Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 206 / Tuesday, October 26, 2010 / Notices 65615 

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY 

Environmental Management SiteSpecific Advisory Board, Portsmouth 

AGENCY: Department of Energy (DOE). 

ACTION: Notice of Open Meeting. 

SUMMARY: This notice announces a 

meeting of the Environmental 

Management Site-Specific Advisory 

Board (EM SSAB), Portsmouth. The 

Federal Advisory Committee Act (Pub. 

L. 92–463, 86 Stat. 770) requires that 

public notice of this meeting be 

announced in the Federal Register. 

DATES: Thursday, November 4, 2010, 6 

p.m.–8 p.m. 

ADDRESSES: Ohio State University, 

Endeavor Center, 1862 Shyville Road, 

Piketon, Ohio 45661. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Joel 

Bradburne, Deputy Designated Federal 

Officer, Department of Energy 

Portsmouth/Paducah Project Office, Post 

Office Box 700, Piketon, Ohio 45661, 

(740) 897–3822, 

Joel.Bradburne@lex.doe.gov. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 

Purpose of the Board: The purpose of 

the Board is to make recommendations 

to DOE–EM and site management in the 

areas of environmental restoration, 

waste management and related 

activities. 

Tentative Agenda 

• Call to Order, Introductions, Review 

of Agenda 

• Approval of September Minutes 

• Deputy Designated Federal Officer’s 

Comments 

• Federal Coordinator’s Comments 

• Liaisons’ Comments 

• Ohio University Update 

• Administrative Issues: 

Æ Subcommittee Updates 

Æ Recommendation on Public Tour 

Æ Motions 

• Second reading of amendment to the 

Operating Procedures 

• Public Comments 

• Final Comments 

• Adjourn 

Public Participation: The meeting is 

open to the public. The EM SSAB, 

Portsmouth, welcomes the attendance of 

the public at its advisory committee 

meetings and will make every effort to 

accommodate persons with physical 

disabilities or special needs. If you 

require special accommodations due to 

a disability, please contact Joel 

Bradburne in advance of the meeting at 

the phone number listed above. The 

Deputy Designated Federal Officer is 

empowered to conduct the meeting in a 

fashion that will facilitate the orderly 

conduct of business. 

Issued at Washington, DC, on October 14, 

2010. 

Rachel Samuel, 

Deputy Committee Management Officer. 

[FR Doc. 2010–26444 Filed 10–25–10; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 6450–01–P 

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY 

Conditional Commitment for a Federal 

Loan Guarantee for Project Financing 

for Southwest Intertie Project—South 

AGENCY: U.S. Department of Energy, 

Loan Programs Office. 

ACTION: Record of decision. 

SUMMARY: The U.S. Department of 

Energy (DOE) has decided to offer Great 

Basin Transmission, LLC (Great Basin), 

a conditional commitment for a Federal 

loan guarantee for partial financing of 

the 235-mile southern portion of the 

Southwest Intertie Project (SWIP), a 

proposed 500-kilovolt (kV) transmission 

line that would extend from southern 

Nevada to southern Idaho. This Record 

of Decision (ROD) is based on the 

analysis in the Final Environmental 

Impact Statement for Project Financing 

for Southwest Intertie Project—South 

(SWIP South) (DOE/EIS–0443, January 

2010) (DOE FEIS). The DOE FEIS 

consists of a cover sheet for the January 

2010 adoption of the Bureau of Land 

Management (BLM) 1993 Southwest 

Intertie Project Environmental Impact 

Statement and Proposed Plan 

Amendment (SWIP EIS) and the BLM 

2008 Environmental Assessment for the 

Southwest Intertie Project Southern 

Portion NV–040–07–048 (SWIP South 

EA). This ROD also reflects minor 

modifications to the Great Basin 

proposal and new information 

developed since DOE issued its FEIS. 

