29728 Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 99 / Monday, May 23, 2011 / Notices 

will meet to receive updates on EAC’s 

program activities and budget. The 

Board will receive updates on the 

Voting System Testing and Certification 

program. The Board will hear updates 

from a special committee on Defining 

Issues of Voting System Sustainability. 

The Board will hear presentations by 

the National Institute of Standards and 

Technology (NIST) and the Federal 

Voting Assistance Program (FVAP) on 

UOCAVA Internet voting and common 

data format. The Board will receive 

updates on EAC grants programs 

including: The Accessible Voting 

Technology Initiative; and the PreElection Logic and Accuracy Testing 

and Post-Election Audit Initiative. The 

Board will receive updates on EAC 

research and studies. The Board will 

hear a presentation on a Rutgers report 

on Voter Participation of People with 

Disabilities in 2010. The Board will hear 

other committee reports, elect officers 

and consider motions. The Board will 

consider other administrative matters. 

Members of the public may observe 

but not participate in EAC meetings 

unless this notice provides otherwise. 

Members of the public may use small 

electronic audio recording devices to 

record the proceedings. The use of other 

recording equipment and cameras 

requires advance notice to and 

coordination with the EAC’s 

Communications Office. 

This meeting will be open for public 

observation. 

PERSON TO CONTACT FOR INFORMATION: 

Bryan Whitener, Telephone: (202) 566– 

3100. 

Thomas R. Wilkey, 

Executive Director, U.S. Election Assistance 

Commission. 

[FR Doc. 2011–12667 Filed 5–19–11; 11:15 am] 

BILLING CODE 6820–KF–P 

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY 

Notice of Intent To Prepare an 

Environmental Impact Statement and 

Notice of Potential Floodplain and 

Wetlands Involvement for the 

FutureGen 2.0 Program 

AGENCY: Department of Energy. 

ACTION: Notice of Intent and Notice of 

Potential Floodplain and Wetlands 

Involvement. 

SUMMARY: The U.S. Department of 

Energy (DOE or the Department) 

announces its intent to prepare an 

Environmental Impact Statement (EIS) 

pursuant to the National Environmental 

Policy Act (NEPA) of 1969 (42 U.S.C. 

4321 et seq.), the Council on 

Environmental Quality’s (CEQ) NEPA 

regulations (40 CFR Parts 1500–1508), 

and DOE’s NEPA implementing 

procedures (10 CFR Part 1021) to assess 

the potential environmental impacts of 

DOE’s proposed action: providing 

approximately $1 billion in Federal 

funding (most of it appropriated by the 

American Recovery and Reinvestment 

Act, or ‘‘ARRA’’) for the FutureGen 2.0 

program. DOE has prepared this Notice 

of Intent (NOI) to inform interested 

parties of the pending EIS and to invite 

public comments on the proposed 

action, including: (1) The range of 

environmental issues, (2) the 

alternatives to be analyzed, and (3) the 

impacts to be considered in the EIS. The 

NOI also provides notice in accordance 

with 10 CFR Part 1022 (DOE’s 

regulations for compliance with 

floodplain and wetland review 

requirements) that the proposed project 

may involve potential impacts to 

floodplains and wetlands. 

The FutureGen 2.0 program would 

provide financial assistance for the 

repowering of an existing electricity 

generator with clean coal technologies 

integrated with a pipeline that would 

transport carbon dioxide (CO2) to a 

sequestration site where it would be 

injected and stored in a deep geologic 

formation. DOE entered into separate 

cooperative agreements with Ameren 

Energy Resources (Ameren) and with 

the FutureGen Alliance (the Alliance) 

that define DOE’s proposed action. This 

program consists of an Oxy-Combustion 

Large Scale Test undertaken by Ameren 

at its Meredosia Power Station in west 

central Illinois and a Pipeline and CO2

Storage Reservoir undertaken by the 

Alliance. In addition, the Alliance 

would construct and operate facilities 

for research, training, and visitors in the 

vicinity of the sequestration site. The 

Alliance has identified its preferred 

sequestration site in Morgan County, 

Illinois, and two alternative sites, one in 

Christian County, Illinois and one in 

Douglas County, Illinois. The program 

would provide performance and 

emissions data as well as establish 

operating and maintenance experience 

that would facilitate future large-scale 

commercial deployment of these 

technologies. DOE would provide 

technical and programmatic guidance to 

Ameren and the Alliance and oversee 

activities for compliance with the terms 

of the cooperative agreements. DOE is 

responsible for NEPA compliance 

activities. 

