15968 Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 55 / Tuesday, March 22, 2011 / Notices 

Collaborative may include researchers 

who are not a part of the ADA National 

Network. For purposes of this priority, 

the term ‘‘ADA stakeholders’’ refers to 

individuals and entities with rights and 

responsibilities under the ADA. The 

Collaborative must be designed to 

contribute to the following outcomes: 

(a) Improved knowledge related to 

ADA implementation. The Collaborative 

must contribute to this outcome by— 

(1) Conducting research on one or 

more areas in the ADA. These areas may 

include, but are not limited to research 

on specific titles of the ADA, research 

on ADA issues in specific industries, or 

research on ADA issues that are relevant 

to individuals with specific types of 

disabling conditions; 

(2) Addressing research questions or 

hypotheses of national significance that 

are directly relevant to individuals and 

entities with rights and responsibilities 

under the ADA (ADA stakeholders); and 

(3) Using appropriate and clearlyidentified research designs to generate 

reliable and valid findings. 

(b) Improved ADA stakeholder 

awareness and utilization of research 

findings produced by the ADA National 

Network. The Collaborative must 

contribute to this outcome by— 

(1) Preparing research products (e.g., 

articles and presentations) that describe 

the findings of the Collaborative’s 

research. The Collaborative must also 

share these research products and 

research findings with the ADA 

Regional Centers and the ADA KT 

Center, which the Department intends 

to fund under separate priorities, for 

further dissemination to ADA 

stakeholders; and 

(2) Participating in the ADA National 

Network research conference. 

Types of Priorities: 

When inviting applications for a 

competition using one or more 

priorities, we designate the type of each 

priority as absolute, competitive 

preference, or invitational through a 

notice in the Federal Register. The 

effect of each type of priority follows: 

Absolute priority: Under an absolute 

priority, we consider only applications 

that meet the priority (34 CFR 

75.105(c)(3)). 

Competitive preference priority: 

Under a competitive preference priority, 

we give competitive preference to an 

application by (1) awarding additional 

points, depending on the extent to 

which the application meets the priority 

(34 CFR 75.105(c)(2)(i)); or (2) selecting 

an application that meets the priority 

over an application of comparable merit 

that does not meet the priority (34 CFR 

75.105(c)(2)(ii)). 

Invitational priority: Under an 

invitational priority, we are particularly 

interested in applications that meet the 

priority. However, we do not give an 

application that meets the priority a 

preference over other applications (34 

CFR 75.105(c)(1)). 

Final Priorities: We will announce the 

final priorities in a notice in the Federal 

Register. We will determine the final 

priorities after considering responses to 

this notice and other information 

available to the Department. This notice 

does not preclude us from proposing 

additional priorities or requirements, 

definitions, or selection criteria, subject 

to meeting applicable rulemaking 

requirements. 

Note: This notice does not solicit 

applications. In any year in which we choose 

to use these priorities, we invite applications 

through a notice in the Federal Register. 

Executive Order 12866: This notice 

has been reviewed in accordance with 

Executive Order 12866. Under the terms 

of the order, we have assessed the 

potential costs and benefits of this 

proposed regulatory action. 

The potential costs associated with 

this proposed regulatory action are 

those resulting from statutory 

requirements and those we have 

determined as necessary for 

administering this program effectively 

and efficiently. 

In assessing the potential costs and 

benefits—both quantitative and 

qualitative—of this proposed regulatory 

action, we have determined that the 

benefits of the proposed priorities 

justify the costs. 

Discussion of Costs and Benefits: 

The benefits of the Disability and 

Rehabilitation Research Projects and 

Centers Programs have been well 

established over the years in that similar 

projects have been completed 

successfully. These proposed priorities 

will generate new knowledge through 

research and development. Another 

benefit of these proposed priorities is 

that the establishment of new DRRPs 

will improve the lives of individuals 

with disabilities. The new DRRPs will 

generate, disseminate, and promote the 

use of new information that will 

improve the options for individuals 

with disabilities to perform regular 

activities in the community. 

Intergovernmental Review: This 

program is not subject to Executive 

Order 12372 and the regulations in 34 

CFR part 79. 

