43916 Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 143 / Tuesday, July 27, 2010 / Notices 

in accordance with the Council on 

Environmental Quality’s (CEQ) 

regulations for implementing the 

procedural provisions of NEPA (40 CFR 

Parts 1500–1508), RUS’s NEPA 

implementing regulations (7 CFR Part 

1794), and the Western Area Power 

Administration’s (Western) NEPA 

implementing regulations (10 CFR Part 

1021). Western was the lead federal 

agency in preparation of the EIS as 

defined at 40 CFR 1501.5; RUS was a 

cooperating agency. The purpose of the 

EIS was to evaluate the potential 

environmental impacts of and 

alternatives to Basin Electric Power 

Cooperative’s (Basin Electric) 

application for a RUS loan and a 

Western interconnection agreement to 

construct the proposed Project. The 

proposed Project’s facility would 

include a new natural gas-fired 

combustion turbine set, a heat recovery 

steam generator, and a steam turbine 

generator set. 

ADDRESSES: To obtain copies of the 

ROD, or for further information, contact: 

Ms. Lauren McGee, Environmental 

Scientist, USDA, Rural Utilities Service, 

1400 Independence Avenue, SW., Stop 

1571, Room 2239–S, Washington, DC 

20250–1571, telephone: (202) 720–1482, 

fax: (202) 690–0649, or e-mail: 

lauren.mcgee@wdc.usda.gov. A copy of 

the ROD can be viewed online at: 

http://www.usda.gov/rus/water/ees/ 

eis.htm. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Basin 

Electric’s proposed Project is to 

construct, own, operate, and maintain 

the Deer Creek Station Energy Facility, 

a 300 MW combined-cycle natural gas 

generation facility, water pipeline, 

transmission line, transmission 

interconnection(s), and other associated 

facilities in Brookings and Deuel 

counties in eastern South Dakota. The 

purpose for the proposed Project is to 

serve increased load demand for electric 

power in the eastern portion of Basin 

Electric’s service area. In 2007, Basin 

Electric prepared a forecast showing 

load and capability surpluses/deficits 

through the year 2021. The forecast 

predicted that by 2014, there will be a 

deficit of 800–900 MW for the eastern 

portion of its service area. The proposed 

Project’s addition of 300 MW of 

generation will help meet Basin 

Electric’s future energy requirements. 

In accordance with NEPA, the CEQ 

regulations for implementing the 

procedural provisions of NEPA, and 

applicable agency NEPA implementing 

regulations, Western and RUS prepared 

an EIS to assess the potential 

environmental impacts associated with 

the proposed Project. The decision 

being documented in RUS’s ROD is that 

the Agency agrees to consider, subject to 

loan approval, funding the proposed 

Project at the White Site 1 location. 

More details regarding RUS’s regulatory 

authority, rationale for the decision, and 

compliance with applicable regulations 

are included in the ROD. Because two 

distinct federal actions are being 

proposed, RUS and Western decided to 

issue separate RODs. 

On February 6, 2009, Western 

published in the Federal Register a 

Notice of Intent to prepare an EIS for the 

proposed Project. On February 26, 2010, 

RUS published its Notice of Availability 

(NOA) of the Draft EIS for the proposed 

Project in the Federal Register. The U.S. 

Environmental Protection Agency 

acknowledged receipt of the Draft EIS 

on February 5, 2010, from Western. The 

45-day comment period ended on 

March 22, 2010. Because few comments 

were received which did not result in 

the substantial modification of the 

alternatives or the environmental 

analysis in the Draft EIS, Western and 

RUS prepared an abbreviated Final EIS 

to address the comments received. RUS 

published its NOA of the Final EIS for 

the proposed Project in the Federal 

Register on June 11, 2010. The U.S. 

Environmental Protection Agency 

acknowledged receipt of the Final EIS 

on May 28, 2010, from Western. The 30- 

day waiting period ended on June 28, 

2010. One comment was received; it 

was addressed in RUS’s ROD. 

After considering various ways to 

meet these future needs, Basin Electric 

identified construction of the proposed 

Project as its best course of action. This 

EIS considered 16 alternatives to meet 

the future energy requirements of the 

eastern portion of its service area and 

five alternative site locations. These 

alternatives were evaluated in terms of 

cost-effectiveness, technical feasibility, 

and environmental factors (e.g., soils, 

topography and geology, water 

resources, air quality, biological 

resources, the acoustic environment, 

recreation, cultural and historic 

resources, visual resources, 

transportation, farmland, land use, 

human health and safety, the 

socioeconomic environment, 

environmental justice, and cumulative 

effects). 

