Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 83 / Friday, April 29, 2011 / Notices 24007 

Dated: April 26, 2011. 

Darrin A. King, 

Director, Information Collection Clearance 

Division, Privacy, Information and Records 

Management Services, Office of Management. 

Office of Innovation and Improvement 

Type of Review: Reinstatement. 

Title: DC School Choice Incentive 

Program. 

OMB #: 1855–0015. 

Abstract: The DC School Choice 

Incentive Program, authorized by the 

Consolidated Appropriations Act of 

2004, awarded a grant to the DC 

Children and Youth Investment Trust 

Corporation that will administer 

scholarships to students who reside in 

the District of Columbia and come from 

households whose incomes do not 

exceed 185% of the poverty line. 

Priority is given to students who are 

currently attending schools in need of 

improvement, as defined by Title I. To 

assist in the student selection and 

assignment process, the information to 

be collected will be used to determine 

the eligibility of those students who are 

interested in the available scholarships. 

Also, since the authorizing statute 

requires an evaluation we are proposing 

to collect certain family demographic 

information because they are important 

predictors of school success. Finally, we 

are asking to collect information about 

parental participation and satisfaction 

because these are key topics that the 

statute requires the evaluation to 

address. 

Additional Information: This is a 

request for emergency clearance to 

collect basic, time critical information 

about scholarship applicants for the DC 

School Choice Incentive Program, and 

preliminary information for the 

evaluation. The Program was recently 

reauthorized on April 15, 2011 through 

‘‘District of Columbia, Federal Funds, 

Federal Payment for School 

Improvement’’. Speaker Boehner 

introduced the Scholarships for 

Opportunity and Results Act which 

reauthorized the DC School Choice 

Incentive Program for another five years 

beginning in FY 2011. Pursuant to 5 

CFR 1320.13, the Department requests 

that OMB review the DC School Choice 

Incentive data collection tool under its 

emergency procedures. The request for 

an emergency clearance is twofold: (1) 

Public harm is likely to result as more 

than 1,150 students on the current 

waiting list must be selected and 

approved to receive funding by the end 

of June, a process that requires 

approximately eight weeks to complete; 

and (2) receiving funding was an 

unanticipated event as funding for this 

program was previously discontinued. 

The purpose of the DC School Choice 

Incentive Program (Program) is to 

provide low-income parents residing in 

the District of Columbia with expanded 

options for the education of their 

children. The statute for this Program 

requires scholarships to be awarded to 

students who reside in the District of 

Columbia and come from households 

whose incomes do not exceed 185% of 

the poverty line. Priority is given to 

students who are currently attending 

Title I schools in need of improvement, 

corrective action or restructuring as 

defined by Title I. To assist in the 

student selection and assignment 

process, the information to be collected 

as requested under this emergency 

clearance will be used to determine the 

eligibility of those students who are 

interested in the available scholarships. 

Also, the authorizing statute requires 

the mandated evaluation to address 

changes in parents’ school involvement 

and satisfaction and so initial levels of 

those factors need to be assessed at the 

time of application. 

Failure to collect this information in 

a timely manner will hinder the 

grantee’s ability to: 

(1) Administer scholarships 

(approximately $15 million) for this 

fiscal year as required by the statute; 

(2) Perform outreach into low income 

communities to make them aware that 

new scholarships are available; 

(3) Collect and process scholarship 

applications to determine eligibility; 

(4) Administer the student lottery; 

(5) Sign-up schools to participate in 

the program and verify they meet 

legislatively mandated requirements; 

(6) Identify the number of slots by 

grade available in participating schools; 

(7) Collect and disseminate 

information on participating schools to 

facilitate parents’ school search process; 

(8) Facilitate parents’ application 

process to schools and enroll their 

child(ren); 

(9) Place students in school through a 

student/school match process; 

(10) Update scholarship invoicing and 

payments system to accommodate new 

legislatively identified scholarship caps 

and published tuition and fees; 

(11) Effectively manage the 

distribution of scholarships to lowincome parents of students; and, 

(12) Meet certain evaluation and 

reporting requirements, as required by 

the statute. 

Frequency: Annually. 

Affected Public: Individuals or 

households. 

Reporting and Recordkeeping Hour 

Burden: Responses: 3,000. Burden 

Hours: 1,000. 

