```

[Federal Register Volume 76, Number 219 (Monday, November 14, 2011)]
[Notices]
[Pages 70429-70433]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2011-29333]

=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY

Notice of Intent To Prepare an Environmental Impact Statement and 
Notice of Potential Floodplain and Wetlands Involvement for the W.A. 
Parish Post-Combustion CO2 Capture and Sequestration 
Project, Southeastern TX

AGENCY: Department of Energy.

ACTION: Notice of Intent to Prepare an Environmental Impact Statement 
and Notice of Potential Floodplain and Wetlands Involvement.

-----------------------------------------------------------------------

SUMMARY: The U.S. Department of Energy (DOE) announces its intent to 
prepare an environmental impact statement (EIS) pursuant to the 
National Environmental Policy Act of 1969 (NEPA) (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 
providing financial assistance for a project proposed by NRG Energy, 
Inc (NRG). DOE selected NRG's proposed W.A. Parish Post-Combustion 
CO2 Capture and Sequestration Project (Parish PCCS Project) 
for a financial assistance award through a competitive process under 
the Clean Coal Power Initiative (CCPI) program. NRG would design, 
construct and operate a commercial-scale carbon dioxide 
(CO2) capture facility at its existing W.A. Parish 
Generating Station (Parish Plant) in Fort Bend County, Texas; deliver 
the CO2 via a new pipeline to the existing West Ranch oil 
field in Jackson County, Texas for use in enhanced oil recovery (EOR) 
operations; and demonstrate monitoring techniques to verify the 
permanence of geologic CO2 storage.
    The project would use an amine-based post-combustion technology to 
capture 90 percent (approximately 1.6 million tons) of the 
CO2 annually from a 250-megawatt equivalent (MWe) flue gas 
slip stream taken from the 617 megawatt (MW) Unit 8 at the Parish 
Plant. Captured CO2 would be dried, compressed, and 
transported about 80 miles in a new pipeline to an existing oil field 
where it would be used for EOR. The project would demonstrate an 
integrated commercial-scale deployment of post-combustion 
CO2 capture technology for use in EOR operations and long-
term geologic storage. DOE selected this project to receive a financial 
assistance award through a competitive process under Round 3 (second 
selection phase) of the CCPI program.
    The EIS will further inform DOE's decision on whether to provide 
financial assistance to NRG for the Parish PCCS Project. DOE proposes 
to provide NRG with up to $355 million of the overall project cost, 
which would constitute approximately 42 percent of the estimated $845 
million total (in 2010 dollars). The project would further a specific 
objective of Round 3 of the CCPI program by demonstrating advanced 
coal-based technologies that capture and sequester, or put to 
beneficial use, CO2 emissions from coal-fired power plants.
    The purposes of this Notice of Intent (NOI) are to: (1) Inform the 
public about DOE's proposed action and NRG's proposed project; (2) 
announce the public scoping meetings; (3) solicit comments for DOE's 
consideration regarding the scope and content of the EIS; (4) invite 
those agencies with jurisdiction by law or special expertise to be 
cooperating agencies in preparation of the EIS; and (5) provide notice 
that the proposed project may involve potential impacts to floodplains 
and wetlands.
    DOE does not have regulatory jurisdiction over the Parish PCCS 
Project, and its decisions are limited to whether and under what 
circumstances it would provide financial assistance to the project. As 
part of the EIS process, DOE will consult with interested federal, 
state, regional and local agencies and Native American tribes.

DATES: DOE invites comments on the proposed scope and content of the 
EIS. Comments must be received within 30 days after publication of this 
NOI in the Federal Register to ensure consideration. In addition to 
receiving comments in writing and by email [See ADDRESSES below], DOE 
will conduct public scoping meetings to provide government agencies, 
private-sector organizations and the general public with opportunities 
to present oral and written comments or suggestions with regard to 
DOE's proposed action, alternatives, and the potential impacts of NRG's 
proposed project for DOE consideration during development of the EIS. 
The public scoping meetings will be held at the Needville High School, 
100 Fritzella Road, in Needville, Texas, on Wednesday, November 30, 
2011; and at the Jackson County Services Building, 411 North Wells 
Street, in Edna, Texas, on Thursday, December 1, 2011.
    Oral comments will be heard during the formal portion of the 
scoping meetings beginning at 7 p.m. [See Public Scoping Process.] The 
public is also invited to informal sessions beginning at 5 p.m. at the 
same locations to learn more about the project and the proposed action. 
Representatives from DOE and NRG will be present at the informal 
sessions to discuss the proposed project, the CCPI program, and the EIS 
process. Displays and other information about DOE's proposed action and 
NRG's proposed project will also be available.