The EIS analyzes in detail the No 

Action Alternative and the Action 

Alternative (construction of the Deer 

Creek Station Energy Facility) at two 

separate locations: White Site 1 

(Brookings County, T111N R48W, 

Section 25 NE Quarter) and White Site 

2 (Brookings County, T111N R48W, 

Section 2 NW Quarter). The No Action 

Alternative would expose Basin Electric 

and its member cooperatives to higher 

prices by purchasing power on the 

volatile open electric market. The 

Action Alternative at White Site 1 

would be located approximately 0.5- 

miles from the existing White 

Substation, would be further away from 

occupied residences, and has more 

suitable site conditions than White Site 

2. The Action Alternative at White Site 

2 would require the construction of a 

new substation for interconnection to 

the grid, would be closer to occupied 

residences, and has site conditions that 

are less suitable for the type of 

development being proposed. The 

resources or environmental factors that 

could be affected by the proposed 

Project were evaluated in detail in the 

EIS. These issues are summarized in 

Table ES–1: ‘‘Summary of Potential 

Impacts of Deer Creek Station,’’ of the 

EIS. 

Based on an evaluation of the 

information and impact analyses 

presented in the EIS, including the 

evaluation of all alternatives, and in 

consideration of the Agency’s NEPA 

implementing regulations, 

Environmental Policies and Procedures, 

as amended (7 CFR Part 1794), RUS 

finds that the evaluation of reasonable 

alternatives is consistent with NEPA. 

The Agency has selected the Action 

Alternative at White Site 1 as its 

preferred alternative. Because the 

proposed Project may involve action in 

floodplains or wetlands, this Notice also 

serves as a final notice of action in 

floodplains and wetlands (in accordance 

to Executive Orders 11988 and 11990). 

This Notice concludes RUS’s 

compliance with NEPA and the 

Agency’s ‘‘Environmental Policies and 

Procedures.’’ 

Dated: July 15, 2010. 

Jonathan Adelstein, 

Administrator, Rural Utilities Service. 

[FR Doc. 2010–18294 Filed 7–26–10; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE P 

BROADCASTING BOARD OF 

GOVERNORS 

Sunshine Act Meeting 

DATE AND TIME: Friday, July 30, 2010, 12 

Noon–1 p.m. 

PLACE: Cohen Building, Room 3321, 330 

Independence Ave., SW., Washington, 

DC 20237. 

CLOSED MEETING: The members of the 

Broadcasting Board of Governors (BBG) 

will meet in closed session to review 

and discuss a number of issues relating 

to U.S. Government-funded nonmilitary international broadcasting. 


sroberts on DSKD5P82C1PROD with NOTICES
Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 143 / Tuesday, July 27, 2010 / Notices 43917 

They will address internal procedural, 

budgetary, and personnel issues, as well 

as sensitive foreign policy issues 

relating to potential options in the U.S. 

international broadcasting field. This 

meeting is closed because if open it 

likely would either disclose matters that 

would be properly classified to be kept 

secret in the interest of foreign policy 

under the appropriate executive order (5 

U.S.C. 552b.(c)(1)) or would disclose 

information the premature disclosure of 

which would be likely to significantly 

frustrate implementation of a proposed 

agency action. (5 U.S.C. 552b.(c)(9)(B)) 

In addition, part of the discussion will 

relate solely to the internal personnel 

and organizational issues of the BBG or 

the International Broadcasting Bureau. 

(5 U.S.C. 552b.(c)(2) and (6)) 

CONTACT PERSON FOR MORE INFORMATION: 

Persons interested in obtaining more 

information should contact Paul 

Kollmer-Dorsey at (202) 203–4545. 

Paul Kollmer-Dorsey, 

Deputy General Counsel. 

[FR Doc. 2010–18479 Filed 7–23–10; 4:15 pm] 

BILLING CODE 8610–01–P 

DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE 

Submission for OMB Review; 

Comment Request 

The Department of Commerce will 

submit to the Office of Management and 

Budget (OMB) for clearance the 

following proposal for collection of 

information under the provisions of the 

Paperwork Reduction Act (44 U.S.C. 

Chapter 35). 

Agency: International Trade 

Administration. 

Title: U.S. Government Trade Event 

Information Request. 

OMB Control Number: 0625–0238. 

Form Number(s): ITA–4136. 

Type of Request: Regular submission. 

Burden Hours: 200. 

Number of Respondents: 400. 

Average Hours per Response: 30 

minutes. 