DOE’s offer of a conditional 

commitment for a loan guarantee for 

SWIP South is authorized under Title 

XVII of the Energy Policy Act of 2005, 

as amended by Section 406 of the 

American Recovery and Reinvestment 

Act of 2009 (Recovery Act). This 

conditional commitment to provide a 

Federal loan guarantee is contingent 

upon Great Basin satisfying all 

precedent funding obligations, and all 

other contractual, statutory, regulatory, 

environmental compliance, and other 

requirements specified by DOE. DOE 

has prepared this ROD in accordance 

with the Council on Environmental 

Quality regulations (40 CFR Parts 1500– 

1508) for implementing the National 

Environmental Policy Act (NEPA), and 

DOE’s NEPA Implementing Procedures 

(10 CFR Part 1021). 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: For 

further information about DOE’s 

decision, contact Carol Hammel-Smith, 

NEPA Document Manager, 

Environmental Compliance Division, 

Loan Programs Office at carol.hammelsmith@hq.doe.gov. Ms. Hammel-Smith 

can be reached by mail at the U.S. 

Department of Energy, 1000 

Independence Avenue, SW., LP–10, 

Washington, DC 20585. For information 

on the DOE NEPA process, contact Carol 

Borgstrom, Director, Office of NEPA 

Policy and Compliance, at (202) 586– 

4600 or (800) 472–2756, or by facsimile 

at (202) 586–7031. Ms. Borgstrom can be 

reached by mail at the U.S. Department 

of Energy, 1000 Independence Avenue, 

SW., GC–54, Washington, DC 20585. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 

Project Background 

SWIP South would begin at the 

existing Harry Allen Substation, located 

in Dry Lake, Nevada, approximately 20 

miles northeast of Las Vegas, Nevada, 

and would run north to the proposed 

Thirtymile Substation, located 

approximately 18 miles northwest of 

Ely, Nevada, where it would 

interconnect with Sierra Pacific Power 

Company’s existing Falcon-Gonder 345– 

kV transmission line. The SWIP South 

would traverse approximately 235 miles 

through parts of White Pine, Nye, 

Lincoln, and Clark counties in Nevada, 

and would consist of self-supporting 

and guyed structures placed 

approximately 1,200 to 1,500 feet apart. 

Because of its location SWIP South 

could be a vital link for distributing 

power from renewable energy sources to 

adjacent states that have adopted 

specific renewable energy standards. 

The SWIP South would have the 

potential to provide up to 600 

megawatts of renewable energy-derived 

electricity to fulfill renewable energy 

standards. 

The proposed project seeking a DOE 

loan guarantee also includes two 

elements related to the Falcon-Gonder 

transmission line: The Falcon 

Substation Upgrades and a Backup 

Communications System. Falcon 

Substation is an existing 345–kV 

switchyard owned by NV Energy (NVE) 

and located in Boulder Valley 

approximately 40 miles northeast of 

Battle Mountain, Nevada. SWIP South 

would connect to the Falcon-Gonder 

transmission line at the proposed 

Thirtymile Substation. The addition of 

the SWIP South line necessitates 

upgrades to NVE’s Falcon Substation to 

improve the existing grid system’s 

stability. The equipment included in the 

upgrade would consist of a 345–kV 


emcdonald on DSK2BSOYB1PROD with NOTICES
65616 Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 206 / Tuesday, October 26, 2010 / Notices 

fixed and/or series capacitor bank and 

other facilities as required for system 

stability mitigation. Access to Falcon 

Substation during construction and 

operation of the expanded facility 

would be provided via existing access 

roads. 

The Backup Communications System 

includes a communications network 

consisting of 16 microwave towers (on 

expanded existing sites and new sites) 

that would provide additional 

operational control to the primary fiber 

optic communications technology. The 

proposed communications towers 

would range in height from 80 feet to 

300 feet. For each proposed site, the 

approximate area required would be up 

to 200 feet by 150 feet (0.7 acre), 

including ancillary support equipment 

and a small buffer area surrounding the 

site. Eight of the sites would require 

new graded access roads and/or power 

distribution lines. 

