34720 Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 117 / Friday, June 18, 2010 / Notices 

We reference the regulations outlining 

the terms and conditions of an award in 

the Applicable Regulations section of 

this notice and include these and other 

specific conditions in the GAN. The 

GAN also incorporates your approved 

application as part of your binding 

commitments under the grant. 

3. Grant Administration: Projects 

funded under this competition are 

encouraged to budget for a two-day 

meeting for project directors to be held 

annually in Washington, DC. 

4. Reporting: At the end of your 

project period, you must submit a final 

performance report, including financial 

information, as directed by the 

Secretary. If you receive a multi-year 

award, you must submit an annual 

performance report that provides the 

most current performance and financial 

expenditure information as directed by 

the Secretary under 34 CFR 75.118. The 

Secretary may also require more 

frequent performance reports under 34 

CFR 75.720(c). For specific 

requirements on reporting, please go to 

http://www.ed.gov/fund/grant/apply/ 

appforms/appforms.html. 

5. Performance Measures: The 

Department has established the 

following Government Performance and 

Results Act of 1993 (GPRA) performance 

measures for this program: 

(1) For each high school served by the 

project, the school’s graduation rate, as 

defined in the State’s approved 

accountability plan for Part A of Title I 

of the ESEA, as well as the graduation 

rates for the following subgroups: 

(A) Major racial and ethnic groups; 

(B) Students with disabilities; 

(C) Students with limited English 

proficiency; and 

(D) Economically disadvantaged 

students. 

Note: The Department will identify each 

school’s graduation rate, as well as the 

graduation rates for the subgroups identified 

in this section, using the data that are now 

reported to the Department by SEAs using 

the EDEN Submission System (ESS). 

Grantees will not be required to provide 

these data. 

(2) The number and percentage of 

students enrolled in grades 9 through 12 

in schools or programs served by the 

project who, during the most recent 

school year, earned one quarter of the 

credits necessary to graduate from high 

school with a regular diploma. 

(3)(A) The number and percentage of 

students served by the project who had 

not attended school for 60 or more 

instructional days immediately prior to 

their participation in the project; and 

(B) The average daily attendance of 

such students while participating in the 

project. 

(4)(A) The number and percentage of 

students served by the project during 

the most recent school year who were 

two or more years behind their expected 

age and credit accumulation in high 

school; and 

(B) The number and percentage of 

such students who earned one half or 

more of the credits they need to 

graduate with a regular diploma. 

(5) For each school served by the 

project that includes an eighth grade— 

(A) The average daily attendance of 

such school; and 

(B) The number and percentage of 

students enrolled in the eighth grade 

who enrolled in ninth grade at the start 

of the next school year. 

These measures constitute the 

Department’s indicators of success for 

this program. Consequently, we advise 

an applicant for a grant under this 

program to give careful consideration to 

these measures in conceptualizing the 

approach and evaluation for its 

proposed project. Each grantee will be 

required to provide, in its annual 

performance and final reports, data 

about its progress in meeting these 

measures. 

VII. Agency Contacts 

For Further Information Contact: 

Theda Zawaiza, U.S. Department of 

Education, 400 Maryland Avenue, SW., 

room 3E122, Washington, DC 20202. 

Telephone: (202) 205–3783 or by e-mail: 

hsgi@ed.gov. 

If you use a TDD, call the FRS, toll 

free, at 1–800–877–8339. 

VIII. Other Information 

Accessible Format: Individuals with 

disabilities can obtain this document 

and a copy of the application package in 

an accessible format (e.g., braille, large 

print, audiotape, or computer diskette) 

on request to either program contact 

person listed under FOR FURTHER

INFORMATION CONTACT in section VII of 

this notice. 

Electronic Access to This Document: 

You can view this document, as well as 

all other documents of this Department 

published in the Federal Register, in 

text or Adobe Portable Document 

Format (PDF) on the Internet at the 

following site: http://www.ed.gov/news/ 

fedregister. To use PDF you must have 

Adobe Acrobat Reader, which is 

available free at this site. 

Note: The official version of this document 

is the document published in the Federal 

Register. Free Internet access to the official 

edition of the Federal Register and the Code 

of Federal Regulations is available on GPO 

Access at: http://www.gpoaccess.gov/nara/ 

index.html. 

Dated: June 15, 2010. 

Thelma Mele ́ndez de Santa Ana, 

Assistant Secretary for Elementary and 

Secondary Education. 