Copies of the proposed information 

collection request may be accessed from 

http://edicsweb.ed.gov, by selecting the 

‘‘Browse Pending Collections’’ link and 

by clicking on link number 4583. When 

you access the information collection, 

click on ‘‘Download Attachments ’’ to 

view. Written requests for information 

should be addressed to U.S. Department 

of Education, 400 Maryland Avenue, 

SW., LBJ, Washington, DC 20202–4537. 

Requests may also be electronically 

mailed to the Internet address 

ICDocketMgr@ed.gov or faxed to 202– 

401–0920. Please specify the complete 

title of the information collection when 

making your request. 

Comments regarding burden and/or 

the collection activity requirements 

should be electronically mailed to 

ICDocketMgr@ed.gov 202–260–8916. 

Individuals who use a 

telecommunications device for the deaf 

(TDD) may call the Federal Information 

Relay Service (FIRS) at 1–800–877– 

8339. 

[FR Doc. 2011–10505 Filed 4–28–11; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 4000–01–P 

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY 

Notice of Intent To Prepare an 

Environmental Impact Statement for 

the Lake Charles Carbon Capture and 

Sequestration Project, Lake Charles, 

LA 

AGENCY: Department of Energy. 

ACTION: Notice of Intent To Prepare an 

Environmental Impact Statement and 

Notice of Proposed 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 the construction 

and operation of a project proposed by 

Leucadia Energy, LLC (Leucadia). DOE 

selected this project for an award of 

financial assistance through a 

competitive process under the Industrial 

Carbon Capture and Sequestration 

(ICCS) Program. 

The Lake Charles Carbon Capture and 

Sequestration Project (Lake Charles CCS 

Project) would demonstrate: (1) 

advanced technologies that capture 

carbon dioxide (CO2) emissions at the 

Lake Charles Cogeneration Gasification 

Project (the LCC Gasification Project) to 


srobinson on DSKHWCL6B1PROD with NOTICES
24008 Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 83 / Friday, April 29, 2011 / Notices 

be located on the west bank of the 

Calcasieu River in southern Calcasieu 

Parish, Louisiana; and (2) permanent 

storage of a portion of the CO2 injected 

as part of existing enhanced oil recovery 

(EOR) operations in the Hastings oil 

field south of Houston, Texas. During 

the DOE demonstration phase of the 

project, approximately 4 million tons 

per year of CO2 from two Acid Gas 

Removal (AGR) units would be 

captured, compressed and transported 

through a new pipeline connecting to 

Denbury Onshore, LLC’s (Denbury’s) 

existing Green Pipeline. The Green 

Pipeline is designed to transport 

approximately 800 million standard 

cubic feet of CO2 per day (about 17 

million tons per year) and currently 

transports CO2 from natural sources to 

existing EOR operations along the Gulf 

Coast. A comprehensive research 

monitoring, verification, and accounting 

(MVA) program would be implemented 

on a portion of the existing CO2 EOR 

operations at the Hastings field to 

confirm permanent storage of about one 

million tons per year during the 

demonstration period. 

The EIS will inform DOE’s decision 

on whether to provide financial 

assistance to Leucadia for the Lake 

Charles CCS Project. DOE proposes to 

provide Leucadia with up to $261.4 

million of cost-shared financial 

assistance. The financial assistance 

would apply to the planning, designing, 

permitting, equipment procurement, 

construction, startup, and 

demonstration of the CCS technology 

and MVA program. DOE’s contribution 

of $261.4 million would constitute 

about 60 percent of the estimated total 

development and capital cost of the CCS 

project, which is estimated to be $435.6 

million (2010 dollars). The project will 

further the objective of the ICCS 

Program by demonstrating advanced 

technologies that integrate CO2 capture 

at industrial sources and monitor the 

sequestration of CO2 in underground 

formations. 

DOE is issuing this Notice of Intent 

(NOI) to: (1) Inform the public about 

DOE’s proposed action and Leucadia’s 

proposed project; (2) announce the 

public scoping meeting; (3) solicit 

comments for DOE’s consideration 

regarding the scope and content of the 

EIS; (4) provide notice that the proposed 

project may involve impacts to 

floodplains and wetlands; and (5) invite 

those agencies with jurisdiction by law 

or special expertise to participate as 

cooperating agencies in the preparation 

of this EIS. DOE does not have 

regulatory jurisdiction over the Lake 

Charles CCS Project or its connected 

action, the LCC Gasification Project. 