Accessible Format: Individuals with 

disabilities can obtain this document in 

an accessible format (e.g., braille, large 

print, audiotape, or computer diskette) 

by contacting the Grants and Contracts 

Services Team, U.S. Department of 

Education, 400 Maryland Avenue, SW., 

Room 5075, PCP, Washington, DC 

20202–2550. Telephone: (202) 245– 

7363. If you use a TDD, call the FRS, toll 

free, at 1–800–877–8339. 

Electronic Access to This Document: 

You can view this document, as well as 

all other documents of this Department 

published in the Federal Register, in 

text or Adobe Portable Document 

Format (PDF) on the Internet at the 

following site: http://www.ed.gov/news/ 

fedregister. To use PDF you must have 

Adobe Acrobat Reader, which is 

available free at this site. Note: The 

official version of this document is the 

document published in the Federal 

Register. Free Internet access to the 

official edition of the Federal Register 

and the Code of Federal Regulations is 

available on GPO Access at: http://

www.gpoaccess.gov/nara/index.html. 

Catalog of Federal Domestic Assistance 

(CFDA) Number: 84.133A–6, 84.133A–7, and 

84.133A–8. 

Dated: March 17, 2011. 

Alexa Posny, 

Assistant Secretary for Special Education and 

Rehabilitative Services. 

[FR Doc. 2011–6713 Filed 3–21–11; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 4000–01–P 

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY 

Notice of Availability of the Draft 

Environmental Impact Statement and 

Public Hearing Notice for the Texas 

Clean Energy Project, near Odessa, 

Ector County, TX 

AGENCY: Department of Energy. 

ACTION: Notice of Availability and 

Public Hearing. 

SUMMARY: The U.S. Department of 

Energy (DOE) announces the availability 

of the Texas Clean Energy Project Draft 

Environmental Impact Statement (DOE/ 

EIS–0444D) for public review and 

comment, as well as the date, location, 

and time for a public hearing. The draft 

environmental impact statement (EIS) 

analyzes the potential environmental 

impacts associated with the Texas Clean 

Energy Project (TCEP), which would be 

constructed and operated by Summit 

Texas Clean Energy, LLC, an affiliate of 

Summit Power Group, Inc. (Summit). 

Summit’s proposal was selected by DOE 

to receive financial assistance under the 

Clean Coal Power Initiative (CCPI) 

program. 

DOE prepared this draft EIS in 

accordance with the National 

Environmental Policy Act of 1969 

(NEPA) (42 U.S.C. 4321 et seq.), the 


srobinson on DSKHWCL6B1PROD with NOTICES
Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 55 / Tuesday, March 22, 2011 / Notices 15969 

Council on Environmental Quality 

(CEQ) regulations that implement the 

procedural provisions of NEPA (40 CFR 

parts 1500–1508), and the DOE 

procedures implementing NEPA (10 

CFR part 1021). 

DATES: DOE invites the public to 

comment on the draft EIS during the 

public comment period, which ends 

May 2, 2011. DOE will consider all 

comments postmarked or received 

during the public comment period in 

preparing the final EIS and will 

consider late comments to the extent 

practicable. 

DOE will hold a public hearing on 

April 5, 2011, in Odessa, Texas. An 

informational session will be held from 

4 p.m. to 7 p.m., preceding the formal 

presentations and formal comment 

period from 7 p.m. to approximately 9 

p.m. See the Public Hearing section for 

details on the hearing process and 

locations. 

ADDRESSES: Requests for information 

about this draft EIS and requests to 

receive a copy of it should be directed 

to: Mr. Mark L. McKoy, Environmental 

Manager, U.S. Department of Energy, 

National Energy Technology Laboratory, 

M/S B07, P.O. Box 880, Morgantown, 

WV 26507–0880. Additional 

information about the draft EIS may also 

be requested by electronic mail at: 

mmckoy@netl.doe.gov or by telephone: 

(304) 285–4426, or toll-free at: (800) 

432–8330, extension 4426. The draft EIS 

will be available at: http:// 

nepa.energy.gov/. Copies of the draft EIS 

are also available for review at the 

locations listed in the SUPPLEMENTARY

INFORMATION section of this Notice. 