[FR Doc. 2010–14732 Filed 6–17–10; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 4000–01–P 

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY 

[OE Docket No. PP–362] 

Notice of Intent To Prepare an 

Environmental Impact Statement and 

To Conduct Public Scoping Meetings, 

and Notice of Floodplains and 

Wetlands Involvement; Champlain 

Hudson Power Express, Inc. 

AGENCY: Department of Energy (DOE). 

ACTION: Notice of Intent to prepare an 

Environmental Impact Statement (EIS) 

and to conduct Public Scoping 

Meetings; Notice of Floodplains and 

Wetlands Involvement. 

SUMMARY: The Department of Energy 

(DOE) announces its intention to 

prepare an EIS pursuant to the National 

Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) of 

1969, as amended (42 U.S.C. 4321 et 

seq.), the Council on Environmental 

Quality (CEQ) NEPA regulations (40 

CFR parts 1500–1508), and the DOE 

NEPA implementing procedures (10 

CFR part 1021) to assess the potential 

environmental impacts from its 

proposed Federal action of granting a 

Presidential permit to Champlain 

Hudson Power Express, Inc. (Champlain 

Hudson) to construct, operate, maintain, 

and connect a new electric transmission 

line across the U.S.-Canada border in 

northeastern New York State. The EIS, 

Champlain Hudson Power Express 

Transmission Line Project 

Environmental Impact Statement (DOE/ 

EIS–0447), will address potential 

environmental impacts from the 

proposed action and the range of 

reasonable alternatives. 

The purpose of this Notice of Intent 

(NOI) is to inform the public about the 

proposed action, announce plans to 

conduct seven public scoping meetings 

in the vicinity of the proposed 

transmission line, invite public 

participation in the scoping process, 

and solicit public comments for 

consideration in establishing the scope 

of the EIS. Because the proposed project 

may involve actions in floodplains and 

wetlands, in accordance with 10 CFR 

part 1022, Compliance with Floodplain 

and Wetland Environmental Review 

Requirements, the draft EIS will include 

a floodplain and wetland assessment as 

appropriate, and the final EIS or record 

of decision will include a floodplain 

statement of findings. 


srobinson on DSKHWCL6B1PROD with NOTICES
Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 117 / Friday, June 18, 2010 / Notices 34721 

DATES: DOE invites interested agencies, 

organizations, Native American tribes, 

and members of the public to submit 

comments to assist in identifying 

significant environmental issues and in 

determining the appropriate scope of 

the EIS. The public scoping period starts 

with the publication of this Notice in 

the Federal Register and will continue 

until August 2, 2010. Written and oral 

comments will be given equal weight, 

and DOE will consider all comments 

received or postmarked by August 2, 

2010 in defining the scope of this EIS. 

Comments received or postmarked after 

that date will be considered to the 

extent practicable. 

Locations, dates, and start and end 

times for the public scoping meetings 

are listed in the SUPPLEMENTARY

INFORMATION section of this NOI. 

Requests to speak at any one or more 

public scoping meeting(s) should be 

received by Dr. Jerry Pell at the address 

indicated below on or before July 6, 

2010; requests received by that date will 

be given priority in the speaking order. 

However, requests to speak also may be 

made at the scoping meetings. 

ADDRESSES: Comments on the scope of 

the EIS and requests to be added to the 

document mailing list should be 

addressed to: Dr. Jerry Pell, Office of 

Electricity Delivery and Energy 

Reliability (OE–20), U.S. Department of 

Energy, 1000 Independence Avenue, 

SW., Washington, DC 20585; by 

electronic mail to Jerry.Pell@hq.doe.gov; 

or by facsimile to 202–318–7761. For 

general information on the DOE 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; by electronic 

mail at askNEPA@hq.doe.gov; or by 

facsimile at 202–586–7031. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Dr. 

Jerry Pell at the addresses above, or at 

202–586–3362. For general information 

on the DOE NEPA process, contact Ms. 

Carol M. Borgstrom at 202–586–4600, 

leave a message at 800–472–2756, or at 

the addresses above. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Executive 

Order (E.O.) 10485, as amended by E.O. 