DOE’s 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 Native 

American Tribes and Federal, state, 

regional and local agencies. 

DATES: DOE invites comments on the 

proposed scope and content of the EIS 

from all interested parties. 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, by e-mail, telephone, or fax [See 

ADDRESSES below], DOE will conduct 

two public scoping meetings in which 

government agencies, private-sector 

organizations, and individuals are 

invited to present oral and written 

comments or suggestions with regard to 

DOE’s proposed action, alternatives, and 

potential impacts. DOE will consider 

these comments during the 

development of the EIS. The scoping 

meetings will be held at Pearland Junior 

High, 4719 Bailey Road, Pearland, TX, 

on May 16, 2011, and at Westlake City 

Hall, 1001 Mulberry Street, Westlake, 

Louisiana, on May 17, 2011. Oral 

comments will be heard during the 

formal portion of the scoping meeting 

beginning at 7 p.m. [See Public Scoping 

Process below]. The public is also 

invited to provide comments and learn 

more about the project and the proposed 

action at informal sessions at the same 

locations beginning at 5 p.m. Various 

displays and other information about 

DOE’s proposed action and the Lake 

Charles CCS Project will be available at 

the scoping meetings. Representatives 

from DOE and Leucadia will be present 

at the informal sessions to discuss the 

proposed project and the EIS process. 

ADDRESSES: Written comments on the 

scope of the EIS and requests to 

participate in the public scoping 

meeting should be addressed to: Ms. 

Pierina Fayish, U.S. Department of 

Energy, National Energy Technology 

Laboratory, 626 Cochrans Mill Road, 

P.O. Box 10940, Pittsburgh, PA 15236. 

Individuals and organizations who 

would like to provide oral or electronic 

comments should contact Ms. Fayish by 

telephone (412–386–5428 or toll-free 1– 

888–322–7436, ext. 5428); fax (412– 

386–4604); electronic mail 

(LeucadiaEIS@NETL.DOE.GOV), or 

formal mail submitted to the address 

given above. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: For 

further information about this project, 

contact Ms. Pierina Fayish, as described 

above. For general information on 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). 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 

Background 

In Section 703 of the Energy 

Independence and Security Act of 2007 

(Pub. L. 110–140), Congress directed 

DOE to ‘‘carry out a program to 

demonstrate technologies for the largescale capture of carbon dioxide from 

industrial sources.’’ DOE subsequently 

sought applications in a funding 

opportunity announcement (FOA) 

entitled ‘‘Carbon Capture and 

Sequestration from Industrial Sources 

and Innovative Concepts for Beneficial 

CO2 Use’’ on June 8, 2009 (Financial 

Assistance Funding Opportunity 

Number DE–FOA–0000015, amended 

July 17, 2009). Congress appropriated 

funding for ICCS in the American 

Recovery and Reinvestment Act of 2009, 

Public Law 111–5 (Recovery Act) in 

order to stimulate the economy and 

reduce unemployment in addition to 

furthering DOE’s existing carbon 

capture and sequestration objectives. 

Projects funded under this ICCS 

program are cost-shared collaborations 

between the government and industry to 

increase investment in clean industrial 

technologies and carbon capture and 

sequestration projects. Under the ICCS 

funding opportunity, industrial firms 

proposed projects to meet their needs 

and those of their customers while 

furthering the national goals and 

objectives of DOE. The successful 

development of advanced technologies 

and innovative concepts that reduce 

emissions of CO2 is a key objective of 

the nation’s effort to help mitigate the 

effects of climate change. 

The projects are funded, in whole or 

in part, with funds appropriated by the 

Recovery Act. The purposes of the 

Recovery Act are to stimulate the 

economy and to create and retain jobs. 

Accordingly, special consideration was 

given to projects that promote job 

creation, preservation, and economic 

recovery in an expeditious manner. 