Written comments on the draft EIS 

can be mailed to Mr. Mark L. McKoy, 

Environmental Manager, at the address 

noted above. Written comments may 

also be submitted by fax to: (304) 285– 

4403, or submitted electronically to: 

mmckoy@netl.doe.gov. Oral comments 

on the draft EIS will be accepted 

verbatim only during the public hearing 

scheduled for the date and location 

provided in the DATES section of this 

Notice. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: For 

further information on the proposed 

project or the draft EIS, please contact 

Mr. Mark L. McKoy (see ADDRESSES). 

For general information regarding the 

DOE NEPA process, please contact: Ms. 

Carol M. Borgstrom, Director, Office of 

NEPA Policy and Compliance (GC–54), 

U.S. Department of Energy, 1000 

Independence Avenue, SW., 

Washington, DC 20585–0103; telephone: 

(202) 586–4600; fax: (202) 586–7031; or 

leave a message at: (800) 472–2756. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: DOE 

proposes to provide limited financial 

assistance (approximately $450 million), 

through a cooperative agreement, to 

Summit for the proposed TCEP. The 

project proponent team includes: 

Summit; Blue Source, LLC; Siemens, 

AG; Linde AG (operating through Selas 

Fluid Processing, Corp.); Fluor 

Corporation; and CW NextGen, Inc. 

The TCEP would use coal-fueled 

integrated gasification combined-cycle 

technology to generate electric power 

and would capture carbon dioxide (CO2) 

for use in enhanced oil recovery (EOR) 

and eventual sequestration. The plant 

would generate 400 megawatts (gross) of 

electricity, of which approximately 213 

megawatts would be provided to the 

power grid. It would also produce urea, 

argon, and sulfuric acid for sale in 

commercial markets. Because of its 

multiple production capabilities, the 

plant is referred to as a poly-generation 

(or polygen) plant. DOE would provide 

approximately 26 percent of the $1.73 

billion (rounded-2009 dollars) in 

development and capital costs 

recognized under the DOE cooperative 

agreement. 

The polygen plant would be built on 

a 600 acre oil field site in Ector County, 

Texas, north of the abandoned oil town 

of Penwell. Summit would design and 

construct the plant to capture 

approximately 90 percent of its CO2. 

During the demonstration phase of the 

plant’s operations, the project would 

sequester about 3 million tons of CO2

per year by transporting it in pipelines 

to existing oil fields in the Permian 

Basin of West Texas for use in EOR 

operations by third-party buyers of the 

CO2. Following the demonstration 

phase, the polygen plant would 

continue in commercial operation for 30 

to 50 years and would continue to 

capture its CO2. 

The draft EIS evaluates the potential 

impacts of the proposed project, 

connected actions, and reasonable 

alternatives. Because the proposed 

project may affect wetlands, the draft 

EIS includes an assessment of impacts 

to wetlands in accordance with DOE 

regulations for Compliance with 

Floodplains and Wetlands 

Environmental Review Requirements 

(10 CFR part 1022). 

DOE analyzed two alternatives in the 

draft EIS, the Proposed Action and the 

No Action Alternative. Under the 

Proposed Action, DOE would provide 

approximately $450 million in costshared funding under the CCPI program 

to the proposed project. DOE has 

already provided a portion of the total 

funding ($23.2 million) to Summit for 

DOE’s share of the preliminary design 

and project definition. 

Under the No Action Alternative, 

DOE would not provide continued 

funding under the CCPI Program. In the 

absence of DOE funding, Summit could 

pursue two options. First, the facility 

and supporting infrastructure could be 

built as proposed without DOE funding. 

The potential environmental impacts of 

this option would be essentially the 

same as the Proposed Action. Second, 

Summit could choose to cancel the 

project, and none of the proposed 

facilities would be built. This option 

would not contribute to the goal of the 

CCPI program, which is to accelerate 

commercial deployment of advanced 

coal technologies with carbon capture 

and sequestration that provide the 

United States with clean, reliable, and 

affordable energy. For purposes of this 

draft EIS, DOE assumes that the project 

would not be built under the No Action 

Alternative. 