Purpose and Need for Agency Action 

Title XVII of the Energy Policy Act of 

2005 (42 U.S.C. 16511–16514), as 

amended by Section 406 of the Recovery 

Act, authorizes DOE to issue loan 

guarantees in support of debt financing 

for transmission infrastructure 

investment projects located in the 

United States. Title XVII as amended 

authorizes a new program for rapid 

deployment of renewable energy and 

electric power transmission projects (the 

Section 1705 Program). Section 1705 

authorizes loan guarantees for ‘‘electric 

power transmission projects, including 

upgrading and reconductoring projects’’ 

that commence construction no later 

than September 30, 2011. 

DOE’s Proposed Action 

DOE’s proposed action is to offer 

Great Basin a conditional commitment 

for a Federal loan guarantee for partial 

financing of Great Basin’s interest in 

SWIP South. Great Basin submitted an 

application to DOE to obtain a loan 

guarantee for financing Great Basin’s 

interest in SWIP South—75% 

ownership interest in the SWIP South 

segment. The DOE loan guarantee 

would apply to no more than 80% of 

that share and other associated eligible 

costs. The balance of SWIP South—25% 

ownership interest—would be acquired 

by NVE and financed separately. The 

NVE subsidiaries with ownership in the 

25% interest would include Nevada 

Power Corporation and Sierra Pacific 

Power Corporation. 

NEPA Review 

In July 1993, BLM completed the 

SWIP EIS in cooperation with the U.S. 

Forest Service, Bureau of Reclamation, 

National Park Service, and Bureau of 

Indian Affairs. The SWIP EIS analyzed 

the environmental impacts that would 

be associated with construction and 

operation of SWIP South and SWIP 

North, and addressed public comment. 

The environmental mitigation measures 

for SWIP South and SWIP North were 

specified in the ROD issued by BLM on 

December 14, 1994 (59 FR 30678), 

herein referred to as the BLM ROD. In 

2008, BLM prepared the SWIP South EA 

to consider the impacts of amending the 

previously approved Right-of-Way 

(ROW) Grants to include a 4-mile 

extension on the southern end of SWIP 

South to allow interconnection with the 

existing Harry Allen Substation. The 

amendment included a shift in the 

location on the northern end of less than 

one mile to allow connection to the 

newly proposed Thirtymile Substation 

and to the existing Falcon-Gonder 345- 

kV transmission line. The SWIP South 

EA also provided an update on the key 

resource areas and impacts from the 

1993 SWIP EIS. BLM issued a Finding 

of No Significant Impact (FONSI) on the 

SWIP South EA in July 2008. 

In accordance with 40 CFR 1506.3, 

DOE, through its Western Area Power 

Administration (Western), on January 

19, 2010, adopted the BLM’s 1993 SWIP 

EIS or 2008 SWIP South EA to meet its 

NEPA obligations related to a proposal 

to finance part of SWIP South. The 

notice of adoption was published by the 

Environmental Protection Agency on 

February 19, 2010 (75 FR 7479). 

Western did not recirculate the SWIP 

EIS or SWIP South EA as a draft DOE 

EIS because the actions covered by the 

original SWIP EIS and SWIP South EA 

were substantially the same as those 

proposed by Western. Although Western 

has decided not to pursue its proposed 

financial assistance, DOE has decided to 

conditionally support SWIP South 

through DOE’s Loan Guarantee Program. 

BLM evaluated the Falcon Substation 

Upgrades described above as part of 

NVE’s proposed One Nevada Line (ON 

Line) project, a transmission line similar 

to the SWIP South in design and 

geographic scope. BLM’s evaluation, the 

Draft Supplemental Environmental 

Impact Statement for the ON Line 

Project, herein referred to as ON Line 

DSEIS (BLMNV/EL/EIS–GI–10/01+1793; 

DES 09–50), was published on 

November 20, 2009, and provides 

detailed information on the 

environmental effects of the Falcon 

Substation Upgrades. None of the 19 

comment letters received concern the 

Falcon Substation Upgrades; therefore 

no changes are expected with respect to 

the Falcon Substation Upgrades when 

BLM issues the final SEIS. 

