25472 Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 83 / Monday, April 30, 2012 / Notices 

Accessible Format: Individuals with 

disabilities can obtain this document in 

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

print, audiotape, or computer diskette) 

on request to the program contact 

person listed under FOR FURTHER

INFORMATION CONTACT. 

Electronic Access to This Document: 

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 via the Federal Digital System 

at: www.gpo.gov/fdsys. At this site 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). To use PDF you must 

have Adobe Acrobat Reader, which is 

available free at the site. 

You may also access documents of the 

Department published in the Federal 

Register by using the article search 

feature at: www.federalregister.gov. 

Specifically, through the advanced 

search feature at this site, you can limit 

your search to documents published by 

the Department. 

Dated: April 25, 2012. 

Michael Yudin, 

Acting Assistant Secretary for Elementary and 

Secondary Education. 

[FR Doc. 2012–10357 Filed 4–27–12; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 4000–01–P 

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY 

Amended Notice of Intent To Modify 

the Scope of the Environmental Impact 

Statement for the Champlain Hudson 

Power Express Transmission Line 

Project in New York State 

AGENCY: Department of Energy. 

ACTION: Amended Notice of Intent. 

SUMMARY: The United States (U.S.) 

Department of Energy (DOE) intends to 

modify the scope of the Champlain 

Hudson Power Express Transmission 

Line Project Environmental Impact 

Statement (CHPE EIS; DOE/EIS–0447) 

and to conduct additional public 

scoping. As described in the original 

Notice of Intent (NOI) (75 FR 34720; 

June 18, 2010), in January 2010, 

Transmission Developers Inc. (TDI) 

submitted, on behalf of Champlain 

Hudson Power Express, Inc. 

(Applicant), an application to DOE for a 

Presidential permit for the Champlain 

Hudson Power Express (Champlain 

Hudson) project. As explained in the 

NOI, DOE will assess the potential 

environmental impacts associated with 

the construction, operation, 

maintenance, and connection of the 

proposed new electric transmission line 

across the U.S.-Canada border in 

northeastern New York State. Public 

scoping originally closed on August 2, 

2010. On February 28, 2012, TDI 

submitted an amendment to the 

application for a Presidential permit to 

DOE that reflects proposed changes to 

the route of the Champlain Hudson 

project, and DOE now intends to revise 

the scope of the EIS to address these 

proposed changes. The proposed 

changes are the result of settlement 

negotiations among New York (NY) 

State agencies, Champlain Hudson 

Power Express, Inc., CHPE Properties, 

Inc. and other stakeholders as part of the 

project review under Article VII of the 

New York State Public Service Law, and 

are reflected in a February 24, 2012, 

‘‘Joint Proposal’’ submitted to the New 

York Public Service Commission. 

The U.S. Fish & Wildlife Service, New 

York Field Office (USFWS Region 5), 

the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers 

(USACE), the U.S. Environmental 

Protection Agency (EPA Region 2), the 

New York State Department of 

Environmental Conservation (NYSDEC), 

and the New York State Department of 

Public Service (NYSDPS) are 

cooperating agencies in the preparation 

of the EIS. 

DATES: DOE is accepting public 

comments on the revised scope of the 

CHPE EIS until June 14, 2012. DOE will 

consider comments submitted after this 

date to the extent practicable. 

ADDRESSES: Please direct written 

comments on the scope of the EIS and 

requests to be added to the document 

mailing list to: Brian Mills, Office of 

Electricity Delivery and Energy 

Reliability (OE–20), U.S. Department of 

Energy, 1000 Independence Avenue 

SW., Washington, DC 20585; by 

electronic mail to 

Brian.Mills@hq.doe.gov; or by facsimile 

to 202–586–8008. For general 

information on the DOE NEPA process 

contact: Ms. Carol M. Borgstrom, 

Director, Office of NEPA Policy and 

Compliance (GC–54), U.S. Department 

of Energy, 1000 Independence Avenue 

SW., Washington, DC 20585; telephone 

202–586–4600, or leave a message at 1– 

800–472–2756; by facsimile at 202–586– 

7031; or send an email to 

askNEPA@hq.doe.gov. 