DOE has developed an overall strategy 

for compliance with NEPA for the CCPI 

program consistent with CEQ 

regulations (40 CFR parts 1500–1508) 

and DOE regulations (10 CFR part 1021). 

This strategy has two phases. The first 

phase involves an open solicitation and 

competitive selection process to obtain 

a set of projects that best meets program 

needs. The applications that meet the 

mandatory eligibility requirements 

constitute the range of reasonable 

alternatives available to DOE to meet the 

program’s purpose and needs. 

Following reviews by technical, 

environmental, and financial panels and 

a comprehensive assessment by a merit 

review board, DOE officials select those 

projects that they conclude best meets 

the program’s purposes and needs. By 

broadly soliciting proposals to meet the 

programmatic purposes and needs for 

DOE action and by evaluating the 

potential environmental impacts 

associated with each proposal before 

selecting projects that would go forward 

to the second phase, DOE considers a 

reasonable range of alternatives for 

implementing CCPI. The second phase 

consists of preparing detailed NEPA 

analyses for each selected project. For 

the TCEP, DOE determined that 

providing financial assistance to the 

proposed project would constitute a 

major federal action that may 

significantly affect the quality of the 

human environment. Therefore, DOE 

has prepared this draft EIS to assess the 

potential environmental impacts of 

Summit’s proposed project and the 

options that are still under 

consideration by Summit. 

Alternative sites considered by 

Summit in developing the proposed 


srobinson on DSKHWCL6B1PROD with NOTICES
15970 Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 55 / Tuesday, March 22, 2011 / Notices 

project are presented in the EIS. 

Alternative sources of water supply and 

reasonable alternative routes for linear 

facilities are addressed as options in the 

draft EIS. 

The draft EIS considers the 

environmental consequences that may 

result from the proposed project and 

describes additional mitigation that 

might be used to reduce various 

impacts. Potential impacts identified 

during the scoping process and 

analyzed in the draft EIS relate to the 

following: 

Air quality; soils, geology, and 

mineral resources; ground water; surface 

water; biological resources; aesthetics; 

cultural resources; land use; 

socioeconomics; environmental justice; 

community services; utility systems; 

transportation; materials and waste 

management; human health, safety, and 

accidents; and noise and vibration. 

Availability of the Draft EIS 

Copies of the draft EIS have been 

distributed to Members of Congress; 

Native American tribal governments; 

Federal, State, and local officials; and 

agencies, organizations, and individuals 

who may be interested or affected. The 

draft EIS will be available on the 

Internet at: http://nepa.energy.gov/. 

Copies of the draft EIS are available for 

public review at the following location: 

University of Texas of the Permian 

Basin, J. Conrad Dunagan Library, Main 

Floor, 4901 E. University Avenue, 

Odessa, TX 79762–0001. Additional 

copies also can be requested (see 

ADDRESSES). 

Public Hearing 

DOE will conduct a public hearing on 

April 5, 2011 at the MCM Elegante 

Hotel, 5200 E. University Boulevard, 

Odessa, TX 79762 to obtain comments 

on the draft EIS. Requests to speak at the 

public hearing can be made by calling 

or writing to Mr. Mark L. McKoy (see 

ADDRESSES). Requests to speak that have 

not been submitted prior to the hearing 

will be accepted in the order in which 

they are received during the hearing. 

Speakers are encouraged to provide a 

written version of their oral comments 

or supplementary materials for the 

record. Each speaker will be allowed 

approximately five minutes to present 

comments. Those speakers who want 

more than five minutes should indicate 

the length of time desired in their 

request. Depending on the number of 

speakers, DOE may need to limit all 

speakers to five minutes initially and 

provide additional opportunities as time 

permits. Comments will be recorded by 

a court reporter and will become part of 

the public record. Oral and written 

comments will be given equal 

consideration. 

The hearing will begin at 4 p.m. with 

an informational session. Formal 

presentations and a formal comment 

session will begin at approximately 

7 p.m. DOE will begin the hearing’s 

formal session with overviews of the 

DOE program, proposed project, and 

NEPA process, followed by oral 

statements by the pre-registered 

speakers. Speakers may be asked 

questions to help ensure that DOE fully 

understands the comments. A presiding 

officer will establish the order of 

speakers and provide any additional 

procedures necessary to conduct the 

meetings. 

