department cannot mandate two options. It could build the project
what outside entities propose, where without DOE funding; the impacts of
Under the cooperative agreement this option would be essentially the
they propose to do it, or how they
between DOE and HECA, DOE would same as those of DOE’s proposed action.
propose to do it beyond establishing
share the costs of the gasifiers, syngas Or, HECA could choose not to pursue its
requirements in the funding opportunity
cleanup systems, a combustion turbine, project, and there would be no impacts
announcement that further the
a heat recovery steam generator, a steam from the project. This option would not
program’s objectives. DOE’s decision is
turbine, supporting facilities and contribute to the goal of the CCPI
limited to selecting among the
infrastructure, and a demonstration program, which is to accelerate
applications submitted by project
phase in which the project would use at commercial deployment of advanced
sponsors that meet CCPI’s goals.
least 75 percent coal (calculated on a Recognizing that the range of coal technologies that provide the
fuel input basis) to generate low-carbon reasonable alternatives in the context of United States with clean, reliable, and
electricity and capture CO2 for EOR and financial assistance and contracting is in affordable energy. However, as required
sequestration.2 Under this agreement, large part determined by the number by NEPA, DOE analyzes this option as
DOE would not share in the cost of the and nature of the proposals submitted, the no action alternative in order to
air separation unit, CO2 EOR and section 216 of DOE’s NEPA regulations have a meaningful comparison between
sequestration facilities, or certain other requires the Department to prepare an the impacts of DOE providing financial
facilities. Accordingly, the EIS will ‘‘environmental critique’’ that assesses assistance and withholding that
evaluate the potential impacts of these the environmental impacts and issues assistance.
aspects of HECA’s project as connected relating to each of the proposals that the
actions. Alternatives considered by HECA in
DOE selecting official considers for an developing its proposed project will be
DOE will also analyze the cumulative award. See 10 CFR 1021.216. This
impacts of both the proposed project discussed in the EIS. HECA analyzed
official considers these impacts and several alternative sites and determined
and any connected actions. The issues, along with other aspects of the
cumulative impacts analysis will that the only reasonable site alternative
proposals (such as technical merit and was its proposed site based on, among
include analysis of greenhouse gas financial ability) and the program’s
emissions and global warming, other air other things, the presence or absence of
objectives, in making awards. DOE sensitive resources; the availability of
emissions, and other incremental prepared a critique of the proposals that
impacts that, when added to past, land; and the site’s proximity to the
were deemed suitable for selection in brackish groundwater supply, to electric
present, and reasonably foreseeable this round of awards for the CCPI
impacts, may have significant effects on transmission and natural gas facilities,
program. and to a CO2 storage reservoir.3 The EIS
the human environment. Once DOE selects a project for an
will describe HECA’s site selection
Alternatives award, the range of reasonable
process. However, DOE does not plan to
alternatives becomes the project as
NEPA requires that an EIS evaluate analyze in detail the alternatives sites
proposed by the applicant, any
the range of reasonable alternatives to considered by HECA because HECA is
alternatives still under consideration by
an agency’s proposed action. The range no longer considering these alternatives,
the applicant or that are reasonable
sroberts on DSKD5P82C1PROD with NOTICES
of reasonable alternatives encompasses they were not part of HECA’s proposal,
within the confines of the project as
those alternatives that would satisfy the and therefore they are no longer
proposed (e.g., the particular location of
underlying purpose and need for agency reasonable alternatives.
the generating plant on the 1,101-acre
2 Because of the requirements of California law,
site or the ROWs for linear facilities), 3 HECA initially selected another site; it
DOE believes that the HECA project would need to
and a no action alternative. Regarding subsequently decided to move the project when it
continue sequestering CO2 throughout the the no action alternative, DOE assumes discovered the existence of sensitive biological
operational life of the plant. for purposes of the EIS that, if it were resources at the initial site.
VerDate Nov<24>2008 16:37 Apr 05, 2010 Jkt 220001 PO 00000 Frm 00033 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:FRFM06APN1.SGM 06APN1

5. Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 65 / Tuesday, April 6, 2010 / Notices 17401
Floodplains and Wetlands including potential impacts from the proposed project are properly evaluated,
The footprint of the proposed electric generation, treatment, transport, storage, DOE will conduct an open process to
generating and carbon capture facility and management of wastes. define the scope of the EIS. The public
would not affect any wetlands or (5) Visual: Potential aesthetic impacts scoping period will end on May 24,
floodplains. Wetland and floodplain of new stacks, mechanical-draft cooling 2010. Interested agencies, organizations,
impacts, if any, from the construction of tower, flares, and other structures of the and individuals are encouraged to
pipelines and transmission lines would proposed plant, of the linear facilities, submit comments or suggestions
be avoided by the use of horizontal and of connected actions. concerning the content of the EIS, issues
direction drilling. In the event that the (6) Floodplain: Potential impacts (e.g., and impacts that should be addressed,
EIS identifies that wetlands or impeding floodwaters, re-directing and alternatives that should be
floodplains would be affected by the floodwaters, possible property damage) considered. Scoping comments should
project (including its linear facilities) or of siting structures on a floodplain. clearly describe specific issues or topics
connected actions, DOE will prepare a (7) Wetlands: Potential effects to that the EIS should address in order to
floodplain and wetland assessment in wetlands due to construction and assist DOE in defining the EIS’s scope.