DOE’s two specific objectives 

identified in the FOA were Technology 

Area 1—Large-Scale Industrial CCS 

Projects from Industrial Sources; and 

Technology Area 2—Innovative 

Concepts for Beneficial CO2 Use. The 

Lake Charles CCS Project was one of 

three projects DOE selected under 

Technology Area 1, which focuses on 

the demonstration of advanced 

technologies that capture and sequester 

CO2 emissions from industrial sources 


srobinson on DSKHWCL6B1PROD with NOTICES
Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 83 / Friday, April 29, 2011 / Notices 24009 

into underground formations or put the 

CO2 to beneficial use in a manner that 

permanently prevents it from entering 

the atmosphere. Technology Area 1 

includes expanding CO2 use in EOR and 

obtaining information on the cost and 

feasibility of deployment of 

sequestration technologies. Therefore, 

under the FOA, DOE sought projects 

with technologies that have progressed 

beyond the research and development 

stage to a point of readiness for 

operation at a scale that, if successful, 

could be readily replicated and 

deployed into commercial practice 

within the industry. 

Purpose and Need for Agency Action 

The purpose and need for DOE action 

is to advance the ICCS program by 

selecting projects that have the best 

chance of achieving the program’s 

objectives as established by Congress: 

demonstrating the next generation of 

technologies that will capture CO2

emissions from industrial sources and 

either sequester them or beneficially 

reuse them. 

Leucadia’s Proposed Project 

Site of Proposed Project: Lake Charles, 

Louisiana and Brazoria County, Texas 

The Lake Charles CCS Project would 

involve the capture and sequestration of 

the CO2 from the LCC Gasification 

Project, a petroleum coke gasification 

plant to be constructed by Lake Charles 

Cogeneration, LLC, in Calcasieu Parish, 

adjacent to the Port of Lake Charles, 

Louisiana. As part of this project, the 

CO2 would be captured, compressed, 

and transported for use in existing 

independent CO2 EOR operations. 

Approximately 4 million tons per year 

of CO2 from two AGR units would be 

compressed and delivered via a new 

connecting pipeline to the existing 

Green Pipeline for transport and use in 

existing EOR operations along the Gulf 

Coast. A research MVA program would 

be conducted over a portion of the 

existing EOR operations at the Hastings 

oil field to confirm permanent storage of 

about one million tons per year during 

the demonstration period. The MVA 

activities would supplement on-going 

monitoring activities conducted in 

conjunction with existing EOR 

operations at the Hastings field. 

Proposed CO2 Capture and Compression 

Facilities 

The CCS project involves the design, 

procurement, installation, and testing of 

the AGR units, CO2 compressors and 

buildings, metering station, and specific 

ancillary equipment. The CO2 capture 

facility would consist of two Lurgi 

Rectisol Selective AGR units in which 

CO2 is separated from the process gas. 

The compression facilities would 

include two compressors, the buildings 

in which the compressors are housed 

(each approximately 80 feet by 140 feet), 

and a meter station to monitor the 

volume of CO2 that is exported. 

Ancillary equipment and systems 

supporting the CO2 capture and 

compression facilities would consist of: 

the electrical system switchgear 

supplying the AGR units and CO2

compressors, load commutated inverters 

for starting the compressors, a chilled 

water supply system, two regenerative 

thermal oxidizers to allow 

environmentally compliant venting of 

CO2 when required, and a propylene 

refrigeration system for cooling within 

the AGR units. All other ancillary 

systems such as cooling water, remote 

controls, external fire protection system, 

and instrument air would be provided 

through capacity expansion or 

infrastructure modification prepared in 

advance of installation of the CO2

capture and compression facilities. 

Proposed CO2 Pipeline and Associated 

Ancillary Equipment 

As part of the Lake Charles CCS 

Project, an affiliate of Denbury would 

construct, own, and operate 

approximately 11 miles of CO2 pipeline 

and associated ancillary equipment. 

This pipeline would connect to 

Denbury’s existing Green Pipeline. The 

new pipeline would include a 16-inch 

outside diameter pipeline and 

associated valves and meter stations. 

The pipeline route would include a 

permanent right-of-way approximately 

11 miles long and 50 feet wide that 

would parallel existing rights-of-way, 

such as roadways, pipelines, railroads 

and transmission lines to the extent 

practicable. The CO2 pipeline would 

cross under the Houston River and 

Interstate Highway I–10 and connect 

with the existing Green Pipeline near 

Buhler, Louisiana. 