For information on the USFWS’s role 

as a cooperating agency, contact Tim R. 

Sullivan by electronic mail at 

Tim_R_Sullivan@fws.gov; by phone at 

602–753–9334; or by mail at 3817 Luker 

Road, Cortland, NY 13045. 

For information on the Army Corps of 

Engineers’ permit process, contact 

Naomi J. Handell by electronic mail at 

Naomi.J.Handell@usace.army.mil; or by 

mail at 696 Virginia Road, Concord, MA 

01742. 

For information on the EPA’s role as 

a cooperating agency, contact Lingard 

Knutson by electronic mail at 

Knutson.Lingard@epamail.epa.gov; by 

phone at 212–637–3747; or by mail at 

290 Broadway, Mail Code: 25th Floor, 

New York, NY 10007–1866. 

For information on the New York 

State Department of Environmental 

Conservation’s role as a cooperating 

agency, contact Patricia Desnoyers by 

electronic mail to 

pjdesnoy@gw.dec.state.ny.us; or by mail 

at 625 Broadway, Albany, NY 12233. 

For information on the New York 

State Department of Public Service’s 

role as a cooperating agency, contact 

James Austin by electronic mail at 

james_austin@dps.state.ny.us; or by 

mail at 3 Empire State Plaza, Albany, 

NY 12223. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 

Background 

Executive Order (E.O.) 10485, 

Providing for the performance of certain 

functions heretofore performed by the 

President with respect to electric power 

and natural gas facilities located on the 

borders of the United States, as 

amended by E.O. 12038 Relating to 

certain Functions transferred to the 

Secretary of Energy by the Department 

of Energy Organization Act, requires 

issuance of a Presidential permit by 

DOE before electric transmission 

facilities may be constructed, operated, 

maintained, or connected at the U.S. 

international border. The E.O. provides 

that a Presidential permit may be issued 

after a finding that the proposed project 

is consistent with the public interest 

and after favorable recommendations 

from the U.S. Departments of State and 

Defense. In determining consistency 

with the public interest, DOE considers 

the potential environmental impacts of 

the proposed project under NEPA, 

determines the project’s impact on 

electric reliability (including whether 

the proposed project would adversely 

affect the operation of the U.S. electric 

power supply system under normal and 

contingency conditions), and considers 

any other factors that DOE may find 

relevant to the public interest. The 

regulations implementing the E.O. have 

been codified at 10 CFR 205.320– 

205.329. DOE’s issuance of a 

Presidential permit would indicate that 

there is no Federal objection to the 

project, but would not mandate that the 

project be constructed. 

On January 25, 2010, TDI submitted 

an application, on behalf of Champlain 

mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with NOTICES

Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 83 / Monday, April 30, 2012 / Notices 25473 

Hudson Power Express, Inc., to DOE’s 

Office of Electricity Delivery and Energy 

Reliability for a Presidential permit to 

construct, operate, maintain, and 

connect a 2,000-megawatt (MW) highvoltage direct current (HVDC) Voltage 

Source Converter (VSC) controllable 

transmission system from the Canadian 

Province of Quebec to the New York 

City and southwestern Connecticut 

regions. After due consideration of the 

nature and extent of the proposed 

project, including evaluation of the 

‘‘Information Regarding Potential 

Environmental Impacts’’ section of the 

Presidential permit application, DOE 

determined that the appropriate level of 

NEPA review for this project is an EIS. 

DOE issued its original NOI for this EIS 

on June 18, 2010 (75 FR 34720). 

On August 5, 2010, TDI submitted an 

amendment to the application that 

eliminated a portion of the proposed 

transmission line consisting of a bipole 

(two cables) that would have extended 

into Connecticut (the Connecticut 

Circuit). This change in the project’s 

design resulted in a proposed HVDC 

transmission line that would consist of 

a bipole with a capacity of 1,000-MW. 

The amendment also proposed 

extending the route using existing 

railroad easements to Whitehall, NY, 

and connecting to the Consolidated 

Edison (Con Edison) system at a new 

substation in Astoria, Queens, NY. On 

July 7, 2011, TDI submitted an 

amendment to the application that 

addressed five conditions required by 

the New York State Department of State 

(NYSDOS). A copy of these 

amendments can be found at http:// 

chpexpresseis.org. 