12038, requires that a Presidential 

permit be issued by DOE before electric 

transmission facilities may be 

constructed, operated, maintained, or 

connected at the U.S. international 

border. The E.O. provides that a 

Presidential permit may be issued after 

a finding that the proposed project is 

consistent with the public interest and 

after favorable recommendations from 

the U.S. Departments of State and 

Defense. In determining consistency 

with the public interest, DOE considers 

the potential environmental impacts of 

the proposed project under NEPA, 

determines the project’s impact on 

electric reliability (including whether 

the proposed project would adversely 

affect the operation of the U.S. electric 

power supply system under normal and 

contingency conditions), and considers 

any other factors that DOE may find 

relevant to the public interest. The 

regulations implementing the E.O. have 

been codified at 10 CFR parts 205.320– 

205.329. DOE’s issuance of a 

Presidential permit indicates that there 

is no Federal objection to the project, 

but does not mandate that the project be 

undertaken. 

Champlain Hudson applied on 

January 27, 2010, to DOE’s Office of 

Electricity Delivery and Energy 

Reliability (OE) for a Presidential permit 

to construct, operate, maintain, and 

connect a 2,000-megawatt (MW) highvoltage direct current (HVDC) Voltage 

Source Converter (VSC) controllable 

transmission system from the Canadian 

Province of Quebec to the New York 

City and Southwestern Connecticut 

regions. After due consideration of the 

nature and extent of the proposed 

project, including evaluation of the 

‘‘Information Regarding Potential 

Environmental Impacts’’ section of the 

Presidential permit application, DOE 

has determined that the appropriate 

level of NEPA review for this project is 

an EIS. 

The proposed Federal action is the 

granting of the Presidential permit and 

it is anticipated that the project could 

significantly affect the quality of the 

human environment. Because the 

proposed project may involve actions in 

floodplains and wetlands, in accordance 

with 10 CFR part 1022, Compliance 

with Floodplain and Wetland 

Environmental Review Requirements, 

the draft EIS will include a floodplain 

and wetland assessment as appropriate, 

and the final EIS or record of decision 

will include a floodplain statement of 

findings. 

DOE invites Tribal governments and 

Federal, state, and local agencies with 

jurisdiction by law or special expertise 

with respect to environmental issues to 

be cooperating agencies with respect to 

the EIS, as defined at 40 CFR 1501.6. 

Cooperating agencies have certain 

responsibilities to support the NEPA 

process, as specified at 40 CFR 

1501.6(b). The U.S. Army Corps of 

Engineers (anticipated), the U.S. 

Environmental Protection Agency 

Region 2, and the New York State 

Departments of Environmental 

Conservation and Public Service are 

cooperating agencies with respect to this 

EIS. 

In addition, Champlain Hudson 

applied to DOE on September 12, 2009, 

for a Federal loan guarantee for the 

proposed project in response to a DOE 

competitive solicitation, ‘‘Federal Loan 

Guarantees for Electric Power 

Transmission Infrastructure Investment 

Projects,’’ issued under section 1705, 

Title XVII, of the Energy Policy Act of 

2005 (EPAct). Section 406 of the 

American Recovery and Reinvestment 

Act of 2009 (the ‘‘Recovery Act’’) 

amended EPAct by adding section 1705. 

This section is designed to address the 

current economic conditions of the 

Nation, in part by facilitating the 

development of eligible renewable and 

transmission projects that commence 

construction no later than September 

30, 2011. DOE is carrying out an 

evaluation of the application submitted 

by Champlain Hudson. Should DOE 

decide to enter into the negotiation of a 

possible loan guarantee with Champlain 

Hudson, DOE would use this EIS to 

meet its NEPA requirements in making 

a determination of funding. 

Applicant’s Proposal 

The applicant’s proposed VSC 

controllable transmission system 

consists of two 1,000–MW HVDC 

bipoles. A bipole consists of two 

connected submarine or underground 

cables, one of which is positively 

charged, and the other negatively 

charged. In total, four cables would be 

laid between Quebec, Canada, and a 

proposed converter station in Yonkers, 

NY, where one bipole (two cables) 

would be terminated. The converter 

station would change the electrical 

power from direct current to alternating 

current. The remaining bipole (two 

cables) would continue to a proposed 

converter station in Bridgeport, CT. 

Champlain Hudson’s proposed 

transmission line would connect 

renewable sources of power generation 

in Canada with load centers in and 

around the New York City and 

southwestern Connecticut regions. 