ADDRESSES: Written comments on environmental concerns about the 
project, overall scope of the EIS, or requests to participate in the 
public scoping meetings should be addressed to Mr. Mark W. Lusk, U.S. 
Department of Energy, National Energy Technology Laboratory, 3610 
Collins Ferry Road, P.O. Box 880, Morgantown, WV 26507-0880. 
Individuals and organizations who would like to provide oral or 
electronic comments should contact Mr.

[[Page 70430]]

Lusk by postal mail at the above address; telephone ((412) 386-7435, or 
toll-free 1-(877) 812-1569); fax (304) 285-4403); or electronic mail 
(Parish.EIS0473@netl.doe.gov.)

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: For further information about this 
proposed project, contact Mr. Lusk, as described above. For general 
information on the DOE National Environmental Policy Act (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); fax (202) 586-7031); or leave a toll-free message (1-(800) 472-
2756).

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Background

    The CCPI program was established in 2002 as a government and 
private sector partnership to increase investment in clean coal 
technology. Through cooperative agreements with its private sector 
partners, the program advances clean coal technologies to 
commercialization. Congress established criteria for projects receiving 
financial assistance under this program in Title IV of the Energy 
Policy Act of 2005 (Pub. L. 109-58; EPAct 2005). Under this statute, 
CCPI projects must ``advance efficiency, environmental performance and 
cost competitiveness well beyond the level of technologies that are in 
commercial service'' (Pub. L. 109-58, Sec. 402(a)). On February 17, 
2009, the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act of 2009 (Pub. L. 111-
5, 123 Stat. 115) appropriated $3.4 billion to DOE for Fossil Energy 
Research and Development. DOE intends to use a significant portion of 
these funds to provide financial assistance to CCPI projects.
    The CCPI program selects projects for its government-private sector 
partnerships through an open and competitive process. DOE issues 
funding opportunity announcements specifying the types of projects it 
seeks, and invites submission of applications. DOE reviews applications 
according to the criteria specified in the funding opportunity 
announcement; these criteria include technical, financial, 
environmental, and other considerations. DOE selects projects 
demonstrating the most promise when evaluated against these criteria, 
and enters into a cooperative agreement with the selected applicants. 
These agreements set out project objectives, obligations of the 
parties, and other features of the partnerships. Applicants must agree 
to provide at least 50 percent of their project's cost; and for most 
CCPI projects, the applicant's cost share is much higher.
    To date, the CCPI program has conducted three rounds of 
solicitations and project selections. Round 1 sought projects that 
would demonstrate advanced technologies for power generation and 
improvements in plant efficiency, economics, and environmental 
performance. Round 2 requested applications for projects that would 
demonstrate improved mercury controls and gasification technology. 
Round 3, which DOE conducted in two phases, sought projects that would 
demonstrate advanced coal-based electricity generating technologies, 
coupled with the capture and sequestration (or beneficial use) of 
CO2 emissions. DOE's overarching goal for Round 3 projects 
was to demonstrate technologies at commercial scale in a commercial 
setting that would: (1) Operate at 90 percent capture efficiency for 
CO2; (2) make progress towards capture and sequestration at 
less than a 10 percent increase in the cost of electricity for 
gasification systems and a less than 35 percent increase for combustion 
and oxy-combustion systems; and (3) make progress towards capture and 
sequestration of 50 percent of the facility's CO2 output at 
a scale sufficient to evaluate full impacts of carbon capture 
technology on a generating plant's operations, economics, and 
performance. The Parish PCCS Project was one of three projects selected 
in the second phase of Round 3. DOE entered into a cooperative 
agreement with NRG on May 7, 2010.

Purpose and Need for DOE Action

    The purpose and need for DOE action is to advance the CCPI program 
by funding projects with the best chance of achieving the program's 
objectives as established by Congress: commercialization of clean coal 
technologies that advance efficiency, environmental performance, and 
cost competitiveness well beyond the level of technologies currently in 
commercial service.

DOE Proposed Action

    DOE's proposed action is to provide limited financial assistance 
through a cooperative agreement with NRG for a new post-combustion 
carbon capture and compression system that would be added to the 
existing W.A. Parish power plant, with the captured CO2 
piped to an oil field for EOR. Under the original cooperative 
agreement, DOE agreed to provide approximately $167 million in cost-
shared funding, or about 50 percent of the total estimated costs for a 
smaller project (about 60 MWe). However, the cooperative agreement also 
specified that NRG would perform a screening study to determine if a 
larger scale system can be employed to improve system economics and 
performance. As a result, NRG recently proposed that the technology be 
demonstrated at a larger scale and requested an increase in DOE funding 
to be applied to the total estimated $845 million project cost. DOE's 
proposed action for purposes of the EIS is to provide up to $355 
million in cost-shared funding for this project.