On February 28, 2012, TDI submitted 

another amendment to the Champlain 

Hudson project Presidential permit 

application to reflect changes to the 

proposed route that resulted from a 

project review process under Article VII 

of the New York State Public Service 

Law. A copy of the February 28, 2012, 

permit application amendment letter 

and other project-related documents can 

be viewed at http://chpexpresseis.org. 

New York State Certification Review 

Process 

Article VII of the New York State 

Public Service Law establishes the 

review process for consideration of any 

application to construct and operate a 

major electric transmission system. As 

part of this process, the New York State 

Public Service Commission 

(Commission) received the application 

for a Certificate of Environmental 

Compatibility and Public Need from 

Champlain Hudson Power Express, Inc. 

in a series of documents dated March 

29, 2010, and held public statement 

hearings on the original application in 

2010. 

Subsequently, the Applicant entered 

into settlement negotiations with several 

parties regarding the proposed facility 

need and benefits, alternate locations, 

environmental impacts, and mitigation 

measures. These negotiations resulted in 

a ‘‘Joint Proposal’’ which includes a 

proposed project alignment and 

configuration that is different from the 

original proposal for the Champlain 

Hudson project. The Joint Proposal also 

contains provisions regarding 

construction methods, environmental 

controls and mitigation measures, 

including the creation of a trust to study 

and mitigate possible impacts of the 

Champlain Hudson project’s underwater 

cables on habitat in the Hudson River 

Estuary, the Harlem and East Rivers, 

Lake Champlain, and their tributaries. A 

copy of the Joint Proposal and other 

related documents can be viewed at 

http://chpexpresseis.org. 

Applicant’s Proposal 

As set forth in the Joint Proposal, the 

Applicant’s preferred alternative now 

consists of a single 1,000-MW HVDC 

bipole. The bipole is comprised of two 

connected submarine or underground 

cables, one of which is positively 

charged, and the other negatively 

charged. In total, two cables would be 

laid between the Province of Quebec, 

Canada, and a proposed converter 

station in Astoria, Queens, NY. The 

converter station would change the 

electrical power from direct current to 

alternating current (AC). The converter 

station would be connected to the New 

York Power Authority gas insulated 

switchgear substation via an 

underground HVAC line, and the 

substation would be connected to Con 

Edison’s Rainey Substation, located in 

Astoria, via HVAC cables installed 

under New York City streets. The 

proposed transmission line would 

connect renewable sources of power 

generation in Canada with load centers 

in and around New York City. 

The Champlain Hudson project would 

still originate at an HVDC converter 

station near Hydro-Que ́bec 

TransE ́nergie’s 765/315-kilovolt (kV) 

Hertel substation, located southeast of 

Montreal, and continue approximately 

35 miles to the international border 

between the United States and Canada 

where the HVDC cables would originate 

underwater at the Town of Champlain, 

NY and extend south through Lake 

Champlain for approximately 101 miles, 

entirely within the jurisdictional waters 

of New York State. However, instead of 

exiting the southern end of Lake 

Champlain at the Village of Whitehall, 

NY, as originally proposed, the cables 

would now exit Lake Champlain at the 

Town of Dresden and run underground 

along New York State Route 22 to 

Whitehall. 

The Upper Hudson River portion of 

the Hudson River polychlorinated 

biphenyl (PCB) site (USEPA 

Identification Number NYD980763841) 