DOE encourages government agencies, 

private-sector organizations, and the 

general public to participate in the 

FutureGen 2.0 program through the 

NEPA process. DOE will consult with 

interested Native American Tribes and 

Federal, state, regional and local 

agencies during preparation of the EIS. 

Further, DOE invites agencies with 

jurisdiction by law or special expertise 

to participate as cooperating agencies in 

the preparation of this EIS. 

DATES: DOE invites comments on the 

proposed scope and content of the EIS 

from all interested parties. To ensure 

consideration in the preparation of the 

EIS, comments must be received by June 

22, 2011. DOE will consider late 

comments to the extent practicable. In 

addition to receiving comments in 

writing and by e-mail [See ADDRESSES

below], DOE will conduct public 

scoping meetings during which 

government agencies, private-sector 

organizations, and the general public are 

invited to present oral and written 

comments with regard to DOE’s 

proposed action, alternatives, and 

potential impacts of the proposed 

FutureGen 2.0 program. DOE will 

consider these comments in developing 

the EIS. Public scoping meetings will be 

held on June 7, 8, and 9, 2011 [See 

‘‘Public Scoping Process’’ under 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION below]. 

ADDRESSES: Written comments on the 

scope of the EIS and requests to 

participate in the public scoping 

meetings should be addressed to: Mr. 

Cliff Whyte, U.S. Department of Energy, 

National Energy Technology Laboratory, 

P.O. Box 880, Morgantown, West 

Virginia 26507–0880. Individuals and 

organizations who would like to provide 

oral or written comments should contact 

Mr. Whyte by mail at the above address; 

telephone (toll-free) 1–877–338–5689; 

fax 304–285–4403; or electronic mail 

(FG2.EIS@netl.doe.gov). 

Oral comments will be heard during 

the formal portion of the scoping 

meetings [See ‘‘Public Scoping Process’’ 

under SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION

below]. Various displays and other 

information about DOE’s NEPA process 

and the FutureGen 2.0 program will be 

available, and representatives from DOE 

and the project partners will be present 

at an informal session to discuss the 

FutureGen 2.0 program and the EIS 

process. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: For 

further information about this project, 

contact Mr. Whyte as described above. 

For general information about the DOE 

NEPA process, please contact Ms. Carol 

M. Borgstrom, Director, Office of NEPA 

Policy and Compliance (GC–54), U.S. 

Department of Energy, 1000 

Independence Avenue, SW., 

Washington, DC 20585; telephone (202– 

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

a toll-free message (1–800–472–2756). 


srobinson on DSK4SPTVN1PROD with NOTICES
Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 99 / Monday, May 23, 2011 / Notices 29729 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 

Background 

On February 27, 2003, President 

George W. Bush proposed that the 

United States undertake a $1 billion, 10- 

year project to build the world’s first 

coal-fueled plant to produce electricity 

and hydrogen with near-zero emissions. 

In response to that announcement, DOE 

developed plans for the original 

FutureGen project, which would 

establish the technical and economic 

feasibility of producing electricity and 

hydrogen from coal—a low-cost and 

abundant energy resource—while 

capturing and geologically storing the 

CO2 generated in the process. DOE 

issued a Final EIS for the original 

FutureGen project (DOE/EIS–0394) in 

November 2007 and an associated 

Record of Decision in July 2009 (74 FR 

35174). The proposed action would 

have resulted in the construction and 

operation of a 330–MWe (gross) 

integrated gasification combined cycle 

(IGCC) plant near Mattoon, Illinois, with 

capture and storage of more than 1 

million tons of CO2 per year in the 

Mount Simon geologic formation. The 

total cost of the original FutureGen 

Project proved to be higher than 

acceptable, however, causing a funding 

gap that could not be filled by Federal 

or state governments or private industry. 

As a result DOE refocused its approach. 