The W.A. Parish Post-Combustion CO2 Capture and 
Sequestration Project

    NRG's proposed project would demonstrate the commercial feasibility 
of a retrofit, commercial-scale CO2 capture and compression 
system, coupled with use of CO2 for enhanced oil recovery 
(EOR) and ultimate sequestration. NRG would design and construct a 
system that would capture approximately 90 percent of the 
CO2 in an up to 250 MWe flue gas slip stream of the 
combustion exhaust gases from the existing 617 MW coal-fired Unit 8 at 
NRG's Parish Plant. The captured CO2 (up to 5,475 tons per 
day) would be transported an estimated 80 miles in a new pipeline to be 
constructed by NRG. The CO2 would be used for EOR and 
ultimately sequestered at the existing West Ranch oil field in Jackson 
County, Texas.

Proposed Carbon Capture Facility: W.A. Parish Generating Station

    The proposed capture system would be constructed on NRG's 4,880-
acre W.A. Parish Plant in rural Fort Bend County near the small town of 
Thompsons, Texas. The plant site includes four large pulverized coal-
fueled power generating units, four smaller natural gas-fired units, 
and a 2,100-acre lake used for cooling water. The proposed project 
would retrofit one of the coal-fueled units (Unit 8) with a post 
combustion CO2 capture system, using space available on the 
plant site immediately adjacent to the unit. The CO2 capture 
system would use the Fluor Corporation (Fluor) advanced Econamine FG 
Plus\SM\ technology, with monoethanolamine as the basis for the 
solvent. The project demonstration period may also include tests of 
other amine-based solvents. A new natural gas-fired combined-cycle 
power plant, estimated to be 80 MW in size, would be constructed to 
produce the auxiliary power needed to drive the compressors and 
equipment of the capture system. The exhaust gases from the new 
combustion turbine would produce

[[Page 70431]]

steam to provide heat for the solvent regeneration process.

CO2 Compression and Transport

    Captured CO2 would be compressed and transported in a 
new pipeline to injection sites at the West Ranch oil field, an 
estimated 80 miles from the proposed capture facility. The pipeline 
route would traverse parts of Fort Bend, Wharton and Jackson counties. 
The anticipated route includes mostly rural, sparsely-developed 
agricultural lands. NRG is currently evaluating potential pipeline 
routes; and plans to use existing rights-of-way and avoid sensitive 
resources to the greatest extent practical. Potential pipeline routes 
will be considered as part of the NEPA process.

CO2 Sequestration via Enhanced Oil Recovery

    The proposed project would deliver up to 1.6 million tons of 
CO2 per year to the West Ranch oil field, located in Jackson 
County near the central Gulf Coast of Texas, to be used for EOR. The 
oil field has operated since 1938 and is well-characterized. However, 
CO2 floods have not been previously demonstrated in this 
field. A joint venture between NRG and Hilcorp Energy Company would 
conduct the EOR operations.
    Project activities eligible for cost-sharing would include: 
engineering and design, permitting, equipment procurement, 
construction, startup and demonstration. Infrastructure investments in 
the oil field by NRG and the costs of EOR operations would not be cost-
shared by DOE and are not included in the total project cost estimates. 
DOE would, however, cost-share in monitoring, verification, and 
accounting (MVA) activities at the EOR site to demonstrate the 
permanence of CO2 sequestration through EOR. Following the 
DOE cost-shared demonstration phase, the system would likely continue 
long-term commercial operations, without further DOE funding.

CO2 Monitoring, Verification, and Accounting Program

    NRG would implement a MVA program to monitor the injection and 
migration of CO2 within the geologic formations. The MVA 
program must meet regulatory and CCPI program requirements and may 
consist 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) experimental techniques yet to be developed.

Proposed Project Schedule

    The project proposed by NRG includes three phases: (1) Planning and 
conceptual design; (2) detailed engineering, procurement and 
construction; and (3) three years of demonstration and monitoring. NRG 
plans to start construction in November 2012 and begin commercial 
operations (demonstration phase) by 2015. The schedule is contingent on 
NRG 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 decision to provide financial 
assistance for detailed design, procurement of equipment, construction, 
and operations is contingent on completion of the NEPA process.