Needs and Uses: Expanding U.S. 

exports is a national priority essential to 

improving U.S. trade performance. The 

International Trade Administration’s 

(ITA) Advocacy Center marshals federal 

resources to assist U.S. firms competing 

for foreign government procurements 

worldwide. The Advocacy Center works 

closely with the Trade Promotion 

Coordination Committee, which is 

chaired by the Secretary of Commerce 

and includes 20 federal agencies 

involved in export promotion. The 

purpose of the U.S. Government Trade 

Event Information Request is to collect 

the necessary information to make an 

evaluation as to whether a firm qualifies 

for senior-level U.S. government (USG) 

support, in the form of attendance at an 

event including witnessing the signing 

of a commercial agreement (e.g., most 

often a contract). 

Affected Public: Business or other forprofit organizations. 

Frequency: On occasion. 

Respondent’s Obligation: Voluntary. 

OMB Desk Officer: Wendy Liberante, 

(202) 395–3647. 

Copies of the above information 

collection proposal can be obtained by 

calling or writing Diana Hynek, 

Departmental Paperwork Clearance 

Officer, (202) 482–0266, Department of 

Commerce, Room 6616, 14th and 

Constitution Avenue, NW., Washington, 

DC 20230 (or via the Internet at 

dHynek@doc.gov). 

Written comments and 

recommendations for the proposed 

information collection should be sent 

within 30 days of publication of this 

notice to Wendy Liberante, OMB Desk 

Officer, FAX number (202) 395–5167 or 

via the Internet at 

Wendy_L._Liberante@omb.eop.gov. 

Dated: July 21, 2010. 

Gwellnar Banks, 

Management Analyst, Office of the Chief 

Information Officer. 

[FR Doc. 2010–18295 Filed 7–26–10; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 3510–FP–P 

DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE 

International Trade Administration 

Proposed Information Collection; 

Comment Request; Implementation of 

Tariff Rate Quota Established Under 

Title V of the Trade and Development 

Act of 2000 as Amended, for Imports 

of Certain Worsted Wool 

AGENCY: International Trade 

Administration (ITA). 

ACTION: Notice. 

SUMMARY: The Department of 

Commerce, as part of its continuing 

effort to reduce paperwork and 

respondent burden, invites the general 

public and other Federal agencies to 

take this opportunity to comment on 

proposed and/or continuing information 

collections, as required by the 

Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995. 

DATES: Written comments must be 

submitted on or before September 27, 

2010. 

ADDRESSES: Direct all written comments 

to Diana Hynek, Departmental 

Paperwork Clearance Officer, 

Department of Commerce, Room 6616, 

14th and Constitution Avenue, NW., 

Washington, DC 20230 (or via the 

Internet at dHynek@doc.gov). 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: 

Request for additional information or 

copies of the information collection 

instrument and instructions should be 

directed to: Robert Carrigg, Office of 

Textiles and Apparel, Room 3119, 14th 

& Constitution Avenue, NW., 

Washington, DC 20230; Phone number: 

(202) 482–2573 and fax number: (202) 

482–0667. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 

I. Abstract 

Title V of the Trade and Development 

Act of 2000 (‘‘the Act’’) as amended by 

the Trade Act of 2002, the 

Miscellaneous Trade Act of 2004, the 

Pension Protection Act of 2006, and the 

Emergency Economic Stabilization Act 

of 2008 contains several provisions to 

assist the wool products industries. 

These include the establishment of tariff 

rate quotas (TRQ) for a limited quantity 

of worsted wool fabrics. On December 1, 

2000, the President issued Proclamation 

7383 which delegated authority to the 

Secretary of Commerce to allocate the 

TRQ and to issue regulations to 

implement these provisions. On January 

22, 2001, the Department of Commerce 

(DOC) published regulations 

establishing procedures for allocation of 

the tariff rate quotas (66 FR 6459, 15 

CFR 335). 

Section 501(e) of the Act restricts 

allocation of imports subject to the TRQ 

to persons ‘‘who cut and sew men’s and 

boys’ worsted wool suits and suit-like 

jackets and trousers in the United States 

and who apply for an allocation based 

on the amount of such suits cut and 

sewn during the prior calendar year.’’ 

Information must be collected each year 

from applicants to ensure they meet this 

requirement and to determine their fair 

share of the TRQ. The DOC will process 

this information and issue a license to 

each eligible person. The license will 

specify the amount of TRQ granted to 

each licensee. The applicant shall retain 

records substantiating the information 

provided in the TRQ license application 

for a period of 3 years; and must be 

made available upon request by an 

appropriate government official. 

The Reallocation of Tariff Rate Quota 

process states not later than September 

30 of each TRQ year, a licensee who 

will not import the full quantity granted 

in a license during the TRQ year shall 

surrender the allocation that will not be 

used to DOC for purposes of reallocation 

through a written or electronic notice, 

including the license control number 

and the amount being surrendered. The 


sroberts on DSKD5P82C1PROD with NOTICES