The project would originate at an 

HVDC converter station near HydroQue ́bec TransE ́nergie’s 765/315-kilovolt 

(kV) Hertel substation, located southeast 

of Montreal, and extend approximately 

35 miles to the international border 

between the United States and Canada, 

crossing in Lake Champlain to the east 

of the Town of Champlain, NY. Four 

cables (two bipoles) would extend south 

under Lake Champlain for 

approximately 111 miles entirely within 

the jurisdictional waters of New York 

State. At the southern end of Lake 

Champlain, the cables would exit the 


srobinson on DSKHWCL6B1PROD with NOTICES
34722 Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 117 / Friday, June 18, 2010 / Notices 

water just north of Lock C12 of the 

Champlain Canal (Canal) in the town of 

Whitehall, NY, and would be buried 

within an existing railroad right-of-way 

owned by Canadian Pacific Railway 

(CP) for 1.7 miles. The cables would 

enter the Canal just south of Lock C12 

and continue under the Canal for 5.6 

miles to Comstock, NY, and then utilize 

another CP railroad right-of-way for 0.4 

miles to circumvent Lock C11. The 

cables would re-enter the canal just 

south of Lock C11 and continue under 

the Canal for 8.9 miles toward Lock C9 

in Kingsbury, NY (there is no Lock C10). 

North of Lock C9, the cables would exit 

the Canal and would be buried for 0.5 

miles within land owned by the New 

York State Canal Corporation on the 

eastern shore of Lock C9. The HVDC 

cables would re-enter the Canal just 

south of Lock C9 and continue under 

the Canal for 2.7 miles toward Lock C8 

in Fort Edward, NY. 

The Upper Hudson River portion of 

the Hudson River polychlorinated 

biphenyl (PCB) site (USEPA 

Identification Number NYD980763841) 

stretches from Hudson Falls, NY, to the 

Federal Dam at Troy, NY. To avoid 

installing and burying HVDC cables 

within this area, the proposed Project 

route would exit the Canal north of Lock 

C8 near Durham Basin, where an 

existing CP railroad right-of-way is 

located immediately adjacent to the 

west of the Canal. Upon exiting the 

canal, the four cables would be buried 

for approximately 46.1 miles within the 

CP railroad bypass route to the west of 

the Hudson River, traversing the 

municipalities of Moreau, 

Northumberland, Wilton, Greenfield, 

Saratoga Springs, Milton, Ballston, 

Clifton Park, Glenville, and 

Schenectady, NY. In the town of 

Rotterdam, NY, the buried route would 

transfer to the CSX Railroad (CSX) rightof-way and proceed south for 

approximately 23.7 miles through the 

municipalities of Guilderland, New 

Scotland, Voorheesville, and 

Bethlehem. The proposed Project route 

would then exit the railroad right-ofway and enter the Hudson River at the 

town of Coeymans, NY (about 14 miles 

south of Albany). In general, when a 

railroad right-of-way intersects with a 

waterway, the applicant’s preference 

would be to attach the cables to the 

bridge structure, particularly for longer 

crossings such as the bridge over the 

Mohawk River in Schenectady, NY. If 

the cables could not be attached to the 

bridge due to engineering concerns or 

owner preference, an option would be 

for the applicant to employ horizontal 

directional drilling to install highdensity polyethylene (HDPE) casings for 

the cables to use under the waterway. 

Upon entering the Hudson River, the 

four cables would be buried for 118 

miles until they reach the City of 

Yonkers, NY. Two of the four HVDC 

cables (one bipole) would terminate at 

the proposed converter station located 

in Yonkers for a total length of 

approximately 319 miles from the U.S. 

border with Canada to Yonkers, NY. The 

remaining two cables would continue 

for approximately 66 miles under the 

Hudson River, Spuyten Duyvil Creek, 

the Harlem River, and the East River 

into Long Island Sound before 

terminating at a converter station near 1 

W Avenue in Bridgeport, CT, for at total 

length of approximately 384.4 miles 

from the U.S. border with Canada to 

Bridgeport. This route is discussed 

below as being Route A, the applicant’s 

preferred alternative. 

The Champlain Hudson Presidential 

permit application, including associated 

maps and drawings, can be viewed or 

downloaded in its entirety from the 

DOE program Web site at http:// 

www.oe.energy.gov/ 

permits_pending.htm (see PP–362), or 

on the project EIS Web site at http:// 

CHPExpressEIS.org. Also available at 

these same locations is the March 5, 

2010, Federal Register Notice of Receipt 

of Application (75 FR 10229). 