Proposed CO2 Sequestration and 

Research Monitoring, Verification and 

Accounting 

MVA activities would be designed 

and implemented to demonstrate the 

permanent storage of approximately 1 

million tons per year of the CO2 injected 

in existing wells located on a portion of 

the Hastings oil field. This oil field is 

located between Alvin and Pearland, 

Texas, near State Highway 35. During 

the DOE demonstration phase of the 

project, the proposed research MVA 

program would supplement privatelyfunded, ongoing MVA activities 

conducted in conjunction with 

Denbury’s commercial EOR operations 

at the Hastings field. While this oil field 

covers approximately 25 square miles, 

the MVA program would be limited to 

approximately 2.8 square miles, or 

slightly more than 10% of the field. The 

following MVA activities would be 

conducted: 

• Well Integrity Testing—Logging of 

existing idle production wells and 

testing of plugged and abandoned wells 

to detect CO2 migration through nonsealing well bores. 

• Flood Conformance Testing— 

Augmentation of measurements to 

observe and model movement of CO2 in 

subsurface formations during the EOR 

operations. 

• Above-zone Monitoring— 

Monitoring of pressures and 

geochemical parameters in the 

formations above the confining layer to 

detect CO2 migration beyond the 

injection zone. 

Proposed Project Schedule 

Leucadia proposes to construct the 

connected LLC Gasification Project over 

an approximate 3-year period projected 

beginning in the first quarter of 2012. 

The gasification project is currently 

undergoing site preparation, including 

clearing and grading. The CO2 capture 

and compression facilities for the Lake 

Charles CCS project would be 

constructed simultaneously with the 

gasification project. Leucadia has 

obtained the environmental permits and 

approvals for construction and 

operation of the gasification project. 

The schedule for the CCS Project is 

contingent on receiving the necessary 

environmental permits and regulatory 

approvals for the new connecting CO2

pipeline, as well as financial closing on 

all the necessary funding sources for the 

Lake Charles CCS Project as a whole, 

including DOE’s financial assistance. 

DOE’s decision to provide financial 

assistance for detailed design, 

procurement of equipment, 

construction, and operations will be 

made after completion of the NEPA 

process and issuance of the EIS. 

Connected and Cumulative Actions 

Under the cooperative agreement 

between DOE and Leucadia, DOE would 

share in the cost of the planning, 

designing, permitting, equipment 

procurement, construction, startup, and 

demonstration of the Lake Charles CCS 

Project. As part of the EIS, DOE will also 

evaluate and consider the impacts 

associated with the larger gasification 

project, which is considered a 

connected action. 

The LCC Gasification Project will use 

a state-of-the-art process in which 


srobinson on DSKHWCL6B1PROD with NOTICES
24010 Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 83 / Friday, April 29, 2011 / Notices 

petroleum coke is converted into 

synthesis gas (syngas) that will then be 

converted into methanol. The 

gasification project would consume 2.6 

million tons per year (tpy) of petroleum 

coke to produce over 2.2 million tpy of 

methanol. The gasification project 

would consist of five General Electric 

(GE) Quench Gasifiers and two trains of 

syngas processing, two Lurgi Rectisol 

Selective AGR units, a methanol unit, 

and Haldor Topsoe wet sulfuric acid 

production. At design plant capacity, 

four GE Quench Gasifiers would operate 

at their design rate, which allows one 

gasifier to be on hot standby or shut 

down for maintenance. The syngas 

processing includes a catalyst to convert 

carbon monoxide and water into 

hydrogen and CO2. Hydrogen sulfide, 

carbonyl sulfide and CO2 will be 

selectively removed from the syngas in 

the AGR units. 

Steam created by the gasification 

process will generate electricity via 

turbines and would provide a 

significant portion of the energy needs 

of the LCC Gasification Project. 

Petroleum coke would be transferred 

from the Port of Lake Charles to the 

gasification project site via a conveyor 

system. Raw water would be supplied 

by pipeline from the Sabine River. The 

water from the Sabine River Authority 

(SRA) would be provided through 

interconnection to the existing SRA 

intake structure on the Sabine River 

Diversion Canal. LCC Gasification has 

received a Louisiana Pollution 

Discharge Elimination System permit to 

discharge non-contact cooling water 

associated with operation of the CO2

compression system. 

DOE will also analyze the cumulative 

impacts of both the proposed project 

and any other reasonably foreseeable 

actions. The cumulative impacts 

analysis will include analysis of 

greenhouse gas emissions and global 

climate change, other air emissions, and 

cumulative impacts on other resources. 