The FutureGen 2.0 program consists of 

the two separate Cooperative 

Agreements with Ameren and the 

Alliance. Ameren’s partners include 

Babcock & Wilcox Power Generation 

Group (B&W) and Air Liquide Process & 

Construction, Inc. (AL). The Alliance is 

a non-profit corporation that represents 

a global coalition of coal producers, coal 

users and coal equipment suppliers, 

including full members: Alpha Natural 

Resources, Inc.; Anglo American, LLC; 

CONSOL Energy, Inc.; Louisville Gas 

and Electric Company and Kentucky 

Utilities Company (LG&E and KU); 

Peabody Energy Corporation; Rio Tinto 

Energy America; and Xstrata, PLC. 

Purpose and Need for DOE Action 

In pursuing the United States’ goal of 

providing safe, affordable and clean 

energy for its citizens, coal plays an 

important role in the nation’s energy 

supply. However, without carbon 

capture and sequestration, the 

combustion of coal and other fossil fuels 

leads to increased releases of CO2 into 

the atmosphere. Because power plants 

are large stationary sources, it is 

generally considered to be more feasible 

to capture CO2 from them and store it 

rather than attempting to capture it from 

mobile sources such as automobiles. 

To this end, DOE has sought to 

support near-zero emissions 

technologies that would produce 

electric power from coal while 

permanently storing CO2 in deep 

geologic formations. The technical, 

economic, and environmental feasibility 

of producing electric power from coal 

coupled with geologic storage 

technology must be proven. DOE 

believes that oxy-combustion 

technology has the potential to help 

open a market for repowering in many 

of the world’s existing pulverized coal 

power plants. In the absence of the 

proven operation of a repowered, nearzero emissions plant, the contribution of 

coal to the nation’s energy supply could 

be reduced. This could potentially 

increase the use of higher cost and/or 

nondomestic energy resources and 

impact the domestic economy as well as 

energy security. 

Proposed Action 

DOE proposes to provide financial 

assistance (approximately $1 billion) to 

Ameren and the Alliance to support 

implementation of their projects, which 

if successful would provide critical 

performance and emissions data as well 

as establish operating, permitting, 

maintenance, and other experience 

needed for future commercial 

deployment of these technologies. 

The FutureGen 2.0 program seeks to 

continue the work of the original 

FutureGen project by advancing 

technology that can make the United 

States a world leader in carbon capture 

and storage (CCS). In formulating its 

proposal for FutureGen 2.0, DOE sought 

to reduce the project’s overall cost by 

changing the technology from coal 

gasification to oxy-combustion. The 

inherent scalability of oxy-combustion 

technology allows a reduction in power 

plant size with substantial cost benefits. 

Studies by DOE’s National Energy 

Technology Laboratory have identified 

oxy-combustion technology as a 

potentially cost-effective approach to 

implement carbon capture at existing 

coal-fueled facilities. It also has the 

potential for use in new power plants as 

well as in repowering a large crosssection of the world’s existing 

pulverized coal plants. 

The FutureGen 2.0 program would 

proceed through 2020 with design, 

construction, operation, and monitoring. 

Performance and economic test results 

would be shared among all participants, 

industry, the environmental 

community, and the public. The 

Alliance has an open membership 

policy to encourage the addition of 

other coal producers, coal users and 

coal equipment suppliers, both 

domestic and international. Consistent 

with the original FutureGen project, 

DOE encourages participation from 

international organizations to maximize 

the global applicability and acceptance 

of FutureGen 2.0’s results, helping to 

support an international consensus on 

the role of coal and geologic storage in 

addressing global greenhouse gas 

emissions and energy security. 

Oxy-Combustion Large Scale Test 

For the Oxy-Combustion Large Scale 

Test, Ameren and its team would 

repower Unit 4 at Ameren’s Meredosia 

Power Station in west central Illinois 

using advanced oxy-combustion 

technology. The oxy-combustion facility 

may be capable of running on a range 

of coals and operating conditions. The 

data generated would be used to expand 

the market for oxy-combustion 

technology. The project is also expected 

to provide performance and emissions 

data as well as establish operating and 

maintenance experience that will 

facilitate future large-scale commercial 

projects. 

The scope of this test includes project 

definition, design, procurement, 

manufacture, installation, startup, 

commercial operation and testing of an 

integrated oxy-combustion coal boiler 

with CO2 capture, purification, and 

compression. The plant would generate 

approximately 200 MWe gross with a 

net output estimated at approximately 

140 MWe. The CO2 would be cleaned, 

compressed for transport, and delivered 

to a terminal point for transfer to the 

Alliance’s project. 