Agency Purpose and Need, Proposed 

Action, and Alternatives 

The DOE proposed Federal action is 

the granting of a Presidential permit to 

Champlain Hudson to construct, 

operate, maintain, and connect a new 

electric transmission line across the 

U.S.-Canada border in northeastern New 

York State. The EIS, Champlain Hudson 

Power Express Transmission Line 

Project Environmental Impact 

Statement (DOE/EIS–0447), will address 

potential environmental impacts from 

the proposed action and the range of 

reasonable alternatives. The purpose 

and need for DOE’s action is to decide 

whether to grant Champlain Hudson 

said Presidential permit. It should be 

noted, however, that although the 

potential environmental impacts are 

important, they are not the only criteria 

that form the basis for the final 

permitting decision. If granted, the 

Presidential permit would authorize 

only that portion of the line that would 

be constructed, operated, and 

maintained wholly within the United 

States. 

Three action alternatives (routes) for 

constructing the proposed transmission 

line inside the United States have been 

identified by the applicant, and they 

differ little in total length: 384.5 miles 

for Route A, 384.2 miles for Route B, 

and 385.7 miles for Route C. The lines 

differ, however, in the amount of the 

line that is submerged or buried 

underground. Route A, the Champlain 

Hudson preferred alternative, has 

approximately 72.4 miles buried 

underground. Route B has 

approximately 89.4 miles buried 

underground, and Route C has about 

68.0 miles buried underground. The 

remaining distances of all routes are 

submerged. Maps showing all three 

alternative routes may be found at 

http://CHPExpressEIS.org/maps. 

All three routes cross the U.S.-Canada 

border in Lake Champlain at Rouses 

Point, NY (which is about five miles 

east of the Town of Champlain, NY), 35 

miles from where they would begin 

southeast of Montreal, Canada. Route A, 

the applicant’s preferred alternative, is 

described in detail above. 

The Route B alternative is the same as 

Route A, except that after exiting the 

water just north of Lock C12 of the 

Champlain Canal (Canal) in the town of 

Whitehall, NY, Route B would continue 

within an existing railroad right-of-way 

owned by Canadian Pacific Railway 

(CP) for 19.5 miles through the 

municipalities of Comstock, Fort Ann, 

and Kingsbury. Route B would overlap 

with Route A where Route A exits the 

Champlain Canal north of Lock C8 near 

Durham Basin. 

Route C is the same as Route A except 

for a 6.3 mile segment from north of 

Lock C8 near Durham Basin, where 

Route A exits the Champlain Canal 

(Canal) to travel south about 4.8 miles 

within the CP railroad right-of-way. At 

the point where Route A would exit the 

canal, Route C instead would continue 

under the Canal for 2.9 miles toward 

Lock C8 in Fort Edward, NY. North of 

Lock C8, the cables would exit the Canal 

and would be buried for 0.4 miles 

within land owned by the New York 

State Canal Corporation on the eastern 

shore of Lock C8. The HVDC cables 

would re-enter the Canal just south of 

Lock C8 and continue under the Canal 

for 2.1 miles towards Lock C7, also 

located in Fort Edward, NY. North of 

Lock C7, the cables would exit the 

eastern side of the canal and be buried 

for 0.2 miles within land owned by the 

New York State Canal Corporation 

before entering the Hudson River to the 

south of Rogers Island, where the 

Hudson River flows parallel to the 

Champlain Canal. The four cables 

would be buried under the Hudson 

River, and Route C would travel in a 

northern direction under the river to the 

west of Rogers Island for 0.7 miles 

before reaching the CP railroad bridge 


srobinson on DSKHWCL6B1PROD with NOTICES
Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 117 / Friday, June 18, 2010 / Notices 34723 

that extends roughly southwest over the 

Hudson River from Fort Edward, NY 

toward Moreau, NY. The cables would 

exit the water on the west side of the 

Hudson River and Route C would 

overlap with Route A at the same point 

where Route A would transition from 

being attached to the bridge structure to 

being buried within the railroad rightof-way in the town of Moreau. This 

alternative assumes that PCB dredging 

activities associated with the Hudson 

River Dredging Project planned for the 

area around Rogers Island are completed 

by 2013. (The northern tip of Rogers 

Island is about one-quarter of a mile 

west of Fort Edward. Overall, the Island 

is just less than one mile in length.) 

Champlain Hudson is also 

considering two alternative substations 

identified as feasible points of 

interconnection in New York, regardless 

of the alternative route: The Gowanus 

345-kV substation, located in New York 

County, and the Astoria (Polleti) 345-kV 

substation, located in Queens County. 