Cumulative impacts are the impacts on 

the environment resulting from the 

incremental impacts of the proposed 

action when added to other past, 

present, and reasonably foreseeable 

actions. 

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 technologies included in the 

ICCS program are those that best 

represent advanced CCS projects that 

are ready for operation at a 

demonstration scale. Once 

demonstrated, those technologies would 

be ready for deployment at a 

commercial scale. 

DOE’s NEPA regulations include a 

process for identifying and analyzing 

reasonable alternatives in the context of 

providing financial assistance through 

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 by DOE itself, the 

Department cannot mandate what 

outside entities propose, where they 

propose to locate their project, or how 

they propose to operate their project 

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 among the applications that 

meet the ICCS goals. 

Section 216 of DOE’s NEPA 

implementing regulations requires the 

Department to prepare an 

‘‘environmental critique’’ that assesses 

the environmental impacts and issues 

relating to each of the proposals that the 

DOE selecting official considers for an 

award (see 10 CFR 1021.216). This 

official considers 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. DOE 

prepared a critique of the proposals that 

were deemed suitable for selection in 

this round of awards for the ICCS 

program. 

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 particular location 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 Leucadia (with 

and without any mitigating conditions 

that DOE may identify as reasonable and 

appropriate), alternatives still under 

consideration, and the no action 

alternative. The EIS will briefly describe 

alternatives previously considered by 

Leucadia in developing the proposed 

project; however, DOE does not plan to 

analyze these alternatives in detail 

because they are no longer under 

consideration by Leucadia and because 

they were not part of the proposal that 

Leucadia offered and DOE accepted. 

DOE also will consider other reasonable 

alternatives suggested during the 

scoping period. 

Under the no action alternative, DOE 

would not provide funding to Leucadia. 

In the absence of financial assistance 

from DOE, Leucadia could reasonably 

pursue several options: the LCC 

Gasification Project would not go 

forward; the LCC Gasification Project 

would go forward without the use of 

CO2 for sequestration and EOR; or both 

the LCC Gasification Project and Lake 

Charles CCS Project would proceed 

without monitoring of the sequestered 

CO2. For the purpose of making a 

meaningful comparison between the 

impacts of DOE providing and 

withholding financial assistance, DOE 

will analyze the impacts under these 

three options as sub-alternatives of the 

no-action alternative. Consequently, in 

the absence of DOE funding Denbury 

would continue to conduct its ongoing 

EOR operations. 

Floodplains and Wetlands 

Sections of the connected LCC 

Gasification Project site are within 100- 

year or 500-year floodplains. Site 

development activities include the 

addition of fill material that would 

result in elevations significantly above 

the local 100-year and 500-year base 

flood elevations. The U.S. Army Corps 

of Engineers (COE) conducted a 

jurisdictional wetland determination, 

and the Port of Lake Charles mitigated 

impacts to 26.2 acres of the wetlands 

through agreement with the COE and 

Stream Wetland Services, LLC. A COE 

permit to develop the LCC Gasification 

Plant site was issued on October 18, 

2008. 

With respect to the Lake Charles CCS 

Project, temporary and localized 

floodplains and wetlands impacts may 

occur during the construction of stream 

and wetlands crossings associated with 

pipeline construction. Wetlands also 

may be impacted by development of the 

50-foot-wide right-of-way. Several small 

isolated wetlands have been identified 

in the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service 

National Wetland Inventory (USFWS, 

2010) within the Hastings MVA project 

area. 

Potential impacts to floodplains and 

wetlands for all aspects of the proposed 

Lake Charles CCS Project and any 

connected actions would be evaluated 

in the EIS. If potential impacts are 

identified, DOE will include a 

floodplain and wetland assessment in 

the EIS, in accordance with its 


srobinson on DSKHWCL6B1PROD with NOTICES
Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 83 / Friday, April 29, 2011 / Notices 24011 

regulations in 10 CFR part 1022, 

Compliance with Floodplain and 

Wetland Environmental Review 

Requirements. 

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 Lake 

Charles CCS Project and any connected 

actions. This list is neither intended to 

be all-inclusive, nor to be a 

predetermined set of potential impacts. 