All meetings will be accessible to 

people with disabilities. In addition, 

any individual needing specific 

assistance, such as a sign language 

interpreter or a translator, should 

contact Mr. Mark L. McKoy (See 

ADDRESSES) at least 48 hours in advance 

of the hearing so that arrangements can 

be made. 

Issued in Washington, DC, on March 17, 

2011. 

Mark J. Matarrese, 

Director, Office of Environment, Security, 

Safety & Health, Office of Fossil Energy. 

[FR Doc. 2011–6694 Filed 3–21–11; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 6450–01–P 

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY 

Bonneville Power Administration 

Central Ferry to Lower Monumental 

500-kilovolt Transmission Line Project 

AGENCY: Bonneville Power 

Administration (BPA), Department of 

Energy (DOE). 

ACTION: Notice of Availability of Record 

of Decision (ROD). 

SUMMARY: This notice announces the 

availability of the ROD to implement the 

Central Ferry—Lower Monumental 500- 

kilovolt (kV) Transmission Line Project 

in Garfield, Columbia, and Walla Walla 

counties, Washington. BPA has decided 

to implement the Combination A 

Alternative identified in the Central 

Ferry—Lower Monumental 500-kV 

Transmission Line Project Final 

Environmental Impact Statement (DOE/ 

EIS–0422, February 2011). The 

Combination A Alternative consists of 

constructing a new 500-kV single-circuit 

transmission line from BPA’s new 

Central Ferry Substation near the Port of 

Central Ferry in Garfield County 

generally west through Garfield, 

Columbia, and Walla Walla counties to 

BPA’s existing Lower Monumental 

Substation in Walla Walla County, a 

distance of about 38 miles. The 

transmission line route begins at the 

new Central Ferry Substation along the 

Snake River, and runs southwest for 

about 11 miles mostly parallel to and 

about 1,200 to 2,500 feet (about 1⁄4; mile 

to c mile) south of BPA’s two existing 

Little Goose-Lower Granite 500-kV steel 

lattice transmission lines. The route 

then angles away from the existing lines 

and proceeds southwest for about 6 

miles before crossing the Tucannon 

River directly north of the town of 

Starbuck. The route then proceeds west 

for about 20 miles from the Tucannon 

River crossing to BPA’s existing Lower 

Monumental Substation. BPA will 

acquire new 150-foot-wide right-of-way 

for the entire length of the new line. 

Approximately 161 new lattice steel 

transmission towers, ranging in height 

from about 104 to 189 feet with an 

average span length between towers of 

about 1,200 feet, will be constructed in 

the new right-of-way. The conductor 

and overhead ground wire for the new 

transmission line will be placed on 

these towers, and counterpoise would 

be buried in the ground at selected 

towers. Construction of the new line 

also will include the upgrade of about 

5 miles of existing access roads, and the 

construction of about 38 miles of new 

access roads. Power circuit breakers, 

disconnect switches, and other 

electrical equipment will be installed at 

Lower Monumental Substation. In the 

vicinity of the Lower Monumental 

Substation, six existing steel lattice 

towers that support existing 

transmission lines in this area will be 

relocated to allow entry of the Central 

Ferry-Lower Monumental transmission 

line into the substation. Fiber optic 

cable will be installed along a portion of 

the new line. All mitigation measures 

identified in the EIS are adopted. 

ADDRESSES: Copies of the ROD and EIS 

may be obtained by calling BPA’s tollfree document request line, 1–800–622– 

4520. The ROD and EIS are also 

available on our Web site, http:// 

www.bpa.gov/go/centralferrylomo. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Tish 

Eaton, Bonneville Power 

Administration—KEC–4, P.O. Box 3621, 

Portland, Oregon 97208–3621; toll-free 

telephone number 1–800–622–4519; fax 

number 503–230–5699; or e-mail 

tkeaton@bpa.gov. 

Issued in Portland, Oregon, on March 11, 

2011. 

Stephen J. Wright, 

Administrator and Chief Executive Officer. 

[FR Doc. 2011–6662 Filed 3–21–11; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 6450–01–P 


srobinson on DSKHWCL6B1PROD with NOTICES