An alternative site under consideration 

for the DC–AC converter station in 

Queens County is land adjacent to the 

Astoria substation. In Connecticut, 60 

Main Street in Bridgeport has been 

identified as a possible alternative site 

for the converter station. 

Under the No Action alternative, DOE 

would deny Champlain Hudson’s 

application for a Presidential permit for 

the proposed international electric 

transmission line. 

Identification of Environmental Issues 

The EIS will examine public health 

and safety effects and environmental 

impacts in the U.S. from the proposed 

HVDC transmission facilities. This 

notice is intended to inform agencies 

and the public of the proposed project, 

and to solicit comments and suggestions 

for consideration in the preparation of 

the EIS. To help the public frame its 

comments, the following is a 

preliminary list of several potential 

environmental issues in the U.S. that 

DOE and Champlain Hudson have 

tentatively identified for analysis, 

including: 

1. Impacts on protected, threatened, 

endangered, or sensitive species of 

animals or plants, or their critical 

habitats: The EIS will consider the 

effects of the construction and operation 

of the project on essential fish habitats 

and species, including the shortnose 

sturgeon (Federally listed endangered 

species), leatherback sea turtle 

(Federally listed endangered species), 

loggerhead sea turtle (Federal listed 

threatened species), green sea turtle 

(Federal listed threatened species), and 

Atlantic sturgeon (Federally listed 

candidate species as of October 17, 

2006). 

2. Impacts on aquatic biological 

resources: The EIS will consider the 

effects of the construction and operation 

of the project on shellfish, benthic 

communities, finfish, and commercial 

and recreational fisheries, and the 

potential for introduction of invasive 

species. 

3. Impacts on floodplains and 

wetlands: The EIS will consider the 

effects of the construction and operation 

of the project on wetlands and on 

freshwater, tidal, and estuarine 

floodplains. The portions of all three 

alternative routes that utilize the CP 

railroad right-of-way would cross 

Federal Emergency Management 

Agency-mapped floodplains associated 

with the Champlain Canal and the 

Hudson River. The routes cross the 

Mohawk River within the City of 

Schenectady, but an option under 

consideration is the possible suspension 

of the cables from the railroad bridge, 

such that they would not be buried 

within the floodplain. The underground 

connection to the Yonkers and 

Bridgeport converter stations utilized by 

all three route alternatives would cross 

bordering floodplain at the landfall 

locations. Portions of the Sherman 

Creek East substation site and the 

underground connection to the 

substation are located in floodplain 

associated with the Harlem River in 

New York City. Limited wetland 

delineations and available New York 

State mapping resources indicate that 

less than 15 acres of wetlands would be 

temporarily impacted within the 

construction corridor along the 

underground portions of Routes A, B, 

and C. 

4. Impacts on cultural or historic 

resources: The EIS will consider the 

effects of the construction and operation 

of the project on shipwrecks and 

National Historic Landmarks; e.g., the 

proposed transmission cable route 

travels through the boundary of the 

Crown Point and Fort Ticonderoga 

National Historic Landmarks. The 

project facilities would also be located 

within National Heritage Areas and New 

York State Heritage Areas, including the 

Mohawk Valley Heritage Corridor and 

the RiverSpark (Hudson-Mohawk) 

Heritage Area. 

5. Impacts on human health and 

safety: The EIS will consider the nature 

and effects of electric and magnetic 

fields that may be generated by the 

construction and operation of the 

project. 

6. Impacts on air quality: The EIS will 

consider the effects of the construction 

and operation of the project on air 

quality, including the emission and 

effects of greenhouse gases such as 

carbon dioxide. 

7. Impacts on soil: The EIS will 

consider the effects of the construction 

and operation of the project on the loss 

or disturbance of soils. 

8. Impacts on water quality: The EIS 

will consider the effects of the 

installation and operation of the 

transmission cables on water quality 

due to potential re-suspension of 

sediments and contaminants, including 

PCBs in the Hudson River. 

9. Impacts to land use: The EIS will 

consider the effects of the installation 

and operation of the project on land 

uses, including agricultural lands, 

parks, and public lands. 

10. Visual impacts: The EIS will 

consider the effects of the installation 

and operation of the project on visual 

resources of any above-ground 

components of the project, including 

near the locations of the two converter 

stations. 