The NVE microwave system upgrades 

were evaluated by BLM in the 

Environmental Assessment—NV Energy 

Microwave and Mobile Radio Project, 

herein referred to as the Microwave EA, 

(DOI–BLM–NV–L 020–2009–0024–EA), 

published on August 27, 2010. BLM 

simultaneously issued a Finding of No 

Significant Impact (FONSI) and 

Decision Record (BLM N–84551–84563; 

N–85487 and DOI–BLM–NV–L000– 

2009–0024 EA, respectively) based on 

the environmental effects evaluated and 

disclosed in the Microwave EA. The 

Microwave EA evaluated 14 of the 16 

communication sites proposed by Great 

Basin. Two locations on private land 

were not evaluated since BLM’s ROW 

grant will not be applicable to those 

sites. DOE has evaluated these sites, as 

discussed below. 

Environmental Impacts of the Falcon 

Substation Upgrades and the Backup 

Communications System 

This section describes the potential 

environmental impacts of the Falcon 

Substation Upgrades and the Backup 

Communications System. This 

discussion is based on the ON Line 

DSEIS and the Microwave EA. 

DOE evaluated the environmental 

impacts of the Falcon Substation 

Upgrades that were analyzed by BLM in 

the ON Line DSEIS. Chapters 3 and 4 

identify minor environmental effects to 

air emissions (mitigatable through 

gravelling) and housing in Eureka or 

Elko Counties (during construction); 

low potential for encountering 

paleontological resources; and no 

adverse impacts to other resources. 

DOE also evaluated the impacts of the 

Backup Communications System as 

analyzed in the Microwave EA, and 

found that impacts would be small or 

not adverse with adoption of mitigation 

measures and best management 

practices. 

A migratory bird survey would be 

required prior to any disturbance during 

migratory bird breeding and nesting 

seasons; monitoring/reporting would be 

implemented. DOE also evaluated the 

two proposed communications sites on 

private land that were not analyzed in 

the BLM Microwave EA. Due to their 

location at existing facilities with access 

roads and power, the impacts of 

constructing and operating these new 

communications towers would be low. 

Both sites include pre-disturbed 

vegetation and wildlife habitat, and low 

potential for impacts to cultural 

resources due to hilltop locations. 

The environmental impacts associated 

with the NVE communications system 

expansion, including the sites to be 

located on BLM land and on private 


emcdonald on DSK2BSOYB1PROD with NOTICES
Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 206 / Tuesday, October 26, 2010 / Notices 65617 

land, would be brief in duration and 

would be minor or would be minimized 

or offset by the mitigation measures 

required by BLM. Further, the 

equipment associated with the NVE 

communications system expansion is 

not substantially different from the 

project features previously evaluated in 

DOE’s EIS. Further, these projects are 

covered by DOE’s NEPA categorical 

exclusion B1.19 (Appendix B to Subpart 

D, 10 CFR Part 1021), which is 

applicable to siting, construction, and 

operation of microwave and radio 

communications towers and associated 

facilities. 

Review of Comments Received on 

DOE’s 2010 Adoption of the 1993 SWIP 

EIS and 2008 SWIP South EA 

As part of its decision process, DOE 

considered comments received on the 

DOE FEIS. In addition, DOE reviewed 

BLM’s 2007 ‘‘Documentation of Land 

Use Plan Conformity and NEPA 

Adequacy’’ for SWIP South; the BLMapproved Construction, Operation & 

Maintenance Plan for the SWIP– 

Southern Portion (August 2010); and the 

BLM-approved Biological Assessment 

(2007) and the Biological Opinion (2007 

and as amended in 2010) for SWIP 

South. 

DOE reviewed comments received on 

February 22, 2010, from the Western 

Watersheds Project (WWP) in response 

to DOE’s January 2010 adoption. WWP’s 

comment attached two comment letters 

that WWP had previously submitted to 

BLM on November 11, 2007, as well as 

WWP’s October 10, 2008, response to 

BLM and the Intervenors in the Interior 

Board of Land Appeals (IBLA) (which 

ruled against WWP’s appeal on 

November 12, 2008). 

In its February 2010 communication 

to Western, WWP recommended that 

DOE deny funding for SWIP South and 

instead award to decentralized energy 

projects that would be accessed locally. 