stretches from Hudson Falls, NY, to the 

Federal Dam at Troy, NY. To avoid 

installing and burying HVDC cables 

within this area and in certain sensitive 

areas of the lower Hudson River, the 

cables would now be buried along an 

overland route. From Whitehall, the 

cables would transition from the Route 

22 right-of-way (ROW) to enter the 

originally proposed route in existing 

railroad ROW owned by Canadian 

Pacific Railway (CP) and would remain 

buried for approximately 65 miles in 

and along the railroad ROW from 

Whitehall to Schenectady, NY. The 

proposed route would enter Erie 

Boulevard just north of the railroad 

crossing at Nott Street and continue 

along Erie Boulevard to a point south of 

State Street where it would again enter 

the railroad ROW. Along this portion of 

the route there are various alternative 

routings that include both the railroad 

ROW and public ways for transitioning 

from the railroad to city streets. The 

public ways include Nott Street, North 

Jay Street, Green Street, North Center 

Street, Pine Street, Union Street, Liberty 

Street and State Street as well as private 

property (a parking lot) located at 

approximately 160 Erie Boulevard. The 

route would follow the railroad ROW 

for a short distance, and would then 

deviate west of the railroad property, 

pass under Interstate 890 then turn 

south, running approximately parallel 

with the CSX Transportation (CSX) 

railroad ROW, and would re-enter the 

CP railroad ROW just north of Delaware 

Avenue. 

From this point in Schenectady, the 

proposed route would follow the CP 

railroad ROW to the Town of Rotterdam, 

NY. In Rotterdam, the route would 

transfer from the CP railroad ROW to 

the CSX railroad ROW and would 

proceed southeast for approximately 24 

miles before entering the Town of 

Selkirk, NY. The cables would then 

travel south for approximately 29 miles 

generally in and along CSX railroad 

ROW through the municipalities of 

Ravena, New Baltimore, Coxsackie, the 

Town of Athens, and the Town of 

Catskill, NY. As originally proposed the 

cables would have entered the Hudson 

River at the Town of Coeymans, NY. 

Now, the cables would enter the 

Hudson River at the Town of Catskill 

mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with NOTICES

25474 Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 83 / Monday, April 30, 2012 / Notices 

(hamlet of Cementon), via horizontal 

direction drilling (HDD). The HVDC 

underwater cables would be located 

within the Hudson River for 

approximately 67 miles until reaching a 

point north of Haverstraw Bay. As part 

of the revised project route, the cables 

would then exit the Hudson River at the 

Town of Stony Point in Rockland 

County, NY, to allow for a 7.7 mile 

bypass of Haverstraw Bay; this portion 

of the route would include three HDD 

installations under the Stony Point State 

Historic Park Site and Rockland Lake 

State Park. After the HDD under the 

parks, the cables would enter the 

Hudson River via HDD and be buried in 

the river for approximately 20.7 miles to 

the Spuyten Duyvil, where it would 

now extend south-easterly within the 

Harlem River for approximately 6.6 

miles before exiting the water to a 

location along an existing railway ROW 

in the borough of the Bronx, NY. The 

cables would then continue along that 

ROW for approximately 1.1 miles. 

At this point, the revised route would 

enter the East River via HDD, cross the 

East River and make land-fall at Astoria, 

Queens, NY. The cables would 

terminate at a new converter station 

proposed to be located near Luyster 

Creek, north of 20th Avenue, for a total 

length of approximately 330 miles from 

the U.S. border with Canada. The 

converter station would be installed on 

properties owned by Con Edison located 

in an industrial zone in Astoria and is 

proposed to have a total footprint of 

approximately five acres. The converter 

station would interconnect via 

underground circuit with the NYPA 

substation near the site of the Charles 

Poletti Power Project in Queens, NY. 

The substation would be connected to 

Con Edison’s Rainey Substation, located 

in Astoria, via HVAC cables installed 

under New York City streets. A map of 

the proposed Champlain Hudson 

transmission line project route can be 

found at http://chpexpresseis.org. 