Meredosia Power Station: The 

Meredosia Power Station is located 

adjacent to the east side of the Illinois 

River, south of Meredosia, Illinois, 

approximately 18 miles west of 

Jacksonville, Illinois. The plant includes 

four generating units, three of which are 

coal-fired and one of which is oil-fired. 

Unit 4, built in 1975, is an oil-fired unit 

that is currently idle. The steam turbine 

and generator have low operating hours 

and could be placed into service as part 

of the repowered oxy-combustion 

design. The station contains existing 

infrastructure that could support the 

operation of the oxy-combustion system 

including interconnection to the 

electrical grid, water supply and intake 

structures, wastewater outfalls, coal 

storage and handling areas, and barge 

and truck delivery systems for coal. The 

5,300-foot western boundary of the 260- 

acre Meredosia Power Station fronts the 

Illinois River, where the station’s oil 

and coal barge unloading facilities are 

located. The land immediately adjacent 

to the station on the north, northeast 

and southeast is railroad property; other 


srobinson on DSK4SPTVN1PROD with NOTICES
29730 Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 99 / Monday, May 23, 2011 / Notices 

immediately adjacent property is 

roadway. Beyond and in addition to the 

railroad property and roadways, land 

use is primarily residential to the north 

and northeast, scattered residential and 

agricultural to the east, and industrial to 

the south. 

Oxy-Combustion Technology: This 

technology involves designing the 

power plant’s boiler to combust coal 

with a mixture of nearly pure oxygen 

and recycled flue gas (which is 

primarily CO2) rather than air. An air 

separation unit produces the oxygen. 

The concentrated stream of CO2 that 

leaves the boiler would be ready for 

processing by environmental cleanup 

equipment (to remove other captured 

emissions) and the compression and 

purification unit. The concentrated and 

compressed CO2 would then be 

transferred to a pipeline for 

transmission to the Alliance’s storage 

location. The oxy-combustion 

technology during normal operations 

would produce near-zero emissions of 

oxides of nitrogen (NOX), oxides of 

sulfur (SOx), mercury, particulate 

matter and other pollutants typical of a 

conventional coal-fired boiler. The plant 

would be designed to capture 

approximately 1.3 million metric tons of 

CO2 per year from the oxy-combustion 

system and is targeted to achieve a CO2

capture rate exceeding 90 percent. 

Pipeline and CO2 Storage Reservoir 

For the Pipeline and CO2 Storage 

Reservoir project, the Alliance would 

design, construct, and operate a 

transmission pipeline and geologic 

injection and storage facility. The 

Alliance’s work involves selection of a 

suitable storage site, development of the 

subsurface storage field, development of 

CO2 transport infrastructure (pipeline), 

and construction of the associated 

research and training facilities, 

including a visitor center. The Alliance 

has identified its preferred site in 

Morgan County, Illinois, for the 

injection facility, and two other sites 

(one in Christian County and one in 

Douglas County, Illinois) as potential 

alternate locations should the preferred 

site prove infeasible. The Alliance’s 

preferred site for geologic storage in 

Morgan County, Illinois is 

approximately 30 miles from the 

Meredosia Power Station, and the 

Alliance’s alternate sites in Christian 

County and Douglas County, Illinois are 

approximately 75 and 125 miles from 

the plant site, respectively. All three 

sites would be evaluated in the EIS 

unless DOE determines that they are not 

reasonable alternatives. 

The Alliance would construct a 

pipeline to transport CO2 from the 

Meredosia Power Station to the selected 

storage site where it would be injected 

through deep wells into the target 

geologic formation. The pipeline and 

storage reservoir would be designed to 

inject and store approximately 39 

million metric tons over a 30-year 

operating period. Depending on 

stakeholder and landowner acceptance, 

the Alliance may also consider other 

sources of CO2 in addition to that from 

Ameren’s plant for injection. Research 

would include site characterization, 

injection and storage, and CO2

monitoring and measurement. 