DOE has determined that decentralized 

projects would not be eligible for loan 

guarantees under this loan solicitation 

since DOE was granted Recovery Act 

authority to provide funding for 

transmission projects, with priority to 

those that facilitate the delivery of 

renewable power. WWP’s 

recommendation would not meet DOE’s 

purpose and need for its loan guarantee 

action. WWP also raised concerns that 

the SWIP project could facilitate 

industrial development that could cause 

the destruction of sagebrush wild lands. 

DOE reviewed the 1994 SWIP EIS and 

the 2008 Interior Board of Land Appeals 

Westerm Watersheds Project v Bureau of 

Land Management and Great Basin 

Transmission, LLC (IBLA No.2008–252 

addressing WWP’s challenge to the 2008 

BLM EA and FONSI for the SWIP– 

Southern Portion). DOE has determined 

that BLM adequately addressed 

potential development in the FEIS and 

that the 2008 appeals process 

established that there has not been 

sufficient change in anticipated 

cumulative impacts considered for the 

SWIP line to require a supplemental 

EIS. DOE also notes that other energy 

projects that might be located in 

sagebrush habitat on public lands would 

only be permitted if they have been 

reviewed under NEPA and are 

consistent with Federal law and policy. 

WWP’s comments included claims of 

segmentation of NEPA review for the 

SWIP project; failure to consider 

alternatives; and inadequate review of 

impacts associated with invasive weeds, 

the desert tortoise and sage grouse, soil 

erosion, off-highway vehicle use, wild 

horse management, global warming, and 

cumulative impacts.In evaluating 

WWP’s claims, DOE reviewed and 

considered the relevant materials in the 

BLM administrative record for SWIP 

South and found that these issues had 

been adequately considered. 

DOE reviewed the 19 comments that 

BLM received on its 2009 analyses 

addressing the Falcon Substation 

Upgrades and the Backup 

Communications System. None concern 

the Falcon Substation Upgrades, and 

therefore few changes are expected for 

the Final SEIS that BLM plans to issue 

at the end of October 2010. After a 30- 

day protest period, BLM expects to issue 

its ROD and ROW by December 2010. 

DOE also reviewed four comment 

letters received on the Microwave EA. A 

30-day comment period began on April 

12, 2010, and closed on May 14, 2010. 

The State Historic Preservation Officer 

indicated completion of a Section 106 

consultation for the Lower Spruce site; 

the Nevada Department of Wildlife 

recommended installing gates and antiperching measures; the Southern 

Nevada Water Authority recommended 

construction coordination; and the Elk 

County Commissioners indicated 

support of the project. On August 27, 

2010, BLM issued a FONSI for the 

Microwave EA. 

Based on review of the documents 

pertaining to the IBLA review, DOE 

finds that the issues raised by WWP 

have been adequately addressed. 

Further, as a result of its review of the 

comments on the ON Line DSEIS and 

Microwave EA, DOE concludes that the 

comments do not present any significant 

new circumstances or information 

relevant to environmental concerns 

bearing on SWIP South, or associated 

potential environmental impacts. 

Alternatives Considered 

DOE considered two alternatives: The 

Proposed Action and No Action. Under 

the Proposed Action, DOE would offer 

Great Basin a conditional commitment 

to partially finance the proposed SWIP 

South transmission line. Under No 

Action, SWIP South most likely would 

not be built and the potential impacts 

discussed above and their related 

mitigation would not occur, nor would 

this transmission line be available to 

transmit power to meet the renewable 

energy standards in adjoining states. 

Environmentally Preferred Alternative 

The Proposed Action is the 

Environmentally Preferred Alternative 

for several reasons. First, the Proposed 

Action furthers the goals of Section 

1705 of the Energy Policy Act of 2005 

to promote the rapid deployment of 

renewable energy and electric power 

transmission projects that could reduce 

the generation of greenhouse gas and 

other air pollutants created by nonrenewable, fossil-fuel generation 

sources. 

Also, because neighboring states that 

could be serviced by SWIP South have 

renewable energy standards, SWIP 

South provides the capacity to deliver 

up to 600 megawatts of renewable 

energy-derived electricity to fulfill the 

requirements of these states. 