The list is presented to facilitate public 

comment on the planned scope of the 

EIS. Additions to or deletions from the 

list may occur as a result of this scoping 

process. 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 

proposed project and connected actions 

on local sensitive receptors, local 

environmental conditions, and specialuse areas, including impacts to smog 

and haze and impacts from dust and any 

significant vapor plumes, including 

greenhouse gas emissions; 

• Climate change: potential impacts 

on climate as a result of CO2 and other 

greenhouse gas emissions. 

• Water resources: potential impacts 

from water use and consumption, 

wastewater discharges, and releases to 

streams during construction and 

operation of the proposed project and 

connected actions; 

• Infrastructure and land use: 

potential environmental and 

socioeconomic impacts associated with 

the proposed project and connected 

actions, including delivery of materials 

and distribution of products (e.g., access 

roads, pipelines); 

• Solid wastes: pollution prevention 

and waste management issues 

(generation, treatment, transport, 

storage, disposal or use), including 

potential impacts from the proposed 

project and connected actions on the 

generation, treatment, storage and 

management of hazardous materials and 

other solid wastes; 

• Ecological resources: potential onsite and off-site impacts to vegetation, 

wildlife, threatened or endangered 

species and ecologically sensitive 

habitats from the proposed project and 

connected actions; 

• Floodplains and wetlands: potential 

wetland and floodplain impacts from 

construction and operation of the 

proposed project, pipelines and 

connected actions; 

• Transportation and traffic: 

potential impacts from the construction 

and operation of the proposed project, 

pipeline and connected actions, 

including changes in local traffic 

patterns, roads and rail lines, traffic 

hazards and traffic controls; 

• Historic and cultural resources: 

potential impacts related to 

development of the site for the proposed 

project and connected actions and 

pipeline construction; 

• Geology and soils: potential impacts 

to existing geologic and soil resources 

from construction and operation of the 

proposed project and connected actions; 

• Public health and safety issues: 

potential construction-related safety, 

process safety and impacts associated 

with CO2 capture and transport to and 

usage in EOR at the sequestration site; 

• Socioeconomics: potential impacts 

on public services and infrastructure 

(e.g. schools, utilities), the creation of 

jobs, use of community resources and 

state and local tax incentives associated 

with the proposed project and 

connected actions; 

• Environmental justice: potential 

disproportionate adverse impacts on 

minority and low-income populations 

associated with the proposed project 

and connected actions; 

• Noise: potential impacts from 

construction, transportation of materials 

and facility operations for the proposed 

project and connected actions; 

• Cumulative effects: incremental 

impacts of the proposed project and 

connected actions when added to other 

past, present and reasonably foreseeable 

future projects, including emissions of 

greenhouse gases and global climate 

change; 

• Compliance with regulatory and 

environmental permitting requirements: 

environmental compliance and 

monitoring plans associated with the 

carbon capture equipment, pipeline 

construction, CO2 sequestration 

activities and connected actions. 

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 and 

Leucadia’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, 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, e-mailed, or 

faxed comments should be received by 

May 29, 2011 (see ADDRESSES). 

DOE will conduct two public scoping 

meetings, to be held at Pearland Junior 

High, 4719 Bailey Road, Pearland, TX, 

on May 16, 2011, and at Westlake City 

Hall, 1001 Mulberry Street, Westlake, 

LA, on May 17, 2011. Oral comments 

will be heard during the formal portion 

of the scoping meeting beginning at 7 

p.m. The public is also invited to 

provide comments and learn more about 

the project at informal sessions at these 

locations beginning at 5 p.m. DOE 

requests that anyone who wishes to 

provide oral comments at this public 

scoping meeting should contact Ms. 

Pierina Fayish, 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 may be given an 

opportunity to speak after previously 

scheduled speakers. Speakers will be 

given approximately 5 minutes to 

present their comments. Those speakers 

who want more than 5 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 5 minutes initially and 

provide second opportunities as time 

permits. Individuals may also provide 

written materials in lieu of, or 

supplemental to, their presentations. 

Oral and written comments will be 

given equal consideration. 

DOE will begin the formal meeting 

with an overview of Leucadia’s project. 

The meeting will not be conducted as an 

evidentiary hearing, and speakers will 

not be cross-examined. 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 26th day of 

April 2011. 

Victor K. Der, 

Acting Assistant Secretary, Office of Fossil 

Energy. 

[FR Doc. 2011–10448 Filed 4–28–11; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 6450–01–P 


srobinson on DSKHWCL6B1PROD with NOTICES