The target formation for CO2 injection 

and storage is the Mount Simon 

sandstone formation, which is one of 

the Illinois Basin’s major deep saline 

formations. The formation’s positive 

characteristics for CO2 storage include 

its isolation from other strata, as well as 

its depth, lateral continuity, and relative 

permeability. The Mount Simon is 

bounded below by a Pre-Cambrian 

igneous rock and above by the Eau 

Claire formation, which is a mixture of 

tightly layered shales with low 

permeability, as well as by secondary 

caprock formations above the Eau 

Claire. The Alliance would implement a 

monitoring, verification, and accounting 

(MVA) program to monitor the injection 

and storage of CO2 within the geologic 

formations to verify that it stays within 

the target formation. The MVA program 

would meet injection control permitting 

and requirements that DOE may impose. 

In accordance with the Safe Drinking 

Water Act, the Alliance would be 

required to obtain a Class VI 

underground injection control permit 

from the U.S. Environmental Protection 

Agency. The MVA program consists of 

the following components: (1) Injection 

system monitoring; (2) containment 

monitoring (via monitoring wells, 

mechanical integrity testing, and other 

means); (3) CO2 plume tracking via 

multiple techniques; (4) CO2 injection 

simulation modeling; and (5) perhaps 

new experimental techniques not yet in 

practice. 

Proposed Project Schedules 

The Oxy-Combustion Large Scale Test 

would initiate operations (including 

CO2 capture, purification and 

compression) in 2016 and complete 

federally-funded project activities 

(operational testing) in 2018. The 

Pipeline and CO2 Storage Reservoir 

would become operational at the same 

time (2016) and complete federallyfunded project activities (operational 

testing and two-years of additional 

federally-funded MVA activities) in 

2020. CO2 capture, pipeline transport, 

injection, and MVA activities are 

expected to operate (without federal 

funding) for approximately 30 years. 

MVA activities would take place during 

injection and continue beyond its 

cessation as prescribed by regulatory 

requirements. The schedule is 

contingent upon Ameren and the 

Alliance receiving the necessary permits 

and regulatory approvals, as well as 

financial closing on all the necessary 

funding sources, including DOE’s 

financial assistance. DOE’s proposal to 

provide full financial assistance for 

detailed design, procurement of 

equipment, construction, and operations 

is contingent upon DOE’s completion of 

the NEPA process, and achievement of 

the permitting and financial 

requirements listed above by Ameren 

and the Alliance. 

Connected and Cumulative Actions 

The components of the FutureGen 2.0 

program will be evaluated individually 

and collectively within the EIS. 

Although injection of other sources of 

CO2 is not currently proposed, such 

injection is reasonably foreseeable and 

will be evaluated in the EIS. DOE will 

also consider the cumulative impacts of 

the program, which will include the 

analysis of emissions (including 

greenhouse gas emissions) and other 

incremental impacts. Cumulative 

impacts are impacts on the environment 

which result from the incremental 

impacts of an action when added to 

other past, present, and reasonably 

foreseeable future actions. 

Alternatives 

NEPA requires that an EIS evaluate 

the range of reasonable alternatives to 

an agency’s proposed action. DOE’s 

range of reasonable alternatives includes 

the No Action Alternative, which is to 

withhold financial assistance for the 

FutureGen 2.0 program, and the Action 

Alternative, which is to provide 

financial assistance to the FutureGen 2.0 

program. 

DOE has developed the range of 

reasonable alternatives for FutureGen 

2.0 program based on evaluation of 

various clean coal technologies through 

the Clean Coal Power Initiative program; 

analysis of the original FutureGen 

Project in terms of technology, costs, 

and suitability for geologic storage; data 

obtained and reviewed through various 

funding opportunity announcements; 

data obtained for the original FutureGen 

Project and a related project called 

Restructured FutureGen; and the 

interest of industry to participate in 

projects to support FutureGen 2.0 based 

on these evaluations. In particular, 

DOE’s current proposal to advance the 

programmatic goal of CO2 storage in the 


srobinson on DSK4SPTVN1PROD with NOTICES
Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 99 / Monday, May 23, 2011 / Notices 29731 

Mount Simon Formation in Illinois 

through the FutureGen Program was 

addressed in its Final Environmental 

Impact Statement for the FutureGen 

Project (DOE/EIS–0394 [November 

2007]) and associated Record of 

Decision (74 FR 35174 (2009)). 