Specifically, Nevada is required to 

deliver 20% of its megawatt capacity 

generated by renewable energy sources 

by 2015; Arizona, 15% by 2025; 

California, 33% by 2030, and Colorado, 

20% by 2020. 

Consultation 

A Section 106 review under the 

National Historic Preservation Act 

(NHPA) and Tribal consultation have 

been completed by BLM for the 

proposed SWIP South project. An 

NHPA Section 106 programmatic 

agreement was finalized during the DOE 

FEIS process, requiring that prior to 

construction, a preconstruction field 

survey and a mitigation plan be 

completed and approved. In July, 2010, 

the BLM submitted to the Nevada State 

Historic Preservation Office (SHPO) the 

Historic Properties Treatment Plans for 

SWIP South entitled: ‘‘Historic 

Properties Treatment Plan, Southwest 

Intertie Project, Southern Portion White 

Pine, Nye, Lincoln, and Clark Counties, 

Nevada, Volumes 1a–c (BLM Report 

Number 8111NG040–2009–1593d 

Volumes 1a–c).’’ The SHPO concurred 

with the BLM determination that the 

three submitted historic treatment 

plans, and BLM Archaeologist 


emcdonald on DSK2BSOYB1PROD with NOTICES
65618 Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 206 / Tuesday, October 26, 2010 / Notices 

monitoring and consulting activities 

would be adequate treatment. 

An Endangered Species Act (ESA) (16 

U.S.C. 1536) Section 7 consultation was 

completed by BLM during the DOE FEIS 

NEPA process. The Service has issued 

four Biological Opinions for the 

proposed project: (1) May 1993; (2) 

March 1994, which included an analysis 

of potential effects to the desert tortoise 

and its designated critical habitat; (3) 

December 2007, which incorporated 

project realignments and the use of Hframes with perching deterrents within 

desert tortoise critical habitat; and (4) 

June and July 2010, which respectively 

amended the 2007 Biological Opinion to 

incorporate an additional tower design 

(tubular guyed-V tower) with perching 

deterrents, and modifications to include 

additional disturbance of desert tortoise 

habitat due to a minor calculation error. 

Mitigation 

DOE will require Great Basin to 

employ all practicable means to avoid or 

minimize environmental harm as a 

result of the proposed action. The loan 

guarantee agreement between DOE and 

Great Basin would require that Great 

Basin implement all project-specific 

environmental protection measures 

specified in the ‘‘Construction, 

Operation, and Maintenance Plan for 

the Southwest Intertie Project 500-kV 

Transmission Line; SWIP—Southern 

Portion; SWIP Central Portion (COM 

Plan),’’ and in the BLM Notice to 

Proceed, issued in August 2010. After 

the DOE loan guarantee is retired, 

enforcement of environmental 

protection will continue through the 

BLM ROW grant provisions for the life 

of the project. 

The NEPA analysis completed in the 

DOE FEIS indicates that SWIP South 

would result in low environmental 

impacts after mitigation measures 

required for BLM’s ROW are 

implemented. The mitigation measures 

are a condition of BLM issuance of the 

ROW that provides Great Basin access to 

construct, operate, and maintain SWIP 

South on BLM land. The BLM 

documents the conditions under which 

Great Basin must operate in the COM 

Plan approved by BLM in 2010. The 

COM Plan incorporates the mitigation 

measures required by the DOE FEIS, the 

2010 Historic Properties Treatment 

Plan, and the 2010 Biological Opinion. 

Decision 

DOE has decided to offer Great Basin 

a conditional commitment for a Federal 

loan guarantee for partial financing of 

SWIP South. This decision is contingent 

on Great Basin satisfying all precedent 

funding obligations, and all other 

contractual, statutory, regulatory, 

environmental compliance, and other 

requirements specified by DOE. 

In reaching this decision, DOE 

reviewed the SWIP NEPA 

documentation and considered the 

potential impacts of the selected 

alternative with implementation of the 

stipulated mitigation measures. 