11. Noise impacts: The EIS will 

consider the effects of the installation 

and operation of the project on noise 

levels near the locations of the two DCto-AC converter stations. 

12. Socioeconomic impacts: This EIS 

will consider impacts on community 

services. 

13. Environmental justice: The EIS 

will include consideration of any 

disproportionately high and adverse 

impacts on minority and low-income 

populations. 

This list is not intended to be all 

inclusive or to imply any 

predetermination of impacts. DOE 

invites interested parties to suggest 

specific issues within these general 

categories, or other issues not included 

above, to be considered in the EIS. 

Scoping Process 

Interested parties are invited to 

participate in the scoping process, both 

to help define the environmental issues 

to be analyzed and to identify the range 

of reasonable alternatives. Both oral and 

written comments will be considered 

and given equal weight by DOE, 

regardless of how submitted. Public 

scoping meetings will be held at the 

locations, dates, and times as indicated 

below: 

1. Bridgeport, CT: Bridgeport City 

Hall, 45 Lyon Terrace, Bridgeport, CT 

06604; 7–9 p.m., Thursday, July 8, 2010. 

2. New York City, NY: U.S. 

Environmental Protection Agency, 290 

Broadway, Room 27A (27th floor, 

conference room A), New York, NY 

10007; 2–4 p.m., Friday, July 9, 2010. It 

is important to note that this is a secure 

building: all carried items, e.g., 


srobinson on DSKHWCL6B1PROD with NOTICES
34724 Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 117 / Friday, June 18, 2010 / Notices 

handbags and backpacks, will be Xrayed and visitors will pass through a 

metal detector. 

3. Yonkers, NY: Royal Regency Hotel, 

165 Tuckahoe Road, Yonkers, NY 

10710; 7–9 p.m., Monday, July 12, 2010. 

4. Kingston, NY: Holiday Inn Kingston 

NY, 503 Washington Avenue, Kingston, 

NY 12401; 7–9 p.m., Tuesday, July 13, 

2010. 

5. Albany, NY: The Holiday Inn 

Albany at Wolf Road, 205 Wolf Road, 

Albany, NY 12205; 7–9 p.m., 

Wednesday, July 14, 2010. 

6. Glens Falls, NY: Ramada Glens 

Falls/Lake George Area, 1 Abby Lane 

(exit 19 off I–87), Queensbury, NY 

12804; 7–9 p.m., Thursday, July 15, 

2010. 

7. Plattsburgh, NY: Plattsburgh North 

Country Chamber of Commerce, 7061 

State Route 9, Plattsburgh, NY 12901; 

7–9 p.m., Friday, July 16, 2010. 

The scoping meetings will be 

structured in two parts: First, an 

informal discussion ‘‘workshop’’ period 

that will not be recorded; and, second, 

the formal taking of comments with 

transcription by a court stenographer. 

The meetings will provide interested 

parties the opportunity to view 

proposed project exhibits, ask questions, 

and make comments. Applicant, DOE, 

and any cooperating agency 

representatives will be available to 

answer questions and provide 

additional information to attendees to 

the extent that additional information is 

available at this early stage of the 

proceedings. 

Persons submitting comments during 

the scoping process, whether orally or 

in writing, will receive either paper or 

electronic copies of the Draft EIS, 

according to their preference. Persons 

who do not wish to submit comments or 

suggestions at this time but who would 

like to receive a copy of the document 

for review and comment when it is 

issued should notify Dr. Jerry Pell as 

provided above, with their paper-orelectronic preference. 

EIS Preparation and Schedule 

In preparing the Draft EIS, DOE will 

consider comments received during the 

scoping period. As noted above, 

comments can be submitted by various 

means, and will be given the same 

consideration. They can be submitted to 

Dr. Jerry Pell either electronically or by 

paper copy; if the latter, consider using 

a delivery service because materials 

submitted by regular mail are subject to 

security screening, which both causes 

extended delay and potential damage to 

the contents. (Warped and unusable CD 

or DVD discs are common.) 

Additionally, comments can be 

submitted through the project Web site 

established for preparation of the EIS, at 

http://CHPExpressEIS.org. This site will 

also serve as a repository for all public 

documents and the central location for 

announcements. Individuals may 

subscribe to the ‘‘mail list’’ feature on the 

project Web site in order to receive 

future announcements and news 

releases. 