Through review and consideration of 

these data and analysis, the repowering 

of an existing power plant with oxycombustion technology was identified 

as the approach that would meet cost 

and technology advancement objectives 

of FutureGen Program. Furthermore, 

DOE determined that due to cost and 

technical advantages obtained through 

efforts conducted by the FutureGen 

Alliance under the original FutureGen 

Project, that the Alliance’s choice of 

geologic storage formations would be 

limited to the Mount Simon Formation. 

Given these factors, reasonable 

alternatives were limited to potential 

oxy-combustion repowering projects at a 

location from which it would remain 

economically viable to transport 

captured CO2 for injection into the 

Mount Simon Formation. 

The range of reasonable alternatives 

for a financial assistance project that is 

proposed by industrial participants is 

limited to the alternatives or project 

options under consideration by the 

participants or that are reasonable 

within the confines of the project as 

proposed (e.g., the particular location of 

the processing units, pipelines, injection 

sites on land proposed for the project, 

and potential measures to mitigate 

potential environmental impacts) and a 

‘‘no-action’’ alternative. Regarding the no 

action alternative, DOE assumes for 

purposes of the EIS that, if DOE decides 

to withhold financial assistance, the 

project would not proceed. 

DOE will evaluate the two projects 

that constitute the FutureGen 2.0 

program with and without any 

mitigating conditions that DOE may 

identify as reasonable and appropriate. 

Alternatives considered in developing 

respective components of the proposed 

FutureGen 2.0 program and eliminated 

from further consideration will also be 

discussed in the EIS. 

The sequestration site would be 

designed to accept and store at a 

minimum the CO2 captured at Ameren’s 

Meredosia Power Station over its 30- 

year design life. The Alliance undertook 

a site selection process in October 2010 

with the issuance of a Request for 

Proposals seeking a site upon which the 

Alliance would construct and operate 

the CO2 storage project. The Alliance 

hosted two public meetings, one for 

prospective site offerors and a 

subsequent meeting for the general 

public, on October 28, 2010, in 

Springfield, Illinois. Representatives for 

16 proposed sites attended the meeting, 

and the Alliance received proposals 

from six sites in November 2010. In 

December 2010, the Alliance selected 

four of the six sites for further 

evaluation and subsequently identified 

three candidate sites, one preferred and 

two alternates, which will be evaluated 

in the EIS. 

DOE will also consider a no-action 

alternative whereby the Department 

would not fund the FutureGen 2.0 

program and the project would not 

proceed. In the absence of DOE funding, 

it would be unlikely that the project 

proponents, or industry in general, 

would soon undertake the utility-scale 

integration of CO2 capture and geologic 

storage with a coal-fired power plant 

repowered with oxy-combustion. 

Absent DOE’s investment in a utilityscale facility, the development of oxycombustion repowered plants integrated 

with CO2 capture and geologic storage 

would occur more slowly or not at all. 

Decision Making Process 

DOE will consider public scoping 

comments in preparing a Draft EIS, 

which will be issued for public 

comment. DOE will consider public 

comments on the Draft EIS and respond 

as appropriate in the Final EIS. No 

sooner than 30 days following 

completion of the Final EIS, DOE would 

announce its decision regarding 

whether to provide financial assistance 

to these projects in a Record of Decision 

(ROD). If DOE decides to provide 

financial assistance, the Alliance would 

develop its pipeline and storage site. 

Similarly, Ameren would proceed with 

detailed design and construction 

activities at the Meredosia site. 

Floodplains and Wetlands 

Activities required to implement the 

FutureGen 2.0 program, such as those 

required to repower Unit 4 at the 

Meredosia Power Station, would be 

undertaken to avoid or minimize 

potential impacts to wetlands or 

floodplains. The Meredosia Power 

Station site includes low lying areas to 

the west, north, and south, which are 

located in the floodplain. However, the 

existing generating units as well as 

proposed locations for the new oxycombustion unit are located above the 

floodplain elevation. Any wetland and 

floodplain impacts that might result 

from installation of monitoring and 

injection wells, or the construction of 

CO2 pipelines or other linear features 

required for this program, will be 

described in the EIS. In the event that 

DOE were to identify wetlands and 

floodplains that would be affected by 

the FutureGen 2.0 program as a result of 

pipelines, injection facilities, or 

connected actions, DOE would prepare 

a floodplain and wetland assessment in 

accordance with its regulations at 10 

CFR Part 1022, and include the 

assessment in the Draft EIS. 