accordance with its regulations at 10 operation of the power plant, linear Written, e-mailed, faxed, or telephoned
CFR part 1022 and include the facilities, and connected actions. comments should be submitted by May
assessment in the EIS. (8) Ecological: Potential onsite and 24, 2010 (see ADDRESSES).
offsite impacts to vegetation, terrestrial
Preliminary Identification of In addition, DOE will conduct a
and aquatic wildlife, threatened and
Environmental Issues public scoping meeting in Salon A of
endangered species,4 and ecologically
the Bakersfield Marriott at the
The following environmental issues sensitive habitats due to the
Convention Center, 801 Truxtun
have been tentatively identified for construction and operation of the power
Avenue, Bakersfield, California, at 7
analysis in the EIS. This list (which was plant, linear facilities, and connected
p.m. on Wednesday, April 14, 2010. The
developed from the environmental actions.
public is also invited to learn more
critique of the proposed project, permit (9) Safety and Health: Construction-
about the proposed project at an
applications that HECA has filed, and operation-related safety, process
safety, and management of process informal session at this location
comments by regulatory agencies on beginning at 5 p.m. DOE requests that
those applications, and information chemicals and materials.
(10) Construction: Potential impacts anyone who wishes to speak at this
from similar projects) is neither an public scoping meeting contact Dr. R.
inclusive nor a predetermined set of associated with noise, traffic patterns,
and construction-related emissions. Paul Detwiler, by phone, fax, e-mail, or
potential impacts. This preliminary list letter (see ADDRESSES).
is presented to facilitate public (11) Community Impacts: Potential
comment on the planned scope of the congestion and other impacts to local Individuals who do not make advance
EIS. Additions to or deletions from the traffic patterns; socioeconomic impacts arrangements to speak may register at
list may occur as a result of this scoping on public services and infrastructure the meeting and will be given the
process. The preliminary list of (e.g., police protection, schools, and opportunity to speak following
potential environmental issues includes: utilities); noise associated with project scheduled speakers. Speakers who need
(1) Atmospheric Resources: Potential operation; and environmental justice more than five minutes should indicate
air quality impacts resulting from issues with respect to nearby the length of time desired in their
emissions during construction and communities. request. Depending on the number of
operation of the proposed HECA project (12) Cultural and Archaeological speakers, DOE may need to limit
and connected actions (e.g., effects of Resources: Potential impacts to such speakers to five-minute presentations
ground-level concentrations of criteria resources from construction of the initially, but will provide additional
pollutants and trace metals—including project and connected actions. opportunities as time permits. Speakers
mercury—on surrounding areas, (13) Cumulative Effects: Incremental can also provide written material to
including those of special concern such impacts of the proposed project (e.g., supplement their presentations. Oral
as Prevention of Significant incremental air emissions affecting and written comments will be given
Deterioration Class I areas). Potential ambient air quality) that, when added to equal weight.
cumulative effects of greenhouse gas other past, present, and reasonably DOE will begin the formal meeting
emissions. foreseeable future actions, including with an overview of the proposed HECA
(2) Water Resources: Potential effects connected actions, may have potentially project. DOE will designate a presiding
of groundwater withdrawals and water significant impacts on the environment. officer to chair the meeting. The meeting
use by the project, including potential This analysis will include potential will not be conducted as an evidentiary
impacts resulting from construction and impacts on climate. hearing, and speakers will not be cross-
operation of the project, including linear The level of analysis of issues in the examined. However, speakers may be
facilities and any connected actions. EIS will be in accordance with their asked questions to ensure that DOE fully
(3) Infrastructure and Land Use: level of importance. The most detailed understands their comments or
Potential effects on existing analyses are likely to focus on potential suggestions. The presiding officer will
infrastructure and land uses resulting impacts to air, water, and ecological establish the order of speakers and any
from the construction and operation of resources. additional procedures necessary to
the proposed project and connected Public Scoping Process conduct the meeting.
sroberts on DSKD5P82C1PROD with NOTICES
actions. For example, potential traffic Issued in Washington, DC, this 30th day of
effects resulting from the proposed To ensure that all issues related to
DOE’s Proposed Action and HECA’s March 2010.
project and potential land use impacts
James J. Markowsky,
of committing farm land to a power 4 No threatened or endangered species have been
plant. Assistant Secretary, Office of Fossil Energy.
identified at the proposed plant site; three listed
(4) Solid Waste: Pollution prevention [FR Doc. 2010–7723 Filed 4–5–10; 8:45 am]
plant species and eight listed wildlife species may
and waste management issues, occur in the ROWs of the linear facilities. BILLING CODE 6450–01–P
VerDate Nov<24>2008 16:37 Apr 05, 2010 Jkt 220001 PO 00000 Frm 00034 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 9990 E:FRFM06APN1.SGM 06APN1