### 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


### 15969 Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 55 / Tuesday, March 22, 2011 / Notices

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 (CO 2) 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 CO 2

. During the demonstration phase of the plant’s operations, the project would sequester about 3 million tons of CO 2 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

CO 2 . Following the demonstration phase, the polygen plant would continue in commercial operation for 30 to 50 years and would continue to capture its CO 2

.

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 provideapproximately $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


### 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 EISmay 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**