DOE has prepared this ROD in 

accordance with the Council on 

Environmental Quality regulations (40 

CFR Parts 1500–1508) for implementing 

NEPA and DOE’s NEPA Implementing 

Procedures (10 CFR Part 1021). 

Basis for Decision 

DOE has determined that the potential 

environmental impacts analyzed in the 

DOE FEIS will be minor after 

implementation of the mitigation 

provisions for the SWIP South BLM 

ROW. The mitigation measures will be 

reflected in the DOE Loan Guarantee 

Common Agreement, and will remain in 

the BLM COM Plan for the duration of 

the granted ROW. 

DOE has also determined that 

potential environmental impacts 

associated with the Falcon Substation 

Upgrades and the Backup 

Communications System would not be 

adverse or can be characterized as 

minor. DOE has determined that no 

further analysis is required, and 

incorporates by reference the 

environmental analyses conducted on 

these project elements. Further, DOE 

has also considered the Congressional 

direction specified in Section 2003 of 

H.R. 4899, the 2010 Supplemental 

Appropriations Act, Public Law 111– 

212, effective on July 29, 2010 (the 2010 

Supplemental Appropriations Act) in its 

decision to issue this ROD. The 2010 

Supplemental Appropriations Act 

allows DOE to provide or facilitate 

Federal financing for SWIP under the 

American Recovery and Reinvestment 

Act of 2009 (Pub. L. 111–5; 123 Stat. 

115), or the Energy Policy Act of 2005 

(42 U.S.C. 15801 et seq.), based on the 

comprehensive reviews and 

consultations performed by BLM under 

the Secretary of the Interior. 

Issued in Washington, DC, on October 18, 

2010. 

Jonathan M. Silver, 

Executive Director, Loan Programs Office. 

[FR Doc. 2010–27046 Filed 10–25–10; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 6450–01–P 

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY 

Federal Energy Regulatory 

Commission 

[Docket No. IC11–725B–000] 

Commission Information Collection 

Activities (FERC–725B); Comment 

Request; Extension 

October 19, 2010. 

AGENCY: Federal Energy Regulatory 

Commission, Energy. 

ACTION: Notice of proposed information 

collection and request for comments. 

SUMMARY: In compliance with the 

requirements of section 3506(c)(2)(A) of 

the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995, 

44 U.S.C. 3506(c)(2)(A) (2006), (Pub. L. 

104–13), the Federal Energy Regulatory 

Commission (Commission or FERC) is 

soliciting public comment on the 

proposed information collection 

described below. 

DATES: Comments in consideration of 

the collection of information are due 

December 27, 2010. 

ADDRESSES: Commenters must send an 

original of their comments to: Federal 

Energy Regulatory Commission, 

Secretary of the Commission, 888 First 

Street, NE., Washington, DC 20426. 

Comments may be filed either on paper 

or on CD/DVD, and should refer to 

Docket No. IC11–725B–000. Documents 

must be prepared in an acceptable filing 

format and in compliance with 

Commission submission guidelines at 

http://www.ferc.gov/help/submissionguide.asp. eFiling and eSubscription are 

not available for Docket No. IC11–725B– 

000, due to a system issue. 

All comments and FERC issuances 

may be viewed, printed or downloaded 

remotely through FERC’s eLibrary at 

http://www.ferc.gov/docs-filing/ 

elibrary.asp, by searching on Docket No. 

IC11–725B. For user assistance, contact 

FERC Online Support by e-mail at 

ferconlinesupport@ferc.gov, or by phone 

at: (866) 208–3676 (toll-free), or (202) 

502–8659 for TTY. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: 

Ellen Brown may be reached by e-mail 

at DataClearance@FERC.gov, telephone 

at (202) 502–8663, and fax at (202) 273– 

0873. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The 

information collected by the FERC– 

725B, Reliability Standards for Critical 

Infrastructure Protection (OMB Control 

No. 1902–0248), is required to 

implement the statutory provisions of 

section 215 of the Federal Power Act 

(FPA) (16 U.S.C. 824o). On August 8, 

2005, the Electricity Modernization Act 

of 2005, which is Title XII, Subtitle A, 


emcdonald on DSK2BSOYB1PROD with NOTICES