Connected and Cumulative Actions

    Under the cooperative agreement between DOE and NRG, DOE would 
share in the cost of the carbon capture and supporting facilities at 
the power plant site, pipeline construction, development of monitoring 
wells and related facilities at the EOR site, and some of the 
operational costs (e.g., MVA activities) during the three-year 
demonstration phase. DOE will consider the potential impacts associated 
with connected actions, such as potential development of additional 
support facilities or infrastructure that would be anticipated for the 
proposed project.
    DOE will also consider the cumulative impacts of the proposed 
project along with any other connected actions, including those of 
third parties. The cumulative impacts analysis will include an 
assessment of pollutant emissions (including greenhouse gas emission 
reductions) and other incremental impacts that, when added to past, 
present and reasonably foreseeable future impacts, may have significant 
effects on the human environment.

Alternatives, Including the Proposed Action

    NEPA requires that an EIS evaluate the range of reasonable 
alternatives to an agency's proposed action. The range of reasonable 
alternatives encompasses those alternatives that would satisfy the 
underlying purpose and need for agency action. The purpose and need for 
DOE action is to advance the CCPI program by providing cost-shared 
funding for selected projects that have the best chance of achieving 
the program's objectives as established by Congress: the 
commercialization of clean coal technologies that advance efficiency, 
environmental performance, and cost competitiveness well beyond the 
level of technologies currently in service.
    DOE's NEPA implementing procedures include a process for 
identifying and analyzing reasonable alternatives in the context of 
providing financial assistance through the competitive selection of 
projects proposed by entities outside the Federal Government. The range 
of reasonable alternatives in competitions for grants, loans, loan 
guarantees and other financial support is defined initially by the 
range of responsive proposals received by DOE. Unlike projects 
undertaken directly by the federal government, DOE cannot mandate what 
outside entities propose, where they propose their project, or how they 
propose to do it, beyond expressing basic requirements in the funding 
opportunity announcement; and these express requirements must be 
limited to those that further the program's objectives. DOE's decision 
is then limited to selecting projects from the applications that meet 
the CCPI program's goals.
    DOE prepared an environmental critique (see 10 CFR Sec.  1021.216) 
that assessed the environmental impacts and issues relating to each of 
the proposals received in CCPI Round 3 that met the basic eligibility 
requirements. The DOE selecting official considered these impacts and 
issues, along with other aspects of the proposals (such as technical 
merit and financial ability) and the program's objectives, in making 
awards. After DOE selects a project for an award, the range of 
reasonable alternatives becomes the project as proposed by the 
applicant, any alternatives still under consideration by the applicant 
or that are reasonable within the confines of the project as proposed 
(e.g., the locations of the processing units, pipelines, and injection 
sites on land proposed for the project) and a ``no action'' 
alternative.
    DOE currently plans to evaluate the project as proposed by NRG 
(with and without any mitigating conditions that DOE may identify as 
reasonable and appropriate), alternatives to NRG's proposal that it is 
still considering (e.g., CO2 capture rates and solvents, 
power and steam supply options, locations of alternative pipeline 
routes, and locations of injection and monitoring wells), and the no 
action alternative. The EIS may also analyze other reasonable project-
specific alternatives identified by DOE (in consultation with NRG) or 
the public (as part of the public scoping process).

[[Page 70432]]

    Under the no action alternative, DOE would not provide funding to 
NRG. In the absence of financial assistance from DOE, NRG could 
reasonably pursue two options. It could build the project without DOE 
funding; the impacts of this option would be essentially the same as 
those of NRG's proposed project, except any DOE-required mitigations 
would not be imposed. Alternatively, NRG could choose not to pursue its 
project, and there would be no impacts from the project. This latter 
option would not contribute to the goal of the CCPI program, which is 
to accelerate commercial deployment of advanced coal technologies that 
provide the United States with clean, reliable, and affordable energy. 
However, as required by NEPA, DOE analyzes this option as the no action 
alternative for the purpose of making a meaningful comparison between 
the impacts of DOE providing financial assistance and withholding that 
assistance.
    Alternatives being considered by NRG related to specifics of the 
proposed project will also be discussed in the EIS. NRG and its 
partners are considering locations for the injection and monitoring 
wells and the pipeline corridors necessary for transportation of the 
CO2.