Preliminary Identification of 

Environmental Issues 

DOE intends to address the issues 

listed below when considering the 

potential impacts resulting from the 

construction and operation of the 

proposed FutureGen 2.0 program and 

any connected actions. This list is 

neither intended to be all-inclusive, nor 

a predetermined set of potential 

impacts. DOE invites comments on 

whether this is an appropriate list of 

issues that should be considered in the 

EIS. The preliminary list of potentially 

affected resources or activities and their 

related environmental issues includes: 

Air quality resources: Potential air 

quality impacts from emissions during 

construction and operation of the 

repowered Unit 4 at the Meredosia plant 

or CCS facilities and other related 

facilities on local or regional air quality; 

Climate change: Potential impacts 

from emissions of CO2 and other 

greenhouse gas emissions; 

Water resources: Potential impacts 

from water utilization and consumption, 

plus potential impacts from stream 

crossings and wastewater discharges; 

Infrastructure and land use: Potential 

environmental and socioeconomic 

impacts associated with the project, 

including delivery of feed materials and 

distribution of products (e.g., access 

roads, pipelines); 

Visual resources: Potential impacts to 

the view shed, scenic views (e.g., 

impacts from the injection wells, 

pipelines, and support facilities for the 

injection wells and pipelines), and 

perception of the community or locality; 

Solid wastes: Pollution prevention 

and waste management issues 

(generation, treatment, transport, 

storage, disposal or use), including 

potential impacts from the generation, 

treatment, storage, and management of 

hazardous materials and other solid 

wastes; 

Biological resources: Potential 

impacts to vegetation, wildlife, 

threatened or endangered species, and 

ecologically sensitive habitats; 

Floodplains and wetlands: Potential 

wetland and floodplain impacts from 

construction of project facilities; 

Traffic: Potential impacts from the 

construction and operation of the 

facilities, including changes in local 

traffic patterns, deterioration of roads, 

traffic hazards, and traffic controls; 


srobinson on DSK4SPTVN1PROD with NOTICES
29732 Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 99 / Monday, May 23, 2011 / Notices 

Historic and cultural resources: 

Potential impacts related to site 

development and the associated linear 

facilities (e.g., pipelines); 

Geology: Potential impacts from the 

injection and storage of CO2 on 

underground resources such as ground 

water supplies, mineral resources, and 

fossil fuel resources, and the fate and 

stability of CO2 being stored; 

Health and safety issues: Potential 

impacts associated with use, transport, 

and storage of hazardous chemicals, as 

well as CO2 capture and transport to the 

sequestration site; 

Socioeconomics: Potential impacts to 

schools, housing, public services, and 

local revenues, including the creation of 

jobs; 

Environmental justice: Potential for 

disproportionately high and adverse 

impacts on minority and low-income 

populations; 

Noise and light: Potential disturbance 

impacts from construction, 

transportation of materials, and facility 

operations; 

Connected actions: Potential impacts 

from the integrated operations of the 

oxy-combustion project and 

sequestration project, as well as 

potential development of support 

facilities or supporting infrastructure; 

Cumulative effects that could result 

from the incremental impacts of the 

proposed project when added to other 

past, present, and reasonably 

foreseeable future actions; 

DOE will also address compliance 

with regulatory and environmental 

permitting requirements and 

environmental monitoring plans 

associated with the carbon capture 

facility and CO2 geologic storage 

activities. 

Public Scoping Process 

This Notice of Intent initiates the 

scoping process under NEPA, which 

will guide the development of the Draft 

EIS. To ensure identification of issues 

related to DOE’s proposed action with 

respect to the proposed FutureGen 2.0 

program, DOE seeks public input to 

define the scope of the EIS. The public 

scoping period will end June 22, 2011. 

Interested government agencies, Native 

American Tribes, private-sector 

organizations, and the general public are 

encouraged to submit comments or 

suggestions concerning the content of 

the EIS, issues and impacts that should 

be addressed, and alternatives that 

should be considered. Scoping 

comments should clearly describe 

specific issues or topics that the EIS 

should address. Written, e-mailed, or 

faxed comments should be received by 

June 22, 2011 (see ADDRESSES). DOE will 

consider late comments to the extent 

practicable. 