Previous Public Scoping 

A public scoping period for the CHPE 

EIS began with the publication of DOE’s 

NOI in the Federal Register on June 18, 

2010. The 45-day public scoping period 

closed on August 2, 2010. DOE received 

scoping comments in the form of 22 

written letters or emails from private 

citizens, government agencies, and 

nongovernmental organizations. DOE 

held public scoping meetings from July 

8, through July 16, 2010, in Bridgeport, 

Connecticut and Manhattan, Yonkers, 

Kingston, Albany, Queensbury, and 

Plattsburg, NY. A total of 33 people gave 

verbal comments at the meetings, and 

their comments were transcribed by 

court stenographers. Commenters requested that the EIS 

establish evidence that the Champlain 

Hudson project is necessary to meet 

electricity demands (either current or 

future) in the project region, as well as 

address concerns over the impact of 

construction on existing transmission 

infrastructure. Commenters expressed 

concerns with regard to sediment 

disturbance and the potential impacts of 

contaminants in the water column on 

humans and wildlife from burying the 

transmission line in Lake Champlain 

and the Hudson River. Commenters also 

requested that the EIS specifically 

analyze potential thermal effects and 

effects of electromagnetic fields on 

aquatic ecosystems, and noted concern 

over impacts to visually important 

resources from construction of the 

transmission line. Commenters noted 

potential environmental and 

socioeconomic impacts from a proposed 

electric converter station in Yonkers, 

NY. Finally, commenters identified 

additional alternatives that they 

believed should be analyzed in the EIS. 

A copy of the Scoping Summary Report 

(December 2010) is available at http:// 

chpexpresseis.org. DOE will address 

these comments, to the extent they are 

still relevant, as well as those submitted 

during the public comment period for 

this Amended NOI, in the CHPE EIS. 

Public Scoping for the Revised 

Applicant Proposal 

Pursuant to the submittal of the Joint 

Proposal, the NY State Public Service 

Commission is holding six public 

statement hearings in April 2012 in a 

variety of locations along the revised 

Champlain Hudson project route, 

including the municipalities of 

Whitehall, Catskill, Ravena, 

Schenectady, Garnerville, and Astoria, 

NY. While DOE does not currently 

intend to hold further public scoping 

meetings, it recognizes that comments 

provided by the public during the 

Commission’s public statement hearings 

may be relevant to DOE’s NEPA process. 

Therefore, DOE intends to review the 

April public statement hearing 

transcripts, in addition to scoping 

comments submitted directly to DOE, 

and will consider them, to the extent 

matters relevant to the federal 

environmental review process arise, as 

scoping comments for purposes of the 

EIS. 

Agency Purpose and Need, Proposed 

Action, and Alternatives 

The purpose and need for DOE’s 

action is to decide whether to grant a 

Presidential permit for the Champlain 

Hudson project. 

The proposed Federal action is the 

granting of the Presidential permit for 

the construction, operation, 

maintenance, and connection of the 

proposed new electric transmission line 

across the U.S.-Canada border in 

northeastern New York State. The EIS 

will analyze potential environmental 

impacts from the proposed action and 

the No Action Alternative. Because the 

proposed action may involve actions in 

floodplains and wetlands, and in 

accordance with 10 CFR part 1022, 

Compliance with Floodplain and 

Wetland Environmental Review 

Requirements, the draft EIS will include 

a floodplain and wetland assessment as 

appropriate, and the final EIS or record 

of decision will include a floodplain 

statement of findings. If granted, the 

Presidential permit would authorize 

only that portion of the line that would 

be constructed, operated and 

maintained wholly within the U.S. 

DOE is seeking comment on the scope 

of the alternatives proposed and 

potential environmental impacts for 

analyses in the EIS and currently 

proposes to analyze the following 

alternatives in detail: (1) the Champlain 

Hudson project, as proposed by the 

Applicant in the Joint Proposal filed 

with the New York Public Service 

Commission on February 24, 2012 and 

submitted to DOE on February 28, 2012 

as an amended application for a 

Presidential permit, and (2) the No 

Action Alternative, which assumes that 

DOE would not grant a Presidential 

permit for the Champlain Hudson 

project and that the proposed line and 

associated facilities would not be 

constructed. 

Issued in Washington, DC, on April 24, 

2012. 

Brian Mills, 

Deputy Assistant Secretary, Permitting, Siting 

and Analysis, Office of Electricity Delivery 

and Energy Reliability. 

[FR Doc. 2012–10304 Filed 4–27–12; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 6450–01–P 

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION 

AGENCY 

[FRL–9665–2] 

Cross-Media Electronic Reporting: 

Authorized Program Revision 

Approval, State of Florida 

AGENCY: Environmental Protection 

Agency (EPA). 

ACTION: Notice. 

SUMMARY: This notice announces EPA’s 

approval of the State of Florida’s request 

mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with NOTICES