Floodplains and Wetlands

    The footprint of the proposed capture facilities and related 
infrastructure that would be constructed at the existing Parish Plant 
would be located to avoid or minimize potential impacts to wetlands or 
floodplains. Wetland and floodplain impacts, if any, would likely only 
be associated with installation of monitoring and injection wells, or 
the construction of CO2 pipelines or other linear features 
required for this project. The CO2 pipeline would likely 
need to cross the Colorado, Navidad and Lavaca rivers, as well as 
smaller streams along the route. DOE will identify such impacts during 
preparation of the EIS and, if any are identified, DOE will prepare a 
floodplain and wetland assessment in accordance with its regulations 
(10 CFR Part 1022) and include the assessment in the 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 
NRG's proposed project and any connected actions. This list is neither 
intended to be all-inclusive, nor a predetermined set of potential 
impacts. DOE invites comments on the list of important issues to be 
considered in the EIS. The preliminary list of potentially affected 
resources or activities and their related environmental issues 
includes, but is not limited to:
     Air quality resources: potential air quality impacts from 
emissions during construction and operation of the proposed project on 
local sensitive receptors, local environmental conditions, and special-
use areas, including impacts to smog and haze, impacts from dusts, and 
impacts from amine and greenhouse gas emissions;
     Water resources: potential impacts from water utilization 
and consumption, plus potential impacts from wastewater discharges;
     Infrastructure and land use: potential impacts associated 
with delivery of feed materials and distribution of products (e.g., 
access roads, pipelines);
     Visual resources: potential impacts to the viewshed, 
scenic views (e.g., impacts from the injection wells, pipelines, and 
support facilities for the injection wells and pipelines), and internal 
and external perception of the community or locality;
     Solid wastes: pollution prevention and waste management 
(generation, treatment, transport, storage, disposal or use), including 
hazardous materials;
     Ecological resources: potential on-site and off-site 
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 and pipelines;
     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;
     Historic and cultural resources: potential impacts related 
to land disturbance and development associated with new linear 
facilities (pipelines, etc.);
     Geology: potential impacts from the injection and storage 
of CO2 on underground resources such as ground water 
supplies, mineral resources, and fossil fuel resources;
     Fate and stability of CO2 being sequestered by 
its use for EOR;
     Health and safety issues: potential impacts associated 
with use, transport, and storage of hazardous chemicals (including 
ammonia), and CO2 capture and transport to the sequestration 
site(s);
     Socioeconomic impacts, including the creation of jobs;
     Disproportionately high and adverse human health and 
environmental impacts on minority and low-income populations;
     Noise and light: potential impacts from construction, 
transportation of materials, and facility operations;
     Connected actions: potential development of support 
facilities or supporting infrastructure (e.g., facilities and utilities 
anticipated for EOR operations);
     Cumulative effects: incremental impacts of the proposed 
project when added to other past, present, and reasonably foreseeable 
future projects; and
     Compliance with regulatory and environmental permitting 
requirements.

Public Scoping Process

    This NOI initiates the public scoping process under NEPA, which 
will assist in the development of the draft EIS. To ensure 
identification of issues related to DOE's proposed action and NRG's 
proposed project, DOE seeks public input to define the scope of the 
EIS. The public scoping period will end 30 days after publication of 
this NOI in the Federal Register. Interested government agencies, 
tribal governments, private-sector organizations, and individuals 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, 
emailed, or faxed comments should be received within 30 calendar days 
of this notice (see ADDRESSES).
    DOE will conduct public scoping meetings at the Needville High 
School, 100 Fritzella Road, in Needville, Texas, on Wednesday, November 
30, 2011; and at the Jackson County Services Building, 411 North Wells 
Street, in Edna, Texas, on Thursday, December 1, 2011. The public is 
invited to learn more about the project at informal sessions at these 
locations beginning at 5 p.m. DOE will begin the formal meetings with 
an overview of NRG's proposed project. Oral comments will be heard 
during the formal portion of the scoping meetings beginning at 7 p.m. 
DOE requests that anyone wishing to speak at the public scoping 
meetings should contact Mr. Lusk, either by phone, email, fax, or 
postal mail (see ADDRESSES). Those who do not make advance arrangements 
may register at the meetings (preferably at the beginning of the 
meeting) and may be given an opportunity to speak after previously 
scheduled speakers. Speakers will be given approximately five minutes 
to present their comments. Speakers wanting more than five

[[Page 70433]]

minutes should indicate the length of time desired in their requests. 
Depending on the number of speakers, DOE may need to limit all speakers 
to five minutes initially and provide second opportunities as time 
permits. Oral and written comments will be given equal consideration.
    The meetings will not be conducted as evidentiary hearings and 
speakers will not be cross-examined. However, speakers may be asked 
clarifying 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 meetings. A court stenographer will record the proceedings, 
including all oral comments received. Individuals may also provide 
written materials in lieu of, or to supplement, their oral comment.

    Issued in Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania, this 4th day of November 
2011.
Anthony V. Cugini
Director, National Energy Technology Laboratory.
[FR Doc. 2011-29333 Filed 11-10-11; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6450-01-P
```