DOE will conduct public scoping 

meetings according to the following 

schedule: 

June 7, 2011—Taylorville High School, 

815 W. Springfield Road, Taylorville, 

IL 62568. 

June 8, 2011—Ironhorse Golf Club, 2000 

Ironhorse Drive, Tuscola, IL 61953. 

June 9, 2011—The Jacksonville Elks 

Lodge, 231 West Morgan Street, 

Jacksonville, IL 62650. 

Each public scoping meeting will 

include an informal session from 5 to 

7 p.m, followed by a formal presentation 

at 7 p.m. 

Oral comments will be heard during 

the formal portion of the scoping 

meetings. The public is also invited to 

learn more about the project at an 

informal session at each location. DOE 

requests that anyone who wishes to 

speak at the public scoping meetings 

should contact Mr. Whyte, either by 

phone, e-mail, fax, or postal mail (see 

ADDRESSES). 

Those who do not arrange in advance 

to speak may register at the meeting 

(preferably at the beginning of the 

meeting) and would be given an 

opportunity to speak after previously 

scheduled speakers. Speakers will be 

given approximately five minutes to 

present their comments. Those speakers 

who want more than five minutes 

should indicate the length of time 

desired in their request. Depending on 

the number of speakers, DOE may need 

to limit all speakers to five minutes 

initially and provide additional 

opportunity as time permits. Individuals 

may also provide written materials in 

lieu of, or supplemental to, their 

presentations. DOE will give equal 

consideration to oral and written 

comments. 

DOE will begin the formal meeting 

with an overview of the proposed 

FutureGen 2.0 program. The meeting 

will not be conducted as an evidentiary 

hearing, and speakers will not be crossexamined. However, speakers may be 

asked questions to help ensure that DOE 

fully understands the comments or 

suggestions. A presiding officer will 

establish the order of speakers and 

provide any additional procedures 

necessary to conduct the meeting. A 

stenographer will record the 

proceedings, including all oral 

comments received. 

Issued in Washington, DC, this 18th day of 

May 2011. 

Charles D. McConnell, 

Chief Operating Officer, Office of Fossil 

Energy. 

[FR Doc. 2011–12632 Filed 5–20–11; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 6450–01–P 

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY 

Environmental Management SiteSpecific Advisory Board, Oak Ridge 

Reservation 

AGENCY: Department of Energy. 

ACTION: Notice of open meeting. 

SUMMARY: This notice announces a 

meeting of the Environmental 

Management Site-Specific Advisory 

Board (EM SSAB), Oak Ridge 

Reservation. The Federal Advisory 

Committee Act (Pub. L. 92–463, 86 Stat. 

770) requires that public notice of this 

meeting be announced in the Federal 

Register. 

DATES: Wednesday, June 8, 2011, 6 p.m. 

ADDRESSES: DOE Information Center, 

475 Oak Ridge Turnpike, Oak Ridge, 

Tennessee 37830. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: 

Patricia J. Halsey, Federal Coordinator, 

Department of Energy Oak Ridge 

Operations Office, P.O. Box 2001, EM– 

90, Oak Ridge, TN 37831. Phone (865) 

576–4025; Fax (865) 576–2347 or e-mail: 

halseypj@oro.doe.gov or check the Web 

site at http://www.oakridge.doe.gov/em/ 

ssab. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 

Purpose of the Board: The purpose of 

the Board is to make recommendations 

to DOE–EM and site management in the 

areas of environmental restoration, 

waste management, and related 

activities. 

Tentative Agenda: The main meeting 

presentation will be on the 2011 Oak 

Ridge Reservation Remediation 

Effectiveness Report and the upcoming 

CERCLA Five-Year Review. 

Public Participation: The EM SSAB, 

Oak Ridge, welcomes the attendance of 

the public at its advisory committee 

meetings and will make every effort to 

accommodate persons with physical 

disabilities or special needs. If you 

require special accommodations due to 

a disability, please contact Patricia J. 

Halsey at least seven days in advance of 

the meeting at the phone number listed 

above. Written statements may be filed 

with the Board either before or after the 

meeting. Individuals who wish to make 

oral statements pertaining to the agenda 

item should contact Patricia J. Halsey at 

the address or telephone number listed 


srobinson on DSK4SPTVN1PROD with NOTICES