DOE will summarize all comments 

received in a ‘‘Scoping Report’’ that will 

be available on the project Web site and 

distributed either electronically to all 

parties of record for whom we have an 

e-mail address, or by mailing paper 

copies upon request. 

Issued in Washington, DC, on June 14, 

2010. 

Patricia A. Hoffman, 

Principal Deputy Assistant Secretary, Office 

of Electricity Delivery and Energy Reliability. 

[FR Doc. 2010–14760 Filed 6–17–10; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 6450–01–P 

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY 

International Energy Agency Meetings 

AGENCY: Department of Energy. 

ACTION: Notice of Meetings. 

SUMMARY: The Industry Advisory Board 

(IAB) to the International Energy 

Agency (IEA) will meet on June 29, 

2010, at the headquarters of the IEA in 

Paris, France, in connection with a joint 

meeting of the IEA’s Standing Group on 

Emergency Questions (SEQ) and the 

IEA’s Standing Group on the Oil Market 

(SOM) on June 29; and on June 30 in 

connection with a joint SEQ/SOM 

Workshop on the Release of Industry 

Stocks on June 30 and a meeting of the 

SEQ on June 30 and continuing on July 

1. 

DATES: June 29–July 1, 2010. 

ADDRESSES: 9, rue de la Fe ́de ́ration, 

Paris, France. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: 

Diana D. Clark, Assistant General for 

International and National Security 

Programs, Department of Energy, 1000 

Independence Avenue, SW., 

Washington, DC 20585, 202–586–3417. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: In 

accordance with section 252(c)(1)(A)(i) 

of the Energy Policy and Conservation 

Act (42 U.S.C. 6272(c)(1)(A)(i)) (EPCA), 

the following notice of meeting is 

provided: 

Meetings of the Industry Advisory 

Board (IAB) to the International Energy 

Agency (IEA) will be held at the 

headquarters of the IEA, 9, rue de la 

Fe ́de ́ration, Paris, France, on June 29, 

2010, beginning at 9:30 a.m. and 

continuing on June 30 at 8:30 a.m.; and 

on June 30, commencing at 2:30 p.m. 

and continuing on July 1, 2010, at 9:30 

a.m. The purpose of this notice is to 

permit attendance by representatives of 

U.S. company members of the IAB at a 

joint meeting of the IEA’s Standing 

Group on Emergency Questions (SEQ) 

and the IEA’s Standing Group on the Oil 

Market (SOM) on June 29, which is 

scheduled to be held at the headquarters 

of the IEA commencing at 9:30 a.m., and 

a joint SEQ/SOM Workshop on the 

Release of Industry Stocks, which is 

scheduled to be held at the same 

location beginning at 9 a.m. on June 30. 

The IAB will also hold a preparatory 

meeting among company 

representatives at the same location at 

8:30 a.m. on June 30. The agenda for 

this preparatory meeting is to discuss 

the SEQ/SOM meeting and to review the 

agendas of the SEQ/SOM workshop and 

the 130th SEQ meeting, to be held on 

June 30–July 1. 

The agenda of the joint SEQ/SOM 

meeting on June 29 is under the control 

of the SEQ and the SOM. It is expected 

that the SEQ and the SOM will adopt 

the following agenda: 

1. Adoption of the Agenda. 

2. Approval of the Summary Record of 

the March 2010 Joint Meeting. 

3. The 2011–2012 Program of Work for 

the SOM and SEQ. 

—Priority Setting Exercise. 

—Governing Board Brainstorming. 

4. The Medium-Term Oil Market Report. 

5. Report on the International Energy 

Forum. 

6. Update on the Medium-Term Gas 

Market Report. 

7. Other Business. 

The agenda of the SEQ/SOM 

workshop on June 30 is under the 

control of the SEQ and the SOM. It is 

expected that the SEQ and the SOM will 

adopt the following agenda: 

1. Introduction by the IEA Secretariat. 

2. Introduction by the Chairman. 

3. Session 1—Industry Stockholding 

Obligation. 

—How do we assure the availability 

of such stocks in a crisis? How are 

industry emergency stocks related 

to minimum operating 

requirements? 

4. Session 2—The Government 

Measures to Make Industry 

Obligatory Stockholding Available 

to the Market. 

—What other measures are available 

besides lowering the obligation for 

industry to hold stocks? Does the 

lowering of the obligation need to 

be more focused than just a uniform 

reduction across all companies, for 

all fuels? What is the minimum 


srobinson on DSKHWCL6B1PROD with NOTICES